Reply:

The function of amending the Constitution to allow for expropriation of land without compensation is currently the responsibility of Parliament.

(a)(b),(c),(d) Falls away.

Reply:

The Department has requested the provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to compile a comprehensive response to the question raised by M. Gen O S Terblanche (DA).

The comprehensive response will be submitted in January 2020.

Reply:

(1) 397.

(2)(a) 529.

(2)(b)

• Some farms which were previously allocated are in the process of being reallocated.

• There are instances where multiple farmers have been allocated a single farm, which has not yet been officially subdivided hence lease units are still being created.

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• Some farms are occupied by farm dwellers hence land rights enquiries are still being conducted.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farm dwellers.

• There are instances where the beneficiaries are still sorting out issues relating to the legal entity that must contract with Government.

• Some farms are no longer leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• There are instances of illegal invasion, which impacts on orderly allocation processes.

• Disputes among beneficiaries.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R375 819.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

Yes, provided that the sale terms are concluded. Approval was granted during the year 2006 for the sale of various Kat River Citrus farms to the farmers at specific market values. The sales would have been funded through the combination of Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development Grant and own finance. The farmers never secured financing and therefore the transactions were not taken any further.

The Department cannot offer title deeds without the terms of the transaction being honoured by any of the purchasers.

a) The Department is already in communication with the farmers, with a view to finalise the transactions and also deal with issues of farm dwellers who are occupying some of the farms.

b) The transfers will commence upon the farmers satisfying the sale conditions.

Reply:

a) 3 824 land parcels.

b) Please refer to Annexure A.

c) 531 789 ha.

ANNEXURE A OF NA 919 OF 2019

Province and Municipality	Parcels	Area (Ha)
EASTERN CAPE	3186	173,150.41
Amahlathi Local Municipality	295	9,293.72
Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality	442	6,299.79
Elundini Local Municipality	14	462.04
Emalahleni Local Municipality (EC)	21	1,675.21
Engcobo Local Municipality	8	3.53
Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality	59	29,928.44
Intsika Yethu Local Municipality	15	2,409.32
King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Municipality	255	3,683.82
Matatiele Local Municipality	48	23,135.56
Mbhashe Local Municipality	18	323.48
Mbizana Local Municipality	6	664.36
Mhlontlo Local Municipality	33	3,992.99
Mnquma Local Municipality	114	3,059.47
Ngqushwa Local Municipality	1251	47,141.62
Ngquza Hill Local Municipality	19	798.94
Ntabankulu Local Municipality	8	11.24
Nyandeni Local Municipality	10	695.44
Port St Johns Local Municipality	13	18.50
Raymond Mhlaba Local Municipality	472	36,591.19
Sakhisizwe Local Municipality	49	1,571.15
Senqu Local Municipality	2	4.63
Umzimvubu Local Municipality	34	1,385.96
FREE STATE	8	1,076.33
Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality	7	1,076.18
Matjhabeng Local Municipality	1	0.15
GAUTENG	87	632.10
City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality	16	2.08
City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality	69	629.72
Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality	2	0.30
KWAZULU-NATAL	141	62,942.62
Endumeni Local Municipality	1	29.16
eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality	16	0.80
KwaDukuza Local Municipality	2	0.15
Newcastle Local Municipality	1	0.15
The Msunduzi Local Municipality	4	0.65
Umzimkhulu Local Municipality	117	62,911.71
LIMPOPO	31	59,301.55
Blouberg Local Municipality	12	27,073.88
Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality	2	4,123.53
Greater Giyani Local Municipality	1	2,063.64
Greater Letaba Local Municipality	1	756.18
Greater Tubatse/Fetakgomo Local Municipality	6	13,019.96
Greater Tzaneen Local Municipality	1	2.57
Lepelle-Nkumpi Local Municipality	3	2,225.14
Makhuduthamaga Local Municipality	4	9,971.93
Mogalakwena Local Municipality	1	64.72
MPUMALANGA	49	27,850.99
Bushbuckridge Local Municipality	11	13,121.59
Chief Albert Luthuli Local Municipality	6	3,146.66
Dr JS Moroka Local Municipality	5	2,171.32
Emalahleni Local Municipality (MP)	1	0.17
Nkomazi Local Municipality	2	506.58
Thembisile Local Municipality	24	8,904.67
NORTH WEST	300	135,840.74
City of Matlosana Local Municipality	1	0.20
Ditsobotla Local Municipality	14	8,194.14
Greater Taung Local Municipality	23	31,916.18
Kagisano-Molopo Local Municipality	1	1,516.87
Local Municipality of Madibeng	26	1,883.61
Mafikeng Local Municipality	27	5,997.22
Moretele Local Municipality	7	3,015.52
Moses Kotane Local Municipality	149	50,643.60
Naledi Local Municipality	3	0.52
Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality	18	23,721.34
Ratlou Local Municipality	2	4,018.63
Rustenburg Local Municipality	22	3,309.60
Tswaing Local Municipality	7	1,623.31
NORTHERN CAPE	22	70,994.38
Ga-Segonyana Local Municipality	1	542.03
Joe Morolong Local Municipality	21	70,452.35
Grand Total	3,824	531,789.11

Reply:

(a) 6.

(b) and (c) Please refer to Annexure A.

ANNEXURE A OF NA QUESTION 992 OF 2019

	Province	Community Name	Status	Date of application	Reason for not registering
1.	Free State	Iketsetse	Not registered	20 October 2018	Constitution was not compliant with requirements and registration documents were incomplete.
2.	Limpopo	Kgashane Mamatlepa	Not registered	11 August 2018	Constitution was not compliant with requirements and registration documents were incomplete.
3.	Mpumalanga	Mmamashianoka - Mdibani	Not registered	4 November 2018	Constitution was not compliant with requirements and registration documents were incomplete.
4	North West	William Bere Moiloa	Not registered	26 January 2019	Constitution was not compliant with requirements and registration documents were incomplete.
5	North West	Majoe Mokuane	Not registered	21 July 2018	Constitution was not compliant with requirements and registration documents were incomplete.
6	North West	Pooyane	Not registered	3 November 2018	Membership list was not submitted and Constitution was not compliant with requirements.

Reply:

(a)(i) Details will be provided by 31 January 2020.

(a)(ii) The target for 2019/2020 financial year is 4109 and achieved to date is 2149

(a)(iii) The target for rural enterprises for 2019/2020 financial year to be supported is 227 and achieved to date is 114

(b) AgriParks are a network of several components. The establishment of AgriParks is a process.

• The Farmer Production Support Unit (FPSU), is the first component. It is a rural small-holder farmer outreach and capacity building unit that is established closer to farmers with primary production. The FPSU does primary collection, some storage, provides some processing for the local market, and extension services including mechanization.
• The Agri-hub(AH), is the second component, depending on the effectiveness of the first component. It is a production, equipment hire, processing, packaging, logistics, innovation and training unit.
• The Rural Urban Market Centre (RUMC), is the third component. It links to rural urban and international markets through contracts. This level has not as yet been reached. Acts as a holding facility, releasing produce to urban markets based on seasonal trends; and provides market intelligence and information feedback, to the AH and FPSU using the latest information and communication technologies.

(c) The Department is in the process focusing on the first component, which is the establishment of the Farmer Production Support Unit (FPSU). There are 27 prioritized FPSU’s.

Reply:

(a) (i) None. Social facilitation has been an internally delivered process.

(ii) Falls away.

(b) Falls away.

(c) Falls away.

Reply:

(1)(a) Land Tenure and Administration[1].

(b)(i) 225

(ii) 30

(iii) 5

(2)(a) The applications in terms of the Land Titles Adjustment Act, 1993 were never tracked as part of land delivery statistics hence that information is not easily accessible at the moment. Diligent attempts have been made to collect data for purposes of this question and it became clear that substantial time is required to construct a database in this regard.

(b),(c) Falls away.

1. This Branch was established in April 2014. ↑

Reply:

The Commission is unbale to verify the reference number referred to. Most of Restitution claims have a reference number that start with KR….

However, if the writer provide the Commission with updated information including the name of the claim and from which Province we will be in a position to respond adequately.

END

Reply:

• The Department has requested the Northern Cape Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to compile a comprehensive response to the question raised by Mr P G Moteka (EFF).
• The comprehensive response will be submitted in January 2020.

                                                                                                       

Reply:

(a) 1612.

(b) It has been observed in previous CPA discussions in the Legislature that the concept of dysfunctional CPAs has been interchangeably used with that of non-complying CPAs. The Department has been tracking non-compliance with the CPA Act and Regulations as opposed to utter dysfunction. The number of non-complying CPAs is 1 370.

(c)(i)

• A large proportion of CPA members are rooted in customary or indigenous ways of land management where decision making is a little bit centralised to some higher authority. The CPA regulatory framework encourages direct participatory democracy and therefore CPA founding documents tend to require direct participation by members. This creates contradictions in approaches by members and sometimes results in the emergence of or undesirable domination by rogue leadership elements.

• CPAs generally exist in areas that were systematically subjected to underdevelopment and poorly resourced education institutions. A substantial part of CPA members is either illiterate or have no more than primary level of education. At a very basic level, this has an impact on the ability of CPA members to understand and apply documented and yet unfamiliar land management rules

• CPAs comprise of diverse groups of people who are tied together by their parents’ or grandparents’ or great grandparent’s historical relationship with the claimed land. They generally tend to share nothing in common except the desire to regain ownership of the land.

• The land use at the time of restoration is generally substantially different from what it was at the time of dispossession. Land claimants therefore tend to receive sophisticated businesses which compel them to become forced business partners who had never consciously conceived of going into business together.

(c)(ii)

• Some CPAs are so under-resourced that they simply don’t have physical space from which to run their affairs and keep their records. This creates access to information challenges for new CPA leaders, depending on how the previous committee has vacated office.

• Well performing CPA businesses do not yield positive outcomes in the livelihoods of CPA members due to the ratio between revenue and large numbers of CPA members. Whilst there may have been visible wealth amongst the owners of the property prior to the CPA taking control, the larger numbers of CPA members shrink any possible redistributable revenue to nothingness. This creates endless instability as members tend to suspect that revenue is misappropriated by the leaders or managers of CPA businesses.

• CPAs are generally established prior to all possible land restitution claimants in community claims being located and verified. Provisions in CPA constitutions are then created for the future inclusion of claimants that were not verified during the settlement of a claim. This is the major source of conflict within CPAs since membership is permanently contested.

• Some CPAs comprise of very large groups like 53 villages that never converge in a single place. This necessitates some form of representative democratic mechanisms for decision making and yet claimants desire to have direct participation.

• Some CPAs comprise of unrelated groups of claimants whose claims were consolidated purely on the basis of proximity, without the informed consent of claimants. A lot of such CPA members do not regard themselves as a single group and therefore do not desire to be in a single entity.

• The CPA as an institution is sometimes not the appropriate entity to run businesses that get conducted on its property hence they get stretched beyond their institutional capacity to manage.

• The creation of separate CPA business ventures and joint ventures also tends to create conflict because of general lack of understanding of institutional relationships that should exist, inability to manage such relationships and lack of clarity regarding the sharing of benefits.
• A lot of CPAs have got factions that work against each other from the date of election to the next election. Executive Committees therefore have got no fair space to commit and correct honest mistakes due to the permanence of factions.

(d)

• There’s collaboration being explored with institutions of higher learning to provide customised training to all willing members of CPAs, in a language they commonly understand.

• The focus of CPA capacity building programmes will become more inclusive to accommodate general membership in order to promote general awareness amongst CPA members that CPAs are indeed community entities where members have to directly hold their leadership accountable instead of passing that responsibility to Government.

• The language spoken by the majority of CPA members will be identified and CPA founding documents will be translated into that language as one of the ways of encouraging effective participation of members in the affairs of their entities.

• In instances where CPAs do not have the necessary infrastructure to keep records, the Department shall, in its District Offices, make available basic CPA documents like constitutions, membership lists, lists of CPA leadership, and financial records (where such financial records are available).

• Strict enforcement of existing legal mechanisms is now being undertaken to promote a culture of accountability within CPAs and discourage rogue CPA executives from operating in a manner that is inconsistent with the aspirations of the CPA membership.

• The Departmental CPA monitoring capacity will be improved in order to better understand the needs of CPAs and provide on time support.

• Internal capacity building needs are continuously being identified in order to improve departmental regulatory capability and discourage unlawful interventions on CPAs by departmental officials.

• The possibility of deconsolidating big CPAs that comprise of various communities who do not regard themselves as a single community, is being explored.

• The Departmental post settlement support mechanisms are being improved and will be made accessible to CPAs. Such mechanisms shall be set in motion as soon as land restoration is chosen by claimants for timeous enterprise planning, setting up of appropriate enterprise management structures, identification of capacity building needs and provision of training.

Reply:

(a) 3 097 117.7820 hectares.

(b) The Communal Property Associations Act, 1996 and Regulations do not require the Communal Property Associations to report this type of information to the Department hence it is currently unknown.

Reply:

The claim is targeted for settlement during the fourth quarter of 2019/2020 financial year, pending acceptance of the Standard Settlement Offer by the Lower Zingcuka community, which will be presented to the Community by end of November 2019.

END

Reply:

a) 8940 is inclusive of pure and phased claims (and this figure is still subject to external audit and verification audit)

b) In order to accelerate the settlement of claims, the Commission on Restitution of Lands Rights participated in the Operation Phakisa of Agriculture Land Reform and Rural Development and as a result the services of external experts were used in the development of a Backlog Reduction Strategy which is still in progress for settlement of all old order land claims (lodged as at 31 December 1998). The Commission at this point is unable to provide specific dates, however the Annual Performance Plan is used as baseline to determine the number of claims to be settled per financial year.

c) 

	Total claims as at 1st October 2019 (subject to verification)
Province
Eastern Cape	805
Free State	8
Gauteng	460
KwaZulu-Natal	3270
Limpopo	1501
Mpumalanga	2036
North West	233
Northern Cape	88
Western Cape	539
TOTAL	8940

d) The completion of the Backlog Reduction Strategy will assist in the cost estimation for the settlement of the old order outstanding claims.

 

Reply:

(1) 467.

(2)(a) 251.

(2)(b)

• Some previously allocated farms are in the process of being reallocated to lessees.

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farmers and farm dwellers.

• There are instances where the beneficiaries are still sorting out issues relating to the legal entity that must contract with Government.

• Some farms are no longer leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• There are instances of illegal invasion, which impacts on orderly allocation processes.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3) (a) R995 614.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 259.

(2)(a) 34.

(2)(b)

• Some previously allocated farms are in the process of being reallocated as consequence of death, abandonment of the property and lease termination due to breach of lease terms

• There are disputes regarding allocation as well as property boundaries.

• Illegal invasion of leased farms by neighbouring communal settlements.

• Some farms are no longer leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• Existence of land restitution claims on leasable properties.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R222 543.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 192.

(2)(a) 70.

(2)(b)

• Some properties were acquired to pilot a policy for the benefit of the First Nations that were disadvantaged by the land restitution deadline of June 1913. A notarial land use right is envisaged for registration instead of a lease.

• Dispute between the allocated beneficiaries and farm workers.

• Ongoing investigation by the Special Investigating Unit thereby resulting in the non-conclusion of a lease since any affected party may become a suspect.

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• Some previously allocated farms are in the process of being reallocated.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R 47 000.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 282.

(2)(a) 787.

(2)(b)

• Some farms are still being reallocated as a consequence of abandonment.

• There are instances where multiple farmers have been allocated a single farm, which then requires an official subdivision.

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farm dwellers.

• There are instances where the beneficiaries are still sorting out issues relating to the legal entity that must contract with Government.

• Some farms are no longer leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• There are unlawful occupations of leasable farms.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R 378 347.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

No.

Reply:

(1). Please find attached original list of 240 claimant beneficiaries.

(2). (a) Of the 240 claimant beneficiaries on the original verified list, 91 are deceased. There is a need to regularly update the verification list by the CPA to replace household representatives of those that passed away.

(b) Hantam Municipality donated the land (Commonages A, B and C) for restitution purposes. Commonage A was transferred to the CPA on 30 March 2017 However, this property is currently being used by the emerging farmers under a formal lease agreement with Hantam Municipality. The municipality is yet to issue the tenants with termination letters so that the CPA can fully occupy the land. The CPA can only occupy the land once the current tenants have been relocated elsewhere.

(3). There was a need for regularisation of the CPA and a new Executive Committee was elected on 05 November 2019. In addition, a panellist has been appointed to assist the CPA on disputes regarding access to the land.

Reply:

• The Department has requested the provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to compile a comprehensive response to the question raised by Mrs A Steyn (DA).
• The comprehensive response will be submitted in January 2020.

                                                                                                       

Reply:

(1) 472

(2)(a) 432

(2)(b)

• Farms that were originally meant to be leased were subsequently earmarked for other programmes like the Animal and Veld Management Programme as well as the One Household One Hectare Programme.

• There are instances where multiple farmers have been allocated a single farm, which has not yet been officially subdivided hence lease units are still being created.

• There are unlawful occupations that make it impossible to conclude lease agreements whilst unlawful occupations are still being sorted.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farmers and farm dwellers.

• Some farms are in the process of being reallocated.

• Some farms have become unleasable because of the growth of settlements in surrounding communities.

• Some farms are claimed in terms of the Restitution of Land Rights Act and the claims have reached an advanced stage.

• Some farmers are still getting their legal entities registered.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

• Disputes amongst beneficiaries.

(3)(a) R159 503.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 410.

(2)(a) 233.

(2)(b)

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• There are reallocations that are currently being done, which have been occasioned by the death of lessees.

• There are instances where multiple farmers have been allocated a single farm, which has not yet been officially subdivided hence lease units are still being created.

• There are instances where the land is the process of being donated to a municipality for commonage purposes.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farm dwellers.

• Some farms are being used by neighbouring communities and have therefore become unleasable.

(3)(a) R353 956.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 223

(2)(a) 227

(2)(b)

• Conflict among beneficiary members.

• Some leases are currently being taken through administrative lease approval processes.

• Some farms are in the process of being reallocated.

• Some farms are in the process of being transferred to farm dwellers.

• Some farms are not leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R51 577.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

(1) 218.

(2)(a) 609.

(2)(b)

• Some farms are still in the process of being allocated to lessees.

• Some previously allocated farms are in the process of being reallocated.

• There are instances of illegal invasion of farms.

• There are instances of disputes with lessees regarding the suitability of the farm, which result in refusal by prospective lessees to sign lease agreements whilst the matters giving rise to a dispute are still being dealt with.

• Some farms are no longer leasable since they are occupied by communities.

• There are instances where multiple farmers have been allocated a single farm, which has not yet been officially subdivided hence lease units are still being created.

• There have been changes in the leasing policy in the past three years, which impacted on the conclusion of leases.

(3)(a) R252 391.00 (April – November 2019).

3(b)

• Agricultural Land Holding Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 407 449 8283

• Department of Rural Development and Land Reform Account: ABSA Bank Account No.: 405 400 6793

Reply:

RESPONSE BY THE DEPARTMENT:

THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, LAND REFORM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

1. A detailed response to Question 510 will be submitted by 31 January 2020.

Reply:

(a) The ARC FMD Vaccine Project business plan outlined the following three key focus areas:

1. Technology development for manufacture of FMD vaccine;
2. Education and training to ensure appropriate skills for the operations of the manufacturing facility;
3. Pilot scale and bioprocess development; and,
4. Design and construction of the FMD vaccine production facility.

Below is a synopsis of the performance of the ARC on the main deliverables of the revised business plan

Since the financial year 2011/12, the following have been achieved:

a) ARC has developed the new GMP compliant suspension culture technology for the manufacture of FMD vaccine – for all virus strains circulating in Southern Africa;

b) At least 10 students were trained at the level of Bachelor of Science Honours degree, with further practical skills development on various aspects of vaccine manufacturing. Subsequently, 7 graduates have been employed by the ARC at the facility;

c) In terms of Process Development – Using suspension culture techniques, the ARC has successfully produced FMD vaccine at 20 litre scale. To date sufficient antigen has been produced to formulate 50 000 doses of vaccine for each of the three virus strains (SAT 1, 2 and 3). Clinical trials to determine immunity and efficacy have been conducted with each of the vaccine strains as well as combinations of the same strains. Assessments of longevity of immune responses continues.

d) On the basis of the outcome/s of the process development, the ARC initiated the design of the manufacturing facility. The design indicated a shortfall in the funds required to construct and complete the manufacturing facility. Consequently, the ARC requested additional funding from the Department/National Treasury in 2012. Unfortunately, there was a delay from National Treasury in responding to the request for additional funding towards completing the project.

e) National Treasury only allocated required funding towards a complete FMD vaccine manufacturing facility in financial year 2019/20 over the MTEF period.

f) Consequently, the ARC has resumed the process towards design and construction of the FMD vaccine manufacturing facility. This process will be in accordance with applicable environmental and municipal regulations. Appropriate procurement processes have now resumed towards ensuring appropriate construction companies could provide the service to ARC.

(b) Fences to achieve disease control purposes is provided for the in the Animal Diseases Act and have been a layer in the FMD control strategy for many years. The location of the current disease control fences, on the international border and around the Kruger National Park complex, are no longer in line with international standards of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). Whereas these fences were intended to provide a barrier between infected zones and adjacent communities in the protection zone, the OIE requires a physical barrier between the protection zone and the free zone. DAFF agrees with the technical soundness of this approach and has already started considering how and where such a fence or barrier will best be placed. Many factors must be taken into consideration, as the placement of this fence will determine the new demarcation of the FMD free zone. As far as possible, DAFF intends placing the line on existing barriers, including the boundaries of commercial farms and existing structures such as highways. Where the existing line cuts through communities, the future placement of a fence must be carefully considered as it will have far-reaching effects on rural communities. The line that demarcates the FMD free zone currently only involves the provinces of Limpopo, Mpumalanga and KwaZulu Natal.

Reply:

During the financial year 2019/20, a number of investigations were conducted into the former Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. It would be appreciated if the Honourable Member was to provide the details of the specific investigation referred to in the parliamentary question, to enable the department to provide an appropriate response.

Reply:

Answer tabled in Parliament on:

DALRRD’S RESPONSE:

The department is supporting farmers through various support services such as awareness; public education and training through seminars, and farmer information sessions in the provinces. Early warning information is continuously being disseminated to farmers using various media platforms. Farmers are encouraged to use drought resistant cultivars and employ good farming practices to counter the effects of drought. All farmers have access to local offices, provincial offices and COGTA for assistance when they are affected by disasters.

Reply:

(1) With reference to her reply to question 245 on 19 July 2019, what was the (a) number of applications that the Land Bank approved subject to grant funding from her department that never materialised and (b) total monetary value of the approved applications;

(a) What was the number of applications that the Land Bank approved subject to grant funding from her department that?

From inception, 15 applications were assessed by the Funding Forum. Out of 15 applications assessed, 7 applications were approved for grant funding and 8 applications were rejected. These applications were rejected because they did not meet the criteria required.

(b) What was the total monetary value of the approved applications?

The total monetary value of the 7 approved applications was R88 731 743.00 for grant funding support. R13 million was paid so far to the approved applications as at 3 March 2019.

(2) Whether (a) any other support would be provided to the farmers since the blended finance has been suspended and (b) she communicated with all the affected farmers; if not, on what date will she communicate the type of support that would be provided to bridge the gap with all affected farmers?

(a) Whether any other support would be provided to the farmers since the blended finance has been suspended?

Farmers will continuously be supported with the existing funding support such as CASP, AgriBEE, MAFISA, Illema-Letsema and Recapitalization programme. Other support will be through Jobs Fund programme that has just been concluded that will also assisting farmers.

(b) Whether she communicated with all the affected farmers; if not, on what date will she communicate the type of support that would be provided to bridge the gap with all affected farmers?

The Minister will communicate with all the affected farmers on the Jobs Fund Programme before the end of the financial year 2019/20.

Reply:

(a) Please refer to the table below

Year	2009-2012	2012-2013	2013-2014	2014-2015	2015-2016	2016-2017
Amount Spent	R 995 379 034	R 1 151 028 123	R 1 081 827 772	R 461 957 000	R 836 612 144	R 308 311 000

b) (i) 1 675 projects were part of the RECAP programme.

    (ii) Please refer to Annexure “A”

c) (i) 375

(ii) Discontinuation of the RECAP programme.

Reply:

a) There is no legislation within the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development which hampers the importation of medical cannabis seeds into the Republic. However, there is regulation which governs the importation of plants and plant products into South Africa. The importation of plant and plant products are subject to the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 (Act No.36 of 1983). The purpose of the Agricultural Pests Act is to provide for measures by which agricultural pests may be prevented and combated.

In terms of Section 3 of the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 (Act No.36 of 1983) (APA), no person shall import into the Republic any plant except on the authority of a permit. Under the said Act “Plant” is defined as any live or dead part of a plant and any derivation of plant. In this regard, any importation of plant including the seeds thereof should meet the phytosanitary import requirements of the Republic under the Agricultural Pests Act.

Cannabis seed for medical, industrial or any other purpose is subject to the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983. It therefore has to be imported under the certain conditions which are informed by a pest risk assessment.

In the past, pre-2001, Cannabis sativa was declared a weed in terms of the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act 43 of 1983) (CARA) under Regulation 15 and subsequently there has been an amendment in 2001 which was promulgated in 2001 and Cannabis was removed from the list of declared weeds. The list of CARA under regulation 15 was interlinked with R.846 of 12 April 1985 of the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 (Act No.36 of 1983) used to regulate the importation of Cannabis: live plants or seeds only for research purpose. Regulation R.846 of 12 April 1985 provides for importation of plants that are listed under Regulation 15 of CARA list as a declared weed or invader plant. Subsequently, the CARA list was amended in 2001 and Cannabis was removed from the list. The reason for removal of cannabis includes that  Cannabis does not affect agricultural production and does not meet the CARA criteria and further that it is being regulated by other pieces of legislation, namely:

• • Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act, 1992: Section 3 (Part III): Department of Justice and Correctional Services,
  • Medicines and Related Substances Act 101 of 1965 as amended, Department of Health.

b) There is currently no need for amending the Agricultural Pest Act, 1983, to accommodate the importation of Cannabis seed into South Africa. The only requirement is that import conditions needs to be developed based on a pest risk assessment. The pest risk assessment and the development of import conditions is a consultative process which is currently underway and expected to be concluded before the end of 2019. It should be noted that the importation of Cannabis sativa will still be subjected to the requirements of the legislation of the Department of Justice and Correctional Services and the Department of Health.

Reply:

The Department has appointed legal representatives for the Ndabeni Communal Property Trust, in order to oppose a sequestration application lodged against the Trust.  The Cape High Court decided in favour of the Trust and the sequestration application was defeated.

The Department, in collaboration with the Master of the High Court, Cape Town was instrumental in having two [2] independent trustees appointed to the Trust in order to secure the trust assets and finalize the verification process of all Trust members.

END

Reply:

No. The department is currently analysing the farm assessment report for the purpose of recovery of funds.

Reply:

(a) There are seventy (70) companies that were contracted to provide mentorship to Land Reform beneficiaries.

(b),(c) Please refer to the table below.

b) Name of the Company	c) Monetary Value
Imbumba Beef Production (Pty) LTD	R 180 000
SARDI- Mr. Johnson Lwalanda	R 180 000
ATS Consulting Management Services by Frikkie Coetzee	R 180 000
Umnga Farmers Training	R 180 000
Nonezile Trading Enterprise	R 180 000
UNIVERSITY OF FORT HARE-ARDRI (Prof. PJ Masike (ARDRI	R 180 000
Agricon Mzansi Farming PTY Ltd	R 180 000
Mgudlwa Farming & Consulting	R 180 000
RULIV	R 180 000
EDEN Agri Services by Shaun Brown	R 180 000
Vusiphango Agency and Consulting cc	R 180 000
Simasonke Agri	R 180 000
Ebeye Consulting Agencies	R 180 000
Riverside Advisory Services	R 180 000
BEST LAND STRATEGIES HOLDINGS (BLS HOLDINGS)	R 180 000
OVK PTY(Ltd)	R 180 000
Grain SA	R 180 000
FSI Consultant	R 180 000
Rhenosterrivier	R 180 000
Agridelight	R 180 000
VKB	R 180 000
Amandla Fresh Fresh Produce Cooperation (Mr. Gert Veljion)	R 180 000
Masisizane Fund	R 180 000
Mlungiseleli Construction 7 cc - Mr. Sandile Luthuli	R 180 000
Tongaat Hullett Sugar (TSB Sugar)	R 180 000
Umoda Development Pty Ltd	R 180 000
Masakhane Trust - Mr. Higgins	R 180 000
Hahisa Consulting	R 180 000
Just Veggies by Dawie Du Plessis	R 180 000
Propa Development and Agric Consultant by Isaac Madiba	R 180 000
Baker Farming Trust	R 180 000
KLK	R 180 000
Resource Africa	R 180 000
Womiwu	R 180 000
Vinny Project Developers by Mr. Vincent Makamu	R 180 000
Agriesy Trading	R 180 000
NKANDANI TRADING	R 180 000
Maphala Technologies and Management	R 180 000
Zwelakhe Investment Group (PTY)	R 180 000
MASDT	R 180 000
TechnoServe	R 180 000
SAL Nkosi Company	R 180 000
Encimanzi	R 180 000
Pharon 59	R 180 000
Mposa Agricultural Consultant -Mr. Alphons Dube	R 180 000
Beef master	R 180 000
GWK Beperk Limited	R 180 000
Lubern Voere by Mr. Sweigers	R 180 000
Matiti Trading and Projects	R 180 000
YOUR TRADE TRAINING & CONSULTANTS	R 180 000
Momano Agric Services	R 180 000
BAFKENAGRIC ENTERPRISE CC	R 180 000
The Ackerman/Pick n Pay Enterprise Development Foundation	R 180 000
Tropical Eden Trading 151 cc t/a Thanniah consultants	R 180 000
AgricultSURE and Farming Service CC	R 180 000
Agri-Start - Mr. F. J.N. Harman	R 180 000
Pan African Business Dev Institute	R 180 000
Reyalema Agric Consultancy cc	R 180 000
Crooks Brothers Limited	R 180 000
Two-A-Day group	R 180 000
BKB	R 180 000
Renosterrivier	R 180 000
Caryki Consulting	R 180 000
Rony Farming (PTY) Ltd	R 180 000
Land Breeze Trading 641	R 180 000
Karsten Group	R 180 000
Dipalemo	R 180 000
Bloemfontein Abbatoire	R 180 000
Herbal View Nursing	R 180 000
ASNAPP	R 180 000

Reply:

RESPONSE TO PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION 1143/NW2303E

The Agricultural Research Council is a statutory body established in terms of the Agricultural Research Act, 1990 (Act no.86 of 1990) (the ARC Act) and is listed as a Schedule 3, Part A Public Entity in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act no.1 of 1999) (the PFMA).

The response to the Parliamentary Question 1143/NW2303E is postulated as per the 3 tables.

In the event that your office requires any further information, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Table 1: REPLY: (1) (a), (b), (c), (d) supporting documents attached

Province	Number of farms	Size	Activities	Current conditions
Gauteng	3	7826ha	Vegetables research, animal breeding and animal production	Good
Mpumalanga	1	66ha	Cattle farming	Good
Western Cape	9	Between 243,8 and 227,917ha	Research on fruit and vine	Fair
Eastern Cape	3	657,65ha	Cattle farming, agricultural training and SAPS stock theft training	Poor
Mpumalanga	1	66ha	Cattle farming	Good
Free State	2	1039.5ha	Plant breeding, National cultivar evaluation and plant diseases	Good
North West	2	594,92ha	Maize trials and Research	Fair
Limpopo	3	5591haha	Vegetables production, research, commercial farming and grazing	Good

Table 2: REPLY: (1) continues (i), (ii), supporting documents attached

Province	Activities	Outcome from each farm
Gauteng	Vegetables research, animal breeding and animal production	-Animal breeding -Maize seeds production -Training of farmers -Cash revenue on social events
Mpumalanga	Cattle farming	Generating external revenue
Western Cape	Research on fruit and vine	Fair
Eastern Cape	Cattle farming, agricultural training and SAPS stock theft unit	-The farm is in a bad state due to underutilization. -Farming -Training
Mpumalanga	Cattle farming	Generating external revenue
Free State	Wheat commercial	R800 000
North West	Maize trials and research	-Research -Maize harvest
Limpopo	Vegetables production, research, commercial farming and grazing	Good

Table 3: REPLY: (2) (a), (b), supporting documents attached

Province	Person or individuals that lease the farm	Amount paid for farm leased
Gauteng	United Seeds Naka breeders	R220 000 p/a
Mpumalanga	AA HUNN	R4716 p/m
Western Cape	None	N/A
Eastern Cape	-SAPS -Chumani Water Solutions -Asante Management Services	-SAPS R21059 -Chumani R12160 -Asante R26827
Mpumalanga	Cattle farming	R4716 p/m
Free State	None	N/A
North West	Agricol	R5617 p/m
Limpopo	Oppierandjie	R35727 p/m

Reply:

a) The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) has undertaken the following with regard to the implementation of the Spatial Data Infrastructure Act (Act 54 of 2003):

(i) The Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Act was assented on 28 January 2004 as Act 54 of 2003 (Gazette No. 25973 published 4 April 2004).

(ii) The operationalization of the SDI Act was done in phases. This was to ensure that systems and processes are in place to avoid legal liabilities.

(iii) SDI Act sections 1-11, 13, 19-22 commenced 28 April 2006 (Gazette No. 28788 published 28 April 2006). Remainder of sections 12, 14 to 18 of the SDI Act came into operation on the 23rd of April 2015 (Gazette No. 38822 published 29 May 2015).

(iv) Regulations for section 5 were published to allow the Minister to call for nomination of the Committee for Spatial Information (CSI) (Gazette No. 29134 published 25 August 2006). The first CSI was appointed in June 2010.

(v) The second CSI was appointed in May 2016. Its term was extended until end of May 2020. The Department will soon release a call for nomination for the third CSI.

(vi) The Department published the Base Data Set Custodianship Policy and the Policy on the pricing of spatial information products and services as national policies for SASDI in 2015 (Gazette No. 38474 published 16 February 2015).

(vii) The SDI Regulations and the National Land Cover Standard documents were published in 2017 (Gazette No. 41203 published 27 October 2017 and Gazette No. 40919 published 15 June 2017 respectively).

(viii) With the assistance of the CSI, the Department has rolled out the implementation of the prioritized ten base data set themes. The themes include inter alia; the Administrative boundaries, Imagery, Geodesy, Land Cover, Land Use, Hydrology, Transport, Conservation, Social statistics and Cadastre, (please refer to Annexure A for more details). To date, the CSI has appointed 10 base data set coordinators who continuously contribute to the delivery of base data sets for the themes allocated for.

(ix) The CSI is currently reviewing the list of the themes to align with the fourteen Global Fundamental Geospatial Data Theme of the United Nations Global Geospatial Information Management (UN-GGIM) as adopted in 2018.

b) The Directorate: National Spatial Information Framework (NSIF) which is responsible for providing administrative support has a budget allocation of R5, 023, 000 for compensation of employees and other related support for the implementation of the Act.

c) Currently the Department has not quantified the savings with regard to the monitoring of spatial information contracts across the different departments and spheres of government. The compliance with Regulation 5 of the Act is still very minimal. Organs of state still continue to embark on exercises to capture spatial data and/or information without receiving the necessary permission from the CSI as required in terms of Regulation 5. As a result, the Department together with the CSI is engaging National Treasury to develop a cost-saving model that will be achieved by implementation of Regulation 5.

Reply:

a) The result of the 2017 Land Audit indicates a figure of 7 701 605 hectares of land that is unregistered trust state land. This figure consists of both un-surveyed and unregistered land in the Republic.

b) (i) None. The role of the Department through the Office of the Surveyor-General is to regulate surveying in the Republic by ensuring the correct implementation of the Land Survey Act, Act 8 of 1997 not the actual surveying. From time to time, the Department would perform state land surveys and not privately owned land.

(ii) None.

(iii) No costs were incurred since there were no land surveys done.

Reply:

No payments were made to the list of suppliers or individuals

Reply:

(a),(b),(c) Yes. The Department, through the office of the branch responsible for Spatial Planning and Land Use Management (SPLUM) in the Northern Cape, has made extensive interventions incuding the convening of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Forum since 2016, which is held on a quarterly basis to discuss various challenges experienced in the province on the implementation of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, Act No 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA). Extensive training on the SPLUMA has been undertaken for all municipalities as well as individual training sessions upon request by local municipalities in the Northern Cape. This included focussed training on appeal related matters. In addition the Department has provided municipalities with different spatial planning tools, guidelines and training material including the following:

• SPLUMA Manuals for Appeal Authorities,
• SPLUMA Core Training manuals,
• SPLUMA Manuals for Municipal Planning Tribunals,
• SPLUMA Manuals for Authorised Officials in terms of section 35(4) of SPLUMA, and
• SPLUMA Manuals for Councillors.

The Department has also formed an intergovernmental team of spatial planning officials in the province spearheaded by its SPLUM branch and including the Office of the Premier, the Department of Co-operative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs (COGHSTA), the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) and the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agent (MISA). This intergovernmental team, co-ordinated by the Department, has been responsible to support local municipalities to improve leadership and administrative capabilities of municipalities, municipal officials and councillors in the implementation of SPLUMA.

Reply:

(a),(b) No

(i),(ii) Falls away.

Reply:

1. (a) (i)(aa),(bb)(cc) Please refer to the table below for details of advertising expenditure by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.

(a) (ii)(aa),(bb),(cc) Please refer to Annexure A for entities reporting to the Minister.

2. (a),(b(i),(ii),(c) Please refer to the table below and Annexure A for a breakdown of expenditure by the Department and entities.

No	(aa) 2016/17	(bb) 2017/18	(cc) 2018/19
(1)(a)(i) DRDLR	5 534 999.71	4 452 087.95	5 638 759.39
(2)(a)(i) DRDLR	206 842.00	Mediamark	NONE	920 777.20	Cut to Black
	20 520.00	Radio Riverside		503 686.20	MSG Group
	69 000.00	ZaFanZone		6 000.00	Heartbeat FM
				6 000.00	Icora FM
	553 128.00	Mahuhumelo Trading		6 000.00	Nongoma FM
			6 000.00	Nqubeko Community Radio
			6 000.00	Pheli FM
			6 000.00	Pongola FM
			6 000.00	Radio Zibonele
			6 000.00	Eldos' FM
			12 400.00	Moutse FM
			102 500.00	Mohodi FM
			123 317.09	Jacaranda FM
			6 000.00	Rise Community Radio
(2)(a)(ii)	None	None	None

ANNEXURE A TO NA-QUES 795 of 2019

Deeds Registration Trading Account

(1) (ii)	(2) (b)	(2) (c)
(aa) 2016-17	(bb) 2017-18	(cc) 2018-19	Amount to Black-owned Media Company	(ii) Total Amount Outdoor Advertising	Outdoor Advertising : Black-owned Company
				2016-17	2017-18	2018-19	2016-17	2017-18	2018-19
R6,379.33	R464,909.21	R171,860.27	R 32,026.75	Government Printing Works – Government Entity	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
			R 111,632.24	Ultimate Recruitment Solutions CC – 100% Black Owned
			R 425,457.12	Mahuhumelo Trading Enterprise CC – 100% Black Owned
			R 26,090.00	MacDuff Trading Enterprise T/A Mac Telecoms SA – 100% Black Owned
			R 47,942.70	BQT Construction (Pty) Ltd – 100% Black Owned

Office of the Valuer-General

(1)(ii)	(2)(b)	(2) (c)
(aa) 2016-17	(bb) 2017-18	(cc) 2018-19	Amount to Black-owned Media Company	(ii) Total Amount Outdoor Advertising	Outdoor Advertising : Black-owned Company
				2016-17	2017-18	2018-19	2016-17	2017-18	2018-19
R36,448.24	R99,977.93	R134,862.79	R 21,136.41	Government Printing Works – Government Entity	R 0.00	R 0.00	R 0.00	R 0.00	R 0.00	R 0.00
			R 250,152.55	Ultimate Recruitment Solutions CC – 100% Black Owned

Ingonyama Trust Board

(1) (ii)	(1) (b) (i) Amount to Specified Black-owned Media Company	(2)(b)(ii) Total Amount Outdoor Advertising	(2) (c) Outdoor Advertising : Black-owned Company
(aa) 2016-17	(bb) 2017-18	(cc) 2018-19	2016-2017	2016-17	2017-18	2018-19	2016-17	2017-18	2018-19
398 411.79	327 754.02	423 951.81	10 326.10	Government Printing Works	0	0	0	0	0	0
			113 439.47	Illanga Newspapers
			215 879.40	Independent Newspapers
			51 054.66	Media 24
			5 500.01	MHP Geospace
			2017-2018
			47 477.00	Illanga Newspapers
			101 726.58	Independent Newspapers
			16 899.30	Media 24
			500.00	MHP Geospace
			109 305.00	TBG Media
			10 000.00	Tower Group
			33 950.00	365 Digital Media
			2018-2019
			66 241.00	Illanga Newspapers
			65 486.11	Independent Newspaper s
			34 446.17	Media 24
			5 000.00	MHP Geospace
			242 706.91	TBG Media

DALRRD response to the above-mentioned questions:

1. (a) (i) During the 2016/17 financial year, the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) spent a total amount of R2 538 495.06.The money was spent on advertising the following departmental programmes:

• Bactocera Invadens Awareness (R249 933.60)
• External Bursary Scheme (R75 103.20)
• Female Entrepreneurial Awards (R359 350.80)
• Internship Programme (R260 357.76)
• LandCare (R620 638.86)
• Assignee DAFF notice (R13 570.56)
• World Food Day commemoration (R959 540.28)

(bb) During the 2017/2018 financial year, an amount of R 2 261 622.53 was spent. The money was spent on advertising the following departmental programmes:

• Arbor Week Launch (R1 201 616.08)
• World Food Day (R313 300.00)
• #YAFF Awards nominations advert (R190 608.75)
• #Youth Awards (R556 097.70)

(cc) During the 2018/2019 financial year an amount of R14 288 507.25 was spent. The money was spent on advertising the following departmental programmes:

• Arbor Month (R1 436 210.38)
• Bursary awards (R171 603.00)
• Call for nominations for Advisory Council (R297 459.00)
• Internship Programme (R278 428.80)
• LandCare Programme (R853 229.16)
• Nomination of Agricultural Producer Agents Council (R18 257.40)
• Nomination of Veterinary Council (R18 257.40)
• Protected Trees Awareness (R447 391.63)
• YAFF Awards (R613 471,86)
• Producer Farmers Register awareness campaign (R10 154 198.62)

2.(a) The department has been sourcing service providers for advertisements through the Government Communication and Information Services (GCIS) department in each specified financial year.

(i) 2016/2017 Financial Year - Black owned companies;

Kurara FM - R7000

Radio NFM - R7000

Radio Riverside - R7000

2017/2018 Financial Year – Black-owned companies – None

2018/2019 Financial Year – Black-owned companies – None

(ii) For the 2016/2017 Financial Year Outdoor Advertising - Alive Advertising company, not

Black-owned) - R110 010.00

2017/2018 Financial Year Outdoor Advertising – None

2018/2019 Financial Year – Outdoor Advertising – None

2. OBP response:

National Assembly Parliamentary question 795/NW1910E

(1)(a) What amount was spent on advertising by (i) her department - n/a and

(ii) state-owned entities reporting to her in the (aa) 2016-17, (bb) 2017-18 and (cc) 2018-19 financial years;

	(aa) 2016/17	(bb) 2017/18	(cc)2018/19
Advertising spent	R252 336.47	R57 390.00	R59 286.50

(2) What amount of the total expenditure incurred by (a) n/a
her department and

(b) state-owned entities reporting to her went to (i) each specified black-owned media company and (ii) outdoor advertising in each specified financial year and (c) on outdoor advertising by her department and state-owned entities reporting to her went to each black-owned media company in each specified financial year

	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19
(i) Black media company	R39 600.00	R53 940.00	N/A
(ii)Outdoor advertising	N/A	N/A	N/A
(c)outdoor advertising to black media	N/A	N/A	N/A

3. PPECB’s response:

Question 1(a)(ii): The PPECB spent a total of R1,022,937 for the period consisting of F2017, F2018 and F2019 year, which was annually dispersed as follows:

Category	(aa)	(bb)	(cc)
	2016-17 R	2017-18 R	2018-19 R
Total excluding VAT:	425,829	277,314	319,794

Question 2 (b)(i) & (ii): The PPECB spent a total of R232,650 (black-owned media companies) and R790,287 (other companies) for the period consisting of F2017, F2018 and F2019 year, which was annually dispersed as follows:

Category	Black owned?	% Black owned
			2016-17 R	2017-18 R	2018-19 R
African Framers Association of SA	Yes	100%	-	-	7,500
Agri South Africa	Yes	51%	16,000	-	-
Dirang Bohle Trading	Yes	100%	28,950	-	-
Picasso Headline (Pty) Ltd	Yes	53%	32,000	8,000	30,900
Tusk Event Management	Yes	100%	72,700	17,600	19,000
(I) Advertising Expenditure: Black-Owned Companies			149,650	25,600	57,400

Category	Black owned?	% Black owned
			2016-17 R	2017-18 R	2018-19 R
Agri Connect (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	64,500	22,500	67,500
Fresh Produce Exporters Forum	No	0%	-	-	-
Independent Newspapers (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	11,020	-	-
Interact Media Defined (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	13,200	14,000	14,500
Kaqala Media (Pty) Ltd T/A Cape Media	No	0%	-	13,800	17,205
Malnor (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	35,600	13,400	44,850
Market Intelligence	No	0%	50,610	63,231	38,293
Media 24 News	No	0%	-	13,800	-
Mediacom Ltd	No	0%	20,860	31,377	41,500
MES Online South Africa (Pty)Ltd T/A Agrifood SA	No	0%	32,566	12,466	38,546
Now Media (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	34,840	66,450	-
Sa Fruit Journal	No	0%	12,500	-	-
Zip Print (Pty) Ltd	No	0%	483	690	-
(ii) Advertising Expenditure: Other Companies			276,179	251,714	262,394
Total excluding VAT:			425,829	277,314	319,794

4. NAMC response:

Expenditure on Advertisement NAMC
Financial year	Description	Supplier	Amount
2016/17	Internal Audit services tender advertisement	Human Communication	32,872.49
2017/18	Internal Audit services tender advertisement	Human Communication	33,611.76
2018/19	Internal Audit services tender advertisement	Human Communication	-
Total			66,484.25

Reply:

THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, LAND REFORM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

Yes. In addition, the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) has developed a detailed implementation plan for the Farmer Production Support Unit (FPSU) to be implemented by 31 March 2021 in order to further strengthen the services currently delivered from the FPSU. The plan is to provide additional production tunnels; upgrade the packhouse; and construct a new storage facility; security lighting; water reservoir and reticulation services; accommodation for FPSU Manager; mechanics workshop for local repairs and maintenance; and a shed for machinery and implements. The Gauteng Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD) will also deploy crop and soil scientists.

(a),(b) Falls Away.

(i) 87 farmers in a 20km radius have been profiled to make use of the facility. In addition, four cooperatives are currently active in the FPSU. The Voice-Out-Deaf and Boo-Letsholo Cooperatives have been operating from the site for approximately two-years, whereas the Seeds of Change Cooperative (occupying a 6000 m² shade net structure) and City Harvest Cooperative occupying the Vertical Chamber farming structure have both taken occupation of the facility during October 2019 after an open tender process was concluded. The Voice-Out-Deaf harvest kale, lettuce and spinach. This group also won the Provincial and National Female Farmer Award on the category of disabled people in agriculture. Boo-Letsholo plant only spinach.

(ii) Several farmers have benefitted from bringing their produce for storage in the FPSU packhouse prior to sending the produce to the market. Veterinary and Extension Support Services are also available to all farmers in the FPSU catchment area. Mechanisation support is available to farmers, the tractors and implements are currently stored off site at a municipal facility, pending the completion of the warehouse. A farmer training facility is available at the FPSU.

Reply:

a) The Department has completed the analysis of the Impact Evaluation Report and the following challenges and lessons were identified

(i) Challenges

• Respondents alleged that government does not conduct proper consultation;
• Unrealistic production plans;
• Generational gaps and lack of youth participation;
• Changing the nature of implementation models by the Department;
• Delays by the Department and appointed stakeholders;
• Lack of commitment from some household members;
• Insufficient funding/lack of stipend/salary;
• Lack of proper project site monitoring.

(ii) Lessons

• Going forward it will be necessary for the Department to develop an implementation plan which is shared with stakeholders prior to development, approval and implementation of new programmes to ensure critical support and ownership;
• The Department should ensure that beneficiaries’ representatives sign off the production plans following community meetings where these plans are presented for approval;
• It is the prerogative of each household to nominate who shall represent it, and the experience has been that elderly people are the ones who usually step forward. This does not mean that youth are not involved; youth who are interested will be involved through their households;
• Since most sites are existing and have been previously operational, production plans were based on the immediate needs of the beneficiaries.
• For the Department to speed up approval of quotations and payments and fast-track the supply of equipment and implements for beneficiaries, it requires the cooperation of all role-players, i.e. beneficiaries, site managers, accountants, suppliers. Continuous and open communication at all times amongst role-players is critical.
• Not all beneficiaries have shown lack of commitment or requested the payment of stipends – most have appreciated the support that government has provided in terms of production inputs, implements and mechanisation;
• The Department will have to strengthen its monitoring endeavours, which are through District Offices closer to clients.

(b) and (c) Expenditure of the commitments will reflect “0” households

Year	2016/2017	2017/2018	2018/2019	Totals
Households Heads/Budget Spent	Number of Households	Budget Spent R “000	Number of Households	Budget Spent R “000	Number of Households	Budget Spent R “000	Number of Households	Budget Spent R “000
Eastern Cape	0		266	5 987	446	18 052	712	24 039
Free State	0		112	22 521	694	40 533	806	63 054
Gauteng	0		107	22 575	4	859	111	23 434
KwaZulu Natal	0		702	38 755	601	38 376	1 303	77 131
Limpopo	766	18 417	1 688	76 896	113	22 530	2 567	117 843
Mpumalanga	0		749	18 616	0	21 768	749	40 384
North West	0		168	15 112	0	0	168	15 112
Northern Cape	0		823	145 290	293	19 769	1 116	165 059
Western Cape	0		33	8 312	100	2 403	133	10 715
Grand Total	766	18 417	4 648	354 063	2 251	164 290	7 665	536 770

Reply:

The Bakgatla-Ba-Kgafela Communal Property Association is registered in accordance with section 8(2) of the Communal Property Associations Act, 1996. Following the Constitutional Court judgement that ordered the Department to register Bakgatla-Ba-Kgafela as a permanent Communal Property Association, it was registered as such and allocated registration number CPA/07/1032/A. Please refer to the attached registration certificate.

Reply:

a) The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) has together with the Provincial Department of Agriculture in the Northern Cape reprioritized Casp budgets and set aside R30 million for provision of fodder for affected farmers as well as expansion of existing fodder production initiative of the province which include the planting of hay and lucerne by farmers along the Orange River. The boreholes have been drilled and equipped for water reticulation.

The Department has also collaborated with the National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC) to expedite the process of classifying and declaring a state of Provincial Drought Disaster to assist farmers to better negotiate for leniency with their financiers. The team led by the NDMC is currently conducting the verification exercise in the Province to ensure that Disaster Management Act is complied with. Following this verification, the NDMC will classify a provincial state of drought disaster.

Reply:

In response to the above-mentioned questions:

1. (a) The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) hosted a Stakeholder Engagement Session after the Minister’s Budget Vote on 16 July 2019 at Radisson Blue Le Vendome in Sea Point, Cape Town.

(b) The Stakeholder Engagement Session was sponsored by AFGRI, Fruit-SA, Distell, Poultry SA and Ocean Group Limited. The cost of the sponsorship is as follows:

Venue and entertainment–R225 768, 00

Beverages–R25 000,00

Branded corporate gifts–R136 102, 50

(c) Captains of the industry and stakeholders from the sector were invited to attend the Minister’s Budget Vote and the Stakeholder Engagement Session after the Budget Vote.

2. (a) Corporate gifts given to attendees were branded power banks, pens and diaries sponsored by Poultry South Africa.

Reply:

THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, LAND REFORM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

The President in the State of the Nation address indicated that government will immediately release State land for agricultural and human settlement in order to make a contribution towards acceleration of land reform to address the inequality in terms of ownership and use. Similarly, the President highlighted the need to urgently address issues of economy. As a strategic intervention on the delivery model, the President has indicated that government will adopt a district approach.

Land release

The departments of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development together with other departments have identified state land that is suitable for agriculture and human settlement. Such identification has taken into consideration who is the holder of the land in question amongst the various spheres of government. Secondly such profiling will indicate the appropriate use of such land and its potential and whether such land is encumbered or not. Thereafter necessary processes of State land disposal will take effect.

Public works has identifies about 100 parcels of land where Restitution of land will be a beneficiary given that some of these properties are areas where communities were forcibly removed in the past.

Agricultural land therefore will enable those communities to engage in agricultural activities and government will give necessary support through its programs such as CASP, Letsema and Land care. A range of farmer support services will be provided for some from provincial departments of agriculture.

The combination of the two departments and the alignment of their programs will go a long way in creating viable farmer support to farmers. Building on the Agriparks, the department will focus on 27 Farmer Production Support Units (FPSUs) which are like service centres to support farmers with mechanisation, extension, market information, production inputs such as seeds and vaccines.

Honourable member, these FPSUs are located in the districts consistent with the President’s statement. Key to the functionality of the FPSUs will be the mobilisation of farmers to ensure that production is activated. The second phase will be the construction of production hubs such as storage facilities, pack houses as well as mini processing plants. However, this will be guided by the commodities that will be produced in those localities.

The department will engage municipalities and districts to activate farmers markets so as to create a value chain pipeline in the various localities. It is our view that these interventions by our department will make a contribution towards the development of economic activities in our communities especially in rural economies.

Reply:

 

 

Response to Parliamentary Question
QUESTION NO.:	512/NW1505E
TO:	MINISTER
FROM:	DIRECTOR-GENERAL
SUBJECT:	QUESTION 512/NW1505E FOR WRITTEN REPLY BY MR N P MASIPA (DA) TO THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, LAND REFORM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
CLASSIFICATION:	CONFIDENTIAL

 

DAFF’S RESPONSE:

PQ.  512/NW1505E MR N P Masipa (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development:

(a) What is the status of communication between her department and the General Administration of Customs of the People’s Republic of China (GACC) regarding the clarification on the interpretation of announcement 122 made on 23 July 2019, (b) by what date is it expected that the situation will be resolved and (c) what are the details of all steps taken by her department to communicate the outcomes of all interactions with the GACC to wool industry role players to avoid unnecessary panic? NW1505E

a) Letters seeking clarity on the wool exports and the health attestation were forwarded to the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC’s) General Administration of Customs of China by the department on the 12th of August 2019 and 19th of August 2019. A response to the letters was received through the South African Embassy in Beijing on the 22nd of August 2019. The interpretation of the response letter by the Embassy outlined that the Chinese government had replied with two main options for the South African government. The one option was to continue with the certificate as agreed upon before Announcement 122 of 23 July 2019. The second option was to propose a new health certificate. Pursuing the second option of proposing a new health certificate would have resulted in the suspension of trade on wool to PRC for the period of negotiation. The first option was the preferred option.

b) The situation is resolved. The industry has also accepted the option of South Africa continuing to certify according to the requirements as agreed before Announcement 122 of 23 July 2019. This option guarantees the clearing of the backlog created by the suspension of export of wool to China. However, the department, in line with Announcement 122 of 23 July 2019 is committed to continue engaging with the PRC on a new draft of the health certificate during a period where there would be minimal impact on wool exports to the PRC. The wool industry has affirmed this position and has requested that should discussions with the PRC commence, the industry should be consulted.

c) The Department held a meeting with representatives of Cape Wools and two wool buyer companies on the 15th of August 2019 to understand the challenges faced by industry. Subsequent to this meeting, a follow-up letter was forwarded to the PRC on the 9th August 2019. The Department also telephonically engaged the industry during the period when the response from the PRC was awaited. Upon receipt of a response from the PRC on 22nd August 2019, the industry was immediately informed telephonically and through an email. An official letter to this effect was also sent to the industry on 23rd August 2019. In its reply, the industry indicated that the existing health certificate will be utilized to address the backlog of wool exports in the stores.