Questions and Replies

Reply:

(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f); The information that the Honourable Member is seeking is currently going through an audit process in order to ensure its accuracy. However, the Entities and the Department will gladly provide such information in their respective 2016/17 Annual reports which will be tabled in Parliament in August 2017 as prescribed in the PFMA.

Reply:

The Minister of Finance provided a guarantee to the Commonwealth Games Federation in support of South Africa’s hosting of the 2022 Commonwealth Games in June 2016. The guarantee was in respect of the operational budget for the Games of R2.7 billion and a contingency budget capped at R479 million (18% of the operational budget) for possible overruns.

In effect, this meant that the South African Government, through the national and provincial departments involved in the hosting of the Games (including the Departments of Sport and Recreation; Arts and Culture; Police; and Human Settlements) as well as the host city, eThekwini, would commit these funds towards the cost of hosting the Games. These departments and the eThekwini municipality were to reprioritise their baseline funds to cover these costs. There would be therefore no additional funds made available for the hosting of the Games.

Reply:

 

Neither the department nor its Entities procured any services or made any payments to Bell Pottinger or any other public relations firm.

Reply:

(a) The Department of Science and Technology:

a	(aa)	(bb)	(cc)	(dd)	(ee)	(ff)
(i)	(ii)
No	No	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

(b) The entities reporting to the Minister of Science and Technology:

b	(aa)	(bb)	(cc)	(dd)	(ee)	(ff)
(i)	(ii)
No	No	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Reply:

(1) The only full qualifications on offer by the Department are the National Certificate (Vocational) [NC (V)] Level 2, 3 and 4 qualifications. The total number of students who attained full NC (V) qualifications in the November 2016 examinations is 34 003 of which 16 031 completed NC (V) Level 2, 11 361 completed NC (V) Level 3 and 6 611 completed NC (V) Level 4.

(2) The total number of certificates printed and forwarded to public colleges for the November 2016 NC (V) Level 2, 3 and 4 examinations as at 30 April 2017 is 33 439 of which 15 798 were for NC (V) Level 2, 11 206 were for NC (V) Level 3 and 6 435 were for NC (V) Level 4.

(3) The challenges linked to the processing of the outstanding 564 NC (V) certificates (233 for Level 2, 155 for Level 3 and 176 for Level 4) for the November 2016 examinations are due to data problems and data processing inconsistencies detected in earlier examination cycles by the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) during the clearing of the NC (V) certificates backlog. These challenges have had a knock-on effect on the processing of the outstanding certificates for the November 2016 cycle. SITA has committed that the challenges affecting the release of the outstanding certificates will be resolved by 30 June 2017.

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 1100 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

Reply:

a) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has neither procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation nor made any payment to Decolonization Foundation

Currently, in the context of its mandate, the Department does not anticipate any dealings or engagement with the Foundation.

b) The National Prosecuting Authority, Special Investigating Unit and Legal Aid South Africa have informed me that they have neither procured anything from, nor made any payments to the Decolonization Foundation.

c) The office of the Chief Justice has not conducted any business with the Decolonization Foundation.

d) The Department of Correctional Services has not conducted any business with the Decolonization Foundation.

Reply:

(a) What amount did the National Empowerment Fund’s sponsorship of the Black Business Council (BBC) event on 15 May 2017 cost?

The NEF approved sponsorship of R150 000 including VAT, totalling R171 000.

(b) Which person(s) or organisation approached the BBC for this sponsorship?

The Acting CEO of the BBC approached the NEF for the sponsorship. BBC correspondence to the NEF dated 11 May 2017 states that:

“We have invited the Minister of Finance, Honourable Malusi Gigaba to be our guest speaker and engage the Black Business Council fraternity on a number of issues.”

The BBC therefore approached the NEF, as an entity with the mandate of driving the implementation of black economic empowerment policies, to be part of an engagement with the Minister of Finance on issues affecting black entrepreneurs in South Africa.

(c) What are the full relevant details of the processes followed in expending the amount in this way?

The NEF approved the sponsorship in accordance with its internal policies.

Reply:

DAFF

DAFF has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

PPECB

PPECB has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

OBP

OBP has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

NCERA

NCERA has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

ARC

ARC has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

NAMC

NAMC has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

MLRF

Marine Living Resources Fund (MLRF) has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

Reply:

Departmental transfers to public entities is governed by section 38(1)(j) of the Public Finance Management Act. Treasury regulation 8.4 sets out the framework for transfers and subsidies. In terms of Treasury Regulation 8.4.1, the accounting officer of a department must maintain appropriate measures to ensure that transfers to public entities are applied for intended purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, regular reporting procedures, internal and external audit requirements, regular monitoring procedures and scheduled and unscheduled inspection visits or reviews of performance.

Public entities strategic plans and annual performance plans are approved by the relevant Executive Authority and tabled in Parliament. These plans set out performance targets for public entities and in terms of Treasury Regulation 8.4.2, the accounting officer of a department may withhold transfers and subsidies to a public entity if, amongst others, the agreed objectives have not been attained and the transfer does not provide the value for money in relation to its purpose or objectives.

Treasury regulation 5.3.1 requires accounting officers of departments to establish procedures for quarterly reporting for effective performance monitoring, evaluation and corrective action.

Reply:

(a) The following universities are currently receiving bursaries for heritage promotion:

• Sol Plaatjie University
• University of Cape Town
• University of Venda
• University of South Africa
• University of Johannesburg
• University of Pretoria
• University of Kwazulu Natal
• Rhodes University
• North West University
• University of Witwatersrand
• Stellenbosch University
• University of the Western Cape.

(b)(i) A total of 95 bursaries have been awarded in the 2016/2017 financial year.

(b)(ii) 271 bursars are currently in the system.

(b)(iii) 180 students have completed their studies since the inception of bursaries five years ago.

Reply:

Schedule 5A of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act No 108 of 1996, which stipulates that libraries, other than national libraries, are an exclusive provincial legislative competence

Reply:

1. (a).My department has never procured any services from or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation

(b). none of the entities reporting to my Ministry (DAC)

    (i). have procured any services from the Decolonisation Foundation and/or

    (ii). made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

Please refer to the question 443 of 10 March 2017.

Reply:

a) The Department has defined its e-Transport architecture which is meant to integrate Transport transversal electronic services (e.g. eNaTIS, NLTIS, AARTO, Driving Licence etc) to enable them to be available online to improve citizen convenience, reduce queues and improve efficiency of integrated systems.

b) The expenditure is embedded in the operations of the current electronic services and it will be difficult to isolate because there is no special funding reserved for eTransport. But as cooperate with our agencies there is a focus to expand our services to make them available online. The current resources will be used to achieve the department’s online services.

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department and each entity reporting to me as follows:

(a) No

(b) No

Reply:

1. (a) The police has submitted the docket to the prosecution on 9 May 2017.

(b) There is still a considerable amount of investigation outstanding, and further investigation is currently underway.

(c) Due to the fact that there is still a lot of investigation outstanding, on 17 May 2017 the prosecution postponed the matter in court to 11 July 2017, to allow further investigation. The accused were released on bail.

2. The prosecutor examined the docket and provided further guidance for police investigation.

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:

The Department’s spending on e-Government services is as following:

(a) 2016/17 expenditure was R1 million.

(b) 2017/18 projected expenditure is R2 million.

Reply:

(a), (b) Not applicable

 

________________________

Approved by the Minister on

Date………………………..

Reply:

No.

Reply:

My assumption is that the question by the Honourable Member is in relation to the investigation that was done by the Special Investigating Unit into the affairs of Mhlatuze Water Board in Richards Bay. The investigation by the SIU was not into a particular individual but it was in relation to Mhlatuze Water Board as an Institution and as such, no findings were made in relation to a particular individual.

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 biggest risk to growth in 2017 lies in lower confidence. Achieving faster growth requires government to prioritise building confidence in households as well as foreign and local investors. This requires engagement with social partners, a focus on improving the ease of doing business to encourage investment and the development of Small Medium Enterprises as well as urgently addressing key structural reforms in the economy.

The National Treasury supports growth through the budget. The budget allocates resources according to the priorities and guidance of the National Development Plan.

In addition, the Minister of Finance and the National Treasury engage regularly with global and local investors to communicate Government’s fiscal and economic strategies and have also played an important role in Government engagements through the CEO initiative, to identify opportunities in labour intensive sectors such as agriculture and tourism to create jobs and growth.

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:

The prevailing unemployment rate remains ominously high. To address the high unemployment rate will require greater effort to reignite growth in the economy. Government is focusing on three main areas: restoring investor confidence, improving the ease of doing business and implementing structural reforms to ensure inclusive growth. Extensive engagement with social partners should reinforce efforts to improve labour relations.

Government’s plans to reduce inequality and poverty; raise employment; and raise the standard of living of all South Africans is guided by the National Development Plan (NDP) supported through the allocation of budget resources according to the NDP priorities and direction.

The National Treasury oversees the following specific programmes to address unemployment, namely:

• the employment tax incentive which seeks to reduce the risk of hiring young, inexperienced workers;

• the learnership incentive which seeks to encourage the development of skills; and

• the Jobs Fund, which seeks to support innovative ways to support employment creation.

Additional details on government programmes to address unemployment can be directed to relevant departments such as Department of Labour, Department of Higher Education etc.

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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)(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:

(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:

(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) 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:

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:

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:

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:

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

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)

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

Reply:

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

Reply:

(a) Nil

(b) Nil

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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.