Questions and Replies

Filter by year

29 November 2016 - NW2591

Profile picture: Davis, Mr GR

Davis, Mr GR to ask the Minister of Basic Education

Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1071 on 29 April 2016, she will make the reports submitted by teachers’ unions accounting for expenditures of her department’s funding available to (a) members of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education and/or (b) Mr G R Davis; if not, in each case, why not; if so, by what date?

Reply:

(a) & (b)

Yes, the Minister will make the teacher union reports available to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education (b) before the end of the financial year 31 March 2017.

29 November 2016 - NW2287

Profile picture: Bergman, Mr D

Bergman, Mr D to ask the Minister of Basic Education

Whether any (a) internal and/or (b) external forensic reports pertaining to (i) her department and/or (ii) each entity reporting to her were completed from 1 January 2009 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what is the (aa) name, (bb) subject matter and (cc) date of conclusion of each of the specified forensic reports?

Reply:

(a)There are 24 reported cases of allegations from the Public Service Commission relating to the Provincial Education Departments (PEDs), and one (1) for the entity, South African Council for Educators (SACE). The Department is following up with the relevant PEDS and SACE for feedback on their investigation process.

29 November 2016 - NW2594

Profile picture: Boshoff, Ms SH

Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education

With reference to her reply to question 4098 on 14 December 2015, (a) what are the key differences between the National Education Evaluation and Development Unit (NEEDU) and the Office of Standards and Compliance for Basic Education (OSCBE), (b) why is the OSCBE being established by regulation and not by legislation, (c) what guarantees will be written into legislation to safeguard the independence of the OSCBE from the civil service responsible for the administration of schools and (d) by what date will the OSCBE be established?

Reply:

(a) The main difference between the National Education Evaluation and Development Unit (NEEDU) and the Office of Standards and Compliance for Basic Education (OSCBE) is that through a Bill, NEEDU would be established as a statutory body whereas pursuing the new legal pathway (i.e., establishing NEEDU as the OSCBE) will create a ‘component of government.’

Where NEEDU is established as a statutory body, it would be governed by a board whereas the OSCBE will be governed by a Governing Advisory Council to oversee, guide and monitor its activities. The process of nominating and appointing members of the Board or the Council, to ensure that the functions of NEEDU or the OSCBE are performed according to the highest professional standards, is the same, and so are the functions of these bodies.

Except for these differences, where NEEDU is established as a statutory body (through a Bill) or as a component of government (in terms of section 7(5)(c), read with section 7A(1) of the Public Service Act,1994, NEEDU and OSCBE are basically the same in all respects, including governing principles, vision, strategic objectives, functions, authorities, and requirements to report to the Minister of Basic Education on the activities and outcomes of their work.

(b) The Bill no longer has any status following the advice by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) to pursue a new legal pathway. It was argued that, the most appropriate organizational form for NEEDU will be that of an independent government component, established in terms of section 11 of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act 27 of 1996) read with section 7(5) and section 7A of the Public Service Act.

(c) In terms of the Administration and Operations clause in the Business Case and Business Plan for the Establishment of the OSCBE, the OSCBE founding document, the Head of OSCBE will be the accounting officer of OSCBE and will report and account on progress and the achievements of functions to the Minister of Basic Education.

(d) OSCBE will be established when all the prescribed processes have been completed. The process entails the following:

  • Approval of the Regulations for the establishment of the OSCBE by the CEM.
  • Declaring the establishment of OSCBE through the promulgation of the Regulations (via the Government Notice) by the Minister.
  • Submitting the updated business case and promulgated Regulations and Government Notice to the DPSA [by NEEDU].
  • Arranging a meeting of the Interdepartmental Assessment Committee to make recommendations on the organizational form for the OSCBE—with NEEDU participating as a member in the Committee and making a presentation to the members [by DPSA].
  • Preparing a submission to inform the Minister for Public Service and Administration and the Minister of Finance of the Committee's recommendation and obtain the concurrence of the said Ministers for the establishment of the OSBE as a government component [by DPSA].
  • Preparing (following concurrence from said Ministers) a presidential proclamation to list the OSCBE in schedule 3 of the Public Service Act so as to establish the OSCBE as a government component [by DPSA].

29 November 2016 - NW2480

Profile picture: Steenkamp, Ms J

Steenkamp, Ms J to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

(1)Whether (a) the Chief Executive Officer, (b) each executive and (c) each board member of the Local Government Sector Education and Training Authority (LGSETA) submitted reports for each international trip they undertook (i) in the 2015 calendar year and (ii) since 1 January 2016; if not, in each case, why not; if so, in each case, on what date; (2) whether he will make the specified reports available to Ms J Edwards; if not, why not; if so, by what date; (3) whether any staff members of the LGSETA were formally appointed to act in the positions of the persons who travelled internationally; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are (a) the names of each staff member who was appointed in an acting position in the specified period and (b) further relevant details in this regard?

Reply:

1. (a) - (c) There were no international trips undertaken by the Chief Executive Officer, executive or board members in the 2015 calendar year and to date.

2. Not applicable.

3. Not Applicable.

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2480 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW1756

Profile picture: Dudley, Ms C

Dudley, Ms C to ask the Minister of Basic Education

Whether her department has adopted or intends to adopt a policy or programme of comprehensive sexuality education in schools; if so, what are the relevant details regarding the implementation thereof?

Reply:

Yes, in line with the implementation of the Department of Basic Education’s (DBE) Integrated Strategy on HIV, STIs and TB, 2012-2016, the DBE reviewed the 1999 National Policy on HIV/AIDS, for Learners and Educators in Public Schools, and Students and Educators in Further Education and Training Institutions and developed a new DBE National Policy on HIV, STIs and TB that aims to provide comprehensive sexuality education programme in schools. In addition, the Policy also seeks to create access to Sexual and Reproductive Health services to learners.

Sexuality education is implemented through Life Orientation as a subject in the curriculum, other programmes include HIV and AIDS Life Skills Education Programme and Peer Education Programme which support and strengthen the content of Life Orientation; as well as, Keeping Girls in School Programme - targeting mainly girls, and the Integrated School Health Programme which is conducted in partnership with the Departments of Health, Social Development, development partners and non-governmental organisations. In addition, the DBE is working with UNESCO to explore the online educator training on comprehensive sexuality education. Training is currently implemented in the Eastern Cape province and will be rolled out to other provinces in subsequent years.

29 November 2016 - NW2595

Profile picture: Boshoff, Ms SH

Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education

With reference to her reply to question 3608 on 2 October 2015, (a) which service provider was appointed to analyse the data for the 2014 National Education Evaluation Development Unit report, (b) what amount was paid to the specified service provider, (c) how many other companies submitted a tender application for the contract to analyse the data and (d) in what way did the procurement process in appointing the specified service provider add to the delays in finalising the specified report?

Reply:

a) The service provider that was appointed to analyse data for the 2014 National Education Evaluation Development Unit is the Underhill Corporate Solutions.

b) R198 117.80 was paid to the service provide.

c) Three companies submitted proposals in response to the Terms of Reference that were advertised.

d) The delay was in supply chain management processes which took too long to appoint the service provider. This had a negative impact on the time frames for the service provider to conclude work.

29 November 2016 - NW2582

Profile picture: Bozzoli, Prof B

Bozzoli, Prof B to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

Whether, with reference to the recommendations of a report commissioned by the National Treasury on International Practices in Post-School Education and Training funding that was produced by DNA Economics and Mzabalazo Economics, any output bonuses have been paid to technical and vocational education training (TVET) colleges as part of their funding formulae; if not, (a) why not and (b) what steps has his department taken in this regard; if so, what (i) amounts have been paid in bonuses to TVET colleges and (ii) were the terms of the bonuses that were awarded?

Reply:

In terms of the National Norms and Standards for Funding Technical and Vocational Education and Training Colleges (NSF-TVET Colleges), paragraph 59 refers to the output bonus as a monetary bonus, which the college receives in recognition of efficient or outstanding service delivery. The output bonus is over and above a college allocation and is determined based on the following criteria:

  • The ratio of past successful completions to past enrolments, and previous versions of this ratio, applicable to previous years, both the absolute levels of this ratio, and improvements in this ratio overtime, should be taken into account.
  • Attainment of development targets in the strategic plan of the college, including targets relating to the representivity of students.
  • Average examination scores attained by students.

Paragraph 15 of the TVET funding norms states:

In the interests of quality TVET services in the public sector, and in order to minimise inefficient utilisation of funds, it is important that the new funding system should be sensitive to the outputs achieved by public colleges. There are two ways in which the new system deals with the matter of efficiency and outputs. Firstly, the system allows DHET to expand enrolment in colleges that prove to be efficient and to decrease enrolment in inefficient colleges. This is made possible through the joint DHET-college planning process. Secondly, the system includes an output bonus, which should be considered a performance incentive that eligible colleges can utilise to improve their facilities, conduct further research, or for some similar developmental activity. The output-related aspects of the system are obviously dependent on the credible measurement of college performance, both in terms of successful completions (or the throughput rate) and in terms of the labour market performance of graduates.

(a) The Department has not been able to implement the payment of output bonuses to TVET Colleges because the TVET system was migrated to the Department on 1 April 2015 from Provincial Departments of Education and prior to this, it was the responsibility of Provinces to determine output bonuses. Since 1 April 2015, the Department has not paid any output bonuses as the TVET funding norms in paragraph 15, quoted above, indicates that the payment of the output bonuses is dependent on the credible measurement of college performance. The Department has started developing credible measurement tools. The TVET sector remains underfunded and with the current budget constraints, it is not possible for the Department to fund any output bonuses. It must be noted that the Department is currently only able to fund TVET Colleges at 57% of the required 80% funding level due to limited budget and increased enrolments. It must also be noted that the Department has submitted bids to National Treasury since 2010 specifically indicating the funding shortfall of which no additional baseline funding was received.

(b) The Department is committed to a system of output bonuses for TVET colleges and is developing a robust, reliable and incontestable measuring tool for performance; ensuring that the TVET examinations system managed by the State Information Technology Agency is cleaned up to produce reliable data on throughput and success rates; instituting a verification process for data supplied by TVET Colleges; implementing for the first time in 2016, a unit record TVET management information system; instituting monitoring and evaluation systems as well as a DHET-college strategic and annual performance planning system, among others. Once the credibility of these measures is tested and consulted, and the Department is able to manage over-enrolment and thereby releasing funds, the system will be implemented.

(i) No amounts have been paid as output bonuses to TVET colleges.

(ii) There are no terms for the payment of bonuses, as no amounts have been paid as output bonuses to TVET colleges.

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2582 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW2542

Profile picture: Van Dyk, Ms V

Van Dyk, Ms V to ask the Minister of Communications

Whether, with reference to the recent prolonged contract disputes between certain productions (names furnished) and the SA Broadcasting Corporation (SABC), the approval of the SABC Board is required before contracts to run new seasons of soap operas are awarded; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what are the relevant details and (b) did the SABC Board have a quorum when it awarded contracts in each case?

Reply:

The SABC is not aware of any contract disputes regarding the production of Soap Operas. The process followed in contracting with production companies is fully and clearly spelt out in the SABC supply chain policy on the acquisition of local content and the SABC follows that process.

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

29 November 2016 - NW2470

Profile picture: Bagraim, Mr M

Bagraim, Mr M to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

Whether (a) the Chief Executive Officer, (b) each executive and (c) each board member of the Construction Education and Training Authority (CETA) submitted reports for each international trip they undertook (i) in the 2015 calendar year and (ii) since 1 January 2016; if not, in each case, why not; if so, in each case, on what date; (2) whether he will make the specified reports available to Mr M Bagraim; if not, why not; if so, by what date; (3) whether any staff members of the CETA were formally appointed to act in the positions of the persons who travelled internationally; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are (a) the names of each staff member who was appointed in an acting position in the specified period and (b) further relevant details in this regard?

Reply:

1. (a) - (c) There were no international trips undertaken by the Chief Executive Officer, executive or board members in the 2015 calendar year and to date.

2. Not applicable.

3. Not Applicable.

 

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2470 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW2481

Profile picture: Steenkamp, Ms J

Steenkamp, Ms J to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

(1)Whether (a) the Chief Executive Officer, (b) each executive and (c) each board member of the Media Advertising Information and Communication Technologies Sector Education and Training Authority (MICT SETA) submitted reports for each international trip they undertook (i) in the 2015 calendar year and (ii) since 1 January 2016; if not, in each case, why not; if so, in each case, on what date; (2) whether he will make the specified reports available to Ms J Edwards; if not, why not; if so, by what date; (3) whether any staff members of the MICT SETA were formally appointed to act in the positions of the persons who travelled internationally; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are (a) the names of each staff member who was appointed in an acting position in the specified period and (b) further relevant details in this regard?

Reply:

1. (a) - (c) There were no international trips undertaken by the Chief Executive Officer, executive or board members in the 2015 calendar year and to date.

2. Not applicable.

3. Not Applicable.

 

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2481 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW2477

Profile picture: Brauteseth, Mr TJ

Brauteseth, Mr TJ to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

(1)Whether (a) the Chief Executive Officer, (b) each executive and (c) each board member of the Food and Beverage Manufacturing Industry Sector Education and Training Authority (FoodBev SETA) submitted reports for each international trip they undertook (i) in the 2015 calendar year and (ii) since 1 January 2016; if not, in each case, why not; if so, in each case, on what date; (2) whether he will make the specified reports available to Mr T J Brauteseth; if not, why not; if so, by what date; (3) whether any staff members of the FoodBev SETA were formally appointed to act in the positions of the persons who travelled internationally; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are (a) the names of each staff member who was appointed in an acting position in the specified period and (b) further relevant details in this regard?

Reply:

1. (a) - (c) There were no international trips undertaken by the Chief Executive Officer, executive or board members in the 2015 calendar year and to date.

2. Not applicable.

3. Not Applicable.

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2477 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW2347

Profile picture: Lorimer, Mr JR

Lorimer, Mr JR to ask the Mr J R B Lorimer (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises

(1) With reference to her reply to question 847 on 11 April 2016, (a) what is the total amount of the fine imposed by Eskom on Optimum Colliery for the delivery of substandard coal, (b) what amount owed for the specified fine has been paid to date, (c) what are the terms of the repayment agreement and (d) by which date will the fine be paid in full; (2) whether any other fines have been imposed on any other coal suppliers for similar reasons; if not, why not; if so, in each case, (a) what are the relevant details, (b) how much did Eskom fine the specified coal suppliers, (c) when were such fines levied and (d) on what date will the fines be paid in full? NW2682E

Reply:

(1) (a) R2, 176 530 611.99 accrued as at August 2015.

(1)(b) This penalty has not been paid by Optimum to date.

(1) (c) No agreement has been reached.

(1) (d) The matter is still the subject of arbitration, no agreement has been reached.

(2) Yes.

(2)(a) Fines normally referred to as penalties have been levied in all instances where coal quality is at the bottom end of the expected range. A coal penalty regime is a standard condition of Eskom contracts.

(2)(b) For Eskom’s long-term coal suppliers, excluding Optimum Colliery which supplies Hendrina Power Station, a total of R90 million in penalties was levied for the period 01 April 2015 to 30 September 2016.

(2)(c) The price adjustments are effected in the month that payment for the respective coal supply was made and are reflected in both the invoice and in Eskom’s payment assessment.

(2)(d) The price adjustments are effected in the month that payment for the respective coal supply was made.

29 November 2016 - NW2466

Profile picture: Mazzone, Ms NW

Mazzone, Ms NW to ask the Minister of Higher Education and Training

How many international trips were undertaken by (i) the Chief Executive Officer, (ii) each executive and (iii) each board member of the Services Sector Education and Training Authority (aa) in the 2015 calendar year and (bb) since 1 January 2016 and (b) what was the (i) cost, (ii) purpose and (iii) detailed itinerary of each specified trip?

Reply:

(a)-(bb) There were no international trips undertaken by the Chief Executive Officer, executive or board members in the 2015 calendar year and to date.

(b) (i)-(iii) Not applicable

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 2466 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

29 November 2016 - NW2083

Profile picture: Kruger, Mr HC

Kruger, Mr HC to ask the Minister of Basic Education

What amount did (a) her department and (b) each entity reporting to her spend on advertising on the (i) Africa News Network 7 channel, (ii) SA Broadcasting Corporation (aa) television channels and (bb) radio stations, (iii) national commercial radio stations and (iv) community (aa) television and (bb) radio stations (aaa) in the 2015-16 financial year and (bbb) since 1 April 2016?

Reply:

(a) The Department of Basic Education has not spent on advertising on (i) ANN7, (ii) SABC Television and Radio Channels, National and Commercial Radio Stations, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

(b) SACE has not spent on advertising on ANN7, SABC Television and Radio Channels, National and Commercial Radio Stations, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

Umalusi has not spent on advertising on ANN7, SABC Television and Radio Channels, Community Television and Radio Stations during the 2015-2016 financial year or since 1 April 2016.

However, Umalusi has spent R212, 106.35 on National and Commercial Radio stations during the 2015-2016 financial year.

29 November 2016 - NW2578

Profile picture: Mashabela, Ms N

Mashabela, Ms N to ask the Minister of Basic Education

(a) What (i) are the names and (ii) is the total number of schools that provide sanitary towels for learners, (b) what is the total number of learners that have been provided with the specified towels in the specified schools and (c) how many times in a given school calendar were the towels provided?

Reply:

(a) What (i) are the names and

(ii) is the total number of schools that provide sanitary towels for learners,

After the President declared in his State of the Nation Address (SONA) in 2011 that the Government should make available sanitary dignity packs to deserving young girls and women, three provinces, namely: Limpopo, Mpumalanga and Gauteng, formed partnerships with Protector and Gamble to distribute sanitary towels to girl learners in selected schools. Currently, there is no available data on the names and number of schools to respond to question (a)(i) and (a)(ii) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

(b) what is the total number of learners that have been provided with the specified towels in the specified schools

Currently, there is no available data on the number of learners that have been provided with the specified towels in the implementing schools to respond to question (b) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

(c) how many times in a given school calendar were the towels provided?

Currently, there is no available data on the number of times in a given school calendar that the towels were given to learners in response to question (c) above. The information has been requested from the three provinces whose schools have implemented the programme.

29 November 2016 - NW2535

Profile picture: Van Damme, Ms PT

Van Damme, Ms PT to ask the Minister of Communications

Whether the (a) chief executive officers, (b) chief operating officers, (c) group executives and/or (d) board members of any of the entities that report to her have (i) met with any representative member and/or close associate of the Gupta family and/or (ii) attended any meetings with the specified persons at the specified family’s estate in Saxonwold, Johannesburg, or anywhere else since she took office; if so, in each specified case, (aa) what are the names of the persons who were present at each meeting, (bb) where did each meeting take place, (cc) what was the purpose of the meeting and (dd) on what date did the meeting take place?

Reply:

The work from all government entities including those reporting to the Ministry of Communications, requires engagement with various stakeholders in the public and private sector. This is in line with the nature of work undertaken.

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

28 November 2016 - NW2295

Profile picture: Van Der Walt, Ms D

Van Der Walt, Ms D to ask the Minister of Health

Whether any (a) internal and/or (b) external forensic reports pertaining to (i) his department and/or (ii) each entity reporting to him were completed from 1 January 2009 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what is the (aa) name, (bb) subject matter and (cc) date of conclusion of each of the specified forensic reports?

Reply:

The following table reflects the response in this regard.

(a) INTERNAL OR (b) EXTERNAL

DEPARTMENT

COMMENT DATE

(aa) NAME

(bb) SUBJECT MATTER

(cc) DATE OF CONCLUSION

(a) Internal Forensic Investigation

SANAC

Instituted in July 2011

Allegation against an employee

The investigation was in response to the serious allegations of fraud levelled against the employee.

March 2012

(a) Internal Forensic Investigation

Medicine Control Council Unit

Instituted in March 2014

Allegation against an employee

The investigation was in response to the serious allegations of dishonesty levelled against the employee.

June 2015

(a) Internal Forensic Investigation

Human Resources Directorate

Instituted in 2010

Fruitless and wasteful expenditure

The investigation was in response to the serious allegations of fruitless and wasteful expenditure levelled against an employee

June 2013

(a) Internal Forensic Investigation

Johannesburg Forensic Chemistry Laboratory

Instituted in June 2014

Allegations of assault against 2 employees

The investigation was in response to the serious allegations of assault levelled against the 2 employees.

July 2014

(b) External Investigation

None

       

(b) External forensic investigation

Council for Medical Schemes (CMS)

Instituted in April 2014

Allegation against the Registrar

The investigation was in response to the serious allegations levelled against the Registrar of CMS by the former provisional curator of Medshield

April 2015

(a)None

South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)

None

None

None

None

(a)None

Office of Health Standards Compliance (OHSC)

None

None

None

None

(b)External forensic investigation

National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS)

19 July 2013

SA Cosmetics

Alleged Fraudulent Transactions

09-Sep-13

(b)External forensic investigation

 

11 April 2014

NHLS Billing

Forensic Investigation into KZN NHLS billing system

24-May-16

END.

28 November 2016 - NW2517

Profile picture: Macpherson, Mr DW

Macpherson, Mr DW to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether, with reference to his replies to questions (a) 2140 and (b) 2141 on 28 October 2016, any South African embassy and/or consulate in the Russian Federation issued a visa to any of the specified Russian nationals; if so, what are the relevant details in each case in terms of the (i) type, (ii) duration of stay and (iii) dates of validity of each of the specified visas?

Reply:

The Honourable Member is requested to provide me with details such as passport numbers and other additional information to enable me to validate the information on our systems and provide a response.

28 November 2016 - NW2405

Profile picture: Hunsinger, Mr CH

Hunsinger, Mr CH to ask the Minister of Transport

What (a) are the full reasons for the recent erection of stop signs on the N12 between the R28 and R558 at Zuurbekom in the Westonaria Local Municipality in Gauteng, (b) traffic impact studies were undertaken (i) to ascertain the necessity for the stop signs and (ii) since the erection of the stop signs, (c) were the results of each of the impact studies in each case and (d) were the costs involved in erecting the stop signs?

Reply:

a) The N12 West route from Naturena in Johannesburg to the Northwest Province border at Fochville has been identified as the most fatal major route in Gauteng. The intersections in the Zuurberkom area have been identified as the most hazardous locations (HAZLOCs) on the N12. The factors that contribute to the dangers at these intersections include the following:

  • Excessive speed on the N12, especially since the recent rehabilitation of the road. Traffic speed monitoring has indicated that almost 40% of vehicles are travelling above the speed limit of 80km/h in this area;
  • High volumes of long trucks and other slow moving traffic crossing the N12, especially in the areas adjacent to the silos;
  • The area adjacent to the N12 in the Zuurberkom area that is developing, resulting in high volumes of pedestrians and cyclists crossing the N12’
  • Reckless and inconsiderate drivers behaviours;
  • High accident rates and fatalities in the Zuurberkom area, especially after the completion of the road rehabilitation (the number of fatalities had more than doubled from 2015 to 2016)

The installation of 4way stops at these intersections has been identified as the most appropriate measure to address these problem at these stage. In the longer term the installation of traffic signals at these intersections will be considered.

b) (i) Yes, traffic studies, investigations and inspections were undertaken by the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport and the Gauteng Department of Community Safety in consultation with the local law enforcement agencies as part of the West Rand Rims (road accident management system)

(ii) Yes, the situation is being monitored closely and regular inspections are being carried out.

c) The study confirmed the need for the 4-way stop and indicated the need for further measures such as overhead lighting, rumble strips and continuous traffic law enforcement in this area

d) No separate record of the costs for the instillation were kept as they were installed as part of the routine maintenance activities.

28 November 2016 - NW2553

Profile picture: Steyn, Ms A

Steyn, Ms A to ask the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

(1)What (a) was the total budget allocated by his department to disaster management (i) in each of the past three financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2016 and (b) amounts were (i) requested by each province in each of the specified financial years and (ii) paid out in each case; (2) whether any outstanding funds must still be paid out to the provinces; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what amount of outstanding funds must still be paid to the provinces and (b)(i) since what date has each of the specified payments been outstanding and (ii) what is the reason in each case?

Reply:

  1. (a) (i) The total budget as per the Grant Allocation was as follows

FINANCIAL YEARS

MUNICIPAL GRANT

PROVINCIAL GRANT

MUNICIPAL DISASTER RECOVERY GRANT

2013/14

R346 500 000

R188 000 000

R11 300 000

2014/15

R363 600 000

R197 000 000

R8 600 000

2015/16

R374 000 000

R204 000 000

R124 000 000

(ii) Yes, no amounts were directly made available by the department since April 2016

(b) (i) Amount requested by each province in the specified financial years and (ii) paid outs.

Note: The amount stated in these tables reflects funding transferred from the Disaster Grants to affected sectors and municipalities. The post disaster recovery funds for sectors are facilitated by the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, directly transferred from National Treasury within the Contingency Reserve to relevant sectors.

PROVINCE

Type of disaster

2013/14

   

Requested

Paid out

Easter Cape

Floods

R1 348 397 495

R111 350 000

Free State

 

0

0

Gauteng

 

0

0

KwaZulu-Natal

Floods

R309 265 636

R34 162 030

Limpopo

Floods

R737 035 841

R87 925 200

Mpumalanga

 

0

0

Northern Cape

Drought

R360 000 000

R50 000 000

North West

Drought

R3 000 804 000

R43 630 000

Western Cape

Floods

R266 589 672

R55 617 000

PROVINCE

Type of disaster

2014/15

   

Requested

Paid out

Eastern Cape

Floods

R579 180 687

R 8 610 800

Free State

Fires

R50 000 000

R15 791 000

Gauteng

Floods

R701 200 770

R14 878 446

KwaZulu-Natal

Drought, Floods and Fires

R181 563 069

R89 083 000

Limpopo

Floods

R213 450 000

R14 884 000

Mpumalanga

Floods

R535 600 000

R97 170 000

Northern Cape

 

0

0

North West

Earth Quake

R163 500 131

R148 508 00

Western Cape

Floods

R1 074 746 408

R82 796 000

NB: It is important to note that national and provincial sector departments, including municipalities agreed to reprioritise internal funding that is anticipated and estimated savings within their equitable shares and conditional grants to address the drought situation to ensure non-duplication of financial resources. The Disaster Grants were to be utilised once provinces have fully spent the reprioritised funding. Again, the funding allocated for floods are the funds that were allocated in 2014/15, within the Medium Term Expenditure Framework to repair the damages as a result of the 2013 floods disasters.

PROVINCE

 

2015/16

   

Requested

Paid out

Easter Cape

Drought

R385 732 991

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Free State

Drought

R102 442 000

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Gauteng

Floods for 2013

R35 588 184

R 35 588 184

KwaZulu-Natal

Floods for 2013/14

R87 096 000

 

Drought

R487 884 098

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Limpopo

Floods for 2013/14

R20 836 000

 

Drought

R51 000 000

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Mpumalanga

Floods for 2013/14

R30 000 000

 

Drought

R162 500 000

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Northern Cape

Drought

R163 281 173 (per month)

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

North West

Drought

R3 461 545 284

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

Western Cape

Floods 2013/14

R86 919 000

 

Drought

R105 000 000

No disaster grants paid out until April 2016, only reprioritised funding as indicated above.

2. No outstanding amounts are to be paid out to the provinces.

28 November 2016 - NW2549

Profile picture: America, Mr D

America, Mr D to ask the Minister of Police

What amount has been allocated by the SA Police Service for the construction of (a) permanent and (b) satellite police stations in Gauteng for the 2016-17 financial year?

Reply:

The accurate figures will soon be forwarded to you in due course as they are still in the process of verification.

28 November 2016 - NW2522

Profile picture: Breytenbach, Adv G

Breytenbach, Adv G to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

What amount have all (a)(i) civil and (ii) criminal litigation and (b) internal disciplinary proceedings instituted against Mr Anwa Dramat, Mr Shadrack Sibiya, Mr Robert McBride and Mr Johan Booysen cost his department; 2) what amount has his department been ordered by the courts to pay for cost orders in each of the specified cases for (a)(i) civil and (ii) criminal litigation and (b) internal disciplinary proceedings instituted against each of the specified persons as at the latest specified date for which information is available?

Reply:

1. (a)(i) and (b) In respect of civil matters and internal disciplinary proceedings pertaining to Mr Anwa Dramat, Mr Shadrack Sibiya, Mr Robert McBride, the Office of the State Attorney was not involved in these matters, excluding for the matter of Mr Johan Booysen. The details are explained below:

Johan Wessels Booysen / NDPP and Others: Case No. 8247/2015 – Durban High Court. In this matter an amount of R9 623.94 was expended on counsel and correspondent attorney fees.

(ii) All the criminal cases mentioned above were handled by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) prosecutors, and there were no specific costs related to criminal litigation in all these cases

2. (a)(i)(ii) and (b) According to the records at the State Attorney, there are no matters specifying that the State Attorney was an attorney of record, with a cost order being granted in these matters.

28 November 2016 - NW2266

Profile picture: Mbhele, Mr ZN

Mbhele, Mr ZN to ask the Minister of Police

With reference to his reply to question 1966 on 6 October 2016, what was the (a) total number of section 33(3) court convictions obtained for cases opened against the South African Police Service members for being in contravention of section 29(2) of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate Act, Act 1 of 2011, as amended, since the specified Act came into effect and (b) sentences handed down in each of the specified cases?

Reply:

(a) As a result of NPA declining to prosecute these matters, there were no convictions.

(b) Engagement with the National Director of Public Prosecution in this regard is underway.

28 November 2016 - NW2204

Profile picture: Mbhele, Mr ZN

Mbhele, Mr ZN to ask the Minister of Police

(a) How many (i) charges have been laid with the SA Police Service and (ii) complaints have been lodged with the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) against the National Head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation, Lt Gen B M Ntlemeza, from 1 January 2012 to date, (b) what was the nature of each (i) charge and/or (ii) complaint and (c) what are the full relevant details of the final outcome in each case?

Reply:

According to information currently at our disposal IPID is investigating four (4) matters against Gen BM Ntlemeza from 1 January 2012 up to date.

A case of defeating the Ends of Justice and corruption was opened against Gen. Ntlemeza by Lt Ramahlaha. A case was opened at Silverton police station with the following CAS 500/05/2016 and the matter is with SPP for decision.

A case of perjury against Gen. Ntlemeza was opened by Gen. JW Booysen. A case was opened at Sandton police station with the following CAS 943/10/2016 and the matter is still under investigation by IPID.

A case of Fraud, Uttering and Corruption against Gen. Ntlemeza was opened by Lt Ramahlaha. A case was opened at Polokwane with the following CAS 478/09/2015 and the matter was declined by DPP.

A case of Fraud, Crimen Injuria and Defamation of character against Gen. Ntlemeza was opened by Gen. JW Booysen. A case was opened at Durban Central police station with the following Cas 617/09/2015 and the matter is still under investigation.

 

28 November 2016 - NW2267

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

What is the (a) procedure followed after the Independent Police Investigative Directorate opens a criminal case with the National Prosecuting Authority in the course of its investigations and (b) relevant (i) South African Police Service Regulation(s), (ii) standard operating procedure(s) and/or (iii) National Instruction(s) governing the specified process?

Reply:

(a) When the criminal investigation has being completed and recommendations are made, IPID hands over the file to NPA for decision in terms of section 7(4) of the IPID act.

(b) (i) & (ii) For departmental recommendations IPID hands over the file to SAPS after completion for disciplinary procedures in terms of section 7(6) & 7(7) of the IPID act and SAPS implements disciplinary steps based on the new SAPS discipline regulation 5(3) which came to effect on the 1st November 2016.

28 November 2016 - NW2545

Profile picture: Mbhele, Mr ZN

Mbhele, Mr ZN to ask the Minister of Police

Whether the SA Police Service implemented all the remedial action ordered by the Public Protector in her report, entitled A Fair Chance to Serve dated 30 March 2015, concerning the complaint by a certain person (name furnished); if not, (a) why not and (b) by what date will the remedial action be implemented; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(a) Yes, the recommendations by the Public Protector were implemented.

(b) The complainant was re-enlisted in the South African Police Service on 1 June 2016. The services of an independent assessor have been secured to make a determination on compensation which was set down for 22 November 2016. A written apology on behalf of the South African Police Service was also provided to the complainant. The office of the Public Protector was informed of progress in this regard.

28 November 2016 - NW2357

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport

Which company was appointed by the Air Traffic Navigation Services to assist with the establishment of the Programme Management Office in the 2014-15 financial year, (b) what criteria were used to appoint the specified company, (c) what budget was allocated to the specified company and (d) what were the (i) key performance indicators, (ii) deliverables and (iii) deadlines?

Reply:

a) Project Centric, a subsidiary of Project-Link Holdings and a project management specialist company, was appointed on 13 June 2014 to conduct a Project Management Assessment and Design assignment for ATNS.

b) The normal ATNS Procurement Policies as per the PFMA and PPFA Guidelines were used in the appointment of the service provider. A request for quotation was issued on 8 April 2014 and closed on 16 April 2014 to eleven (11) service providers. The bids were evaluated against the criteria of administrative compliance, functional evaluation, price and BEE.

c) Project Centric was recommended as the successful company for appointment to the relevant line Executive at ATNS, at a total cost of R355, 737.00 including VAT. A budget of R450, 000.00 had been allocated for this exercise.

d) The service provider was broadly mandated to conduct a feasibility study for the deployment of a strong matrix Project Management Office (PMO). The specific brief to the successful service provider was to conduct an independent assessment of the current PMO (at the time) and design of a strong matrix PMO assisting with the following:

(i) and (ii)

    • Conducting project management processes readiness assessment;
    • Conducting a feasibility study and a business case for a strong matrix PMO;
    • Developing a detailed design of a strong matrix PMO and a business case;
    • Developing a change management plan and strategy;
    • Developing a communications strategy and plan; and
    • Developing a training plan.

(ii) The project commenced in August, 2014 and was completed at the end of November, 2014. Throughout the project life cycle regular feedback sessions were held with all project stakeholders to ensure a consultative process for the design of the PMO. Project status reports were distributed to all stakeholders including the EXCO. On 6 February 2015 the final Report, PMO Assessment and Design Project, as well as a request to obtain approval to implement recommendations as per the Report were tabled at the EXCO.

 

28 November 2016 - NW2616

Profile picture: Mbhele, Mr ZN

Mbhele, Mr ZN to ask the Minister of Police

What (a) is the current status of the investigation into CAS 199/06/2016 opened at the Khayelitsha Police Station, (b) are the offences contained in the docket, (c) is the (i) rank and (ii) name of the investigating officer and (d) are the full details of all feedback given to the family in terms of the (aa) content of, (bb) dates on which and (cc) the means through which the feedback was given?

Reply:

(a) The case docket, Khayelitsha CAS 199/06/2016 is still under investigation. The cell phone records have been requested from the service provider to be analysed. This will assist in identifying and tracing the suspects.

(b) The offence is house robbery.

(c)(i) & (ii) The details of the investigating officer cannot be disclosed to allow the investigation to be conducted without fear or favour.

(d)(aa) The complainant has been provided with feedback relating to the case number, the particulars of the investigating officer as well as the status of the investigation.

(d)(bb) Feedback was provided to the complainant on 2016-06-07 and 2016-06-29.

(d)(cc) Feedback was provided to the complainant by means of cell phone communication.

28 November 2016 - NW1966

Profile picture: Mbhele, Mr ZN

Mbhele, Mr ZN to ask the Minister of Police

(a) What is the total number of section 33(3) cases that were opened against SA Police Service members for being in contravention of section 29(2) of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate Act, Act 1 of 2011, as amended, since the specified Act came into effect, (b) what is the total number that resulted in guilty convictions and (c) what were the sanctions in each of the specified cases case?

Reply:

(a) Total number of section 33(3) matters opened by IPID

Year

Reported cases

2012/13

127

2013/14

65

2014/15

60

2015/16

41

Total

293

Refer to annexure A for more details

(b) Total number that resulted guilty in convictions per year

Year

Departmental

Criminal

2012/13

3

0

2013/14

7

0

2014/15

11

0

2015/16

11

0

Total

32

0

Refer to annexure B for more details

(c) Total number of sanctions per year

Year

Verbal warning

Written Warning

2012/13

1

2

2013/14

2

5

2014/15

0

11

2015/16

3

8

Total

6

26

Refer to annexure B for more details

Annexure A: Intake

2012-2013

Province

Station

Case Number

Short Description

Circumstances

CAS No

Free State

Hoopstad

2012040213

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

05/03/2012

Mpumalanga

Kanyamazane

2012040333

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Free State

Botshabelo

2012050448

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Free State

Selosesha

2012060159

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

68/06/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Ekuvukeni

2012060191

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Inanda

2012060194

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Msinga

2012060196

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Mbazwana

2012060197

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Melmoth

2012060200

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Emanguzi

2012060201

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Pongola

2012060206

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Free State

Parkroad

2012060307

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

546/06/2012

Free State

Bultfontein

2012060310

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

37/06/2012

Gauteng

Soshanguve

2012060318

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

OB: 880/06/2012

Free State

Villiers

2012060322

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Villiers 31/06/2012

Free State

Bethlehem

2012060323

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Bethlehem 195/06/2012

Free State

Phuthadithjaba

2012060324

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Phutha's 148/06/2012

Free State

Luckhoff

2012060325

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

25/06/2012

Free State

Phuthadithjaba

2012060326

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Phutha's 149/06/2012

Free State

Harrismith

2012060328

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Harrismith 150/06/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Chatsworth

2012060334

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Chatsworth CAS: 396/06/2012

Free State

Kagisanong

2012060335

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

KAGISANONG CAS 176/06/2012

Free State

Welkom

2012060342

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

296/06/2012

Free State

Batho

2012060359

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Batho CAS 100/06/2012

Free State

Tseki

2012060454

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tseki 131/06/2012

Free State

Tseki

2012060457

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tseki 132/06/2012

Free State

Tseki

2012060459

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tseki 133/06/2012

Free State

Soutpan

2012060472

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Soutpan CAS 15/06/2012

Mpumalanga

Masoyi

2012060482

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Free State

Vrede

2012060495

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Vrede 73/06/2012

Free State

Memel

2012060502

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Memel 39/06/2012

Eastern Cape

Whittlesea

2012060596

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

328/06/2012

Free State

Boithuso

2012060649

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

270/06/2012

Free State

Kroonstad

2012060650

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

206/06/2012

Western Cape

Mbekwani

2012070068

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Western Cape

ElsiesRiver

2012070077

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

616/06/2012

Western Cape

Mfuleni

2012070101

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Free State

Kopanong

2012070171

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

44/07/2012

Free State

Bronville

2012070172

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

14/07/2012

Free State

Zastron

2012070175

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

48/07/2012

Free State

Kopanong

2012070176

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

45/07/2012

Free State

Edenburg

2012070177

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

11/07/2012

Free State

Kopanong

2012070178

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

40/07/2012

Free State

Bloemspruit

2012070179

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

99/07/2012

Eastern Cape

Storms River

2012070211

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

08/07/2012

Eastern Cape

Alexandria

2012070222

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

28/07/2012

Eastern Cape

Alexandria

2012070223

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

27/07/2012

Eastern Cape

Fort Beaufort

2012070225

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

41/07/2012

Limpopo

Nebo

2012070230

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

166/06/2012

Limpopo

Tubatse

2012070235

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

232/06/2012

Eastern Cape

Ngqeleni

2012070314

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

80/07/2012

Free State

Tseki

2012070397

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tseki 51/07/2012

Free State

Tseki

2012070401

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tseki 52/07/2012

Western Cape

Nyanga

2012070441

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

458/07/2012

Free State

Tweespruit

2012070450

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

17/06/2012

Western Cape

Paarl

2012070462

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Mbekweni CAS 141/07/2012

Western Cape

CapeTown

2012070547

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

1691/04/2012

Free State

Clocolan

2012070643

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

82/07/2012

Limpopo

Levubu

2012070667

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Gauteng

Katlehong

2012080101

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

425/07/2012

Free State

Namahadi

2012080194

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Namahadi 28/08/2012

Gauteng

Silverton

2012080260

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

179/08/2012

Free State

Heidedal

2012080293

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

95/08/2012

Mpumalanga

Kwaggafontein

2012080312

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

68/08/20012

Gauteng

Lenasia

2012080347

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

237/08/2012

Western Cape

George

2012080389

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

871/07/2012

Free State

Bethlehem

2012080435

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

14/08/2012

Western Cape

BeaufortWest

2012080550

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

341/08/2012

Mpumalanga

Acornhoek

2012080621

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Mpumalanga

Siyabuswa

2012080829

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

451/08/2012

Western Cape

Brackenfell

2012090154

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Northern Cape

Jan Kempdorp

2012090164

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

261/08/2012

Northern Cape

Jan Kempdorp

2012090229

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

262/019/2012

Limpopo

Mahwelereng

2012090244

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

94/09/2012

Mpumalanga

Belfast

2012090359

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Limpopo

Lebowakgomo

2012090553

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

282/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090572

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

57/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090576

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

46/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090577

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

59/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090578

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

60/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090579

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

55/09/2012

Mpumalanga

Barberton

2012090581

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

239/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090587

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

53/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090588

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

61/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090589

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

62/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090629

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

56/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090633

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

54/09/2012

Northern Cape

Olifantshoek

2012090635

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

58/09/2012

Northern Cape

Rietfontein

2012090638

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

67/09/2012

Northern Cape

Witdraai

2012090644

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

45/09/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Maphumulo

2012100014

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Maphumulo CAS 130/09/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Tongaat

2012100042

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Tongaat CAS157/09/2012

Western Cape

Wynberg

2012100237

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Wynberg CAS 92/10/2012

Western Cape

Saldanha

2012100241

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Saldanha CAS 50/10/2012

Mpumalanga

Piet Ritief

2012100356

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Gauteng

Mamelodi West

2012100503

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

345/10/2012

Western Cape

Swellendam

2012100517

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Western Cape

Steenberg

2012100519

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Western Cape

Touwsrivier

2012100556

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Touwsrivier CAS 114/102/2012

Western Cape

Worcester

2012100558

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Worcester 343/10/2012

Western Cape

Kirstenhof

2012100562

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Kirstenhof 242/10/2012

Western Cape

PlettenbergBay

2012100610

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Western Cape

Mfuleni

2012100719

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

514/10/2012

Western Cape

Mfuleni

2012100722

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

517/10/2012

Western Cape

MitchellsPlain

2012100724

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

1586/10/2012

Limpopo

Mankweng

2012110012

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

282/10/2012

Mpumalanga

Kwamhlanga

2012110155

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

96/11/2012

Mpumalanga

Vosman

2012110180

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

109/11/2012

Western Cape

Riversdal

2012110196

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Gauteng

Muldersdrif

2012110527

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

137/11/2012

Gauteng

Midrand

2012110690

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

916/11/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Msinga

2012110693

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

101/11/2012

Kwazulu Natal

Ezibayeni

2012110713

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Ezibayeni Cas 34/11/2012

Gauteng

Sunnyside

2012110738

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Sunnyside Cas 947/11/2012

Free State

Bayswater

2012120034

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

13/12/2012

Eastern Cape

Middelburg

2012120049

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

329/11/2012

Eastern Cape

Dimbaza

2012120222

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

63/11/2012

Western Cape

Wynberg

2012120256

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

301/10/2012

Western Cape

Goodwood

2012120257

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

335/10/2012

Western Cape

Strand

2012120357

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

335/12/2012

Limpopo

Levubu

2013020015

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

158/01/2013

Kwazulu Natal

Mooi River

2013020272

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

31/02/2013

Eastern Cape

Ngangelizwe

2013020302

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Western Cape

Kwanokuthula

2013030495

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

 

Kwazulu Natal

Plessislaer

2013030635

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Plessislaer

Eastern Cape

Flagsaff

2013010093

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

Flagstaff CAS 04/01/2012

Eastern Cape

Tsolo

2013010629

Sec 33(3) Charges

Non-compliance with IPID Act

93/01/2013

2013-2014

Province

PoliceStation

CaseNumber

IncidentCodeShortDesc

IncidentSubCodeShortDesc

CaseNumber

Gauteng

Moroka

2013040087

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

27/04/2013

Gauteng

Kempton Park

2013040326

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

414/042013

Gauteng

Protea Glen

2013040332

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Protea Glen Cas 257/04/2013

Kwazulu Natal

Empangeni

2013050053

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

488/04/2013

North West

Brits

2013050089

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

53/05/2013

Gauteng

Kagiso

2013050120

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

128/05/2013

Northern Cape

Kimberley

2013050177

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

404/04/2013

Western Cape

Piketberg

2013050307

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

140/05/2013

Northern Cape

De Aar

2013050313

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

66/12/2012

Northern Cape

De Aar

2013050326

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Northern Cape

De Aar

2013050337

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Northern Cape

DeAar

2013050339

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Eastern Cape

Balfour

2013060157

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

4/06/2013

Western Cape

Somerset-Wes

2013060198

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Strand CAS 224/06/2013

Eastern Cape

Port Alfred

2013060453

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Standerton

2013070143

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Graskop

2013070187

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

NULL

2013070251

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Barberton

2013070252

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Kwazulu Natal

Kwamakutha

2013070277

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

kwa-makthua

Free State

Ladybrand

2013070306

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

163/07/2013

Mpumalanga

Bethal

2013070373

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Eastern Cape

Humewood

2013070384

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

639/05/2013

Mpumalanga

Schoemansdal

2013080034

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Gauteng

Kagiso

2013080064

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

96/08/2013

Gauteng

Bramley

2013080198

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

79/08/2013

Kwazulu Natal

Pietermaritzburg

2013080557

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Plessislaer 703/08/2013

Gauteng

Sunnyside

2013090002

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sunnyside Cas 1072/08/2013

Mpumalanga

Leslie

2013090163

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

18/01/2013

Northern Cape

Bathlaros

2013090257

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

26/09/2013

Gauteng

Diepsloot

2013090266

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

182/09/2013

Gauteng

Moroka

2013090304

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

37108/2013

Gauteng

Katlehong

2013090328

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2013090614

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

491/09/2013

Mpumalanga

Siyabuswa

2013100098

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Masoyi

2013100100

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Gauteng

Akasia

2013100155

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Akasia Cas /10/2013

Free State

Harrismith

2013100173

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Kriel

2013100175

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Gauteng

Mamelodi

2013100241

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Mamelodi Cas /10/2013

Eastern Cape

Mlungisi

2013100274

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Mlungisi Cas 66/10/2013

Mpumalanga

Vosman

2013100344

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Kwamhlanga

2013100450

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Free State

Parkweg

2013100462

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

1383/10/2013

Gauteng

Loate

2013100467

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

482/10/2013

Kwazulu Natal

Margate

2013100544

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

705/03/2007

Mpumalanga

Nelspruit

2013100549

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2013110021

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Lydenburg

2013110024

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Acornhoek

2013110281

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Eastern Cape

EastLondon

2013110503

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Kwazulu Natal

Highflats

2013120143

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Highflats cas 29/12/2013

Gauteng

Olivenhoutbosch

2013120145

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Northern Cape

Springbok

2013120448

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

150/12/2013

Mpumalanga

Tonga

2014010406

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Tonga

Mpumalanga

Secunda

2014010427

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Secunda

Mpumalanga

Skukuza

2014010585

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Bethal

2014010586

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Gauteng

MamelodiEast

2014020229

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

Mamelodi East Cas 000/02/2014

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2014020256

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2014020261

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Carolina

2014020309

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Mpumalanga

Kriel

2014020521

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

Limpopo

Polokwane

2014020559

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

772/02/2014

Mpumalanga

Ogies

2014030396

Sec 33(3) Charges

Sec 33(3) Charges

 

2014-2015

Province

PoliceStation

CaseControlNumber

CaseNumber

Section

IncidentCode

Mpumalanga

Witbank

2014040119

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Dimbaza

2014040167

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Actonville

2014040229

07 /03/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Verulam

2014040256

192 /04/2013

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Vulindlela

2014040309

44 /04/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Ntabethemba

2014040313

18 /10/2013

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Elsburg

2014040416

188 /04/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Zastron

2014040453

218 /04/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Estcourt

2014050076

16 /05/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Bhekithemba

2014050168

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Mangaung

2014060092

87 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Heidedal

2014060093

22 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Hazyview

2014060110

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Roodepoort

2014060121

164 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Upington

2014060194

114 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rosedale

2014060197

48 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rosedale

2014060200

68 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rosedale

2014060203

69 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rosedale

2014060205

71 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rosedale

2014060215

72 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Mondeor

2014060228

103 /06/ 201

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Tonga

2014060326

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Swartkops

2014070148

168 /06/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Masoyi

2014070237

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2014070240

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2014070244

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Nelspruit

2014080150

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Nelspruit

2014080151

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Tsomo

2014080549

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Zwelitsha

2014090291

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Mthatha

2014090311

185 /9 /014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Keimoes

2014090440

129 /9 /2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Hartebeeskop

2014090449

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Tonga

2014090450

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Dalasile

2014100256

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Vrede

2014100464

0092/10/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Nqamakwe

2014100484

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Western Cape

Kraaifontein

2014100582

1946/10/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Namahadi

2014110676

0117/11/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Maokeng

2014120041

293 /11/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Queenstown

2014120277

35 /12/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Bushbuckridge

2014120300

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

KingWilliamsTown

2014120387

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

JaneFurse

2014120396

0148/11/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

Burgersfort

2014120402

130 /12/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

Burgersfort

2014120419

131 /12/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Bell

2015010155

13 /01/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Grahamstown

2015010275

113 /01/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Ngqamakwe

2015010324

95 /01/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Nqamakwe

2015010341

94 /01/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

JaneFurse

2015010497

109 /01/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Hazyview

2015020076

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Dullstroom

2015020164

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Mdantsane

2015020389

197 /02/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Parkweg

2015030078

117 /03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Tweeling

2015030084

0014/03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Ficksburg

2015030296

172 /03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Balfour

2015030329

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Embalenhle

2015030342

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Kagisanong

2015030496

0439/03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

2015-2016

Province

PoliceStation

CaseControlNumber

CAS Number

Class

IncidentCode

Free State

HobHouse

2015040009

0032/03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Kagisanong

2015040119

530 /03/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Western Cape

Kwanokhuthula

2015040133

0777/12/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Embalenhle

2015040162

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Wepener

2015050121

17 /05/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Verkeerdevlei

2015050180

12 /5 /015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Edenville

2015050228

31 /05/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Parkweg

2015050318

1065/05/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Hibberdene

2015060029

0296/05/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Western Cape

Athlone

2015060076

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Western Cape

TableView

2015060098

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Ermelo

2015060215

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Arlington

2015060375

0017/06/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Hluhluwe

2015070042

0006/07/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Acornhoek

2015070248

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Temba

2015080028

1074/07/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Kagisho

2015080277

94 /08/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Ekurhuleni Metro Police

2015080509

707 /08/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Douglasdale

2015080510

881 /08/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Makwane

2015090073

0006/09/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

Dennilton

2015090111

0183/10/2014

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Lindley

2015090458

0045/09/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Bethlehem

2015090471

409 /9 /015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Eshowe

2015090613

395 /09/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

Lamontville

2015100199

15 /10/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

Elliot

2015100218

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rietfontein

2015110339

42 /11/ 201

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rietfontein

2015110340

43 /11/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Northern Cape

Rietfontein

2015110359

44 /11/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Sakhile

2015120043

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Siyabuswa

2015120049

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Mpumalanga

Sakhile

2015120052

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

Tzaneen

2015120390

0367/12/2015

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Eastern Cape

KingWilliamsTown

2016010065

06 /01/2016

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Limpopo

Maake

2016010254

0126/01/2016

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Gauteng

Alexandra

2016010272

360 /01/2016

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Bothaville

2016010299

0130/01/2016

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Free State

Viljoenskroon

2016020119

0008/02/2016

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

North West

Mogwase

2016020444

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

North West

Bethanie

2016020445

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Kwazulu Natal

CatoManor

2016020448

 

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

33.3 – Failure to comply with section 29

Annexure B: Convictions

Details of disciplinary convictions 2012/13

No.

CCN

Station

Nature of complaint

Sentence / Sanction

1

2012060254 NC

Norvalspont

Contravening of Section 29 of the IPID Act

Written warning

2

2012090154 WC

Brackenfell

Contravening of Section 29 of the IPID Act

Verbal warning

3

2012100241 WC

Saldanha

Contravening of Section 29 of the IPID Act

Written warning

Details of disciplinary convictions 2013/14

No.

CCN

Station

Nature of complaint

Sentence / Sanction

1

2012070450 FS

Tweespruit

Non-compliance with Section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

2

2012060159 FS

Selosesha

Non-compliance with Section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

3

2012060310 FS

Bultfontein

Non-compliance with Section 29 of IPID Act

Verbal warning

4

2012090581 MP

Barberton

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

5

2012060505 MP

Nelspruit

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

6

2012040333 MP

Kanyamazane

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

7

2013020013 EC

Willowmore

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Verbal warnings

Details of disciplinary convictions 2014/15

No.

CCN

Station

Nature of complaint

Sentence / Sanction

1

2012060482 MP

Masoyi

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

2

2013070252 MP

Barberton

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

3

2013100098 MP

Siyabuswa

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

4

2013090614 MP

Ermelo

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

5

2013070373 MP

Bethal

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

6

2014010586 MP

Bethal

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

7

2014040119 MP

Witbank

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

8

2014080151 MP

Mamethlake

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

9

2013070306 FS

Ladybrand

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

10

2012090553 LP

Lebowakgomo

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written Warning

11

2013080034 MP

Schoemansdal

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

Details of disciplinary convictions 2015/16

No.

CCN

Station

Nature of complaint

Sentence / Sanction

1

2012070177 FS

Edenburg

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Verbal warning

2

2015040009 FS

Hobhouse

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Verbal warning

3

2015050180 FS

Verkeerdevlei

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

4

2015050228 FS

Edenville

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

5

2015060076 WC

Athlone

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Verbal warning

6

2015080277 NC

Kagisho

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written Warning

7

2015010497 LP

Jane Furse

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

8

2015090111 LP

Dennilton

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

9

2014020256 MP

Ermelo

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written Warning

10

2015020076 MP

Hazyview

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

11

2014080150 MP

Barberton

Non-compliance with section 29 of IPID Act

Written warning

28 November 2016 - NW2309

Profile picture: Matsepe, Mr CD

Matsepe, Mr CD to ask the Minister of Science and Technology

(1) Whether any (a) internal and/or {b) external forensic reports pertaining to (i) her department and /or (ii) each entity reporting to her were completed from 1 January 2009 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what is the (aa) name, (bb) subject matter and (cc) date of conclusion of each of the specified forensic reports?

Reply:

(a) No internal forensic reports

(b) External forensic reports – 2

(i) Pertaining to the Department of Science and Technology (aa) Forensic investigation into the Nkowankowa Demonstration Centre. (bb) Forensic investigation into various allegations regarding irregularities pertaining to the Nkowankowa Demonstration Centre, which was a Department of Science and Technology led community project. The period under investigation was from 01 December 2013 to 31August2015. (cc) The forensic investigation was concluded on 22 June 2016

Find here: http://pmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/RNW2309entity.pdf

 

 

 

 

28 November 2016 - NW2566

Profile picture: Mulaudzi, Adv TE

Mulaudzi, Adv TE to ask the Minister of Transport

Did (a) her department and/or (b) any entity reporting to her conduct feasibility studies on Vuwani Airport in Limpopo, which is not in operation and remains a white elephant; if not, (i) why not and (ii) who is responsible for the maintenance of the specified airport?

Reply:

(a) The National Department of Transport has not conducted feasibility studies on Vuwani Airport in Limpopo.

(b) The Limpopo Department of Transport has conducted a pre-feasibility study for the Vuwani/P.R. Mphephu Airport during 2010. The study was part of the Limpopo Airlift Strategy, with the purpose of providing direction and guidance for the development of aviation in the province. Five generic strategies were identified in determining the status of each of the airports considered at the time, as follows:

1. Grounded: Nothing should be done as there is no, or very little potential, now or in the future, for aviation development.

2. Delayed: The development of aviation will only take place in the long term and is awaiting other matters to be put in place.

3. Boarding: There is some market potential, which should be left to the market to action and develop.

4. Take-off: There is good market potential which would be picked up by the market with minimum intervention.

5. Catapulted Take-off: There is market potential, but the development of aviation will only take place with significant intervention from government.

The Vuwani/P.R Mphephu Airport fell within the third category. The Limpopo Department of Transport decided to wait a few years so that further analysis could be done on the Vuwani/P.R Mphephu Airport as well as the other public airports within the province. Such analysis will consider developments that are taking place at, amongst others, Lephalale, Musina and its SEZ status, and the Tubatse area.

The Limpopo Department of Transport is currently collaborating with the Department of Public Enterprises in determining if some of these airports can be re-commissioned and the extent of improvements that are required to enable re-commissioning.  The Limpopo Aviation Technical Stream has been established and various meetings have already been held. The Province is currently developing the Terms of References for the viability assessment, which should be conducted no later than the 2017/2018 financial year. This will provide an indication if P.R. Mphephu Airport will be viable and the costs associated with its re-commissioning, should the indication be positive. Other options will be explored depending on the outcome of the viability study.

(b) (i) N/A

     (ii) The airport is an asset of the Limpopo Department of Public Works, Roads and Infrastructure, although the buildings are utilised by the Limpopo Department of Transport. The Limpopo Department of Transport has not allocated any maintenance budget pending the outcome of the viability study.

28 November 2016 - NW2516

Profile picture: Matsepe, Mr CD

Matsepe, Mr CD to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What are the relevant details of the type of information that is stored on the movement control register for persons (a) entering and (b) leaving the Republic; (2) what is the total number of persons who entered the Republic through the OR Tambo International Airport from 1 January 2016 to 1 September 2016?

Reply:

(1)(a) The following information is captured by the Immigration Officer for persons entering the Republic:

- Flight / vessel / transport number

- Biographic details including surname, first names, date of birth, etc.

- Occupation

- Purpose of visit

- Visa details (whenever applicable)

(1)(b) The following information is captured by the Immigration Officer for persons leaving the Republic:

- Flight / vessel / transport number

- Biographic details including surname, first names, date of birth, etc.

- Visa details (if confirmation is required on departure)

(2) 2 777 931

28 November 2016 - NW2193

Profile picture: Baker, Ms TE

Baker, Ms TE to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation

(1)What (a) is the current status of the Ermelo Waste Water Treatment Plant in Mpumalanga and (b) are the results of the water quality tests of the treated effluent in each month since 1 January 2016; (2) whether the specified plant complies with the standards for effluent discharge as regulated by her department; if not, what action has she taken to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1)(a) The Ermelo Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently receiving 12-16 Ml/day and is designed to handle 10 Ml/day. Overall, the infrastructure of the plant is in a bad condition and this has compromised the sewage treatment process to the extent that substandard effluent is being discharged.

(b) The Green Drop System, which the Department utilizes to monitor compliance levels of wastewater treatment works in the country, shows that the level of compliance for the plant from 01 January 2016 to September 2016 is zero for micro, physical and chemical parameters specific for wastewater effluent.

(2) The effluent from the plant does not comply with the general standard. The Department had meetings with the municipality, inspections were conducted and correspondence was also sent to the municipality. Due to the lack of response from the municipality, a task team (comprising DWS, the Departments of Human Settlements, Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Economic Development, Environment and Tourism as well as the District and Local Municipalities) was then established to address the concerns related to the plant. See Tables 1 and 2 below:

Table 1: Correspondence with the Municipality prior to establishment of the task team

DWS Action

Issues raised

Type of communication

Municipality response

Issued communication due to poor water quality discharging into the stream

  • sewage pollution
  • water use authorisation application

Letter dated 23 November 2009

None

Site inspection conducted on 14 July 2010

  • sewage pollution

Section 19 letter dated 19 July 2010

None

Site inspection conducted on 11 Nov 2011

  • sewage pollution at Pet Dam

Meeting held with the

municipality immediately after the inspection

The problem was resolved same day

Site inspection conducted on 14 June 2012

  • sewage spillages and poor effluent quality
  • reporting of pollution incidents
  • incomplete discharge charges forms
  • water use authorisation application
  • Poor attendance of stakeholder forum meetings

Meeting with municipality on 06 August 2012

Raised their challenges

Table 2: Correspondences with the Municipality after establishment of the task team

DWS Action

Issues raised

Type of communication

Municipality response

Issued communication based on the meeting held on 06 August 2012

  • sewage pollution
  • establishment of the Task Team

Letter dated 14 August 2012

None

Follow up

  • reminder to respond

Letter dated 11 October 2012

Submitted insufficient action plan on 14 November 2012

Task Team

Actions from minutes

Meeting on 26 September 2012 at Govan Mbeki Municipality

No feedback, the Municipality sent another person without information

Task Team

Actions from minutes

Meeting on 14 November 2012 at Lekwa Municipality

Attended

Task Team

Actions from minutes

Meeting on 06 February 2013 at Dr Pixley ka Seme Municipality

Did not attend

Issued a communication

  • Non-attendance of Task Team meeting

Letter dated 22 February 2013

None

Task Team

Actions from minutes

Meeting on 12 June 2013 at Gert Sibande District Municipality

Did not attend

Issued a communication

  • Action plan

Letter dated 22 August 2013

None

Assessment of WWTW on 29 October 2013 and 13 March 2014

  • Non-compliance letter

Letter dated 24 March 2014

None

The Department allocated R 44 275 029 million to refurbish the Ermelo Waste Water Treatment Plant in Mpumalanga. The project commenced in November 2015 and is scheduled for completion in January 2017.

---00O00---

28 November 2016 - NW2212

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Environmental Affairs

What is she doing in providing evidence that can assist in the trial proceeding against a certain person (name furnished) that has been linked to a web of corruption and implicated by other rhino poachers who claimed to have worked for the poaching kingpin while the person upon confrontation by the police confirmed his intention not to stop killing rhinos?

Reply:

Please note that neither the Department of Environmental Affairs nor I can provide evidence that can assist in the trial of the person referred to in the question. However, the South African Police Service’s Directorate: Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) arrested the said person and associates on 18 December 2014 and the investigation was successfully finalised. The syndicate members were consequently brought before the Hluhluwe magistrates court after their arrest. Although bail was formally opposed by the prosecutor, the magistrate ruled in favour of the accused and they were subsequently released on R10 000,00 bail each. The matter is currently on the court roll at the Ngwelezane Regional Court. The matter has been postponed on numerous occasions due to change of legal representation on the part of the accused. We are advised that a final court date will be determined within the next month and that the investigation and prosecution team have gathered sufficient evidence and have been ready to proceed with the trial since the arrest of the syndicate members.

---ooOoo---

28 November 2016 - NW2213

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Environmental Affairs

Whether she is instituting investigations into recent reports of illegal trade in endangered species allegedly taking place at the Faraday Muthi Market, in Selby, Johannesburg, where it is alleged that animal parts from endangered species such as leopard, lion, chimpanzee, hyena, pangolin and vulture are being traded illegally; if not, when will an investigation be instituted into the trade practices of the Johannesburg Muthi markets so as to ensure that they are legally compliant as regards trade in wildlife; if so, what are the full details of any such investigation?

Reply:

Nature conservation is a concurrent competence between national and provincial government and any investigation into illegal trade in endangered species allegedly taking place at the Faraday Muthi Market, in Selby, Johannesburg will have to be done by the Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD) which is the conservation authority responsible for law enforcement in the Gauteng Province.

However, due to increasing reports of the illegal activities occurring at various muthi markets, a national project has been included in the 2016/17 workplan of the Technical Committee of Minister and Members of Executive Council (MINTECH) Working Group IV, the national coordinating forum on environmental compliance and enforcement that is aimed at raising the awareness of traditional healers on the duties and obligations applicable to their activities in terms of the national biodiversity legislation.

---ooOoo---

28 November 2016 - NW2526

Profile picture: Mileham, Mr K

Mileham, Mr K to ask the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

(1) Whether any (a) criminal, (b) civil and/or (c) disciplinary charges have been laid against any person and/or organisation involved in the Siyenza Group toilets tender scandal project in the Amathole District Municipality in the Eastern Cape; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what is the (i) nature of the charges laid and (ii) current status of each specified case; ( 2 ) Whether any amounts have been recovered from (a) the specified company and/or (b) any of the specified persons and/or organisations involved in the specified tender scandal project; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what amount (i) has been recovered and (ii) remains outstanding in each case; (3) What is the current status of the rectification programme undertaken by (a) the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agent and/or (b) any of the specified agent’s implementing agents on the tender scandal project

Reply:

The response below was provided by the municipality:

(1) (a),(b) & (c) No criminal, civil or disciplinary charges have been laid against any person and/or organisation involved in the Siyenza Group toilets tender project in the Amathole District Municipality. The investigations by the Public Protector and the National Treasury are currently underway. The outcome of the investigations will determine if there are grounds for such actions.

(i) Not applicable

(ii) Not applicable

(2) No amounts have been recovered from the specified company and/or any of the specified persons and/or organisations involved in the Siyenza Group toilets tender project. The outcome of the investigations will determine if there are grounds for such actions.

(i) Not applicable

(ii) Not applicable

(3) (a) & (b) There is no rectification programme currently being undertaken by Municipal Infrastructure Support Agent (MISA). However, MISA in partnership with the Department of Water and Sanitation will be supporting the implementation of the programme by Amatola Water Board. The Amatola Water Board has been appointed by the Department of Water and Sanitation as an implementing agent for the completion of the project. Further, the Amatola Water Board has developed and costed the implementation plan for the completion of the project. The proposed commencement date of the project is January 2017.

28 November 2016 - NW2489

Profile picture: Carter, Ms D

Carter, Ms D to ask the Minister of Health

(1)In view of the Esidimeni incident which resulted in unnecessary deaths within the most vulnerable sector within our society, what steps has he taken to (a) safeguard the wellbeing of the remaining former patients of the Life Healthcare Esidimeni Hospital and (b) ensure a transparent and unbiased investigation into the circumstances around the deaths of the 36 psychiatric patients; (2) what assurances can he give that there will be accountability and consequences, including criminal prosecutions, regarding the matter?

Reply:

(1) As you might have heard Honourable Member, I have asked the Health Ombudsperson to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter. However, as immediate steps to avoid further deaths, I sent teams out visit the NGOs where deaths have occurred, and even others that were new, to assess the safety of the patients that are still alive, in order to take appropriate steps to ensure their safety.

(2) I am currently awaiting the outcome of the investigation by the Health Ombudsperson in order to determine what further interventions are required and should be taken regarding this matter.

END.

28 November 2016 - NW2587

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport

(1)Whether the implementation plan for the National Transport Master Plan 2050 (NATMAP) has been completed; if not, (a) why not and (b) by what date will the specified plan be completed; (2) whether the final NATMAP 2050 has been submitted to Cabinet for approval; if not, (a) why not and (b) by what date will the pla n be submitted to Cabinet; (3) whether her department will conclude all outstanding legislation relating to the NATMAP 2050 by the end of the 2016-17 financial year as indicated in her department’s 2015-16 annual performance and strategic plans; if not, (a) why not and (b) what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1) The Implementation Plan for National Transport Master Plan 2050 is not complete. It is the target

for the 2016/17 financial year and anticipated to be completed by March 2017.

(2) The National Transport Master Plan 2050 has been submitted to Cabinet and got approval on the 19 October 2016.

(3) The legislation will not be completed in 2016/17 financial year as approval by Cabinet was only in October 2016.

28 November 2016 - NW2586

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport

Whether the establishment of the Single Transport Economic Regulator will be reintroduced into the department’s strategic and annual performance plans; if not, why not; if so, (a) by what date and (b) what are the further relevant details?

Reply:

Yes, the Single Transport Economic Regulator project will be part of the 2017/18 and onwards of the Department’s Strategic and Annual Performance Plans. The Department plans to present a Bill (draft legislation framework) to Cabinet to solicit gazetting approval for 60 days public consultation by end of financial year of 2016/17. Thereafter, inputs from the public will be consolidated and a revised Bill will be taken back to Cabinet for approval during 2017/18 financial year. The next step will be to table the Bill in Parliament by end of 2017/18 financial year. Upon promulgation of the Bill to a legislation, the Transport Economic Regulator establishment will commence.

28 November 2016 - NW2552

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

(1)To what position has Ms Ashley Rutherford been appointed in the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality? (2) whether the position was advertised before the appointment of the specified person; if not, why not; if so, (a) on which dates and (b) in which media were advertisements placed? (3) (a) what qualifications (i) were required for the specified position and (ii) does the person possess, (b) how many other applicants applied for the position and (c) what is the total annual remuneration package for the position?

Reply:

The following response is based on the information received from Gauteng Provincial Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs:

1. Ms Ashley Rutherford was nominated as a councillor from July 2014 up until 31 May 2015 to fill a vacancy following the resignation of a councillor.

2. Not applicable, councillors are nominated from the applicable party list to be elected in the vacancy.

3. Not applicable, councillors are nominated from the applicable party list to be elected in the vacancy.

28 November 2016 - NW2543

Profile picture: Rabotapi, Mr MW

Rabotapi, Mr MW to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture

1. Whether his department contributed any funds to the funeral of a certain person (name and details furnished) if not, what is the position regarding the contribution of funds towards the costs of an artist’s funeral; if so, (a) what is the total amount that his department contributed and (b) what are the further relevant details?

Reply:

The DAC has been faced with requests to assist in situations where some of artists passed on. These requests normally come from bereaved families. However, it should be noted that, in the absence of formal policy in this regard, it became important to:

a)  Appreciate the historical fact that many South African artists experienced the worst isolation and marginalisation of their works during apartheid. Despite these challenges artists continued to share South African talent and culture with the world.

b) Most of these artists are currently in the late 60s and beyond. Therefore they can no longer do work as they reached their peak during very difficult moments of the country. A lot of the works remain legendary and continues to shape the arts and cultural landscape of the country.

In relation to the above, the DAC has responded to requests related to the passing on of various legends. The financial assistance is subject to the availability of funds. Amongst them are the following:


1.The late Mr Ben Nomoyi who was in the film industry  in the early 1970s. He was able to produce works that ensured entry into the Guinness book of records. An achievement that was never recognised for many years.

2. The late Pat Matshikiza who was a jazz artist was also assisted.

3. The late Mr David Masondo, one of the pioneers of Mbaqanga music which is unique to our country and resonated to broader society.

4. The late Mduduzi 'Mandoza' Tshabalala, one of the Kwaito stars that emerged on the eve of the democratic dispensation. His music connected with society at large and deepened the social cohesion at the much need time when the country was going through a very difficult transition. Therefore he remains symbols of social cohesion.

5. Ms Pinise Saul who died recently in London her family as well was assisted with the preparation of the funeral.

The artists were assisted to the tune of R95 000 individually. It’s only 'Mandoza’ who is the youngest amongst them but the DAC strongly considered the role of his music to unite the country.

Accordingly, the focus has been on the legends of our country and who are elderly. A process is underway to determine a comprehensive criterion because sustainability of such help is in doubt. The Ministry has setup a structure of legends, which focuses on preserving the works of these legends for generations to come. It is believed that this endeavour will find innovative ways of ensuring that some of these welfare concerns may be mitigated. Currently, many of our legends are involved in various programmes, especially the master classes to share their skills with the youth.

28 November 2016 - NW2605

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation

What are the reasons that South Africa voted against the follow-up Human Rights Council resolution calling for the appointment of an independent expert to tackle violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity?

Reply:

Quote

There has been no follow up resolution to that of the Human Rights Council on the said issue. South Africa has never voted against any resolution at the Human Rights Council or United Nations General Assembly on the thematic issue of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI). 

 

Unquote

25 November 2016 - NW2520

Profile picture: Breytenbach, Adv G

Breytenbach, Adv G to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he has taken any action against any employee of the National Prosecuting Authority for persisting in prosecuting a certain person (name furnished) despite the fact that the State was allegedly aware that it could not prove prejudice in the specified prosecution; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

It must be noted that the accused application for a discharge in terms of section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act was refused. In other words the court found that the state had published a case that the accused had to answer. The National Director of Public Prosecutors (NDPP) convened a meeting where the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) South Gauteng, Advocate Andrew Chauke was requested to submit a report on various allegations relating to the prosecution of the case. At the conclusion of that meeting, it was decided that the DPP would obtain the transcript of the court proceedings for him to further address the matter with the prosecutor and his supervisor.

The DPP further reported to the NDPP that he perused the transcript of the proceedings and subsequently addressed the shortcomings of the prosecutor and pointed out to him the resultant adverse effects on the case due to him not communicating the developments in court to his supervisor.

25 November 2016 - NW2105

Profile picture: Marais, Mr EJ

Marais, Mr EJ to ask the Minister of Small Business Development

What amount did (a) her department and (b) each entity reporting to her spend on advertising on the (i) Africa News Network 7 channel, (ii) SA Broadcasting Corporation (aa) television channels and (bb) radio stations, (iii) national commercial radio stations and (iv) community (aa) television and (bb) radio stations (aaa) in the 2015-16 financial year and (bbb) since 1 April 2016?

Reply:

The Department of Small Business Development and its entities’ total spend on advertising on media is as follows:

#

(a) Department

(b) Entities

   

Small Enterprise Finance Agency (sefa)

Small Enterprise Development Agency (seda)

(i)

Africa News Network 7 (ANN7)

ANN7

ANN7

 

(aaa & bbb)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(aaa & bbb)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(aaa & bbb)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(ii)

SA Broadcasting Corporation (SABC)

SABC

SABC

(aa)

(aaa & bbb)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(aaa & bbb)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(aaa)

2015-16 financial year and since April 2016:

R4 492 250.

     

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bb)

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R125 400.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R220 000.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R330 132.

 

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb)Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(iii)

National commercial radio stations

National commercial radio stations

National commercial radio stations

 

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

No amount was spent.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R320 000.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R456 522.

 

(bbb) Since April 2016:

R189 999.24.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent

(iv) (aa)

Community television stations

Community television stations

Community television stations

 

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

No amount was spent.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

No amount was spent.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R28 000.

 

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(iv)

(bb)

Community radio stations

Community radio stations

Community radio stations

 

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

No amount was spent.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R157 000.

(aaa) 2015-16 financial year:

R445 289.

 

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

R62 000.

(bbb) Since April 2016:

No amount was spent.

Please note further that for the 2015 International Cooperatives Day, the department advertised in SAFM and Motsweding FM (both SABC radio stations). However, the budget came from the DTI.

25 November 2016 - NW2550

Profile picture: America, Mr D

America, Mr D to ask the Minister of Police

What steps is the SA Police Service taking to address (a) understaffing, (b) inadequate building maintenance, (c) dilapidated fencing, (d) inadequate external signage, (e) sub-standard detention cells, (f) overcrowding in offices, (g) inadequate toilet facilities, (h) inadequate lighting and (i) insufficient vehicles at the Putfontein Police Station in the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality?

Reply:

(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h) The workforce analysis for the Putfontein Police Station is depicted below see the link:

http://pmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/RNW2550Table.pdf

The following posts were identified as critical vacancies:

1 x Sub Section Commander: Human Resource Management (Salary level 8).

1 x Principal Personnel Officer (Salary level 7).

The proposed promotion posts were requested from the South African Police Service (SAPS) Head Office as critical funded posts in terms of the allocated posts to the province.

During the 2016/2017 financial year, the Gauteng Province received an allocation of

1 320 entry-level Police Act employees. This allocation was scientifically distributed and approved by the Provincial Commissioner, to all 142 stations within Gauteng, by utilising the following criteria:

  • A gap analysis was conducted, taking into consideration all Visible Policing and Detective Service members on salary levels 1-7, comparing the actual allocation with the Fixed Establishment.
  • The allocation of 1 320 entry level Police Act employees was distributed equally amongst all stations taking into consideration the shortages on levels 1-7 for Visible Policing and Detective members.
  • After the distribution, all stations with shortages were staffed equally at 78,15% on levels 1-7 (Visible Policing and Detectives).

The Gauteng Province receives an entry-level allocation every financial year, but unfortunately this allocation does not meet the human resource demands of the various business units in the province. Cluster Commanders are therefore advised to ensure the equal distribution of Human Resources within the cluster, taking into consideration the fixed establishment.

The Gauteng Province is currently busy with a project in terms of which police stations with a surplus of members within the Visible Policing environment have been instructed to identify and redeploy members to their Detective Service environment, where there is a general shortage of personnel. Furthermore, Police Stations are also instructed to redeploy experienced Visible Policing members to the Detective Service environment when they receive their new entry-level allocation.

The Putfontein Police Station is a leased facility. The owners have been engaged regarding the poor conditions of the Police Station as, in accordance with the lease agreement, it is their responsibility to ensure that the facility is properly maintained.

The need for an alternative Police Station was included in the Provincial User Asset Management Plan (UAMP) for the 2017/2018 financial year. The Divisional Commissioner: Supply Chain Management has been requested to source a proper alternative facility.

(i) Per the SAPS Asset Register, the Putfontein Police Station had a total of 16 vehicles on 6 November 2016. The distribution of vehicles is as follows:

COMPONENT

NUMBER OF VEHICLES

IDEAL VEHICLES AS PER EFFICIENCY INDEX SYSTEM

SURPLUS/SHORTAGE

Station Commander

1

1

0

Detective Service

6

6

0

Support Service

1

3

-2

Visible Policing

8

10

-2

Total

16

20

-4

The Putfontein Police Station has an overall shortage of four vehicles, which will be addressed by 31 March 2017.

25 November 2016 - NW2519

Profile picture: Horn, Mr W

Horn, Mr W to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) How many cases relating to the contravention of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, as amended, is the National Prosecuting Authority currently prosecuting and (b) what is the quantum of each of the specified prosecutions?

Reply:

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has informed me that the NPA does not collate specific statistics on offence. However, the table below highlights cases that are extracted from the case administration system developed by SCCU Regional Heads.

Particulars of the Matter

Quantum/Amount Involved

1. The State v Legodi Boshielo & 2 others – Project Mobile Classrooms - Department of Education - Limpopo

R70 million

2. The State v Mogotlane and Nemavhola- Project Mankele Bridge - Department of Roads and Transport - Limpopo

R79,5 million

3. The State v Mweli and Others- Project Department of Education - North West

R16 million

4. The State v Sbu Ndebele and Others - Project Tasima - Department of Transport - Pretoria

R42.5 million

5. The State v Savoy and Others- Project Intaka- Department of Health - KZN

R70 million

6. The State v .Energy Utility Services (Pty) Lt and Others – Project Eskom – Western Cape

R65 million

7. The State v Steven Jonkers and Another- Project Bus Contractor - Department of Transport - Northern Cape

R14,5 million

8. The State v Scholtz and Others - Project Trifecta - Department of Social Development - Northern Cape

R200 million

25 November 2016 - NW2415

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Police

Whether CAS 482/06/2016 opened at the Woodstock Police Station in Cape Town has been handed over to the Malawian authorities yet; if not, on what date will it be handed over to the specified authorities; if so, on what date was the specified docket handed over to the authorities?

Reply:

The case docket, Woodstock CAS 482/06/2016 (Theft), has not been handed over to the Malawian authorities for investigation. The alleged crime was committed between 8 June 2016 and 19 June 2016 at 29 Low Street, Observatory, Cape Town and not in Malawi. There is therefore no need for the case docket to be sent to Malawi for investigation. On 28 July 2016, the Senior Public Prosecutor at the Cape Town Magistrate’s Court declined to prosecute in this matter as there was no evidence linking the possible suspect to the perpetration of the crime.

25 November 2016 - NW2494

Profile picture: Dlamini, Mr MM

Dlamini, Mr MM to ask the Minister of Energy

What programmes or initiatives has her department put in place to educate rural and poor communities about the importance of energy efficiency?

Reply:

To educate the public about the importance of energy efficiency, the Department developed and launched the Energy Efficiency Campaign Strategy during the United Nations Convention on Climate Change’s 17th Conference of Parties (COP 17) held in Durban in 2011. In addition, on 13 March 2015, the President of South Africa launched the Presidency and Government energy savings campaign highlighting various initiatives the government will implement to promote energy savings, and these include the green building policy framework, minimum energy performance standards and labeling of energy efficiency appliances, improvement of energy efficiency, and, importantly, the installation of solar panels and solar water heaters in buildings including in residential buildings in rural and poor communities.

Furthermore, on 17 May 2016, the Minister of Energy unveiled the South African Energy Efficiency Label, and also announced measures to be implemented in buildings as part of promoting energy savings. The SA Energy Efficiency Label has been designed to provide the South African consumers, including poor and rural communities, with accurate and comparable information that enables an informed purchase decisions when buying household appliances. The advantage to consumers, especially poor and rural communities, is that they have an opportunity to play an active role both in achieving savings on electricity consumption and in making a meaningful contribution to the effort on reducing carbon emissions.

Some of the energy savings measures being implemented by the Department include the installation of smart metering and clean energy technologies in schools and government buildings, deployment of co-generation in municipal waste water treatment facilities, and the installation of energy efficient technologies related to municipal infrastructure. It should also be noted that the Ministry of Energy has been conducting outreach programmes to poor and rural communities as part of the energy savings campaign.

25 November 2016 - NW2531

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

(1)What (a) is the current status of the investigations into (i) CAS 1277/9/2016 and (ii) CAS 1344/9/2016 opened at the Pretoria Central Police Station and (b) are the charges contained in each docket; (2) whether any suspects have been arrested to date; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (3) whether any (a) suspects or (b) witnesses have been interviewed; if not, in each case, why not; if so, (i) by what date and (ii) what are the further relevant details in each case; (4) on what date will the specified investigations be finalised?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) The investigation into Pretoria Central CAS 1277/09/2016 has been concluded and the case docket was handed in at the office of the Senior Public Prosecutor at the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court for decision on 14 November 2016. The decision on prosecution is awaited.

(1)(a)(ii) The investigation into Pretoria Central CAS 1344/09/2016 has not yet been concluded. The suspect must still be interviewed and a warning statement obtained. Some witnesses still need to be interviewed and their statements obtained.

(1)(b) The charge in both cases is Assault Common.

(2) No suspects were arrested on any of the two cases as the Criminal Procedure Act, 1997 (Act No. 51 of 1997), does not make provision for a member of the South African Police Service to arrest a suspect on a charge of Assault Common unless the crime was committed in his/her presence.

(3)(a)(i & ii) The suspect in Pretoria Central CAS 1277/09/2016 was interviewed on 20 October 2016 and his warning statement obtained.

The suspect in Pretoria Central CAS 1344/09/2016 has not yet been interviewed. As soon as all the witness statements have been obtained, the suspect will be interviewed and the warning statement obtained. The case docket will then be forwarded to the Senior Public Prosecutor for a decision.

(3)(b)(i & ii) Three witnesses were interviewed in Pretoria Central CAS 1277/09/2016.

Eight witnesses were interviewed in Pretoria Central CAS 1344/09/2016 and all indicated that they will submit statements through their Attorneys.

(4) The investigation into Pretoria Central CAS 1277/09/2016 has been concluded.

It is envisaged that the investigation in the case docket Pretoria Central CAS 1344/09/20146 will be concluded within the next two weeks.

25 November 2016 - NW2548

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

Whether (a) he and/or (b) the SA Police Service (SAPS) has taken any steps to address the (i) understaffing and (ii) underresourcing of the Akasia Police Station in the City of Tshwane; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) whether the SAPS is aware of the need for a new police station in Ward 4 of the specified metropolitan municipality; if not, why not; if so, (3) has the need for the specified new police station been investigated; if not, (a) why not and (b) will the SAPS launch an investigation in this regard; if so, (i) what were the findings and (ii) on what date will the new police station be built?

Reply:

(1) (a) (b) (i) (ii) The workforce analysis for the Akasia Police Station is depicted in the link below:

https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW2548Table.docx

The following posts were identified as critical vacancies:

1 x Sub Section Commander: Human Resource Management (Salary level 8).

1 x Principal Personnel Officer (Salary level 7).

The proposed promotion posts were requested from the South African Police Service (SAPS) Head Office as critical funded posts in terms of the allocated posts to the province.

During the 2016/2017 financial year, the Gauteng Province received an allocation of

1 320 entry-level Police Act employees. This allocation was scientifically distributed and approved by the Provincial Commissioner, to all 142 stations within Gauteng, by utilising the following criteria:

  • A gap analysis was conducted, taking into consideration all Visible Policing and Detective Service members on salary levels 1-7, comparing the actual allocation with the Fixed Establishment.
  • The allocation of 1 320 entry level Police Act employees was distributed equally amongst all stations taking into consideration the shortages on levels 1-7 for Visible Policing and Detective members.
  • After the distribution, all stations with shortages were staffed equally at 78,15% on levels 1-7 (Visible Policing and Detectives).

The Gauteng Province receives an entry-level allocation every financial year, but unfortunately this allocation does not meet the human resource demands of the various business units in the province. Cluster Commanders are therefore advised to ensure the equal distribution of Human Resources within the cluster, taking into consideration the fixed establishment.

The Gauteng Province is currently busy with a project in terms of which police stations with a surplus of members within the Visible Policing environment have been instructed to identify and redeploy members to their Detective Service environment, where there is a general shortage of personnel. Furthermore, Police Stations are also instructed to redeploy experienced Visible Policing members to the Detective Service environment when they receive their new entry-level allocation.

The management of the Akasia Police Station redeployed two members from Visible Policing to the Detective Service.

2. No, SAPS is not aware of the need for a new police station in Ward 4 of the specified metropolitan municipality. To date no request was received for the possible establishment of an additional service point in the Akasia policing area.

(3)(a)(b)(i)(ii) The Akasia Police Station is a leased facility. The need for an alternative police station was included in the Provincial User Asset Management Plan (UAMP) for the 2017/2018 financial year. The Divisional Commissioner: Supply Chain Management has been requested to source adequate alternative accommodation for a new police station.