Questions and Replies

Reply:

(a) The Department procured goods and services to the value of R 2,2 billion from the small-, medium- and micro-sized enterprises (SMMEs) in 2015-16 financial year and up to April 2016 as follows:

No.	(b)(i) % SMME’s: 2015/16 Financial Year	(b)(ii) % SMME’s: From 1 April 2016
1.	50,03%	1%

(b) The Entities procured goods and services from the small-, medium- and micro-sized enterprises (SMMEs) in 2015-16 financial year and up to April 2016 as follows:

No.	Entity	(b)(i) % SMME’s: 2015/16 Financial Year	(b)(ii) % SMME’s: 1 April 2016
1.	Amatola Water Board	99.7%	92.1 %
2.	Bloem Water Board	37%	35%
3.	Lepelle Water Board	72.10%	Not yet available
4.	Magalies Water Board	22.27%	22.27%
5.	Mhlathuze Water Board	66.91%	72.86%
6.	Overberg Water Board	13.7%	Not yet available
7.	Rand Water Board	38%	3.05%
8.	Sedibeng Water Board	97%	35%
9.	Umgeni Water Board	17.79%	0.03%
10.	Trans Caledon Tunnel Authority	1%	0.20%
11.	Water Research Commission	21%	29%
12.	Inkomati CMA	30%	23%
13.	Breede-Gouritz CMA	14.39%	22.36%

--00O00---

Reply:

Refer to the table below for the summary of the acquired hardware and software for the periods in question:

	(i) 2014-15 financial years	(ii) 2015-16 financial year
(a) Hardware	My Department awarded three (3) tenders for the acquisition of hardware	My Department awarded three (3) tenders for the acquisition of hardware
(b) Software	No tenders were awarded for acquisition of software	My Department awarded four (4) tenders for the acquisition of software

The specific details for the tenders awarded for the acquisition of hardware and software during the period in question is detailed in Annexure A.

---00O00---

Reply:

The National Department of Basic Education contacted the Eastern Cape Education Department to seek clarity on the matter as we could not find a Seymour High School in the Amathole region on the national database. The Eastern Cape Department indicated that there is no Seymour High School in the Amathole but Seymour Primary School, located in the Fort Beaufort district. The province and the district were not aware of any disruptions at Seymour Primary School – a school that had been visited by district officials at the beginning of the year to assess readiness for the 2016 academic year. The principal of Seymour Primary School has also sent in a written response indicating that the school has operated normally since the opening of schools on 11 January 2016, and no disruptions have been experienced at the school. The response from Seymour Primary School attached (Annexure A)

Reply:

1. The Department of Labour’s spent on SMMEs for 2015/16 accounted for 59.2% of the total procurement spent.

2. When taking all its entities into account, 29.6% accounted for SMMEs procurement.

3. Cooperatives accounted for negligible share and the Labour Activation Programme is focusing on Enterprise Development Programme with a special focus on Cooperatives.

Reply:

(1)(a) Yes, my Department has incurred irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditures as determined by the Auditor-General in the 2014-15 financial year.

(1)(b) The findings have not yet been determined by Auditor-General since the audit for the financial year 2015/16 has not been finalised.

(1)(b)(i) The irregular expenditure was incurred for various reasons as disclosed on the financial report for the year end 2014/15 which was made public and is available on my departmental website.

(1)(b)(ii) Recipients are various service providers who provided service to my Department. In terms of the National Treasury instruction on the treatment of irregular expenditure, my Department is bound to pay for the service when the obligation has been made by my Department officials on behalf of the Department. After the payment has been made the Department has to investigate how the transgression was done and take appropriate disciplinary actions as directed by the PFMA.

(1)(b)(iii) Refer to the list below for the tender processes followed that led to the transgressions committed:

• Procurement of IT services not following the SITA Act;
• Procurement of goods and services deliberately split into parts or items of smaller value merely to avoid complying with the requirements of the SCM policy and legislation;
• The final decision on the acceptance of quotations not done by a properly delegated official or committee;
• Goods or services of a transaction value of more than R2 000 procured without inviting at least three written price quotations from prospective suppliers and the deviation not approved by delegated person;
• Deviations from competitive bidding and not test the market by procuring goods and services from none approved sole supplier;
• Correct Supply Chain Management (SCM) processes and procedures not adhered to.
• Payment may only be made in terms of a valid contract to a duly authorised payee.
• Incorrect authorisation of transactions (delegations not complied with);
• Expenditure exceeding original excess of the approved contract or quoted amount or no contract in place;
• Lowest quotation not selected and no motivation provided;
• Contracts awarded without original tax clearance certificates or tax clearance certificates expired;
• The method of procurement is inconsistent with those prescribed in terms of PN 8 of 2007/2008. Goods or services of a transaction value of R10 000 to R500 000 were procured without inviting at least three written price quotations from prospective suppliers and the deviation was not approved by delegated person; and
• Goods and services were rendered by the supplier and paid for without a valid written signed contract.

(2)(a) My Department is investigating the matter to determine whether the transgressions were in the interest of the State or not.

(2)(b) The appropriate actions will be taken upon completion of the investigation.

---00O00---

Reply:

Minister was invited to participate in this forum as a World Communication Forum Davos Committee Co-Chair elected for the period of 2015/16. She was also requested to speak within the larger theme announced for the opening panel: "Country Reputation - who's in charge of Communications, Identity and Trust?".

Minister was also invited to be one of the officials handing over the C4F Gala Awards to the winners. The category given to Minister to confer was on “communications of the future” – in recognition of the most creative and effective communication campaign. Minister had an opportunity to meet representatives from BRICS countries, where they’ve agreed to establish the BRICS Communications Forum which will focus on defining the communication strategy of BRICS.

(b) Mr Donald Liphoko: Acting Director-General Government Communications and Information Systems

Ms Mashudu Ralutanda: PA & Ministerial Support Staff

Mr Michael Currin: Chief Director: Provincial & Local Liaison, GCIS

Nthambeleni Gabara: Ministerial News and Media Service

(c) (i) The total amount is still in the process of being audited and will subsequently be made available.

(ii) The breakdown is also not available as it still needs to be audited.

 

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

Reply:

(1) (a) Universal Service and Aceess Agency of South Africa (USAASA), has informed me that it has appointed three companies (BUA Africa, CZ Electronics and Leratadima) to produce and supply set-top boxes to the South African Post Offices accross the country, including the Northern Cape and the Free State.

(b) USAASA informed me that the companies provided STBs as follows:

(i) Northern Cape: BUA Africa provided 3,506 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 27,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 150 STBs.

(ii) Free State: BUA Africa provided 1,400 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 16,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 00 STBs.

(c) USAASA further informed me that BUA Africa did not receive any payments as their invoices came in late. Leratadima and CZ Electronics were paid R680,934.34 and R35,841,674.00 respectively.

(2)  According to the Agency, not all produced STBs are Digital Terrestrial Television: 3,506 are DTH STBs and 27,150 are DTT STBs.

                                                                         

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

Reply:

(a) Phase 1 for the installation of the ±45 km pipe work and associated works was completed at a cost of R570 million. Phase 2 commenced in December 2014.

(b) Phase 2 expenditure for the 2014/15 Municipal financial year was R59.6 million. It is anticipated that the expenditure for 2015/16 (30 June 2016) will be R82 million. A further R40 million has been budgeted for the completion of Phase 2 during the 2016/17 financial year.

(c) Phase 2 is scheduled for completion by March 2017 with Phase 3 in December 2018.

---00O00---

Reply:

(1)(a)(b)(i)(ii) The 2015 data on learner pregnancy is not ready for use as yet.

(2)(a)(b)(c) The 2015 data on learner pregnancy is not ready for use as yet.

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii) Yes, Productivity South Africa does run developmental programmes for Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), and Cooperatives.

(aa) The entity has developed action learning solutions to assist SMMEs and Cooperatives aimed at equipping them with the right skills, knowledge and attitudes to implement systems and procedures to improve productivity, profitability, growth and employment creation within these sectors.

The details of the program are as follows:

1. PHASE 1: Business Start-up Workshop (BSUW)

The objective of this phase is to cultivate productive behaviour and distribute productivity competencies among emerging entrepreneurs, including SMMEs and co-operatives. They are enabled to achieve the following learning outcomes:

• Demonstrate an understanding of productivity and its measurement.
• Define entrepreneurship and the characteristics of a successful entrepreneur.
• Demonstrate an understanding of business compliance.
• Identify sources of start-up capital.
• Demonstrate an understanding of the business plan guide/ template as a tool during implementation of action plans to establish a business.

    2. PHASE 2: Business Performance Improvement Workshop (BPIW)

The objective of this phase is to apply an action learning solution to assist SMMEs and co-operatives to implement systems and procedures that will result in:

• Wastage elimination
• Increased sales
• Reduced operational costs through speed and quality improvement
• Maximised profits
• An early warning system (EWS) to proactively detect distress.

1. PHASE 3: After-care and Coaching

The third phase of the programme assist delegates with practical assignments relevant to their own businesses in the form of coaching aftercare services. The practical implementation of the programme content facilitates the achievement of the following objectives:

• The assumption of entrepreneurial behaviour
• The ability to calculate basic productivity measurements
• The ability to establish and maintain critical business practices, such as cash-flow management, budgeting and inventory control
• Practical measurement of current productivity levels and setting of achievable improvement targets
• The ability to undertake practical productivity improvement projects based on set targets
• The ability to realise tangible financial savings from productivity improvement projects and improving profitability and growth.

The coaching component is applied throughout the programme as practical improvement projects are presented. Productivity advisors align activities according to the requirements of the group/cluster. The programme is concluded with a comprehensive stakeholder close-out report and entrepreneurs who complete their portfolio of evidence receive certification.

(bb) An amount of R6 277 116.00 has been budgeted for the 2016/17 financial year for this program.

(cc) A total 1 200 SMMEs and 4 300 Cooperatives will be assisted.

 

Reply:

(a) The Universal Service and Access Agency for South Africa, which is the entity charged with the responsibility of managing the production and installation of set top boxes, informed me that 823 STBs were installed country wide as at 29 February 2016.

(b) The companies USAASA contracted to install the specified STBs are: Amigen Investments, Duramics Trading & Projects, Ketelelo Trading, Krosworx, KST Consortium, Lamec, Maziya Construction, Silverwell Business Enterprise and Ellies Industries.

(c) USAASA further informed me that Amigen Investments was paid R15,400.00; Duramics Trading & Projects was paid R 3,850.00; Ketelelo Trading was paid R15,950.00; Krosworx was paid R14,300.00; KST Consortium was paid R2,750.00; Lamec was paid R18,150.00; Maziya Construction was paid R12,650.00; Silverwell Business Enterprise was paid R24,200.00; and Ellies Industries has not redeemed any vouchers at SAPO.

 

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

Reply:

1. (a) Lingcom Primary School in Graaff-Reinet in the Eastern Cape has 683 learners and was assessed on the 03 July 2015. (b) The assessments conducted indicate that the school has access to basic services (water, sanitation and power supply), however it is entirely constructed from inappropriate materials (asbestos) and there is a need to replace the structures built out of inappropriate materials.

​2. The DBE considers all schools built out of inappropriate material (mud, asbestos, metal and wood) as unsafe, this is in line with the Regulations Relating to Minimum Uniform Norms and Standards that were promulgated in November 2013.

3. (a)(b)(i)(ii) The condition assessment undertaken was meant to ascertain what the infrastructural needs of the school and developed a scope of works for the required interventions. The school has been placed on the new and replacement category programme by the Eastern Cape Department of Education which entails replacing all buildings built out inappropriate material for the implementation during the 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial year.

(bb) The estimated cost of replacing the structures built out of inappropriate materials at is R27 million. This amount includes professional fees and contigiencies as at the date that the school was assessed and this is subject to escalation on the construction materials.

(cc) The project is currently at advanced planning stagess and is scheduled to go through

procurement and is anticipated to commence on site towards the end of 2016 and completion is anticipated to be 18 months after commencement on site.

4. The school has been prioritised in the Provincial infrastructure programme that is funded through the Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) and the project will be funded fully to bring the school line with the requirements of the Norms and Standards.

Reply:

1. The Department appointed Cheadle; Thompson & Haysom attorneys since they previously dealt with similar language related cases initiated by the said Lourens and were therefore familiar and more knowledgeable regarding the issues at hand. Furthermore, the said attorneys had assisted the Department in drafting the Use of Official Languages Act in 2012 and their appointment was thus necessary to ensure continuity and effectiveness in addressing the language related issues.

2. The legal costs of the (a) attorneys amount to R726 186.70 and (b) R694 925.69 for advocates to date.

Reply:

Soldiers of the SANDF are not deployed in in the KZN game parks per se but are responsible for border safeguarding operations. Amongst other, along the KZN-Mozambican borders therefore there is no financial implications related to the above mentioned question, only OP CORONA budget is spent for border safeguarding.

Reply:

No, the security nature of Home Affairs and Government Printing Works business is not geared towards development programmes for small business and cooperatives but we do provide direct contractual work to small business where applicable.

Reply:

1. (a), (b), (c) and (d). The table below shows the number of appropriately trained sign language teachers at Foundation, Intermediate, Senior and Further Education and Training Phases in each province.

Province	Foundation Phase	Intermediate Phase	(c)Senior Phase	(d)Further Education and Training Phase	Total
Eastern Cape	35	22	26	16	99
Free State	16	2	3	3	24
Gauteng	11	10	11	1	33
KwaZulu-Natal					31
Limpopo	26	20	22	17	85
Mpumalanga	13	9	No school catering for FET	22
North West	12	11	2	0	25
Northern Cape	4	3(7)	3(6)	2(5)	12(18)
Western Cape	7	5	5	5	22

Source: Provincial reporting

2. (a) and (b). The table below shows the names of schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers in specified schools in each province.

Province	(a) School	(b) Number of Teachers
Eastern Cape	Efata	35
	St Thomas	28
	Reubin Birin	21
	Sive	15
Totals	4	99
Free State	Bartimea Special School	13
	Thiboloha Special School	11 (2 specialist teachers teaching sign language as a subject.
TOTAL	2	24
Gauteng	Dominican	9 (7)
	Filadelfia	2(4)
	Katlehong School for the Deaf	6(7)
	MC Kharbai	4(4)
	Sizwile	5(3)
	St Vincent	4(3)
	Transoranje	3(3)
Totals	7	33(31)
KwaZulu-Natal	Fulton School for the Deaf	2 (4) assistants in brackets.
	KwaThintwa School for the Deaf	2(6)
	VN Naik School for the Deaf	3(4)
	Durban School for the Deaf	3(4)
	KwaVulindlebe School for the Deaf	0(5)
	Indaleni School for the Deaf	1(7)
	Vuleka School for the Deaf	7(5)
	St Martin de Porres	8(2)
	Bumbisizwe Special School	1(2)
	Inkanyezi Special School	2(1)
	Inkanyiso Special School	0(1)
TOTAL	11	29(43)
Limpopo	Setotolwane	34
	Yingisani	17
	Bosele	15
	Tshilidzini	15
	Sedibeng	4
TOTAL	5	85
Mpumalanga	Kamagugu	6
	Silindokuhle	12
	Bukhosibetfu	4
	Marietjie	2
	Wolvenkop	3
TOTAL	5	27
Northern Cape	Retlamelang	12
TOTAL	1	12
Western Cape
	De la Bat	80% 0f teachers in the schools completed SASL linguistic training university level
	Nuwe Hoop
	Dominican Wittebome
	Mary Kihn
	Noluthando School

Source: Provincial reporting

(3) (a)(b)(c). The table below shows the number and names full service schools catering for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers deployed at each school. Only the Free State and Mpumalanga have Full Service Schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments.

Number of Schools; And (b) Names of schools	Number of appropriately trained teachers
Free State
Botle ba Thuto P/S	No teachers appropriately trained Teachers and parents of learners who are identified with hearing impairments were provided with strategies on how to support these learners
Jagersfontein I/S
Mofulatshepe P/S
Oranjekrag I/S
Zama P/S
Christiaan de Wet I/S (Ordinary School)
Gelukwaarts IF/S
Hermana P/S
Jim Fouche P/S
Mabela P/S
Maboloka P/S
Pontsheng P/S
Dieketseng P/S
Hlaboloha P/S
Kegomoditswe
Winburg C/S
Kweetsa P/S
Letsibolo P/s
Malebaleba P/S
Ntuthuzelo P/S
Refihletse P/S
Reseamohetse P/S
Thoriso P/S
Chris van Niekerk I/S
JJ Kubheka P/S
Ntshwephepa P/S
Poelamo P/S
Sentrale Volkskool P/S
Theha Setjhaba P/S
Lesoana P/S
Letlotlo P/S
Mafube P/S
Leifo Iziko I/S
Mphatlalatsane P/S
Masaleng P/S
Pulamadiboho P/S
Qhubeka P/S
Sekgothadi P/S
Theboho P/s
TOTAL= 41 SCHOOLS
MPUMALANGA
Bukihosibetfu Full Service School	4
TOTAL= 1 SCHOOL

Source: Provincial reporting

(4) The following are the steps taken to bridge the gap caused by shortages for appropriately trained sign language teachers in each province.

Eastern Cape

The Eastern Cape Department of Education has entered into a partnership with the Education and Training Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA) to train all educators in four Schools for the Deaf. The EDTP SETA has in turn, contracted University of Witwatersrand (WITS) to train educators in two workshops of five days per year in 2014 and 2015. The partnership with Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) continues in the 2016/17 until all educators in these schools are qualified to teach Sign Language.

Free State

Teachers at Bartimea and Thiboloha Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing were trained on the South African Sign Language (SASL) Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) at Home Language level. Teachers were also trained on sign language as a means of communication.

Gauteng

• Continuous SASL competency training takes place.
• Currently all teachers teaching SASL as a subject have NQF Level 5.
• All SASL teachers have deaf class assistants to compliment the language skill and to adopt the team teaching approach;
• Collaboration with Wits Centre for Deaf Studies to assist with Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) for SASL, focusing on prose and poetry.

KwaZulu-Natal

The Inclusive Education Directorate has arranged with ETDP SETA to fund SASL training and the up-skilling of teachers from the above-mentioned schools. ETDP SETA has secured the services of the Wits Language School to undertake the training, assessment and certification of teachers. In the current training cohort, there are six (6) District officials and fifty seven (57) teachers receiving training in SASL. The training programme which extends over 15 days commenced in December 2015 and will continue in March-April 2016.

Mpumalanga

• There is ongoing orientation of stakeholders on the approved SASL CAPS which includes, Curriculum Implementers (CIs), School Management Teams (SMTs), Deaf Teacher Assistants and educators;
• The Education department of Mpumalanga is providing training of teachers, Language Subject Advisors and Deaf teacher assistants on SASL;
• 45 teachers have to date been trained on NQF Level 4 and 5;
• 60 Foundation Phase Language Subject Advisors and Inclusive Education officials have been trained on the basics of SASL; and
• For the financial year 2015/16, 60 teachers will be trained on NQF Level 4 and 5 by the University of Free State. The training will take place from 25 February to 12 March 2016.

Limpopo

All teachers teaching learners with hearing impairments have been trained on basic SASL and further advanced training at the University (Advanced Diploma) level is planned for the future.

Western Cape

18 educators are being trained on SASL through the ETDPSETA by the University of Witwatersrand. Of the number given eight (8) are doing the advance level. In 2014 to 2015; thirty four (34) educators and officials were trained on SASL. The training on SASL will continue annually for all the educators.

Reply:

1. (a). There is currently a total of fifteen (15) translators in service to the department,
2. (b) these in house translators perform translation work in all the official languages including French and Portuguese,
3. (c) (i) the annual remuneration of translators are according to their levels which are level eight (8) with notches ranging from 91,404 to 107,670 and level nine (9) with notches ranging from 311, 784 – 376, 626 per annum, (ii) the sum total of all the translators in the department is fifteen (15).

(2). Yes, steps have been taken in the department with regards to building of capacity of translation services. Translators attended on-going development training in areas such as basic copy editing, proof reading and advancement in foreign languages. In addition, there are a number of translators who have registered with various institutions of higher learning through the DAC bursary scheme for the long term formal programs such as studies in applied linguistics.

Reply:

1. Minister can confirm that he was in Dubai during the month of December 2015. This was a private trip and no business meetings took place.

2. A letter was sent to the Presidency requesting leave as well as advising of overseas trip. There was no response or specific brief as it was a Private trip.

3. This was a private trip and no official meetings were held.

Reply:

The budget for Special Schools (Inclusive Education) is as follows

(a) 2013 to 2014 - R5 172 011 000

(b) 2014 to 2015 - R5 713 272 000

(c) 2015 to 2016 - R6 308 093 000

Sources:

2013-15 – Annual financial Statement

2015-16 – In Year Monitoring Report (March 2016)

Reply:

(a) Ministers private passport was used and stamped for:

    (i) entry into Dubai and

    (ii) exit from South Africa

(b) Minister travelled in his private capacity and the trip was paid for in his private capacity.

Reply:

In relation to the question of translators in other departments, I am unable to provide answers since these departments are not accountable to me. The honourable Member must feel free to ask each of the departments of government and their respective entities.

Reply:

Department of Communications:

(a) The Minister and (b) the Department have not (i) entered into any agreements with and (ii) received any sponsorships and/or services from (aa) Sahara Holdings, (bb) Oakbay Investments, (cc) The New Age Media, (dd) Vusizwe Media, (ee) Mabengela, (ff) Islandsite Investments 255, (gg) Afripalm Horizons Stakes, (hh) Dunrose Investments and/or (ii) JIC Mining Services since 1 May 2014.

Government Communication and Information System (GCIS):

(b)(i) GCIS has not entered into any agreements with (aa) Sahara Holdings, (bb) Oakbay Investments, (dd) Vusizwe Media, (ee) Mabengela, (ff) Islandsite Investments 255, (gg) Afripalm Horizons Stakes, (hh) Dunrose Investments and/or (ii) JIC Mining Services since 1 May 2014.

The the Department has however transacted with (cc) The New Age Media to procure advertising. (aaa) Payments made from the budget appropriated to Government Communication and information System (GCIS) to The New Age Media are detailed in the table (bbb) below:

	2014/2015
Government Communication and Information System (GCIS)	Database registration	R 14 945.40
	Profiling Campaign	R 720 990.72
	Recruitment	R 301 195.75
	Recruitment Phase 3	R 57 078.43
	SONA 2014	R 100 137.60
	SONA 2015	R 101 888.64
Total Government Communication and Information System (GCIS)		R 1 296 236.54
	2015/2016
Government Communication and Information System (GCIS)	SONA 2016	R 145 555.20
	Voter Education	R 81 874.80
Total Government Communication and Information System (GCIS)		R227 430.00

South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC):

(b) (i) Yes

(ii) Yes

(cc) Yes

(aaa) 1. New Age newspaper subscription.

2. The SABC and The New Age (TNA) have an agreement that the SABC will cover live all the TNA Business Breakfasts. This agreement is for a period of three years. The agreement stipulates that the TNA will arrange and organise the Business Breakfasts by providing the venue (as well as catering) and secure the participants. The SABC in turn broadcasts the event. The advantage for the SABC is the acquisition of content.

(bbb) 1. R 733,930.

2. Nil

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA):

The Authority has not (i) entered into any agreements with and did not (ii) receive any sponsorships and/or services from (aa) Sahara Holdings, (bb) Oakbay Investments, (cc) The New Age Media, (dd) Vusizwe Media, (ee) Mabengela, (ff) Islandsite Investments 255, (gg) Afripalm Horizons Stakes, (hh) Dunrose Investments and/or (ii) JIC Mining Services since 1 May 2014.

Film and Publications Board (FPB):

The Film and Publication Board bought a table for The New Age business breakfast in the 2014/15 financial year for an amount of R 14 261.40.

Brand South Africa (BSA):

Brand South Africa has not (i) entered into any agreements with and did not (ii) receive any sponsorships and/or services from (aa) Sahara Holdings, (bb) Oakbay Investments, (cc) The New Age Media, (dd) Vusizwe Media, (ee) Mabengela, (ff) Islandsite Investments 255, (gg) Afripalm Horizons Stakes, (hh) Dunrose Investments and/or (ii) JIC Mining Services since 1 May 2014.

Media Diversity and Development Agency (MDDA):

MDDA has not (i) entered into any agreements with and did not (ii) receive any sponsorships and/or services from (aa) Sahara Holdings, (bb) Oakbay Investments, (cc) The New Age Media, (dd) Vusizwe Media, (ee) Mabengela, (ff) Islandsite Investments 255, (gg) Afripalm Horizons Stakes, (hh) Dunrose Investments and/or (ii) JIC Mining Services since 1 May 2014.

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MR D LIPHOKO

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SYSTEM

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

Reply:

I did not undertake an international trip on government business to either the French Republic and/ or the Republic of Senegal in the 2015 -16 financial years.

Reply:

(a) The Honourable Member will remember that the main aim of the framework on Gender and Media International Cooperation is to support the implementation of the “Women and the Media follow-up” for section J of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Women and the Media. Now, the Minister was invited by UNESCO to share ideas and experience with the world on how the South African government is making strides in terms of promoting and championing gender equality in all forms of the media; how we as government we are encouraging women to take advantage of the revolution in communications technology in order to make their voice to be heard across the country.

The Minister was invited to make opening and closing statements at this global forum as well as chairing two sessions, however, Mr Johannes Rantete attended the global assembly on behalf of Minister Faith Muthambi. The South African delegation led by Mr Rantete used the platform to urge the international community to put gender equality and women’s empowerment in the media at the heart of all discussions and agreements. Again, the Geneva Framework on Gender and Media International Development Cooperation resonates with the contemporary agenda:

• Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5: Achieving gender equality and empowering women and girls,
• SDG 16, target 10: Concerning measures to promote public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms,
• SDG 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.

A series of stories about this event were published on the government online news agency: SAnews.gov.za as well as on social networks.

(b) (i) Mr Johannes Rantete (attended in place of Minister);

Mr Mishack Molakeng; and

Mr Nthambeleni Gabara.

(ii) Acting Director-General: GCIS;

Media Liaison Officer: Ministry of Communications

Assistant Director: SA News

(c) (i) The total amount is still in the process of being audited and will subsequently be made available.

(ii) The breakdown is also not available as it still needs to be audited.

 

 

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

Reply:

1. No, the Acting Director General did not sign a Performance Agreement for the 2015/16 financial year.

2. Not all Senior Managers submitted Performance Agreements.

    (a) Ms R Fisher, Ms P Pillay, Mr MJ Rantete and Mr F Nieman.

    (b) These SMS members occupied their posts during the course of the year.

   (c) The officials have signed 2016/17 Performance Agreements in line with the 15 April 2016 deadline.

 

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

Reply:

According to the information received from the Metropolitan Municipalities,

(a) The total number of leakages that were (i) reported and (ii) fixed since 1 July 2015 are indicated below:

Buffalo City: leakages reported 1 928 and fixed 1 928;

City of Cape Town: leakages reported 27 500 and fixed 27 500;

City of Johannesburg: leakages reported 22 431 and fixed 22 408;

City of Tshwane: leakages reported 61 000 and fixed 56 000;

Ekurhuleni: leakages reported 31 857 and fixed 31 850;

eThekwini: leakages reported 104 960 and fixed 103 176;

Manguang: leakages reported 16 976 and fixed 13 442;

Nelson Mandela Bay: leakages reported 8 014 and fixed 8 014.

(b) The litres of water that were lost due to leakages since 1 July 2015:

Buffalo City: not measured;

City of Cape Town: 2 978 Million Litres;

City of Johannesburg: 11 531 Million Litres;

City of Tshwane: 64 000 Million Litres;

Ekurhuleni: 41 880 Million Litres;

eThekwini: 279 Million Litres per Day; (approximately 2,511 million)

Manguang: 3,658 Million Litres per Day; (approximately 32,922 million)

Nelson Mandela Bay: 34 000 Million Litres.

(c) The average response time to fix the leakages are:

Buffalo City: 3 hours;

City of Cape Town: less than 24 hours;

City of Johannesburg: 32 hours;

City of Tshwane: 48 hours;

Ekurhuleni: 47 hours;

eThekwini: 1 to 2 working days;

Manguang: 3 working days;

Nelson Mandela Bay: 4 hours.

Reply:

The MDDA has never conducted any Social Impact Evaluation study since 2004. A Social Impact Study was proposed during 2014, but, due to the Board not quorating, commissioning of the study was delayed pending adjudication and appointment of a service provider to conduct the study.

(a) The study has just been commissioned and the service provider is expected to start working as soon as the contracting processes have been completed.

(b) The assessment will be done through perusing all MDDA previous records, including visiting and investigating all projects that have been MDDA beneficiaries since 2004, and through engaging all relevant stakeholders including government.

(c) With regard to how many people were involved, this question will be answered as soon as the Impact Study has been completed.

(d) With regard to the outcomes in each such case, this question will be answered as soon as the Impact Study has been completed.

(e) With regard to how successes were measured in each such case, this question will be answered as soon as the Impact Study has been completed.

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

Reply:

(1)(a) Yes, on 31 March 2015.

(1)(b) On grounds of medical conditions. The member was informed in writing to submit a full set of the correctly completed exit documents to the South African Police Service.

(2)(a) No. The member’s exit documents are still at the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) for further processing of pension payout.

(2)(b) According to the rules of the pension fund, pension monies will be paid out within 60 days from the date after the day on which GPAA received exit documents from SAPS (11 March 2016). Expected finalization/payment date is before or on 8 June 2016.

(3)(a) No. According to Polmed records, the member still has medical aid cover, and her medical aid benefits were never suspended at any stage.

(b)(i)&(ii) The member’s pension benefits were suspended during the period 1 April 2007 until 30 September 2007.

(aa)&(bb) The member was on leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 which emanated from the disapproval of temporary incapacity leave by the Health Risk Manager.

Upon receipt of supporting medical report from the member, SAPS reconsidered the representation and converted the leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 into temporary incapacity leave.

The member was reimbursed for the period of leave without pay on 24 February 2014. The pension contribution to GPAA was deducted from the reimbursement and paid to GPAA for the said period.

(4) SAPS is responsible for processing Ill-Health Retirement and the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) is responsible for pension payout.

(5) No case of negligence is being investigated.

No negligence was found on the side of SAPS but rather on the side of the member due to the following reasons:

- The member submitted documents of poor quality, e.g. the decree of divorce was certified more than once.

- The member’s lawyer refused to submit the decree of divorce that was duly certified.

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

(1) No (a) fridges, (b) curtains, (c) couches, (d) tables and (e) chairs were replaced at the Parliamentary villages since 01 April 2015.

(2) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii) and (3) fall away.

Reply:

The short answer is that the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) is not an “investigating authority”, and is therefore not mandated to undertake nor conduct investigations to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.

Legal provisions in the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, Act No 38 of 2001 (the FIC Act), prevent the FIC from disclosing any information on what matters the FIC may be working on or not.

In particular, the FIC Act contains strict limitations to protect the confidentiality of reporters, on the disclosure of information reported to it, information at its disposal and of details of its activities concerning such information (section 29 read with section 53, and sections 40 and 41 read with section 60, of the FIC Act).

The FIC is therefore not able to provide the information requested.

The way the Honourable Member has phrased this Question 1247, reflects certain misunderstandings of the FIC Act and how the FIC is called upon to lawfully administer the FIC Act, which I need to clarify, and do so below, to ensure the Honourable Member is better informed.

The FIC Act requires designated financial and other institutions to establish and verify the identities of their customers, and maintain related records of their customers and their transactions. The FIC Act also requires designated institutions to report certain information, such as large cash transactions (R25 000 and above) and suspicious and unusual transactions to the FIC. Importantly, an institution which reports a suspicious or unusual transaction to the FIC may continue with the reported transaction(s) unless instructed by the FIC not to do so.

The FIC Act currently does not require a financial institution to pay special attention to any category of customers. The FIC Act also does not contain any provisions which require financial institutions to apply a risk-based approach to the manner in which they manage customer relationships. In this respect the FIC Act is not in line with current international standards on measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (the FATF)).

These FATF standards require, among others, that financial institutions understand the risks associated with different business relationships and apply enhanced due diligence where they perceive higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Enhanced due diligence implies more diligent identification and verification measures and stricter monitoring of customers’ transaction activities.

Parliament is currently considering amendments to the FIC Act to give effect to the requirements of the international standards. These requirements include the application by financial institutions of a risk-based approach to customer due diligence and applying additional due diligence to PEPs (described in the amendments as Persons in Prominent Positions).

I re-affirm that the FIC does not itself undertake “investigations” with a view to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.

Instead, the FIC analyses information reported to it and at its disposal, and supplies financial intelligence on financial transactions of reported persons or entities, but not evidence, to competent authorities, such as investigating law enforcement authorities, statutory supervisory bodies and state security agencies, to facilitate the administration and enforcement of the laws of the Republic.

These competent authorities, as lawful recipients of FIC issued financial intelligence, in turn undertake independent criminal investigations, supervisory inspections, or other actions, respectively, within their respective legal mandates.

Accordingly, the sharing of information by the FIC with other competent authorities enables them to better discharge their respective responsibilities in the administration of the criminal justice system, the financial and non-financial sector regulatory systems, and the protection of national security, in the Republic.

The FIC Act contains strict limitations on the disclosure by the FIC of information at its disposal. This also applies to disclosure by the FIC of details of its activities concerning such information. Section 29(4) of the FIC Act provides that:

“No person who knows or suspects that a report has been or is to be made in terms of this section may disclose that knowledge or suspicion or any information regarding the contents or suspected contents of any such report to any other person, including the person in respect of whom the report is or is to be made, otherwise than-

(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;

(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;

(c) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or

(d) in terms of an order of court.”

Contravention of this provision is an offence punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 53 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.

Moreover, section 40(1) of the FIC Act restricts the FIC to disclosing information under its control:

“(a) to an investigating authority inside the Republic, the South African Revenue Service and the intelligence services, which may be provided with such information-

(i) on the written authority of an authorised officer if the authorised officer reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity; or

(ii) at the initiative of the Centre, if the Centre reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity;

(b) to an entity outside the Republic performing similar functions to those of the Centre, or an investigating authority outside the Republic which may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, obtain information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the identification of the proceeds of unlawful activities or the combating of money laundering or financing of terrorist and related activities or similar offences in the country in which that entity is established;

(c) to an accountable institution or reporting institution which or any other person who may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, be provided with information regarding the steps taken by the Centre in connection with transactions reported by such accountable institution, reporting institution or person, unless the Centre reasonably believes that disclosure to such accountable institution, reporting institution or person of the information requested could-

(i) inhibit the achievement of the Centre’s objectives or the performance of its functions, or the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the functions of another organ of state; or

(ii) prejudice the rights of any person;

(d) to a supervisory body, which may at the initiative of the Centre or on written request be provided with information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the exercise by that supervisory body of its powers or performance by it of its functions in relation to an accountable institution

(e) in terms of an order of a court; or

(f) in terms of other national legislation.”

In terms of section 41 of the FIC Act:

“No person may disclose confidential information held by or obtained from the Centre except-

(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;

(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;

(c) with the permission of the Centre;

(d) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or

(e) in terms of an order of court.”

Contravention of these two provisions (sections 40 and 41) is an offence and punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 60 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.

Confirmation or denial by the FIC in the public domain on whether the FIC has received or disclosed any information relating to a particular person or entity to another competent authority, or taken any other action related to such information would amount to a contravention of the above-mentioned provisions of the FIC Act and is therefore not legally permissible.

Moreover, since the FIC’s mandate requires it to assist and work in collaboration with other competent authorities in any given criminal investigation or supervisory inspection or action, any public disclosure of information relating to a specific person or entity who may be the subject of an investigation, supervisory inspection, or details of an operation being conducted by such competent authorities,. It would therefore be irresponsible for the FIC to comment in public on operational matters in which the FIC may or may not be involved. is likely to have a serious detrimental impact on the investigation, inspection or operation.

In conclusion, as Minister of Finance I therefore cannot confirm or deny whether the FIC has information relating to the specific persons or entities previously mentioned at its disposal, nor whether the FIC has or has not made information available to law enforcement authorities in support of investigations of allegations of money laundering against the specific persons or entities.

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

1. (a) To date, 1 287 properties have been confirmed as illegally occupied.

Below is a summary of instances of unlawful occupation:

Province	Squatters	Mud houses	Private houses/ commercial buildings	Total number of illegally occupied properties
KwaZulu Natal	128	301	110	539
Eastern Cape	20	27	75	122
Gauteng	83	0	66	149
Limpopo	3	0	29	32
Northern Cape	16	0	47	63
Western Cape	8	0	119	127
North West	31	0	104	120
Free State	8	1	17	26
Mpumalanga	31	10	68	109
Total number of illegally occupied properties	313	339	635	1 287

(b) 313 properties are occupied by squatters who have built temporary (squatter camps) residences on the properties. 339 properties are occupied by communities that have built mud structures on the land. 635 properties are occupied by private sector commercial businesses and are being used either as private residences or business premises.

(2) To date, none of the above listed matters listed matters have been referred for criminal investigation. The Department of Public Works is currently following the civil route in order to resolve disputes.

________________________________________________________________________

Reply:

1. Loate and Dube police stations.

(b) A map indicating the boundaries is attached as per Annexure A.

(c)(i)

	(c)(i)(aa) Police Act Employees	(c)(i)(bb) Public Service Act Employees
Dube	41	9
Loate	118	26

(c)(ii)(aa) and (bb) Breakdown per function and salary level is attached as per Annexure B.

(c)(i)(cc) Operational vehicles at Dube police station:

Operational vehicles at Dube police station
Sectors	6
Detective Service	5
Client Service Centre	6
Crime Prevention	2
Total operational vehicles	19

Operational vehicles at Loate police station
Detective Service	16
Client Service Centre	5
Crime Prevention	15
Total operational vehicles	36

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:-

(1)(a) The amount allocated to the Cybersecurity Hub for the 2016/2017 financial year is R 16, 418, 000.00

(b) Specific deliverables include

• Formalise engagements with stakeholder, which supports the sharing and technical integration of cybersecurity incident information
• Operationalisation of the Proactive and Reactive services
• Increased functionality of Hub’s tools
• Assist in the enablement and establishment of sector CERTs
• Dissemination of incident and thereat information to stakeholders
• Undertaking of a cybersecurity awareness programs which includes upgrade of the Hub’s website functionality

(2)(a)(i) In the 2017/2018 financial year R 15, 325, 000.00 has been allocated

(ii) In the 2018/2019 financial year R 12, 297, 000.00has been allocated

It should be noted that the allocated budget for these two financial years are subject to change as the MTSF is yet to be finalised.

(b) The monies will be used as follows:

• Obtaining international certification for the Hub
• Establishment of both private and public sector industry specific CERTs
• Integration of incident information
• Development and deployment of cybersecurity audit and readiness tools
• Ongoing awareness programs

(3)(a) The Department is the sole funder of the Hub

(b) N/A

(c) N/A

(4)(a) In the 2014/2015 financial year R 18 533 013 was allocated

In the 2015/2016 financial year R 15 156 157 was allocated

(b) In the 2014/2015 financial year the monies were used for:

• Establishment of the Hub
• Development of Operational Processes
• Development of Policies and Procedures

In the 2015/2016 financial year the monies were used for:

• Research
• Technical and operational support
• System integration
• Facilities, facilities maintenance
• Infrastructure costs
• Stakeholder engagement

Reply:

(a) The original contract commenced on 13 November 2011 and the contract was terminated (DPW) on 13 March 2014 due to the contractor not performing his obligations. The second contract to finalise the outstanding work was awarded on 10 November 2015.

(b) The contractor failed to perform his obligations and the National Department of Public Works had to re-start the tendering process in order to appoint the new contractor for completion of the project.

(c) The anticipated date of completion is 9 July 2016.

(d) The budget allocation for the construction and completion of the specified police station is R 31 581 451-00.

(e) The amount spent to date is R 16 887 830-00.

(f) The projected expenditure for the project is R 31 581 451-00.

Reply:

Department

(a) An audit on possible existence of ghost employees in the Department of Transport was undertaken by the Inhouse internal audit activity in the 2011/12 financial year, with a follow-up audit in the 2012/13 financial year.

(b) The results of both full-scale and follow-up audits revealed that there were no ghost employees in the payroll system (PERSAL) of the Department of Transport.

The issue of ghost employees is indicated as a high risk in the fraud risk register of the Department and is regularly and closely monitored by the relevant risk owners

Airports Company South Africa SOC Limited (ACSA)

1.(b) The Airports Company South Africa has conducted audits to establish whether any “ghost workers” existed on the payroll for the financial years mentioned above, 2011 to 2016.

   (i) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2011-12 financial year.

   (ii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2012-13 financial year.

   (iii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2013-14 financial year.

   (iv) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2014-15 financial year.

   (v) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2015-16 financial year.

2. (a) Audits have been conducted by Internal Audit and External Auditors for the period 2011 to 2014.

    (b) Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) and Sizwe Ntsaluba Gobodo (SNG) for the period 2011 to 2014. The Auditor General of SA (AGSA) audited for the period 2015 to 2016.

    (c) There were no findings raised related to the existence of “ghost workers”.

    (d) – (f) Please see response to (c) above.

Air Traffic and Navigation Services SOC Limited (ATNS)

1. As part of the part of the annual Internal Financial Controls audit, the payroll process is subject to audit annually with audit procedures applied to detect ghost employees.

(b) (i) 2011-12

(ii) 2012-13

(iii) 2013-14

(iv) 2014-15

(v) 2015-16

(aa) the audits are done annually.

(bb) the audits are done annually.

2. The audits are undertaken annually between November and February by internal audit and further by external auditors. There have been no ghost employees found through audit procedures over the years.

   (a) The audits are done annually.

   (b) Both ATNS internal audit and external audit.

   (c) No ghost employees were found.

   (d) None of the above.

   (e) None of the above.

   (f) None of the above.

   (g) None of the above.

South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)

1. Yes (a) N/A

(b) the SACAA’s Internal Audit division conducted ghost employee checks/reviews through payroll audits which are performed annually.

(i) No audit was conducted in 2011-12,

(ii) Audits were conducted in 2012-13,

(iii) and 2013-14, (iv) and in 2014-15.

(v) The audit for 2015-16 has not taken place yet.

(aa) None of the above

(bb) 2015-16 audit is scheduled to take place during the 2016-17 FY.

2. (a) In each case the audits are conducted after the end of the financial year.

(b) The audits are carried out by the Internal Audit division using the Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs) to identify any anomalies within the payroll system.

(c) For the audits conducted in 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 NO ghost employees were identified.

(d) None of the above.

(e) None of the above.

(f) None of the above.

(g) None of the above.

(i) None of the above.

(ii) No incidences were revealed by the audits in the SACAA.

Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (CBRTA)

(1) (b) The C-BRTA has not undertaken any audits specifically to determine how many ghost workers are on the books on any of the given financial years i.e. 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16. However, the Agency has put internal control measures in place to ensure that only valid employees are paid and therefore mitigating against the risk of paying ghost employees. Among others, these internal control measures include but are not limited to:

• Input on certain payroll transactions by one employee (a Senior Administrative Officer), where approval for processing is then provided by the Payroll Specialist;
• The review of the monthly payroll by another employee at Senior Manager level, against all input documentation; and
• The approval of Payroll for payment after a further review by the Executive Manager.

Furthermore, the periodic internal and annual external audits of the entity are undertaken with payroll being one of the specific audit items on the programme. None of these audits have uncovered any ghost workers in the reporting periods in question. (aa) The Agency has not seen the need to conduct these audits because the internal control processes in place have been found to be adequate and the risk of paying ghost employees is mitigated.

(bb) While there are no specific audits conducted on the ghost employees, the following internal auditors have conducted payroll audits and have found the controls within payroll environment to be effective:

Financial year	Internal auditors	External auditors
2011-12	IA Professionals and Related Services	Auditor General South Africa
2012-13	Nkonki	Auditor General South Africa
2013-14	Nkonki	Auditor General South Africa
2014-15	Price Waterhouse Coopers	Auditor General South Africa
2015-16	Price Waterhouse Coopers	Auditor General South Africa

Road Accident Fund (RAF)

1. (b) To determine whether any ghost workers are on the books of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA), as part of its annual audit of the RAF, performs an audit to identify possible ghost employees, whilst the RAF performs: a 100% data analytics review, and on a sample basis, verification of employees on the SAP system against the physical information on personnel files; internal financial control reviews, on a sample basis, to ensure that employees who resigned, or who were dismissed, are timeously terminated on the SAP system; and, further ad hoc audits.

The number of respective audits totalled (i) 1 audit in the 2011-12, (ii) 2 audits in the 2012-13, (iii) 6 audits in the 2013-14, (iv) 6 audits in the 2014-15 financial years;

(aa) this question is not applicable as audits were undertaken during the aforementioned periods, (bb) the annual and other regular audits referred to in 1(b) will continue in future;

(2) In each case the audits -

(a) were undertaken:	(b) by:
following the RAF’s year-end at 31 March 2011, 31 March 2012, 31 March 2013, and 31 March 2014, as part of the statutory annual audit,	AGSA,
on 24 and 25 November 2011, in respect of an ad hoc 100% physical head count audit,	RAF Internal Audit Department,
during June 2013, September 2013, November 2013, March 2014, April 2014, July 2014, November 2014, and March 2015, as part of the internal financial control reviews,	RAF Internal Audit Department,
during April 2013 and April 2014, as part of the data analytics review,	RAF Internal Audit Department,

(c) no ghost employees were identified, therefore questions (d), (e), (f), and (g)(ii) are not applicable to the RAF.

Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)

1. There hasn’t been any ghost employees for the period 2011/2012 – 2014/2015

The latest physical verification / audit was done during September 2015. In this verification process/ audit no ghost employees identified.

The 2015/2016 verification is still under progress, the results of which will be available once done.

2. (a) The latest verification was done during September and October 2015 – this verification relates to the 2014/2015 financial year.

(b) The verification for 2014/2015 financial year was done by the Payroll unit of the RTMC

(c) The outcome for the 2014/2015 verification dictates that there were no ghost employees at RTMC.

(d) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees.

(e) There was no cost incurred for the 2014/2015 verification as the exercise was done internally by Payroll unit of the RTMC. The 2015/2016 verification process has not been completed, but were can indicate that there are no amounts to be incurred as the exercise is done internally by RTMC Payroll.

(f) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees

(g) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees

Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA)

1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.

(aa) Not Applicable

(bb) Not Applicable

2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.

(b) Auditor General, SEMA/IRS and Audit & Risk Management Solutions

(c) No ghost employees were found

(d) Internal controls are in place and are reviewed periodically

(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit. Internal audit does the payroll audit as part of their annual systems audit.

(f) Not Applicable

(g) Not Applicable

South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.

(aa) Not Applicable

(bb) Not Applicable

2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.

(b) Auditor General South Africa

(c) No ghost employees were found

(d) Internal controls are in place and AGSA performs on audit on an annual basis verifying each employees

(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit.

(f) Not Applicable

(g) Not Applicable

Ports Regulator of South Africa (PRSA)

1. (b) There were no special audits undertaken by the Ports Regulator since both the internal and external auditors perform employee verification for all employees taking into account the fact that the Ports Regulator employs only 17 employees. The verifications are done annually and did take place in (i) 2011/12, (ii) 2012/13, 2013/14, (iv) 2014/15 and (v) 2015/16. (aa) N/A, (bb) N/A.
2. (a) these audits were undertaken each year by (b) internal and external auditors and (c) there were no ghost employees found on the payroll. (d) Strict internal controls prevented this, (e) the audits were done as part of the annual audit (f) there were no guilty parties to be handled.

 

South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA)

SAMSA has not undertaken audits on ghost workers as a separate audit exercises. However, the Auditor-General does verify the existence of employees on the SAMSA payroll during their audits. The AG has not identified any ghost worker on the SAMSA payroll during their previous audits.

Railway Safety Regulator (RSR)

The Human Resources and Payroll Audits are undertaken on a yearly basis by both the Internal Auditors as well as the Auditor-General and no audit findings for ghost employees were identified for the following financial years:

Financial Years	Ghost Workers
2011-2012	No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing
2012-2013	No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing
2013-2014	No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing
2014-2015	No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing
2015-2016	No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

1. No audits have been undertaken to determine specifically how many ghost workers are on the books of PRASA in the financial years mentioned. PRASA Internal Audit Department performs Human Capital Management (HCM) audits, where the scope relates to the adequacy and effectiveness of HCM processes including:

• Policies and Procedures
• Staff Retention and Succession Planning, Scarce Skills Plans
• Overtime Management
• Leave Management, Productivity and Absenteeism
• Recruitment  and Selection
• Terminations and Suspensions
• Salary increases and promotions
• Payroll
• Organisational structure and reporting lines
• Employee Wellness Programme

The Auditor General also performs audit on the HCM function as part of their annual year end audit. PRASA also undertakes monthly payroll reconciliations, and to date no discrepancies have been uncovered.

2. See (1) above.

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:-

1. (a) Since 1 October 2015, the National ICT Forum has held a number of meetings through its various structures, which comprises of the Chairpersons Forum, Chamber meetings and Working Committees.

(b) (i) Meeting Dates:

• • • Chairpersons Forum – 30 November 2015, 11 March 2016 and 06 May 2016
    • Economic Chamber – 3 March 2016
    • Social Chamber – 27 November 2015 and 19 February 2016
    • Governance and Security Chamber – 7 December 2015
    • ICTs and Disability Chamber – 2 December 2015 and 17 March 2016

(ii) Venues:

• Chairpersons Forum – Director General’s Boardroom (Department)
• Economic Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
• Social Chamber – Blue Crane boardroom (Department)
  • Governance and Security Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
• ICTs and Disability Chamber – Burgherspark Hotel (Pretoria)

 

(iii) Agendas:

Chairpersons Forum – Stakeholder Mobilization and Participation, Resource Mobilization, Draft Work Programmes of Chambers, National Workshop

Economic Chamber – ICT Skills, ICT SMMEs support, Electronic Manufacturing, Postal Sector and ICTs

• Social Chamber – e-Health, e-Education, e-Justice and e-Agriculture
• Governance and Security Chamber – e-Commerce, Internet Governance, Policy Mapping and Cyber Security.
• ICTs and Disability Chamber – ICT Assistive Devices, Access to Government websites, Access to Banking Services

(iv) Records of decisions:

• Chambers have developed their Terms of Reference and firmed up their structures
• Chambers have now resolved and are prepared draft Work Programmes which still need to
• be approved by the department
• The Chairpersons Forum agreed to convene a National Workshop to discuss and endorse
• the draft Work Programmes

(2)(a) Reports and (b) Initiatives

Initiatives that are coming out of the draft work programmes of the chambers include the following:

• Conduct a National ICT Skills Audit with relevant stakeholders
• Develop and implement a basic National e-Literacy Programme
• Facilitate creation of Creative Hubs for SMMEs in townships with relevant support
• Support development of ICT applications that will enable SMMEs to expand business opportunities
• Develop and implement a Cybersecurity Awareness programme
• To develop a National set of Principles/framework for Internet Governance in South Africa
• Establish/ or revive an Intergovernmental Forum on Internet Governance
• Create a cybersecurity Body of Knowledge for general access by South Africans
• Explore Youth Job Creation Programme focusing on cybersecurity awareness
• Facilitate engagements with relevant to improve access to banking services, government websites, employment, education and broadcasting for people with disabilities.

A National Workshop will be convened before the end of June 2016 to discuss and endorse the draft programmes of each Chamber. The workshop will also discuss resource mobilization for implementation of the work programme and timelines.

Reply:

The details of the reprioritisation of funds in the 2016 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, subsequent to the aggregates tabled in the 2015 Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement are set out below.

(a)(i) Amounts reprioritised from national departments:

see the link:  http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Table.docx

1. As part of the reprioritisation exercise, the Department of Energy receives additional funding taken from the local government level: Integrated National Electrification Programme. This results in a net positive reprioritisation of R87.2 million in 2016/17.

(a)(ii) Amounts reprioritised from provinces:

The provincial department-specific impact of the provincial equitable share reprioritisation is determined through separate provincial-own budgetary processes and legislative approval. Thus the details for each province were not known at the time of tabling the 2016 national budget; however the aggregate provincial reprioritisation was. The provincial equitable share reprioritisation per province is shown in the table below.

Provincial equitable share: heres the list: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Equitable.docx

The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient province was determined by the department that acts as the national transferring officer. The effect of grant reductions on provincial aggregates is shown in the table below and is informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.

Provincial conditional grants:

 heres the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Accountable.docx

(a)(iii) Amounts reprioritised from municipalities:

Local government equitable share:

The impact on municipalities of the R1.8 billion in reprioritisation of the local government equitable share over the MTEF is not shown separately per municipality, as many factors influenced these allocations. These are set out in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Division of Revenue (Annexure W1 to the Division of Revenue Bill and the Budget Review). The allocations amount to 26.4 per cent of the local government level reprioritisation and 5.5 per cent of the total reprioritisation over the MTEF.

The changes affecting municipal allocations include data updates to variables in the local government equitable share formula; to account for changes in projected inflation, electricity and water bulk costs and household growth rates. Significant changes also resulted from the decision by the Municipal Demarcation Board to re-determine multiple municipal boundaries, including the merging of several municipalities. All new demarcations are reflected in the 2016 Division of Revenue Bill and therefore allocations for individual municipalities in the 2015 and 2016 Division of Revenue Bills are not directly comparable where demarcations have been changed. The allocations for Special Support for Councilor Remuneration and Ward Committees also changed as a result of the merging of some municipalities.

The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient municipality was determined by the department that acts as the transferring officer. The aggregate grant reductions for individual grants are shown in the table below and are informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.

Local government conditional grants:

here's the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990conditiongrant.docx

(b)(i) &

(b)(ii) The percentage that each amount represents of the funds reprioritised in the sphere of government that it resides in is show in the tables above under (a)(i), (a)(ii) and (a)(iii). These tables above also show the percentage that funds represent of the total amount of reprioritisation over the MTEF.

Reprioritisation at each sphere of government as a percentage of the total:

see the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990reproriasition.docx

Reply:

1. Yes. According to South African Airways, their sponsorships in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16 were as following (all these sponsorships were approved in accordance with the company’s delegation of authority requirements and followed an internal approval process which included the approval of a business case):

Sponsorship Property	Right Holder	Value	Period
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5m per annum	2013-14
SA Olympic Teams	SASCOC	R6m per annum	2014-15
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5m per annum	2014-15
SA Olympic Teams	SASCOC	R6m per annum	2015-16
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5 per annun	2015-16
Miss South Africa	Sun International	R594k	2015-16
World Routes	UBM	R1.5m	2015-16
NBA Africa Games	NBA Africa	R1.3m	2015-16
International Jazz Extravaganza	Teacup Projects Proprietary Limited	R1.1m	2015-16

Notes:

• The SA Rugby sponsorship was a four (4) year agreement that ended in on 31 December 2015
• The SASCOC sponsorship is a three (3) year agreement that expires in March 2017
• All other sponsorship listed above with the exception of SA Rugby and SASCOC were agreements reviewed annually
• All SAA sponsorships including the ones listed above, are offered strictly on Value-In-Kind (VIK) basis with no outlay of cash. The sponsored parties are liable for airport taxes.

2. There is no mandatory provisions in the cost containment measures (National Treasury Instruction 01 of 2013/14) prohibiting sponsorships although accounting authorities were required to implement measures to contain operational costs and eliminate all non-essential expenditure. SAA is only required to obtain the Minister’s approval for significant transactions outlined in terms of Section 54(2) of the PFMA.

3. According to SAA, the Bafana Bafana sponsorship is valued at R110m in value in kind over a five (5) year period.

4. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter as SAA announces and accounts for all its sponsorships.

Nonetheless, prudence is required in exercising financial authority during times of financial constraints.

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

The 1 200 properties are not untraceable as suggested by the Honourable Member. Rather, the land parcels in question cannot be linked to the Geographical Information System (GIS) due to the absence of cadastral information on them. The Department of Public Works (DPW) has therefore approached the Office of the Chief Surveyor-General to provide spatial geo-reference cadastral data of South Africa for these properties in the format of the (Environmental Systems Research Institute) ESRI files that are currently being used in the Department, so that the land parcels can be linked to the GIS. It is important for all property under the custodianship of the DPW to be put on the GIS system so that the Department or the Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE) is enabled to manage immovable assets optimally, incorporating the ability to do conditionality assessments and thus provide for asset investment decisions.

Attached to this reply is Annexure A, which lists the 1 200 properties.

Reply:

(a) (i) 5449 individuals

(ii) 837 Corporate/businesses

(b) Smallest amount = R204.75

Largest amount = R10 551 548.16

(c) The Legal cause is Non Payment of Toll.

(d) (i) & (ii) From a Summons issue perspective Daly Attorneys were used. They form part of the Contractor’s business model with their sub-contractors.

Werksmans Inc. is on a retainer as Sanral’s attorneys of record related to e-Toll matters. A due SCM process was followed in their initial appointment.

(e) (i) Senior advocates may be appointed depending on the specifics of the defences offered for specified claims. However, no matter has reached a stage where the particular defences are known.

(ii) (iii) The appointment of senior advocates depends on the legal matters to be argued and the availability of a particular senior advocate.

(f) (i) There are fixed costs applicable to the drafting of summonses, costs of the court and sheriff costs. (ii) There is no specific budget for legal costs. SANRAL has a general budget for legal costs. Furthermore, depending on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts and if a defendant found guilty, the costs are carried by the defendant.

Reply:

The Minister has not met with any member, nor close associate of the Guptas. He has also not attended a meeting with a specified person at the Gupta’s Saxonworld Estate in Johannesburg.

Reply:

(1) (a)(i) & (ii) There are approximately 2.5 million distinct vehicles using the GFIP on a monthly basis. Approximately 1,45 million vehicles are currently registered or making payment. SANRAL received more than 600 000 enquiries on the less60% offer via the web or via inbound calls from the public. Of the 600 000, approximately 130 000 have settled their account or made arrangements to settle. There is however still work in progress related to the balance of the 600 000 users indicated above.

(b)(i) R136m discounted paid and payment agreements for a further R123m discounted entered into.

(ii) (aa) & (bb) – the system is not set up to distinguish between type of users.

(2) SANRAL is an agency of Government and must comply with the requirements of the PFMA. There is a legal obligation on users to pay toll at a toll plaza or tolling point. SANRAL is obliged to collect outstanding debts to Government in terms of the PFMA.

(a) The SANRAL Act allows for both civil and criminal legal processes. Both are available to SANRAL and the prosecuting authorities.

(b) The extent of these processes are determined by legislation

(c) The NPA already successfully prosecuted a person in 2015 for the non-payment of toll as well as fraud. Further cases are investigated. The issuing of civil summonses already commenced.

(d) We trust that the honourable member is not suggesting that due to legal costs, SANRAL should neglect its obligation to collect the debt owed as mandated in the PFMA. As the honourable member would appreciate the costs are dependent on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts.

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

(a) User Departments’ accommodation requirements differ in size and type and are informed by User Asset Management Plans (U-AMPs) for new requirements and/or ad hoc requests. The decision on the allocation of State-owned property to meet User requirements is also informed, among others, by: an assessment of the type of service being rendered by the client department; the fitness for purpose of the building; the functionality of the building; and the geographic location of the building.

The Department of Public Works (DPW) is further guided by the Space Planning Norms and Standards for Office Accommodation Use by Organs of State (Government Gazette No. 27985, 2 September 2005) to determine the appropriate space requirements for allocation.

(b) In the main, immovable assets under the custodianship of the DPW are primarily intended for the use of national User-Departments. Where assets are surplus to its needs, the DPW engages with other organs and custodians in the national, provincial and local spheres following the application of the above-mentioned criteria. Where there is no take-up within the Government sector, the Department may elect to lease out surplus properties to the private sector.

________________________________________________________________________

Reply:

1. South African Airways has indicated that on all destinations they have stopped transporting fire-arms for passengers. Additional information is available on SAA’s webiste at http://www.flysaa.com/za/en/flyingSAA/baggage/firearms.html

2. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter.

Reply:

(a) There have not been attempts to replace the Councillors. Minister met with the previous Chairperson and expressed the intention to change the structure of the Council to derive maximum value for all stakeholders.

(b) There is currently no designated Chairperson of the council.

(c) There has not been any meetings with the Chairperson.

Reply:

(1) The Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality constructed 1219 new houses, serviced 139 stands with water and sanitation and rectified 1561 houses during the 2015/16 financial year.

As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard as been issued to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost.

(a) 198 houses/units were built during the second quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.

(b) 215 houses/units were built during the third quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.

(2) An additional R500m was allocated to the Eastern Cape Provinces by the National Department and was disbursed as follows:

    (a) R122m to Housing Development Agency which was appointed as the implementing agent for all new developments in the municipality;

    (b) R46,5m for projects to be completed in the municipality by the Eastern Cape Department of Human Settlements – ECDOHS;

    (c) R50,3m to the Municipality to complete current running projects (R50, 3m);

    (d) R95m to the Revolving Fund of municipality as a reimbursement for bridge financing to fund housing construction;

    (e) R186,2 to fund project commitments in the Eastern Cape other than Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality.

(3) The funds expended on rectification during the year under review were funded from the original Human Settlement Development Grant allocation to the Eastern Cape for 2015-16 financial year.

(4) An amount of R186, 2 m was spent on subsidised housing construction in the Eastern Cape other than in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, from additional R500m allocation.

Reply:

The Provincial Commissioner of the Eastern Cape was not aware of the alleged irregularities as contained in the attached statements to this Question in Parliament, which are viewed in a very serious light.

 (a) Two (2) Senior Officers have been appointed to conduct an in-depth investigation into the alleged irregularities at Madeira Police Station with a view to take appropriate action against whoever might be implicated in such irregularities.

 (b) The investigation will commence immediately and is envisaged to be finalized within twenty one (21) days.

 (c) Progress will be reported in due course.

Reply:

(1) Five thousand four hundred and sixty five (5 465) houses in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape require rectification.

(2) (a)(i)(aa) to (cc) From 2011 to 2014 a total of 28 261 housing units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;

(dd) In 2014/15, a total number of 2 048 units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;

(ii) Since 1st April 2015, a total of 1 561units were rectified; and

(b) As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard was issued in 2015 to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Where defects and poor workmanship are identified, they remain the responsibility of the Province, Municipality and/or the Developer to take relevant remedial action against the contractor and enforce repairs at the cost of the contractor or developer.

The Honourable member is also referred my speech to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) on 12 May 2015 during the Policy Debate on the budget of my Department. I indicated,

“We are no longer rectifying houses using our budget. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the NHBRC, which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost. The money currently used on rectification can and will be used in building more houses”.

In order to limit the need to rectify houses, Government established the National Home Builders Registration (NHBRC). Its mandate is to ensure that all contractors who undertake the construction of a subsidised house are registered with the NHBRC and the requirement for registration, amongst others, is that they comply with all minimum norms and standards and expertise to construct a house.

In addition, the National Department conducts structured project-level monitoring on a quarterly basis in all nine Provinces for verification of delivery. During these, the quality of construction is also observed and reported. I also recently met with contractors involved in the housing subsidy market to address challenges and to emphasize amongst other the importance of quality workmanship.

Reply:

The Honourable Member should note that the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) provides in section 32(2) that the Municipal Council must recover all irregular expenditure incurred unless the municipal council has, after an investigation by a council committee, certified the expenditure as irrecoverable and has decided to write it off. The municipal council is the only appropriate authority that should take action in relation to the irregular, unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure that has been incurred. The overall accountability process for municipal budget and expenditure must take place in a municipality, Provincial and national oversight is ‘distant’ and intervention by the two spheres only warranted as a last resort where local government has collapsed. Therefore, detailed information in this regard is therefore best obtained from the municipality concerned.

The following response is provided based on the disclosures in municipal audited annual financial statements, monitoring reports submitted by the municipality and engagements during mid-year meetings with municipal officials. The Honourable Member should also note that National Treasury has recently introduced consequence management measures that were elaborated on in MFMA Circular 76 issued in October 2015. This provided practical information on how municipalities should address such matters. It must therefore be understood within the context of the phased-in approach to implementation; hence, please noted that further actions may have been taken since these engagements with municipalities which are not reflected in this response as they are subject to ongoing monitoring and reporting.

(a) Irregular expenditure relates to categories of expenditure incurred in contravention of or not in accordance with the MFMA, Municipal Systems Act, Public Office-Bearers Act, and Supply Chain Management policy. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R1.8 billion irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. No information was reported on amounts to be recovered, although MPAC was tasked with the responsibility to investigate such matters. During mid-year engagements the municipality advised that 8 employees were dismissed, however, no information was provided on write-offs or recovery.

City of Cape Town incurred R1 million irregular expenditure of which R85 000 was condoned. Disciplinary procedures were in place. A forensic unit was established to investigate allegations; however, no information was available on write-offs or recovery.

Ekurhuleni incurred R794 million of irregular expenditure of which R32 million was condoned; however, the majority of the cases were still under investigation by MPAC and other organs of state. In instances where MPAC had concluded investigations, these were reported to council for condonement. Section 32 processes will be used to follow up on recoveries.

eThekwini incurred R500 000 of irregular expenditure of which R400 000 was condoned. The municipality advised that it is addressing this matter in terms of the legislated processes.

City of Johannesburg incurred R1.5 billion of irregular expenditure of which R4 million was condoned. 83 cases are being investigated and 10 have been completed. The municipality has implemented measures to recover money. For example, when an employee resigns before the disciplinary case has been completed, the municipality withholds the employees pension payout. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.

Mangaung incurred R289 million of irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R2.1 billion of irregular expenditure of which R12 million was condoned. Investigations are being conducted by Internal Audit and reports are tabled at MPAC from time to time, for recommendations and follow-up actions, including those instances where amounts are write-off and recoveries instituted. No further details were available.

City of Tshwane incurred R1.6 billion of irregular expenditure of which R28 million was condoned. A number of cases are currently under investigation. No information was available on write-offs and recoverable.

(b) Unauthorised expenditure means any expenditure incurred by a municipality otherwise than in accordance with section 15 or 11(3) of MFMA and includes overspending of total amount appropriated in the municipality’s approved budget or overspending of the total amount appropriated for a vote in the approved budget or expenditure from a vote unrelated to the department or functional area covered by the vote or expenditure of money appropriated for a specific purpose, otherwise than for that specific purpose or spending that is inconsistent with any conditional allocation, amongst others. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R432 million of unauthorised expenditure of which none was authorised through a special adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations. No information was available on any recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendation.

City of Cape Town had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

Ekurhuleni had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

eThekwini had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

City of Johannesburg incurred R2.7 billion of unauthorised expenditure. No information was provided on amounts authorised through an adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations, or on amounts recovered.

Mangaung incurred R2.1 billion of unauthorised expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 28 of the MFMA read with regulations 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations was passed by council. No information was available on recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R780 million of unauthorised expenditure, of which R623 million was authorised through a special adjustment budget. No information was available on recoveries.

City of Tshwane incurred R2 billion of unauthorised expenditure, of which R1.2 billion was authorised through an adjustment budget. A report was tabled in Council to address accounting-related transactions, such as over-expenditure relating to provision for depreciation, loss on disposal of assets, finance charges and debt impairment.

(c) Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure relates to expenditure incurred that could have been avoided had reasonable care been exercised. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R5 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. No expenditure was condoned and no information was available on write-offs or recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendations.

City of Cape Town incurred R440 00 of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which none was condoned; however, R146 000 was recovered. The municipality is in the process of condoning the outstanding amounts.

Ekurhuleni incurred R181 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which R1.2 million was condoned. These have been referred to MPAC and other organs of state for investigation.

eThekwini had reported no fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

City of Johannesburg incurred R20 million fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R23 000 was condoned, and R361 000 was still to be recovered. The remainder is subject to the outcome of further investigations.

Mangaung incurred R29 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed by council. No information was available on condoned amounts, write-offs or recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R551 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R226 000 was condoned. MPAC are still investigating. No confirmation of outcomes was received with regard to write-offs or recoveries.

City of Tshwane incurred R19 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R513 000 was condoned. A number of cases are still under investigation. No confirmation of outcomes were received on write-offs or recoveries.

Reply:

1. (a) R1.54 million is allocated for the implementation of SA Connect Phase 1.

(b) The allocated amount will be spent to procure broadband connectivity services for the Phase 1 sites. Detailed Breakdown:

Budget Allocation (Million)
2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	Total
336 600	422 300	711 900	1 450 800

2. (a) The Department is engaging with SITA to explore options of the appointment of the service provider that will be in line with the existing procurement legislations and regulations.

(b) The lead agency should be an organisation with the following capabilities:

   (i) To coordinate between public & private sector players,

   (ii) To raise funding to expand fibre infrastructure,

   (iii) To rollout simultaneously in all the phase 1 districts as per the Broadband Implementation Plan,

   (iv) To leverage on existing infrastructure to minimise duplication.

(c) The Department is engaging stakeholders to finalise the appointment process and no requests for proposals have been published yet.

    (i) - (iii) See (c) above

3) (a) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for this project of which R100 million was transferred to Sentech for dual illumination and R50, 240 million to SAPO for the National Address System.

(b) No funds were spent since 1 April 2016. Because the department was engaging with the relevant stakeholders to finalise the appointment process.

4) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for the project. An amount of R49, 760 million was rolled over.