Questions and Replies

Reply:

No. Currently the provisions of the South African Reserve Bank Act, 1989 (Act No. 90 of 1989 – “SARB Act”), as amended by the South African Reserve Bank Amendment Act , 2010 (Act No. 4 of 2010 – “SARB Amendment Act), effectively rule out the possibility of anyone, through the accumulation of shares, exerting undue influence on the South African Reserve Bank (“SARB”).

The Board of the SARB (“Board”) is a supervisory board and is strictly responsible for the corporate governance of the institution and not its day-to-day management. The Governors are vested with original powers of management and are responsible for the day-to-day management of the SARB, which includes monetary policy, bank supervision, financial stability and the payment system.

Previously, in the period before the SARB Act was amended in 2010 there was an absence of adequate preventative measures, private shareholding in a central bank could potentially create the risk of untoward actions by shareholders taken in pursuit of personal objectives rather than the public interest. Although a single shareholder in the SARB was in terms of the SARB Act restricted to holding not more than 10,000 shares and to no more than 50 votes at a meeting of shareholders, the SARB at times in the past (i.e. before 2010) experienced deliberate attempts at circumventing these limitations. Individual persons by utilising the names of minors, relatives, friends or other persons under their influence accumulated unduly large numbers of SARB shares under their control. This resulted in undue concentrations of SARB shares under the ultimate control of single persons, who could potentially utilise the commensurate number of votes under their control to exercise undue influence on the SARB for personal purposes and their own personal gain.

The SARB Amendment Act, which introduced substantial amendments to the legal structure and operations of the SARB, amongst other things, adequately addressed the previous anomaly. Major amendments constituted the introduction of the concept of “associates” in respect of shareholders or potential shareholders of the SARB and the establishment of a panel (established and convened by the Governor) to give effect to fit and proper principles with regard to non-executive directors elected by shareholders. It resulted in the existing numbers of SARB shares held by all persons who qualify as associates of a specific shareholder or potential shareholder being taken into account in the determination of the number of shares (limited to 10,000 shares) that the specific shareholder may lawfully hold or acquire. Shareholders were also hereafter only entitled to elect non-executive directors to the Board that had been declared eligible by the panel. The Board consists of fifteen directors (eleven non-executive and four executive directors) of which the President appoints eight, which includes the Governors. The shareholders elect the remaining seven.

Consequently, shareholders of the SARB have limited powers, which in addition to the above (at a general meeting of shareholders), are limited to discussing the annual report and financial statements of the SARB, appointing of the auditors and approving their remuneration and discussing special business duly placed on the agenda of the meeting.

Reply:

The OTO announced earlier this year that they will be launching an investigation with regards to the refund processes administered by SARS to better understand the challenges, risks and complexity associated with the process. The investigation is currently underway and SARS is committed to working with the OTO to give them the required insight into the process so that they will be able to satisfactorily give feedback to the public on their findings.

SARS would want the current investigation underway to first be concluded before additional responses to the topic at hand is made as this stage.

Reply:

1. The Minister of Finance does not have the authority to conclude country agreements for the nuclear new build programme on behalf of government. In addition, the Minister does not have the mandate to determine policy or implementation frameworks for the energy sector. The Minister of Finance’s role in this regard will relate to Sections 66 and 70 of the Public Finance Management Act, which requires concurrence for any guarantee, indemnity or security that binds the National Revenue Fund to future financial commitments. In addition, the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act allows the Minister of Finance to make exemptions from provisions in the interests of national security, if the likely tenderers are international suppliers, or if it is in the public interest.

2. If any agreements have been concluded regarding project management and the construction of specified nuclear power plants, it would be between the relevant accounting authority and the service provider. Such agreements do not necessarily require the approval of the Minister of Finance.

Reply:

(1)(b) No, the National Treasury and South African Airways have not made any payment for the Board Chairperson to stay at the Oyster Box Hotel in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal. National Treasury does not pay for accommodation for non-employees based on our internal policy.

(2)(b) Prohibited in terms of the National Treasury policy on Gifts, Donations and Sponsorships.

(3) No.

Reply:

(1)(a) The total number of staff members of the SA Revenue Service who have resigned during the period 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2017 is 1277.

(b) 82 Employees were dismissed during the period 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2017.

(c)(i) 166 Employees were suspended with full pay during the period 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2017.

(c)(ii) 43 Employees were suspended without pay during the period 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2017.

(2)(a) 913 External applicants were recruited during the period 1 September 2014 and 30 April 2017 to fill funded vacancies.

(b) The annual attrition rate is reflected in the table below per financial year:

Reply:

Sections 39 and 40 of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) places the responsibility of budgetary control and financial management on the accounting officer of the department, which in this case is the Director-General of the Department of Energy. Should fruitless and wasteful expenditure have taken place, Section 38(1)(g) requires the accounting officer to report the details of the case to the relevant treasury. The Department of Energy’s monthly expenditure report for March 2017 does not reflect any fruitless and wasteful expenditure in the department.

 

 

Reply:

1.Due to the confidential nature of some of the information requested and our legislative obligation to the protection of personal information governed by the Protection of Personal Information Act, SARS is prohibited from disclosing any employee specific information that may include names of individuals, qualifications, job specific information, length of service, work record, etc.

The following summarised information can however be made available:

1227 employees resigned during the period 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2017 and 82 employees were dismissed during the same period.

2. Due to the confidential nature of some of the information requested and our legislative obligation to the protection of personal information governed by the Protection of Personal Information Act, SARS is prohibited from disclosing any employee specific information that may include names of individuals, qualifications, job specific information, length of service, work record, etc.

The following summarised information can however be made available:

The attrition rate for SARS remained stable over a period of 7 years. There is in actual fact a significant decline in the rate between 2013/14 and 2016/17 financial year.

913 External applicants were recruited during the period 1 September 2014 and 30 April 2017.

2674 Internal applicants were appointed during the period 1 September 2014 and 30 September 2017.

Internal appointments as a percentage of external appointments are reflected in the table below:

External Recruitment	Internal Appointments	Total	% Internal Appointments
913	2674	3587	74.55%

All recruitment is based on the requirements of the job that is necessary in terms of years of service and experience and demanded by the job to be performed.

Reply:

(a) Department of Tourism

	(i) Procured any Services from the Decolonisation Foundation	(ii) Made payments to the Decolonisation Foundation
(aa) what services were procured	No service procured	No payments made
(bb) what were the total cost	Not applicable	Not applicable
(cc)what is the detail breakdown of the cost	Not applicable	Not applicable
(dd) What is the total amount paid	Not applicable	Not applicable
(ee) what was the purpose of payments	Not applicable	Not applicable
(ff) Is the detailed payment in each case	Not applicable	Not applicable

If no services were procured or payments made what is the Department’s position in this regard?

The department procure goods and services from service providers registered on the Central Supplier

Database through the normal tender procedure as prescribed.

(b) SA Tourism

	(iii) Procured any Services from the Decolonisation Foundation	(iv) Made payments to the Decolonisation Foundation
(aa) what services were procured	No service procured	No payments made
(bb) what were the total cost	Not applicable	Not applicable
(cc)what is the detail breakdown of the cost	Not applicable	Not applicable
(dd) What is the total amount paid	Not applicable	Not applicable
(ee) what was the purpose of payments	Not applicable	Not applicable
(ff) Is the detailed payment in each case	Not applicable	Not applicable

If no services were procured or payments made, what is SA Tourism’s position in this regard?

SA Tourism procures services and goods from suppliers registered on the central supplier database. The entity is guided by the prescripts of the PFMA and prescribed tender processes.

Reply:

(a) (i) 2014/15: R58,983,000, adjusted to R54,273,000

(ii) 2015/16: R55,662,000, adjusted to R94,698,000

(iii) 2016/17: R104,643,000, adjusted to R132,395,000

(b) R162,683.000

Reply:

(a) & (b) The National Department of Human Settlements and the entities reporting to me have not (i) procured any services from and/or (ii) made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

Reply:

Chapter 6 of the Tax Administration Act No. 28 of 2011 protects the confidentiality of all taxpayers and as such I am unable to provide any details of the Presidents’ tax affairs.

Reply:

NATIONAL TREASURY

(1)(a) No

(2)(a)(i)&(ii) No

(2)(a)(aa) N/A

(2)(a)(bb) N/A

ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD

(1) The Accounting Standards Board did not participate in the Dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event.

(2) The Accounting Standards Board did not it participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma.

CO-OPERATIVE BANKS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY

The Co-operative Banks Development Agency did not participate in the Dialogue with the President in Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event hosted at the Oyster Box Hotel in Umhlanga, Durban, on 25 February 2017

The Co-operative Banks Development Agency did not participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma.

DEVELOPMENT BANK OF SOUTHERN AFRICA

(1) (b) No

(2) (b)(i) (ii) No

(3) (aa) (bb) N/A

FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE

1. The FIC did not take part in the Dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event, hosted at the Oyster Box Hotel in Umhlanga, Durban, on 25 February 2017.

1. The FIC did not participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma.

FINANCIAL SERVICES BOARD

(1) (a) Not applicable.

(b) The FSB did not participate in the event referred to.

(2) (a) Not applicable.

(b) The FSB did not participate in the event referred to.

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND

GEPF did not participate in the dialogue referred to in the question, and GEPF did not participate on the auction as mentioned in question 2.

INDEPENDENT REGULATORY BOARD FOR AUDITORS

No person from IRBA participated in the dialogue with the President, and no person participated in the auction referred to in the question.

PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR

1. (b) No

1. (b)(i) No

(b)(ii) No

LAND BANK

1. (a) The Land Bank did not participate at the above-mentioned event as it was not invited.

2. (a) The Land Bank did not participate in the auction of the souvenirs or personal belongings of the President as it was not invited.

(aa) nothing was purchased.

(bb) no cost to the Bank.

FAIS OMBUD

No person from FAIS Ombud participated in the dialogue with the President, and no person participated in the auction referred to in the question.

PUBLIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION

(1)(b) The PIC did not incur costs for any participation in the Dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 at the Oyster Box Hotel in Umhlanga Durban.

2(b) The PIC did not participate in any auction of souvenirs or personal belongings of President Jacob G Zuma.

SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS

1(b) SAA did not participate in the Dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event hosted at the Oyster Box Hotel in Umhlanga, Durban, on 25 February 2017.

2(b) SAA did not participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma.

SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICES

1. The South African Revenue Service did not participate in any dialogue with the President to unpack SONA 2017.

2. The South African Revenue Service did not participate in any auction pertaining to items belonging to the President of the Republic, Mr JG Zuma.

SASRIA

1. Sasria SOC Limited did not participate in the dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event.
2. Sasria SOC Limited did not participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma

TAX OMBUD

The Office of the Tax Ombud did not participate in the auction of the (i) souvenirs or (ii) personal belongings of the President of the Republic, Mr Jacob G Zuma.

Reply:

1. There is currently a satellite campus of the Ehlanzeni Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) College operating in the Thaba Chweu Municipality at Lydenburg. The satellite campus is currently located in a municipal building.
2. The College undertook a basic feasibility assessment, and established that there is an immediate need to provide mining related programmes for the area and further identified the need to support the Tourism and Hospitality sector. As an interim response to this, the College supported by the Department is in the process of securing access to a building in closer proximity to the centre of the town. The College is also at an advanced stage of securing land from the Municipality.
3. At present, there is no allocated budget. The College is in the process of mobilising expressions of interest to fund the initiative from the various mines within the area.

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 1080 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

Reply:

No, neither the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, nor her departments and all entities reporting to her procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

Reply:

The Department and its entities have not procured any services from/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

 

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 1221 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

Reply:

(a) Nil

(b) Nil

Reply:

The amount spent during the financial year 2016-2017 will be made available when the auditing process on the figures has been completed.

Reply:

Yes, the official has been suspended.

(a) The official was suspended on 17 March 2017.

(b) The official is facing various charges of alleged misconduct, details of which are still confidential pending finalisation of the disciplinary processes.The suspension. was to enable the Board to conduct an investigation on allegations of misconduct.

(c) Mr Mmberegeni Dzebu.

d) The Council requested the then Minister of Communications to second an official to act as the CEO. Mr Dzebu was found to be a suitable person.

 

Reply:

PROVINCE	MISCONDUCT CASES ON SEXUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN STAFF MEMBERS AND PUPILS REPORTED AND INVESTIGATED BY SACE
	2014	2015	2016
	REPORTED	INVESTIGATED	REPORTED	INVESTIGATED	REPORTED	INVESTIGATED
WC	1	0	0	0	1	0
NW	1 Bojanala 1 Kenneth Kaunda	0	1 Ngaka Modiri Molema	0	1 Bojanala	0
GP	Not responded
FS	Not responded
NC	Not responded
KZN	Not responded
MPU	Not responded
EC	Not responded
LMP	Not responded
TOTAL	3	0	1	0	2	0

The Department of Basic Education cannot confirm if matters were investigated by the SACE as the SACE is independent from the Department. However, the question was referred to the PEDs and the SACE for response. Out of nine (9) PEDs only two (2) have responded. The information would be updated as and when the responses are received from the PEDs and the SACE.

Reply:

1. My Department has no records of school staff members who were found to be administering corporal punishment in each school and/ or district. This is more relevant to provincial administration duties. Therefore, the question was referred to the PEDs for response. Out of nine (9) PEDs only two (2) have responded as indicated in the below table. The information will be updated as and when the responses are received from the PEDs.
2. The Department of Basic Education cannot confirm if matters were reported to the SACE as the SACE is independent from the Department. However, the question was also referred to the SACE for response.

	SCHOOL STAFF MEMBERS FOUND TO BE ADMINISTERING CORPORAL PUNISHMENT	TOTAL
	2014	2015	2016
	REPORTED IN THE PED	REPORTED TO SACE	REPORTED IN THE PED	REPORTED TO SACE	REPORTED IN THE PED	REPORTED TO SACE
WC	352		430		501		1 283
NW	1		4		7		12
GP
FS
NC
KZN
MPU
EC
LP
TOTAL	353		434		508		1 295

PROVINCE	No. OF CASES RESULTED IN DISCIPLINARY ACTION
	2014	2015	2016	TOTAL
WC	160	204	222	586
NW	1	3	7	11
GP
FS
NC
KZN
MPU
EC
LP
TOTAL	167	207	229	597

1. Sanctions ranged from final written warning coupled with a fine not exceeding one month salary or suspension without pay for a period not exceeding three months to dismissal in more serious cases.

Reply:

(a)-(b) There are no entire inappropriate structures remaining in Limpopo and KwaZulu- Natal provinces.

Reply:

(1)(2)(3) This matter is one of the many matters we are looking into at the Ministry of Communications.

Reply:

The Interim Board has been directed to review the governance framework and the related policies, the effectiveness of controls and systems as well as the alignment of policies with the work of the SABC. The outcome thereof will inform the kind and extent of the interventions to implement the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on the SABC Inquiry.

The appointment of a permanent Board with the requisite skills will also strengthen good corporate governance and compliance. The Board will be expected to report to the Minister on a quarterly basis on the progress thereof.

Reply:

(a)

(1) Ms Yolisa Phahle;

(2) Ms Renee Williams;

(3) Ms Nomazotsho Memani;

(4) Ms Khumbudzo Phophi Ntshavheni; and

(5) Ms Khumbudzo Phophi

The following members were coopted as additional members to the advisory body:

(1) Ms Aitheli Makhwanya (National Film and Video Foundation)

(2) Lindiwe Ndebele Koka (Department of Arts and Culture)

(3) Dr Anneline Chetty (Department of Trade and Industry)

(4) Mr Zamokwakhe Dlamini (Department of Science and Technology)

(5) Ms Mamedupe Kgatshe (Independent Communications Authority of South Africa)

(6) Ms Fikile Hlongwane (Independent Communications Authority of South Africa)

(7) Mr Regardt Gouws (Films and Publication Board)

 

(b) (i) (ii)

(i) The advisory body members were appointed on 8 October 2015.

(ii) They were appointed in terms of section 38 of the Broadcasting Act of 1999. This process was guided by the following requirements: The South African Broadcast Production Body shall comprise six (6) members appointed by the Minister representing government; the regulator; industry; civil society; consumer groups and organised labour with proven experience and expertise in content creation and development, production, marketing, distribution, acquisition, policy and regulation, technologies, intellectual property, cyber security and any other skills required in the content industry.

Reply:

1. The Defence Review Committee compiled the Defence Review 2015, based on a strategic assessment of the constitutional mandate of the Defence Force and an analysis of the African Battle Space.
2. Principle 3 of the Defence Review (as listed in the Introduction) stated that the defence mandate, mission, goals and tasks will be focussed on the attainment of the Defence Force’s constitutionally mandated functions and government’s national strategic goals and priorities. Strategically the Defence Force will adopt a defensive posture, but will maintain offensive operational capabilities.
3. Furthermore, Principle 4 states that the Defence Force must stand ready to: defend and protect South Africa; safeguard South Africa and its people; contribute to regional and continental security; and provide support in times of crisis and disaster - both domestically and regionally, man-made or natural. As an important pillar of the South African state, the Defence Force will contribute to national development.
4. The above principles, coupled to the strategic analysis, are expanded to what the Defence Review 2015 describes as the Strategic Defence Concept (Layered Defence Approach in Chapter 3) namely:

(a) Layer 1:

(i) Firstly, to influence the international security agenda through integrated diplomacy efforts and the pursuit of national objectives.

(ii) Secondly, through strategic engagement of the United Nations and the African Peace and Security Architecture, to:

1. Pursue defined multi-lateral security objectives.
2. Promote the deepening of democracy on the African continent.
3. Promote peace, security and development on the continent.

(iii) Thirdly, the pursuit of strategic bi-lateral objectives.

(b) Layer 2:

1. Firstly, to safeguard the South African State, its people and its territory.
2. Secondly, to collaboratively or deliberately protect vital national interests.
3. Thirdly, to contribute to South Africa’s developmental agenda.

(c) Layer 3: To defend and protect the territory, sovereignty and people of the Republic of South Africa.

5. In times of relative peace, and in order to strengthen and maintain that peace, the focus must be on Layer 1. Chapter 10 of the Defence Review 2105 also speaks to the importance of diplomacy vis a vis Layer 1:

(a) South Africa is committed to the promotion of peace and stability and to the resolution of conflict by peaceful means. Active participation in multilateral institutions and collective security mechanisms are an expression of this commitment. South Africa has also entered into a number of international agreements that entail reciprocal obligations and undertakings to engage in cooperation in various sectors, including defence.

(b) In the post-conflict reconstruction role, there is a vital linkage to be established between foreign policy, defence policy and that of trade policy. Whilst Defence is primarily concerned with the arena of security sector reform, other sectors of Government must become seized with important concurrent trade and investment initiatives.

6. Senior South Africa leaders are thus responsible to play an important role in the promotion of South Africa’s national strategic goals and priorities, including those of foreign policy, trade policy and defence policy objectives.

7. Nonetheless, the Defence Force must continually prepare for Layer 2 and Layer 3 as mandated by the Constitution. The Air Defence Priorities listed in the Defence Review 2015 are not individually ranked, and it would be incorrect to state that the role of VIP air transport is more important than the air capabilities required for the safeguarding of the country.

8. I support of the Layered Defence Approach, as part of the wider pronouncements of the Defence Review 2015, it was concluded that South Africa requires an Air Defence Capability that:

a. Is responsive and agile to deliver air power to defend and protect the integrity of South Africa’s airspace and support the landward and maritime defence strategies. The air defence capability must provide deterrence and powerful interdiction during joint operations, specifically through comprehensive air domain awareness, air combat, combat support and air mobility capabilities.

b. Can support deployed landward and maritime forces through appropriate airspace control, reconnaissance, close-air support, augmentation of firepower and inter-and-intra-theatre air mobility in complex operational circumstances.

c. The air defence capability must also be capable of strategic reach and joint rapid response across the spectrum of conflict, and support the sustainment of protracted joint operations over long distances.

9. The Defence Review Committee further concluded (and not ranked in order of individual priority) that the Air Defence migration priorities must include:

1. Meeting the full requirements for VIP air transport.
2. Air capabilities required for the safeguarding of South Africa, with specific attention to dedicated air capabilities required for border safeguarding and maritime reconnaissance.
3. Inter-theatre and intra-theatre lift in support of landward deployments, with specific attention to the air capabilities required for rapid reaction and Special Force operations, including strategic lift, intra-theatre lift and heavy lift rotary wing capabilities.
4. Rotary wing combat support for landward operations with integrated anti-armour capability.
5. Interception and interdiction and close air support for deployed forces, with integrated stand-off capability.

10. As can be seen from the above priorities, the main emphasis in the Air Defence Capability is the supportive role of the South African Air Force by means of military air mobility, inclusive, but not limited to VIP air transport.

11. The Defence Review provides for an inclusive military air mobility capability by emphasising all its components, again including and not limited to VIP air transport.

   a.A military air mobility capability is primarily required in the defence, protection and safeguarding of South Africa and to promote regional security. Diverse military air mobility operations are conducted, including support to the Police Service and other civil authority, humanitarian relief operations and search and rescue operations. The following military air mobility capabilities are to be provided:

b. Heavy fixed and rotary-wing cargo and troop transport capability.

c. Medium fixed and rotary-wing cargo and troop transport capability.

d. Light fixed and rotary-wing command and control capability.

e. An in-flight refuelling capability.

f. A military air ambulance capability.

g. A VIP air transport capability is required to provide:

     (i) Presidential and Deputy Presidential intercontinental air transport capability;

     (ii) VIP, and other identified persons, intercontinental air transport capability; and

     (iii) VIP, and other identified persons, continental air transport capability.

     (iv) The capital and operating funds for VIP air transport should be ring-fenced and managed by the Chief of the Air Force.

Reply:

The status of the so called intelligence report is a subject of litigation in Court proceedings, in which the Democratic Alliance is a party. I therefore cannot comment on the matter.

 

Reply:

(aa) The following vehicles were used by Minister Fikile Mbalula and Deputy Minister Gert Oosthuizen in the (aaa) 2014-15 and the (bbb) 2015-16 financial years:

Vehicles utilised from Pretoria office base

	(i) Minister	(ii) Deputy Minister
(a) Make	Mercedes Benz	Mercedes Benz
(b) Model	ML 500	E500
(c) Price	R940 885.80	R928 161.77
(d) Date of acquisition	07 July 2011	20 March 2013

Vehicles utilised from Cape Town office base

	Minister	Deputy Minister
(a) Make	Mercedes Benz	BMW
(b) Model	ML500	530D
(c) Price	R 935 871.60	R 843 369.00
(d) Date of acquisition	05 October 2011	12 October 2011

(bb) Information for the motor vehicles used by the Minister Fikile Mbalula and Deputy Minister Gert Oosthuizen from 01 April 2016 is as follows:

Vehicles utilised from Pretoria office base

	Minister	Deputy Minister
(a) Make	BMW	Mercedes Benz
(b) Model	X5	E500
(c) Price	R902 529.99	R928 161.77
(d) Dates	07 July 2015	20 March 2013

Vehicles utilised from Cape Town office base

	Minister	Deputy Minister
(a) Make	Mercedes Benz	BMW
(b) Model	ML500	530D
(c) Price	R 935 871.60	R 843 369.00
(d) Date	05 October 2011	12 October 2011

Reply:

(i) (ii) see the link for reply: https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW1068Annexure-170522.docx

(aa) (bb) (b) (i) Attached as Annexure A

(ii) Attached as Annexure B

Reply:

This information will be made available to Parliament when the Bill is introduced.

Reply:

The Cropping around SPRINGBOKPAN AGRIPARK in the past two financial years are for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 are as follows as a summary;

1. 2015/2016: Maize - 977ha and Sunflower -5 126.6ha
2. 2016/2017: October to December 2016 ( Maize- 2 299ha , Sunflower - 3 174ha, 30ha - Vegetables)
3. 2016/2017: January to March 2017 (Maize - 660ha, and Sunflower- 2 832ha).

See attached POE'S as verification.

Reply:

1. (a) Breakdown of total costs from date of handover of 18 Mark Street, Stellenbosch

Year	Security	Clearing of the property	Municipal Services	TOTAL
2014	R25 792.90	R2 207.80	R27 955.98	R55 956.68
2015	R136 060.32		R29 194.85	R165 255.17
2016	R271 804.00		R30 037.87	R301 841.87
2017	R17 329.00	R30 453.50		R47 782.50
YTD	R450 986.22	R32 661.30	R87 188.70	R570 836.22

Since the handover, the property has been secured with shutter boards and the
rubble that was present on the property has been removed.

(b) The property was handed back to the Department on 10 July 2014’.

(c) No, given the condition of the property, it has not rendered any income during the period.

2. (a) The Department has received offers for the use of the property and is currently in the
process of evaluating the offers. As part of evaluating the offers received, the Department
will have concluded the condition assessment of the property by 15 May 2017.

  (b) The estimated cost to restore the property will be available following the conclusion of the condition assessment.

3. No request has been received from the Stellenbosch Municipality for transfer of the property.

4. The Department has received offers for the use of the property and is currently in the process of evaluating the offers. The Department is aiming to have a decision made on the offers by 31 May 2017.

Reply:

The expenditure was mainly incurred by the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) and the expenditure toward the bid for the 2022 Commonwealth Games is being verified. The information asked for by the Honourable Member shall be provided before long.

Reply:

Minister of Public Works:

(a) The Department has not conducted any comprehensive building condition assessments regarding infrastructure repairs, except for an assessment of the structural damage to one of the security features at the private residence of the President, Mr Jacob G Zuma, in Nkandla, KwaZulu-Natal. The South African Police Service (SAPS) conducted a physical assessment of the security features at the said premises.

(b) The Department has not conducted any maintenance assessments of the security upgrades at the private residence of the President, Mr Jacob G Zuma, in Nkandla, KwaZulu-Natal. The position is that the Department will assess and consider such if requested and permitted by the owners if necessary.

(a)(i) The assessment of the structural damage to one of the security features was conducted on 29 June 2016 and the physical assessment of the security features was done by the SAPS on 30 March 2015.

(a)(ii) The assessment of the structural damage to one of the security features was done by the Department and the physical assessment of the security features was done by the SAPS.

(a)(iii) Not Applicable

(a)(iv) Regarding the assessment of the structural damage to one of the security features, there was no indication that there is more infrastructure repair required. Regarding the physical assessment of the security features done by the SAPS, the question should be addressed to the SAPS.

(a)(v) A cost estimate has not been done regarding the repair of the structural damage to the said security feature. Regarding a cost estimate relating to the physical assessment of the security features done by the SAPS, the question should be addressed to the SAPS.

(a)(vi) The work on the infrastructure repairs to the said security feature has not commenced. Regarding work relating to the physical assessment of the security features done by the SAPS, the question should be addressed to the SAPS.

(b)(i) – (vi) Not Applicable.

Reply:

There are two separate cases currently pending in the Gauteng High Court and the Constitutional Court respectively. The issues to be considered by the Courts, amongst others, relate to Mr Gordhan in his capacity as the former Minister of Finance. It will therefore be inappropriate to comment on the question asked while these matters are before the Courts.

Reply:

(1)(a) The first phase of the experimental fishery ran for 5 years from 2004 until 2009.  The permit holder held permits in this fishery, along with a further 14 permit holders in 8 areas with 2 vessels per area.  The second phase was ‘relaxed’ to an exploratory fishery for a further 5 years from 2012 until 2017 (last permit expires at the end of February 2018).  Although the exploratory fishery is set to run for 5 years, permits are issued only for 12 months at a time (this is the maximum length of time allowed for a permit to be issued under the Marine Living Resources Act).

(1)(b) Catch rates have been in the order of 600kg-1000kg per trip (typically between 8 and 20 days duration), but this varies greatly with soak times and weather conditions.

(1)(c) Market trials have been undertaken in Australia, the USA, Europe, and there has also been testing of the local market.

(2)(a-d) All of this information is captured in the mandatory catch returns which are sent to the Department after each trip.  In addition, Departmental scientists also independently verify information on size composition and sex ratio through sampling on board during fishing operations and at factory facilities.

(2)(e) Local community training is not a permit condition in this fishery, although training of skippers and crew has taken place on the initiative of the permit holder.

(3)(a) Monthly trips are undertaken either on fishing trips or to factory facilities to verify the data provided and collect additional biological data and samples.

(3)(b) There was very little fishing during the first phase of the experimental fishery, and as a result insufficient data were collected for meaningful analysis.  For the second phase, the fishery was therefore ‘relaxed’ to an exploratory fishery in an attempt to remove the obstacles that had made it difficult for permit holders to active their permits.  No assessment has been conducted as yet as the exploratory fishery still has just under a year until completion, and the assessment will be conducted once the exploratory fishery is completed and all the data are available. 

(4)(a) The exploratory fishery will terminate at the end of February 2018.  Once the assessment is completed an evaluation will be made as to whether a further exploratory phase is required or whether a decision can be made regarding the likely viability of a commercial fishery.  It is recognised that the assessment may take some time, and consideration is still to be given as to whether to continue with interim exploratory fishing until the results of the assessment are available

(4)(b) All areas will be assessed at the same time with the available information, although given the distribution of data, it is likely that sufficient information for decision-making will only be available for the False Bay area.  The length of time for the assessment to be undertaken is uncertain – this will be dependent on the availability of, and workloads on, Departmental scientists in 2018.

Reply:

1. I was briefed by the Minister of Health on Life Esidimeni on 1 February 2017, which was immediately after the release of the report on the matter by the Health Ombud, Professor Malegapuru Makgoba. Immediately after this briefing, on behalf of the government, I extended our deepest condolences to the families of psychiatric patients who died so tragically in Gauteng.

2. The investigation that was conducted by the Health Ombud was comprehensive and sufficient with regard to assisting government with information to deal with the matters at hand. As such I am not intending to establish a Commission of Inquiry.

Reply:

The issue of Tax is a confidential matter between the South African Revenue Services and the Tax payer.

Reply:

1. Currently, section 107 of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 and section 74 of the Value Added Tax Act 89 of 1991 makes provision for the Minister of Finance to make regulations prescribing amongst other things the information that the Minister may require from the South African Revenue Service (SARS) Commissioner to ensure smooth tax administration and optimal revenue collection. The proposed amendments to section 107 of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 and section 74 of the Value Added Tax Act 89 of 1991 are to clarify that the Minister of Finance may make regulations in relation to the information that the Minister of Finance may deem necessary to ensure transparency, reporting on tax collection and that the target set in the Budget for revenue is achieved.

2. The proposed regulations will be made only after the amendment bills have been passed into law and will be published for public comment. A media statement will then be issued when these regulations are published for public comment.

Reply:

No. The two Ministers represented the National Executive in these proceedings. As the Honourable Member clearly points out in his question, this was a Government decision, based on legal advice from highly competent lawyers.

Reply:

(1) Currently, there are no vacancies in the positions of (a) chief executive officer, (b) chief financial officer and/or (c) chief operating officer in the entities reporting to the Department of Sport and Recreation South Africa.

Therefore (i) and (ii); (2) (a) and (b); and (3) (a), (b) and (c) fall away.

Reply:

I have on several occasions, including in a reply to a written Parliamentary Question (No. 347), publicly stated that South Africa indeed nominated Mr Nhlanhla Nene for the position of Head of the African Regional Centre of the New Development Bank, also known as the BRICS Bank. No further action is being taken in this regard as Mr Nene subsequently accepted a position in the private sector.

Reply:

Mr PJ Gordhan is no longer the Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Finance, Mr Malusi Gigaba and the SARS Commissioner, Mr Tom Moyane, have a good working relationship. There is no longer a need for mediation.

Reply:

I would like to plead with the Honourable Member to grant the administration an extension of a period not exceeding a further 10 working days to source the correct information to enable me to respond to the question.

Reply:

I am empowered by Section 178(1) (j) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, (the Constitution) as Head of the National Executive to designate four persons to serve on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), after consulting the leaders of all the parties in the National Assembly.

Members of the JSC that I have designated serve until I replace them in terms of Section 178(3) of the Constitution. The three members served in that capacity since 2009 and I decided to replace them to enable others a chance to also serve on the JSC. I would also like to once more express my gratitude to the three members for the immeasurable contribution they have made during their tenure.

Reply:

1. (a) No

    (b) No

2. (a) & (b): Over the years, before the removal of the former Minister of Finance Mr Pravin Gordhan from office, the Department of Energy has been undertaking the preparations for the rollout of the Nuclear New Build Programme (NNPB). As part of these preparations, the Government has entered into Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) with nuclear vendor countries. These IGAs cover a broad range of areas for potential cooperation. Amongst others, the IGAs cover the use of nuclear energy for electricity generation including the design, construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants in South Africa.

It should however be noted that the Western Cape High Court has recently reviewed and set aside the decision of the Minister of Energy of 10 June 2015 to table some of these Intergovernmental Agreements before Parliament in terms of Section 231(3) of the Constitution.

(i) South Korea, USA, China, France and Russia.

(ii) The IGAs have no financial implications attached to any of them because they are cooperation agreements.

Reply:

1. I established the IMC on Comprehensive Social Security in 2015 consisting of five Ministers (the first five Ministers listed under 2a below). Early this year, I took a decision to reconstitute this IMC to include other Ministers (as listed below).

 (a) Twice.

 (b) (i) & (ii) 9 September 2015 in Cape Town and 12 May 2017 in Pretoria.

 (c) The main agenda of the IMC is to address existing policy gaps by developing a responsive social protection system for South Africa as envisaged in Chapter 11 of the National Development Plan (Vision 2030). The IMC’s agenda also entails taking forward the Social Security Reform Discussion Paper.

2. (a) The following nine Ministers are Members of the IMC:

• Minister of Social Development
• Minister of Finance
• Minister of Labour
• Minister of Health
• Minister of Transport
• Minister of Home Affairs
• Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services
• Minister of Communications
• Minister of State Security

 (b) The IMC was previously co-chaired by the Ministers of Finance and Social Development. However since its reconstitution, I am the Chairperson of the IMC.

Reply:

1. Mr PJ Gordhan is no longer the Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Finance, Mr Malusi Gigaba and the SARS Commissioner, Mr Tom Moyane, have a good working relationship. There is no longer a need for mediation.

2. In light of the response under (1), this question is no longer relevant.

Reply:

The following information was received from the Provincial Department of Co-operative Governance, Human Settlements, and Traditional Affairs (CoGHSTA) in Limpopo.

a) and b)

(i) Bela-Bela Local Municipality is owed by the following departments:

Departments	Amount	Payment received in March 2017
National Public Works	R202,130.42	R0.00
Provincial Public Works, Roads and Infrastructure	0.00	R0.00
Agriculture	R14,206.00	R0.00
Education	R1,463,428.37	R500 000.00
Rural Development and Land Reform	R0.00	R0.00
TOTAL:	R1 679 764.79	R500 000.00

c) The above amounts are owed since 2011.

d) The reason for non-payment is that there are government properties that are built on communal land and some properties are not registered.

e) In the last Debt Verification session held with Bela-Bela Local Municipality, the Departments owing indicated that they will pay some of the outstanding debt by 31 March 2017. Only the Department of Education honoured the commitment to pay and an amount of R500 000.00 was paid by 31 March 2017.

The National Department of Co-operative Governance (DCoG) was able to collect information from the following local municipalities:

• Lephalale Local Municipality
• Lim 368 (i.e. former Modimolle and Mookgophong Local Municipalities)
• Thabazimbi Local Municipality

a) and b)

(ii) Lephalale Local Municipality is owed the amounts reflected on the link below by the following departments:

https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW626Table-170522.pdf

c) The above amounts have been owed for more than 150 days.

d) The municipality has not provided the reasons for non-payment.

e) Information regarding when the amounts will be paid has not been submitted.

a) and b)

(iii) Lim 368 (i.e. Modimolle and Mookgophong LMs) is owed by the following departments (see link below):

https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW626Department-170522.pdf

c) The above amounts have been owed for more than a year (1yr).

d) The municipality has not provided any reasons for non-payment.

e) Information regarding when the amounts will be paid has not been submitted.

a) and b)

(iv) Thabazimbi LM is owed by the following departments:see link below

https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW626ThabazimbiLM-170522.pdf

c) Some of the amounts have been outstanding since March 2008.

d) The municipality has not provided the reasons for non-payment.

e) Information regarding when the amounts will be paid has not been submitted.

Reply:

1. The Conditions of Appointment are derived from or are linked to the salaries and conditions of service which apply to comparable (identified) Senior Management positions in the Public Service. Due to this link, I will be able to issue the 2017 Annual Determination once the cost of living adjustment for Members of the Senior Management Service for 2017 has been determined by the Minister for Public Service and Administration, after consultation with the Minister of Finance.

2. The Conditions of Appointment, inclusive of remuneration and conditions of service, applicable to members of the Public Service Commission are derived from or are linked to the salaries and conditions of service which apply to comparable (identified) Senior Management positions in the Public Service. The conditions of service of Senior Managers in the Public Service are determined by the Minister for the Public Service and Administration. Despite the linking of the salary dispensation of Members of the Public Service Commission with the Senior Management Service, the salary progression measures (notch increases) introduced for the SMS in 2002 for implementation with effect from 1 April 2003 were not extended to Commissioners.

(3) The Conditions of Appointment applicable to Members of the Public Service Commission provide for an Inclusive Flexible Remuneration Package for members of the Public Service Commission. This package consists of the basic salary (70% of the package), the State’s contribution to the Government Employees Pension Fund (13% of the pensionable salary) and a flexible portion. The flexible portion can be used for a motor car allowance, 13th cheque, medical assistance, housing allowance or non-pensionable cash allowance. It should however be noted that the total amount structured for these benefits must equal the amount available in the flexible portion of the Member’s package.

Reply:

1. As at 15 December 2016, information at our disposal indicates that 7 municipalities have established 49 Special Rating Areas (SRAs) between them in terms of section 22 of the Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act, Act 6 of 2004 (“the Act”). The 7 municipalities are Breede Valley, City of Cape Town, eThekwini, KwaDukuza, Mossel Bay, Stellenbosch, and Nelson Mandela Metro.

2. Taking into account that the establishment of SRAs is a voluntary arrangement, we are not in a position to provide an independent authoritative view because we have not undertaken an assessment of whether the 49 SRAs that have been established by the 7 municipalities have achieved the objectives for which they were voluntarily established for.

Section 22(2) of the Act requires a municipality to consult and “obtain the consent of the majority of the members of the local community in the proposed special rating area who will be liable for paying the additional rate”. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that if the majority of the affected members of the community are of the view that the SRA is not achieving its objectives, they can call for its dissolution. In this regard, the policies of all 7 municipalities provide for the municipality to dissolve the SRA upon written application by the majority of the owners of rateable properties within the SRA.

The establishment of SRAs is normally initiated by property owners (and not by municipalities) who make proposals to municipalities and these are established for a fixed period, which is ordinarily not more than five years, but their geographic boundaries and life spans can be amended by the municipality after consultations with the affected property owners if the majority are in favour of such amendment.

3. Following from (2) above, we are not in a position to answer this question at this point in time.