Reply:

The forensic investigation into matters relating to NLC funding is currently underway and I await conclusion of the investigation.

I have also been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission.

Ms Mampane’s reply is as follows:

(a) “At this stage, the Commission has established that the Minstrels’ Carnival Heritage Museum is housed at a rented property as per (b) below. The NLC is continues to ensure due diligence on the funding including reassessment of information and reports submitted and will at the appropriate time take remedial actions should the need arise.

(b) The address is ERF 82, 5/7 Crete Road, Wetton, Cape Town.”

-END-

Reply:

The South African sugar industry is an important part of South Africa’s agricultural sector, employing some 85 000 people directly. South Africa experienced an increase in imported sugar up until 2017. To provide protection to South African sugar producers, and following consultation with the industry facilitated by the Ministry, in August 2018 the International Trade Administration Commission (ITAC) amended the dollar-based reference price used to determine the effective customs duty on sugar, which resulted in an increase in the customs duty on imported sugar.

Subsequently, sugar imports declined from 844 522 tons in 2017, to 544 708 tons in 2018, and to 519 189 tons in 2019. This has been largely attributed to the change in the tariffs.

Imports from Brazil have declined from a record 243 982 tons in 2017 to 21 971 tons in 2019; while imports from the United Arab Emirates have declined from 157 387 tons in 2017 to t 26 tons in 2019.

This decline in sugar imports has continued during 2020, with imported sugar for the period from January to October 2020 amounting to 408 364 tons, some 8% below imports during the same period in 2019. However, I have been advised that there has been an increase in imports from Brazil during this period, from 19 488 tons in the period from January to October 2019, to 31 563 tons in the same period in 2020; though still below levels of imports experienced in 2017 and 2018. Imports from the UAE as reflected in official statistics for 2020 (to date), remain at modest levels compared to 2017.

To help provide further support to the sugar value chain in South Africa, government began consultation in August 2019 with the sugar industry - including producers, industrial and retail users, and organised labour – on the development of a masterplan for the sector. The broad terms of the Masterplan, which includes a commitment to local procurement of at least 80% of need for industrial users and retailers were agreed in April 2020, and signed by stakeholders during a virtual signing ceremony in November 2020, ahead of the 3rd South Africa Investment Conference.

A media statement was issued jointly by the dtic and the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) on 17 November 2020, providing the details of the masterplan, a copy of which can be found on the dtic website at http://www.thedtic.gov.za/government-and-industry-stakeholder-signed-the-sugar-master-plan/.

-END-

Reply:

The NLC has advised that there is no basis for an investigation into the named individual.

The Department requested further information from the NLC and will provide such information in a supplementary reply.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below. In view of the costs per participant, I have requested the Department to consider following this up with the Board of the NLC.

The reply of Ms Mampane, the Commissioner is as follows:

a) “(i) In terms of the allocation about R 801 000.00 (eight hundred and one thousand) was spent on the workshop.

(ii) According to the allocation, funds were provided generally for a programme and not for infrastructure.

b) Kindly see (ii) above.

c) The event was planned for 150 people.

d) In Cape Town.”

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the Commissioner of the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) of the following:

a) The CIPC held a meeting with the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC), which is a big user of sound recordings for needle-time rights to establish a working relationship between the two entities. In terms of the envisaged working relationship, the SABC will share with CIPC the data/information on the use of sound recordings. The data/ information from SABC, will be used to verify distributions made by Collecting Societies (SAMPRA and IMPRA) in this regard. Data/information on usage in simple terms determines how much performing artists and owners of sound recordings must get as their royalty for the use of their music repertoire.

b) The data / information from SABC, which shows how many sound recordings were used or played, will be made available to CIPC and Collecting Societies. This will create transparency and efficiency in the distribution process of royalties. Of the two Collecting Societies that CIPC is regulating, an audit has been performed on SAMPRA processes and systems to ensure transparency and a further audit to all distributions will be performed. A tracking register has been developed with SAMPRA to track the improvement on its systems and processes.

CIPC has also embarked on robust education and awareness sessions to the performing artists and owners of sound recordings. The sessions explain their rights as members of the Collecting Societies so that they can enforce accountability and transparency in the manner in which such Collecting Societies run their business. This is also to ensure good governance.

c) CIPC has requested the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in writing to send a mission to South Africa for technical assistance to Collecting Societies and big users such as SABC on how best to generate data / information on use of sound recordings using new technological system. This will, in our view create a more transparent system and accountability.

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) that it is not required to approve speed hump designs or standards. The SABS is responsible for promulgating voluntary standards and not compulsory standards. The Department of Transport and Department of Public Works, local municipalities or an interested party or association could submit a request for the development of a new standard or a New Work Item for consideration as per the national standards development process.

-END-

Reply:

The Competition Commission of South Africa is empowered by the Competition Act (the Act) to review mergers and acquisitions in South Africa where an acquiring establishes control over an acquisition target. The Act requires the Commission to determine whether or not the merger is likely to have an anti-competitive effect, including whether or not the merger will result in the removal of an effective competitor. In addition, the Commission must assess whether or not the merger can be justified on substantial public interest grounds, by assessing the impact of the merger on (i) a particular industrial sector or region; (ii) employment; (iii) the ability of small and medium businesses, or firms controlled or owned by historically disadvantaged persons, to effectively enter into, participate in and or expand within the market; (iv) the ability of national industries to compete in international markets; and (v) the promotion of a greater spread of ownership, in particular to increase the levels of ownership by historically disadvantaged persons and workers in firms in the market. The provisions of the Act would apply to acquisitions by firms such as Google and/or Facebook where they acquire control of a target firm and where the transaction meets the thresholds set out in the legislation.

The Facebook/ WhatsApp transaction took place in 2015. I am advised that the transaction was not notifiable because WhatsApp did not generate any revenue in South Africa, meaning that the transaction did not meet the South African merger notification thresholds. However, both locally and globally, competition authorities have reconsidered the approach of competition authorities to regulating digital markets.

I am advised that the Competition Commission does not have any active cases against Amazon.

In general terms, over the last decade South Africa has played a global thought leader role in how to balance competition and public interest considerations in order to promote foreign investment whilst ensuring that mergers safeguard and promote jobs, localisation, and other dimensions of our public interest and our economic policy.

-END-

Reply:

1. The Musina-Makhado Special Economic Zone (SEZ) was designated by Cabinet in accordance with the Special Economic Zone Act No 16 of 2014. The Act prescribes a process in which all special economic zones are designated.

I am advised that the project was not designated as a Presidential project.

The Department reports that implementation of Musina-Makhado is coordinated through a Steering Committee that consists of various departments and State owned entities such as the Department of Water Affairs and Sanitation and Eskom. The purpose of the steering committee is to support the SEZ company with the mobilisation and management of stakeholders, particularly with regards to sector departments and state owned entities. At this stage, departments have not committed specific funding towards the development of the project. The province is still finalising the Master plans and environmental authorisation processes.

2. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) application for Musina Makhado Special Economic Zone has been launched in terms of the National Environmental Management Act and the associated regulations. The process is still underway.

The Limpopo government has advised the Department that it has an investor pipeline of $15.2 billion with potential investors in various projects ranging from power generation to minerals beneficiation. According to the Province, the investors will be bringing their own funds to finance their investment projects.

-END-

Reply:

A total of 20 000 CPAP ventilators have now been produced in South Africa, during the national state of disaster under the NVP. These ventilators have been produced by two local entities, namely the state-owned Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the South African Ventilator Emergency Project (SAVE-P) – a consortium of companies.

Production began in July 2020 and the final units were completed during November 2020. The 20 000 units produced include the following:

• 18,000 Venturi-type CPAP devices manufactured through a contract with the CSIR, which is a state-owned science Council; and
• 2,000 blender-type CPAP devices manufactured by SAVE-P.

The CSIR ventilator systems were assembled and packaged by Akacia Medical in the Western Cape. Individual components for the CPAP-ventilator were manufactured by a consortium of industry partners in Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape, including the Central University of Technology and firms such as Black Capital Systems, Andani Futuretech Manufacturing, UV Tooling, Sola Medical, Gabler Medical and Pitchline Engineering. All manufacturing was done for the CSIR.

The SAVE-P consortium incorporates manufacturers located in Cape Town, Pinetown, Durban, Midrand, and Alberton, consisting of MCR Manufacturing, Reef Engineering, Bosch, Executive Engineering, Rhomberg Instruments, Dowclay Products, ISO Health SA, Pegasus Steel, NAACAM, AFRIT, Corruseal, New Age Medical Supplies, Aveti and Non-Ferrous Metal Works.

The development, production and procurement cost for the 20 000 units were funded through a R250 million donation from the Solidarity Fund, at an average cost of R12 500 per unit.

The South African Radio Astronomy Observatory (SARAO) was appointed to manage the national effort to design, develop and produce the respiratory ventilators to support the government’s response to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Engineers at SARAO have experience and a track record in developing and execution of complex systems within short timeframes. They developed the MeerKAT radio telescope system in the Karoo, the precurser to the SKA.

SARAO performed an initial qualification review of both the CSIR and SAVE-P devices, to first determine whether they met the specifications of the NVP. Following this review, CSIR and SAVE-P was required to develop a industrialisation plan – to determine whether they had the manufacturing capacity to produce the units, including sourcing of components. – culminating in a Production Readiness Review conducted by SARAO. Following the Production Readiness Review, a technical dossier with a prototype of the device was provided to SAPHRA in order for the SAPHRA to perform the required inspections for licensing. Both devices were approved by SAHPRA on 26 June 2020. Clinical trials were conducted of both devices at Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital on behalf of the SARAO; with a further clinical trial conducted at Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital under the supervision of the National Department of Health. Quality Control for each unit produced is performed by the final assemblers, under the supervision of the SARAO, who have conducted unit inspections to ensure that units produced meet approved specification.

-END-

Reply:

I am awaiting conclusion of the current forensic investigation process and when this is done, due consideration will be given to any other information that emerged either in the process or through information made available to the public, including from Members of Parliament.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission.

Ms Mampane’s reply as received is reproduced below:

a) “(i) The allocation (R21 08 623, 21) was for training camps, license fees and development, advertisement, admin including international competition.

(ii) The allocation of 24 million was for the send-off and it included accommodation in 9 provinces, advertising, admin fees, travel costs, medical assistance, security, sport wear including catering.

(iii) Funding decisions were made by the relevant distribution agencies with due consideration of all the information placed before them including availability of budget.”

-END-

Reply:

Government has identified public procurement as one of the economic policy instruments to re-industrialise the economy. In this regard, the Preferential Procurement Regulations make it mandatory for organs of state, including state owned companies (SOCs) to implement local production and content in the procurement of goods designated for such purpose in the public procurement system.

To date, a number of products have been designated for local production.

The National Treasury, being the custodian of supply chain policy in government has circulated the instruction notes/circulars which regulate the environment within which government departments, public entities and SOCs may procure designated products.

In addition to this, I am advised of work by the dtic across a number of initiatives, to strengthen compliance, as detailed below.

To promote compliance with the local content requirements, Proudly South African (PSA) working closely with the Department of Trade, Industry & Competition (the dtic) has instituted a tender monitoring system which monitor tenders for compliance on local content and production on a regular basis.

Where there are incidences of non-compliance, the dticrequests organs of state to rectify this through either amending or canceling tenders. Some of the non-compliant tenders are referred to the National Treasury’s Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (OCPO) for intervention.

I am advised that the dtic is also working closely with the Office of the Auditor General to scale up the auditing of tenders designated for local production; audit opinions are being issued in this matter. The dtic is also working with the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) in making sure that the biggest SOCs reporting to it such as Denel, Eskom and Transnet implement local content requirements in their tenders.

Regular training is also provided to other departments and SOCs on the implementation of local content.

Finally, the dtichas made submissions on the draft Public Procurement Bill on the tightening of measures dealing with non-compliance on the local content requirements.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission.

Ms Mampane’s reply is as follows:

(a)“(i) A total amount of about R 8 290 000.00 was spent on the magazine. In terms of the report this amount is inclusive of procurement of transport equipment, marketing costs, procurement of operational equipment including personnel costs.

(ii) The organization was funded to conduct the socioeconomic cohesion symposium in two different areas/regions namely the metropole as well as the Western Cape region. A total amount of about R 5 460000.00 was spent in executing the project. This cost is inclusive of all operational costs and personnel costs for both regions/areas.

(iii) The cultural awareness campaign would have been part of the socio-cohesion programme.

b) The report submitted does not provide the number of publications and only quantifies the costs associated with publishing the magazine.

c) The report submitted only quantifies costs related to the execution and does not mention the names of the speakers.

d) The report submitted only quantifies costs related to the execution and does not indicate the number of people in attendance.

e) It was held in the Western Cape in the areas as defined in (a)(ii).

f) The purpose of the cultural awareness campaign was to set a foundation to integrate communities who were still operating within the boundaries of the previous dispensation according to race and socioeconomic status.”

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the Director General of the DTIC as follows:

1. The Department has been advised by the official that she was married to Mr Hangwani Mulaudzi’s brother until 2013. There is currently no family relationship.

2. The Department advised me that the official is not involved in the work of the Department relating to NLC matters; and that in any event, the NLC’s funding processes and decisions are administered by the NLC independent from the Department. Based on the above, no conflict of interest was detected.

-END-

Reply:

As per the Ministerial Handbook, official vehicles are provided to Ministers and Deputy Ministers in order for them to carry out their official duties. In instances where official vehicles are not available, vehicles are then hired.

As per our records, cars were hired for Minister Ebrahim Patel for use in cities where no official vehicle was available, as follows:

Minister Ebrahim Patel

Place of hire	Travel date	Return date	Amount (R)	Supplier Name
Port Elizabeth	25-Jul-19	25-Jul-19	1 565,73	Phakisa world fleet Solutions Isando (Hwt.Pks)
Durban	12-Jul-19	13-Jul-19	1 771,81	Phakisa world fleet Solutions Isando (Hwt.Pks)
Durban	14-Sep-19	15-Sep-19	3 932,35	Woodford Car And Bakkie Hire (Hwt.Wch)
Durban	4-Oct-19	4-Oct-19	2 970,68	Woodford Car And Bakkie Hire (Hwt.Wch)
Durban	16-Oct-19	18-Oct-19	6 363,34	Woodford Car And Bakkie Hire (Hwt.Wch)
Total			16 603,91

The records for the Deputy Ministers are still being collated and will be provided as a supplementary reply as soon as possible.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is set out below. In light of the challenges faced by many South Africans as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, I will be requesting a review of the reserves policy.

The reply of the NLC Commissioner follows:

1. The National Lotteries Commission is a Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, Schedule 3A entity. The NLC was established with the primary mandate of regulating lotteries and sports pools. From that regulatory activity, the NLC is enabled to distribute funds destined for good causes.

The NLC does not receive funding from the fiscus. The main source of revenue is derived from the share of National Lottery ticket sales from the Operator. The investments (that is, reserves) aim to sustain the operations of the organization during Licence transitions where revenue received from the National Lottery Operator is low as observed in the previous two licenses. Also in instances where the Operator may not operate. The reserves will supplement the grant allocations for good causes and the operational costs of the organisation for a period of twelve (12) months in instances where there is no revenue flowing into the organisation. This will ensure that the NLC continues to deliver on its mandate.

Section 25 of the Lotteries Act allows the NLC to invest any money which is not required for immediate allocation. Investment income diversifies the organization’s Revenue and mitigates the risk of a single source of revenue derived from a share of National Lottery ticket sales. Investment income therefore significantly contributes towards funding the operational expenditure of the organisation, consequently the NLC is able to maximize contribution to fund good causes through grant allocations.

2. and (3) During the 2019/20 financial year, the NLC had only one investment with Rand Merchant Bank which had an initial investment period of five years. The investment has subsequently matured and the NLC is in the process of re-investing.”

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

“(1)(a) In the 2019/20 financial year the NLC achieved a return of 8,42%.

(b) In terms of Generally Recognised Accounting Practice (GRAP) 104, the NLC had fair value adjustment of R9,2 million during the 2019/20 financial year.

(2)(a) The NLC has an approved investment policy in compliance with Treasury Regulation 31.3.1. The following principles are noted from the approved investment policy-

i) The pillars of the investment policy include amongst other Capital Preservation and maximization of returns.

ii) Monies that may be placed in long term investment products should be with banks that have bank guaranteed deposits

(b) In accordance with the approved investment policy, NLC investments in maturity periods of between 3 months to long-term of 5 years.

(c) The banks with which NLC invests are rated by the various rating agencies. The investment quality is determined by the investment ratings given by the rating agencies.

(d) The NLC is guided by an approved investment policy. Investments that do not have capital preservation are not permitted.”

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is set out below. I advise that it has been clarified by the NLC that the (1)(b) below refers to the NLC Senior Manager : Financial Accounting.

Reply by Commissioner Mampane:

“(1)(a) The NLC has an approved investment policy in compliance with Treasury Regulation 31.3.1. Investments are made in terms of the investment policy approved by the NLC Board.

(b) Investments are managed by the NLC.

(c) The performance of investments is monitored on a monthly basis.

(2)(a)(i) No investments have been written off. (ii) Not applicable

(b) Not applicable

(3) The National Lotteries Commission is a Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, Schedule 3A entity. It does not receive funding from the fiscus. The investments support the organisation as follows –

• sustains the operations of the organization during licence transitions where the uptake in ticket sales demonstrates low performance (The reserve strategy is aimed at sustaining the organisation for a period of twelve months in instances where there is no revenue flowing into the organization);
• Supplements the grant allocations as the interest received from investments is utilized towards funding the operational expenditure of the organisation which means that more money is allocated towards grant allocations.”

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the Department as follows:

a) In the previous reply, the reference to “funding approval” refers to applications from the Mpumalanga Economic Growth Agency/Ekandustria Industrial Park for funding for the second phase, from funds available within the dtic budget. The application for funding for Ekandustria Industrial Park was presented to the dtic Critical Infrastructure programme and referred back on for the Industrial Parks Management - Mpumalanga Growth Agency (MEGA) to provide supporting information on a number of areas including the following:

1. A maintenance plan for the industrial park;
2. Investment promotion and potential investors pipeline;
3. Security measures to be put in place to attend to continuous crime in the industrial park; and
4. Progress on restoring the waste-water treatment plant which was revitalised in phase 1 and has since been decommissioned due to crime.

The Critical Infrastructure Programme referred back the Application for Phase 2 for Ekandustria on 3 July 2018, for additional information that was required. the dtic and the DBSA engaged the Mpumalanga Economic Growth Agency MEGA and sent written communication on 27 August, 2018. The revised application has since been received on 10 November, 2020.

The Ekandustria Industrial Park has had significant challenges with several service delivery protests that impacted the revitalization programme, resulting in work stoppages during the first phase and protests continued after the first phase had been completed. The management of MEGA decided to slow down the revitalization process during this time due to the risk that would impact on the assets, the staff of MEGA and the Construction team.

Should the application meet on the necessary requirements it will be presented to the next sitting of the Critical Infrastructure Programme for funding in the fourth quarter.

b) Further phases are dependent on the urgent needs of the industrial park and the programme responds to the applications submitted. A guide for the phases is as follows –

Phase 1: Security infrastructure upgrade, fencing, lighting, critical top structures and electrical requirements - The first phase requirements was requested by the industrial parks management agencies who have been experiencing high crime levels.

Phase 2: Compliance to regulatory requirements – Landfill sites; Waste and Water treatment plants, Fire, Health & Safety Requirements, and Renewable energy initiatives.

Phase 3: Engineering designs and construction of new and existing roads, bulk water supply and sewage treatment plants or industrial effluent control.

Phase 4: Upgrading electricity infrastructure, and build new top structures in line with the expansion programme of the Parks.

Phase 5: Development of vacant land and sustainable industrial clusters in the Parks.

(c)&(d) The budgetary estimates for expenditure and the quantum in Rand of funding approved in the 2020-2021 financial year is not available as the dtic has not approved any application for the Ekandustria Industrial Park yet.

-END-

Reply:

The Poultry Master Plan was developed with input from the African Farmers Association of SA (AFASA) and the SA Poultry Association (SAPA), together with other stakeholders such as organised labour, importers and public entities.

In the initial phase of the Master Plan implementation, the focus has been on tariff adjustments to protect the sector, accompanied by the expansion of domestic investment to increase output. The industry was set targets for promotion of black-owned poultry farms. In all three areas, progress has been made: poultry tariffs were increased in February 2020, investment of over R750 million has been put into the sector and local production of chickens has increased in the past eight months.

In the next phase of implementation, a proposal is being developed for a localisation designation to enable state-entities to ensure that poultry used within the state (eg at hospitals) is procured from local producers. Once this phase has been implemented, data on the levels of participation by poultry producers can be collected.

The Poultry Master Plan has the objective inter alia of promoting transformation across the full value-chain particularly among integrated producers, to ensure that the presence of black South Africans are not limited to poultry farming, where returns are in many cases modest. The DTIC has not in the past collected detailed data on ownership in the poultry feed sector – however, with the focus in the Master Plan on transformation, this will be done in future, bringing together information across different public entities and sister departments.

-END-

Reply:

The project in question has not yet reached financial close.Consequently there is no construction taking place and therefore no jobs to measure.

Reply:

I am advised by the Department that:

1. The sabbatical leave was not taken. The employee in question was granted an International Scholarship and sabbatical leave was approved for this purpose for the period 1 October 2017 until 30 September 2018. Due to personal circumstances, the employee could not take up the scholarship and returned to work on 27 November 2017 and the sabbatical leave for the period 1 October 2017 until 24 November 2017 was subsequently converted to unpaid leave and is being recovered.

2. The sabbatical leave for the period 9 February 2018 to 8 February 2019 was approved in line with the Departmental policy on sabbatical leave as the Department of Public Service and Administration does not specifically provide for sabbatical leave, but allows departments to determine their own sabbatical leave policies.

a) The original approval was granted for a period of 12 months, from 9 February 2018 until 8 February 2019. The Accouting Officer did, however, approve a deviation from the 12 months consecutive sabbatical leave to allow for taking the leave in non-consecutive intervals as and when required, provided that the total period of leave taken does not exceed 12 months (261 working days). However, the employee took 249 working days out of the 261 working days; and

b) A breakdown of each period taken is provided in the table below:

2018
Period	No. of working days
09.02.2018 – 22.02.2018	10
27.02.2018 – 07.03.2018	7
29.03.2018 – 10.05.2018	27
01.06.2018 – 22.06.2018	16
02.07.2018 – 06.07.2018	5
13.08.2018 – 31.08.2018	15
10.09.2018 – 18.09.2018	7
12.11.2018 – 26.11.2018	11
	98 working days
2019
21.01.2019 – 08.02.2019	15
18.02.2019 – 29.03.2019	29
08.04.2019 – 16.04.2019	7
06.05.2019 – 14.05.2019	6
10.06.2019 – 21.06.2019	9
26.06.2019 – 28.06.2019	3
08.07.2019 - 30.07.2019	17
31.07.2019 – 04.09.2019	25
06.09.2019 – 20.09.2019	11
23.09.2019	1
25.09.2019	1
03.10.2019 – 08.11.2019	27
	151 working days
Total working days taken	249 working days

-END-

Reply:

1. I am advised that according to the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (the dtic) records, the specified person travelled overseas as detailed below and that all trips undertaken were aligned to the functions for which the official is responsible and were duly authorised by the delegated authority.

No	Destination (b)	Date	Cost (a) in Rand (R)	Purpose of each trip (c)
1	Boston	Oct 2011	73 727,00	Learning and development intervention.
2	Beijing and Shanghai	Nov 2011	61 661,00	Attended the SA EXPO in Beijing and Shanghai as part of the Dept’s trade promotion programme.
3	Boston	Mar 2012	73 596,00	Learning and development intervention.
4	Boston	Apr 2013	63 296,00	Attended the 2013 Governance, Risk Management and Compliance Summit.
5	Kuala Lumpur	Jun 2013	35 454,00	Invited to attend The Global Summit for Women 2013 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
6	Brazil	Aug 2013	57 077,00	Conducted an international benchmarking study in Brazil pertaining to Public Entities and Statutory Institutions.
7	Washington	Nov 2013	75 843,00	Attended the 17th Annual KM World Conference & Exposition in Washington.
8	Paris	Jun 2014	59 026,00	Attended the Global Summit of Women in Paris.
9	Washington	Jul 2014	77 898,00	Attended and participated in the AGOA Forum and the business engagements on the margins of US-Africa Leaders’ Summit. Provided support to the Minister.
10	Brazil	Oct 2014	69 708,00	Led the delegation for the 6th Investment and Trade Initiative (ITI) in Brazil.
11	Washington	Nov 2014	96 567,39	Learning and Development Conference in Washington.
12	Atlanta and Santa Fe	Jul 2015	100 311,72	Trade promotion programme to Atlanta & Santa Fe. Supported the Deputy Minister.
13	California and St Louis	Oct 2015	104 453,72	Learning and Development intervention. Also met with Showroom Management Company regarding the trade promotion Hub in Atlanta.
14	Hong Kong	Mar 2016	60 916,72	Participated in the Trade Promotion Expo.
15	Atlanta	Jul 2016	119 081,23	Participated and attended the trade promotion programme in Atlanta.
16	Moscow	Sept 2016	48 688,23	Attended and participated in the national Pavilion in Moscow.
17	Washington	Nov 2016	64 713,23	Learning and development intervention.
18	Atlanta and Miami	Nov 2016	100 375,23	Participated in the trade promotion programme.
19	San Diego	Apr 2017	125 456,23	Meeting with institutional buyers regarding the trade promotion programme.
20	Doha Qatar	Apr 2017	60 793,23	Attended the International Conference on Chemical Disarmament and Security as part of council function.
21	Atlanta	Jul 2017	97 586,29	Participated in the Trade Promotion programme.
22	Atlanta	Jan 2018	80 163,29	Participated in the Trade Promotion programme.
23	Atlanta	Jul 2018	64 021,68	Participated in the Trade Promotion programme.
24	New York, Philadelphia and Orlando	Oct 2018	119 116,68	Participated in the outward mission as part of the Trade Promotion programme.
25	Atlanta	Sept 2019	90 927,93	Facilitated the Trade Promotion project closure.
26	Geneva, Germany and the United Kingdom	Nov 2019	101 427,93	Part of SABS administration function to address a session of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Working Party on Regulatory Cooperation and Standardisation Policies and undertook benchmarking visits to the British Standards Institute (BSI), German National Standards Body (DIN) and Swiss Standards Body (SNV).

2. The specified person received the following gifts from Ithuba in 2016 when representing the Department at the launch of Ithuba’s new “Raffle” game:

• 1 box of chocolates;
• Two wine glasses;
• 1 pair of Jenna Clifford earrings; and
• Soap.

3. I am advised that the gifts were disclosed to the Department in 2016.

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the Director-General that the Department has not received any allegations of the awarding of incentives through the Industrial Financing Branch to family members of the officials mentioned.Therefore, no investigations have been necessary.

-END-

Reply:

Following my reply to PQ 737, I requested the Department to contact the provincial regulators and ask for information to advise on further steps that national government may need to take.

Information was received from the Eastern Cape, Gauteng, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, North West, KwaZulu-Natal and Western Cape provinces. I am advised that no information was received as yet from the Free State and Northern Cape.

The provincial liquor regulators form part of the National Liquor Regulators Forum (NLRF), which also consist of the South African Police Services (SAPS). SAPS indicated that in order to address liquor abuse as a contributor to contact crime as well as serious violent crimes, the National Crime Combatting Forum (NCCF) Instruction 2 of 2019 was issued to address the policing of the legal and illegal liquor trade from 01 April 2019 to 31 March 2020.

All provinces were instructed to plan and execute joint liquor control operations to ensure compliance by liquor traders with the provisions of national and provincial liquor legislation, focusing specifically on licensed liquor premises and illegal liquor outlets in close proximity of schools. This focused operational approach ensured the termination of illegal liquor trade at 2 279 unlicensed liquor outlets which were located in close proximity of schools.

With the country now at Level 1 and with the return of full government functions, further steps will be taken to request the outstanding information from the two provinces. The replies from provinces will form the basis for consideration by national government and where challenges were identified (e.g. the need for a clear and empowering legislative framework to enable provinces to take additional action), this is currently under consideration. On completion of these processes, a report will be prepared.

-END-

Reply:

 

Eight (8) companies made commitments totalling R36.2 billion at the previous two South African Investment Conferences held in 2018 and 2019 respectively, as detailed in my reply to question 555.

These are private sectors investments and hence companies do not report progress publicly. However, feedback, monitoring and reporting on progress is facilitated through the project management function of InvestSA, who is in regular communication with the companies who have made investment commitments. InvestSA also facilitates inter-governmental cooperation to help unblock challenges which these projects may be experiencing.

While the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has interrupted progress on some of the investments in the tourism and hospitality sectors, I am advised that a number of projects are under construction.

Further progress will be reported at the 3rd South African Investment Conference, which is expected to be held later this year.

 

Reply:

I am advised by the Mrs Philisiwe Mthethwa, CEO of National Empowerment Fund (NEF), that the NEF does not have a Fund referred to as the Corporate Fund. The funding products listed in the question are housed under the NEF’s uMnotho Fund.

Mrs Mthethwa has provided the following information in respect of the uMnotho Fund:

 

“Brief description of uMnotho Fund:

uMnotho Fund is designed to improve access for medium-sized black businesses and has the following six funding products:

1. Acquisition Finance,
2. New Ventures Finance,
3. Expansion Finance,
4. Capital Markets Fund,
5. Liquidity and Warehousing and
6. Property.

These products provide capital to black-owned and-managed enterprises as well as to black entrepreneurs who are provided with expansionary acquisition finance that allows black majority shareholding in companies, new ventures finance and black businesses that are or wish to be listed on the JSE. Funding ranges from R2 million to R75 million.  The Fund is priced to achieve returns that are in line with the level of risk taken by the NEF. 

uMnotho Fund performance since inception to date:

The Fund since inception to date has invested R3.3 billion in black transactions by value of investment. These investments have benefited over 143 companies that are black-owned and managed. Over 20 290 jobs have been supported through this Fund. The sectors invested include but are not limited to Property, Transportation, Tourism & Entertainment, Arts & Culture, Media, Construction, Energy etc.

Funding products under inquiry:

(i) uMnotho Liquidity & Warehousing portfolio

• Since inception to date the NEF has invested R154.4 million under Liquidity & Warehousing and by volume this amounts to 5 companies supported under this portfolio.
• Total jobs supported is 3 496.

(ii) uMnotho New Ventures Finance portfolio

• Since inception to date the NEF has invested R1.2 billion by value and by volume this equates to 63 companies supported.
• Total jobs supported is 9 164"

-END-

Reply:

I have received a reply from the National Lotteries Commission requesting additional time in replying to the first part of the question (1), which I reproduce in full.I have advised the NLC that the shift to lockdown level 2 should enable them to commence immediately with collection of geo-coordinates.

In respect of the second part of the question (2), the NLC provided a reply that reflects the NLC position, and which has not been independently verified. As more information becomes available following the processes that I have initiated, these will in due course be made available:

1. NLC reply: “The NLC submitted a list of organisations that received R 10 Million or greater and top 50 organisations that received highest funding in the past 10 years. The list comprised of the name of the funded organisation, the amount funded, the province where the funded organisation comes from and the year in which the organisation was funded. The NLC list did not include the purpose of each grant and the details of the geo-coordinates of the location of each project including longitude and latitude coordinates.

In order to provide information relating to the purpose of each grant, the NLC will have to go through the individual project files to ascertain the purpose of each project which will take some time as some of the information is in the legacy Grant Management System (GMS) which is no longer used as requested information dates as far back as 10 years ago. The NLC is not in possession of information regarding the geo-coordinates of the location of each project including longitude and latitude coordinates. The NLC will have to travel to all locations of funded projects across the country to get the exact geo-coordinates. With the current nation-wide lockdown regulations, it will be a challenge for the NLC to visit all relevant projects that were funded within the past 10 years. The required geo-coordinates can be provided post the nation-wide lockdown.

In light of the above, the NLC would like to kindly request the extension for the submission of the information regarding the purpose for each grant as requested above to the second week of September 2020. The NLC further request that the submission of geo-coordinates of the location of each project including longitude and latitude coordinates be deferred to post nation-wide lockdown.”

2. NLC reply: “Grants made to Denzhe were not omitted from the supplied list. The list was provided per allocation in line with the set threshold of R10 million or above and top 50 highest funded organisation in the past 10 financial years. Denzhe funding of R17 million is on the list for organisations that were allocated R10 million or above in the past 10 years. The allocations for Denzhe are as follows:

a)  R 17 000 000 - October 2016 (Charities Sector)

b) R 5 000 000 - March 2017 (Sports and Recreation Sector)

c) R 4 666 658. 79 - January 2018 (Charities Sector)

d) R 918 966. 50 - January 2018 (Sports and Recreation Sector)

Grants for other organisations were not omitted. The list was provided per allocation in line with the set threshold of R10 million or above and top 50 highest funded organisation in the past 10 years.”

-END-

Reply:

I am advised by the Department that the company referred to in the question has been approved for a R8 million grant funding for machinery and equipment, commercial vehicles and business development services, under the Black Industrialist Scheme in the 2016/2017 financial year. To date an amount of R4,89 million has been disbursed towards machinery and equipment. The project is still active with the balance of R3,1 million available.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

2019/20 Activities	Total Budget Spent
A summary of activities attached	a) Logistics	R 5 723 997.37
	b) Catering	R 1 509 085.20
	c) Venue hire	R 879 758.42
	d) Music hire	R 65 000.00
	e) Advertising	R 2 612 647.75

-END-

Reply:

The Moody’s downgrade of the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) to Ba2 from Ba1 appear to be based principally on concerns about the preparedness of Government to support public entities, and the timeliness of any decision to offer such support. This follows challenges with timely provision of funding for the Land and Agricultural Development Bank to make payments of maturing credit facilities and payments relating to SAA.

Moody’s recognised that the IDC “is still one of the stronger credits in the country, primarily reflecting the company's high capital buffers.”Moody’s further highlighted that the “IDC has strong capitalisation, with an equity-to-total assets ratio of 66% as of March 2019, which provides significant buffers to absorbunexpected losses and grow the business further.”

Moody’s assessment of the assumption of government support has been reduced from high to strong, and as a result the rating for the IDC to be downgraded. A similar rerating of the Development Bank of SouthernAfrica has been effected, for similar reasons.

As the principal factors relate to Moody’s assumptions on the sovereign, the IDC Board and Management will reinforce the point about the IDC’s capital buffers in engagement with Moody’s.

The IDC’s commitment to the COVID-19 relief funding remains i.e. the COVID-19 relief funding has not been affected by the credit downgradebecause IDC is managing prudently within its Liquidity Framework. The IDC continues to receive funding applications in this regard and perform the necessary credit assessments.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by MsThabangMampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

“Response from the National Lotteries Commission:

The South AfricanSports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) applied for funding relating to Commonwealth Games in Glasgow on the 14th July 2014. The application was adjudicated on the 28th May 2015 and an amount of R 4 000 000.00 was granted. The approved funds were paid directly to SASCOC.”

-END-

Reply:

In the letter addressed to the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on 15 June 2020, I advised that I have received various allegations of maladministration at the National Lotteries Commission, particularly relating to irregularities in respect of pro-Active Funding. When these allegations were brought to my attention, I requested an independent investigation on the matters. The ad-hoc release of information flowing from the current process may compromise the investigation and I will accordingly provide the additional information as soon as the processes warrant and permit it. I can confirm that the investigation commissioned is currently considering four projects.

-END-

Reply:

MsThabangMampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission furnished me with a reply to the question submitted, which is reproduced below.

Reply by the National Lotteries Commission, MsThabangMampane:

1. Mr. TebogoSithathu is not part of the media and communications service provider database and/or panel of the National Lotteries Commission. To the best of NLC records, no companies associated with Mr. TebogoSithathuare part of the media and communications service provider database and/or panel of the National Lotteries Commission.

2. Mr. TebogoSithathu has never received any remuneration from the NLC in return for services rendered. To the best of NLC records, no companies associated with Mr.TebogoSithathu have ever received any remuneration from the NLC in return for services rendered.

-END-

Reply:

I have been furnished with a reply to the question submitted, by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

Reply by the National Lotteries Commission, Ms Thabang Mampane:

1. “The panels for the past financial years (2015/16 to date) were established following a supply chain process as prescribed by the Public Finance Management Act (No.1 of 1999 as amended) (“PFMA”), National Treasury Regulations- Practice Notes, Instructions, Circulars and Letters, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act (No. 5 of 2000) (“PPPFA”) and Regulations, 2011, Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Amendment Act (No. 46 of 2013, amongst other legislation, as well as NLC’s Supply Chain Management Policy. The NLC’s panel of attorneys list for the past financial years (2015/16 to date) are detailed as below. The NLC did not have a panel prior to the years depicted herein.”

Table 1:

Bid Number	Name of Legal Firm	Duration	End-Date
RFP/2013-4HL	M.L Mateme Incorporated (PTY) LTD	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Gildenhuys Malatji Incorporated	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Routledge Modise Attorney (T/A Hogan Lovells)	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Rooth and Wessels Incorporated (PTY) LTD	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Maponya Inc	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Denga Incorporated (PTY) LTD	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Poswa Incorporated	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Adams & Adams	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Ngeno & Mteto Inc	36 Months	1-May-17
RFP/2013-4HL	Malebye Incorporated	36 Months	1-May-17

Table 2:

Bid Number	Name of Legal Firm	Duration	End-Date
NLC/2017-3	Raphela Inc Attorney	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Padi Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Nozuko Nxusani Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Morare Thobejane Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Moche Attorneys	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Malebye Motaung Mthembu Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Manong Pilane Mokotedi Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Diale Mogashoe Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Ndobela Lamola Inc.	36 Months	22-Aug-20

Table 3:

Bid Number	Name of Legal Firm	Duration	End-Date
NLC/2019-2	Malatji Kanyane Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Spoor & Fischer	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Moeti Kanyane Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Gildenhys Malatji Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Cheadle Thompson & Hayson Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Ramushu Mashile Twala	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Mfenyana Attorneys	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Lannard Paul Cowen	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Mathopo Mashimane Mulangaphume	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Poswa Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Hogan Lovells	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Maphosa Attorneys	36 Months	31-Aug-22

2. “The NLC’s panel of attorneys regularly used for legal matters involving the NLC depends on their areas of expertise/legal scope and/or availability including urgency, where applicable. The issue of capacity and/or resources are considered while an attempt is made to reach as many as possible. On the list below, all but two law firms have done work for the NLC. Since this is a panel, the NLC endeavours’ to ensure that as many law firms as possible are allowed the opportunity to do work, though this is not a guarantee. The details are as follows:”

Table 4:

Bid Number	Name of Legal Firm	Duration	End-Date
NLC/2017-3	Raphela Inc Attorney	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Padi Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Nozuko Nxusani Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Morare Thobejane Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Moche Attorneys	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Malebye Motaung Mthembu Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Manong Pilane Mokotedi Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Diale Mogashoe Inc	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2017-3	Ndobela Lamola Inc.	36 Months	22-Aug-20
NLC/2019-2	Malatji Kanyane Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Spoor & Fischer	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Moeti Kanyane Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Gildenhys Malatji Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Cheadle Thompson & Hayson Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Ramushu Mashile Twala	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Mfenyana Attorneys	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Lannard Paul Cowen	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Mathopo Mashimane Mulangaphume	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Poswa Inc	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Hogan Lovells	36 Months	31-Aug-22
NLC/2019-2	Maphosa Attorneys	36 Months	31-Aug-22

“All the Legal Firms that are on the panel were utilized by the NLC, with the exception of Ramushu Mashile Twala and Mathopo Mashimane Mulangaphume.”

(3) “Ramulifho Inc. or Lesley Ramulifho is not on the NLC panel of attorneys. Ramulifho Inc. has rendered legal services for labour related issues to the then National Lotteries Board now the NLC. This was approximately around 2014, prior to the advent of the panel of legal service providers.”

-END-

Reply:

I have been provided with the requested information by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Department and following the tabling of the information, no statement appear to be necessary.

The information supplied by the CFO is as follows:

1. The service providers for the specified goods are as follows:

 

Service provider	Goods provided	Total amount (R)
Multisurge (Pty) Ltd	Masks	69 000
Evergreen	Gloves	2 493
Triple N Medical Supplies	Gloves, masks, hand sanitiser	117 301
		188 794

2. There were no deviations from standard supply chain management procedures. The procurement for PPE was done in line with the initial Instruction Note from NT in which NT identified and provided a list of suppliers on which the State could urgently procure PPE from identified suppliers.

3. Procurement was assessed and awarded in line with National Treasury prescripts for procurement as per the Health and Safety guidelines issued by the Department of Public Service and Administration due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

-End-

Reply:

The Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) CEO advises me that the acquisition transaction has been successfully executed and the project is currently in development, including a Bankable Feasibility Study is in the process of being finalised and negotiations are underway with all key stakeholders including Eskom. The IDC has concluded it negotiations with the parties and is now a 22.5% shareholder in New Largo Coal (Pty) Ltd (NLC).

By way of background, at the end of 2015, Anglo American plc announced it would be disposing of its coal assets as part of its restructuring and drive to reduce debt. Amongst the South African coal assets was New Largo Mine, which was at an advanced feasibility study stage at the time of disposal.

The IDC, CoalZar and with the Seriti Consortium agreed to co-bid for the purchase, with the purchase price and pre-implementation costs are being funded by shareholder loans. The purchase price was funded in proportion to shareholding. The IDC funding also included funding on behalf of Employee and Community Trusts and the bankable feasibility study review and completion. Seriti and Coalzar continue to fund the New Largo’s operational costs.

The mine will be strategically developed to support Eskom’s Kusile Power Station. Given New Largo Coal’s proximity to Kusile, I am advised by the IDC that it is well positioned as a supplier, and it is expected that Kusile will purchase approximately 70% of the company’s coal production.

The IDC decided to participate in the transaction, since in its view it facilitates the creation of a significant black industrialist in the coal mining space and supports its strategy of increasing production of energy minerals that ensure security of energy supply. I am advised that the project is expected to create 1 100 direct jobs and 478 construction jobs.

The IDC’s participation in the New Largo Coal project, brings the total value of approvals to black industrialists in the mining sector to R8,4 billion since 1 April 2015, supporting 29 deals (net) in the sector over the period. Total approvals to black industrialists across all sectors totals R25,2 billion since 1 April 2015.

 

-END-

Reply:

In my previous response I advised that all travel in the department has been considered in line with internal policies of the department as well as National Treasury’s Instruction Note No. 04 of 2017/2018 on cost containment related to travel and subsistence.

National Treasury’s Instruction Note No. 04 of 2017/2018 allows for the following air travel arrangements for departments and constitutional institutions:

“5.7.3.2 For flights that are five (5) hours or less, business class tickets may only be purchased for:

1. Director- Generals or persons holding equivalent ranks in departments;
2. Persons appointed on grounds of policy considerations in terms of Section 12A of the Public Service Act, 1994 (i.e. advisors to exceutive authorities); and
3. Accounting officers of constiutional institutions

5.7.3.3 For flights exceeding five (5) hours, business class tickets may only be purchased for:

1. Directors- General or persons holding equivalent ranks in departments;
2. Deputy Directors-General and Chief Directors or persons holding equivalent ranks in the department;
3. persons appointed on grounds of policy considerations in terms of Section 12A of the Public Service Act, 1994 (i.e. advisors to exceutive authorities);
4. accounting officers of constitutional institutions;
5. employees at the level of management that report directly to the accounting officer of a constitutional institution;
6. employees at the level of management that report directly to the officials referred to in paragraph (e) above and
7. non-executive members serving on any governance committee of a department or constitutional institution.
8. any other employee to whom authority was granted as indicated in 5.3.7.1.

5.7.3.4 Notwithstanding the provisions of 5.3.7.1, 5.3.7.2 and 5.3.7.3 above, accounting officers or delegated officials of departments and constiutional institutions may approve the purchse of business class tickets:

1. for employees with disabilities,
2. for employees with special needs,
3. in cases where economy class flights are not available, or
4. where the business class ticket is the same price or cheaper than the economy class ticket to the same destination.

In line with the above provisions, the Director-General, Deputy Directors-General, Chief Directors and officials with disabilities and special needs have travelled business class. The names of persons below the level of DDG who travelled business class, as provided by the Department, is submitted below:

Passenger	Job Title
Moosa Ebrahim	Chief Director
Molefane Maoto	Chief Director
Kruger Niki	Chief Director
Jensma Stieneke	Chief Director
Medupe Moloantoa Sidwell	Chief Director
Le Roux Adriaan	Chief Director
Mene Wamkele	Chief Director
Osman Shareen	Chief Director
Hudson Daryl	Director
Xulu Noziphozandile	Director
Mogashoa Ephraim	Deputy Director
Padayachy Meshendri	Deputy Director
Skosana Vusumuzi Jeffrey	Deputy Director
Ndikandika Nangamso	Executive Assistant
Mkhwebane Precious Nthabeleng	Personal Assistant

-END-

Reply:

Following an initial reply from the NLC setting out the reasons why they will not be able to provide the requested information within the available time before the Parliamentary Reply was due and requesting additional time, kindly find the supplementary reply submitted by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

Response from the National Lotteries Commission:

A total of hundred and fifty (150) organisations were funded to the value of R 10 million or greater by the National Lotteries Commission (NLC) in the past 10 financial years. The names of funded organisations and the amounts are highlighted on the attached list (See Annexure A). The NLC has a fully-fledged Monitoring and Evaluation Department that monitors implementation and outcomes of funded projects. All funded organisations signs a Grant Agreement with the NLC with terms and conditions relating to how the grants are to be used. The NLC follows up on these conditions and applies its internal policies in cases on non-compliance. The NLC has sourced the services of a panel of engineers responsible to assist in providing NLC with quality assurance reviews on funded infrastructure projects. The Office of the Auditor General South Africa (AGSA) also conducts in-depth audit into NLC’s funding process. In recent years, the NLC received a negative media coverage from an on-line media publication (GroudUp) alleging a wide range of corruption in relation to certain projects that were funded by the organisation. The NLC Board appointed an audit firm, Sekela Xabiso to investigate the alleged corruption and the investigation is on-going. In addition to that, the Honorable Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition has also appointed an audit firm, Nexia, SAB&T to investigate the same allegations and the investigation is on-going as well. All findings from the relevant assurance bodies (audit/investigation) are/will be analysed and reviewed in order to ensure that proper remedial actions are implemented.”

Reply:

Since the start of the national lockdown, engagements with members of the Provincial Executive Councils included the following:

1. Meetings convened by the Presidency and attended with Premiers, on discussions related to the Covid-19 pandemic were held as follows:  

• 4 April,
• 18 April,
• 16 May, and
• 17 June.

2. Discussions were held between Deputy Ministers and Provincial MECs in May/June 2020, to discuss the regulation of liquor sales under Lockdown Level 3. A meeting of the Ministry with the MECs in the Economic Development Portfolio was held on 17 June 2020, covering a briefing on Covid-19 recovery plans at provincial level and views on the sale of alcohol.

-END-

Reply:

The essential service certificates issued by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) were not a compulsory requirement for businesses to operate during the Lockdown.

The CIPC provided a service to businesses, registered under the Companies Act, to register as essential service providers.

The status of the CIPC certificate was made clear in a statement issued by the Department on 26 March 2020. It was stated that possession of a CIPC certificate did not constitute permission to operate during the Lockdown and that companies should be guided by the Regulations as to whether they were permitted to operate.

The information on the number of companies which operated as essential (and later, ‘permitted’ services) enabled government to keep a record of the number of workers who were employed at such companies This information was important when considering the level of movement of workers outside their homes during the early phases of the lockdown; and the appropriate transport directions and regulations. It provided law enforcement officers with proof that a company’s senior management certified that it was an essential service.

Almost 500 000 companies registered on the CIPC’s Bizportal website, as essential service providers and, later, as permitted service providers under Alert Level 4.

I decided not to issue Directions that would have required companies to register, even though I was advised that the Lockdown Regulations would have permitted me to issue such Directions. I took the view that it was preferable to allow companies to determine whether their business fell within the definition of essential services in terms of the Lockdown Regulations.

With effect from 1 June 2020, and the start of Alert Level 3, the concepts of essential and permitted services no longer apply. The CIPC has therefore stopped issuing the certificates.

-- END --

 

Reply:

I have requested the additional information and am advised as follows:

1. The names and the job titles of the relevant employees as per question 259 on 25 May 2020 who have taken sabbatical leave since 1 January 2019 and the details are as follows:

No	(a) Name of employee	(b) Job title	Details
			Period	Duration	Details
1.	Ms Z Kobue	Deputy Director: Technology Architecture	1 March 2019 to 30 November 2019	9 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards an MBA
2.	Ms J.K.M Maifadi	Assistant Director: MCEP	1 April 2019 to 30 November 2019	8 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards an MBA
3.	Mr M.M Mahlangu	Administrative Assistant	1 October 2019 to 31 August 2020	10 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Business Management
4.	Ms A.T Mashimbyi	Assistant Director: SACU	1 May 2019 to 30 November 2019	7 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards an MBA
5.	Mr N.S.C Nkuna	Director: Communication and Marketing	26 July 2019 to 25 January 2020	6 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards an MBA
6.	Ms R Raluthaga	Trade and Industry Advisor	1 August 2019 to 31 October 2019	3 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Public Management
7.	Ms R Ramdhani	Deputy Director: Chemicals and Allied Industries	16 August 2019 to 15 November 2019	3 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Postgraduate Diploma in Monitoring and Evaluation
8	Ms B.P Phatlane	Trade and Industry Advisor	16 January 2019 to 31 March 2019	2½ months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Public Administration
9.	Mr D.M Ndhlela	Deputy Director: Regional Industrial Development	1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021	12 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a PhD
10.	Ms A.T.V Lebuso	Director: Organisational Development and Transformation	1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019	12 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Industrial/ Organisational Psychology
11.	Ms A.A Ontong	Director: Human Resource Development	3 April 2018 to 3 April 2019	12 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a PhD
12.	Mr S.J Melodi	Investigator	1 September 2019 to 31 December 2019	4 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Law
13.	Mr A.N Makhuvela	Deputy Director: Capital Equipment and Allied Industries	1 October 2019 to 28 February 2020	5 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Masters in Management (Public Policy)
14.	Ms J Scholtz	Chief Operating Officer	9 February 2018 to 8 February 2019	12 months	Attendance of classes towards an MBA
15.	Ms J.R Vass	Chief Director: Skills for the Economy	1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019	12 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a PhD
16.	Ms P.Q Myeki	Deputy Director: Industrial Climate Change Response	1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020	12 months	Research and writing a dissertation towards a Doctorate in Business Administration

(2) None of the employees have subsequently applied for an additional period of sabbatical leave.

-END-

Reply:

Following an initial reply from the NLC setting out the reasons why they will not be able to provide the requested information within the available time before the Parliamentary Reply was due and requesting additional time, kindly find the supplementary reply submitted by Ms Thabang Mampane, Commissioner of the National Lotteries Commission, which is reproduced below.

“The names of top 50 funded organisations and the amounts are highlighted on the attached list (See Annexure A). The NLC has a fully-fledged Monitoring and Evaluation Department that monitors implementation and outcomes of funded projects. All funded organisations signs a Grant Agreement with the NLC with terms and conditions relating to how the grants are to be used. The NLC follows up on these conditions and applies its internal policies in cases on non-compliance. The NLC has sourced the services of a panel of engineers responsible to assist in providing NLC with quality assurance reviews on funded infrastructure projects. The Office of the Auditor General South Africa (AGSA) also conducts in-depth audit into NLC’s funding process. In recent years, the NLC received a negative media coverage from an on-line media publication (GroudUp) alleging a wide range of corruption in relation to certain projects that were funded by the organisation. The NLC Board appointed an audit firm, Sekela Xabiso to investigate the alleged corruption and the investigation is on-going. In addition to that, the Honorable Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition has also appointed an audit firm, Nexia, SAB&T to investigate the same allegations and the investigation is on-going as well. All findings from the relevant assurance bodies (audit/investigation) are/will be analysed and reviewed in order to ensure that proper remedial actions are implemented.”

Reply:

During the Portfolio Committee meeting held on 26 May 2020, I addressed the overall approach by the Department to transformation. In short, transformation of the economy is both a social and economic imperative. The bitter legacy of the past has not been reversed – the process of colonial dispossession took place over more than 300 years and inherited privilege (assets, skills and networks) reproduces itself beyond the removal of apartheid laws. The Constitutional values of human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms require active steps for their realisation.

The economy’s long-term growth rate will remain constrained if the level of involvement by tens of millions of citizens, black South Africans, women and young people remains low. The purpose of affirmative processes and laws is to enable this base to be broadened.

In terms of section 3 (c) of the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) Act, the IDC has an explicit statutory mandate to promote the economic empowerment of historically disadvantaged communities and persons. This has not meant that the IDC provides funding only to black South Africans, as the Honourable Member well knows. But it does mean that the IDC must give special emphasis on the promotion of broad-based empowerment.

The qualifying criteria for COVID-19 funding are set with the primary consideration to increase the availability of essential critical personal protective equipment products to supply the local market, in order to save lives. Therefore, the funding criteria cater for ALL South African registered businesses that have capacity to supply the critical products, including but not exclusively for B-BBEE companies.

I am advised that the IDC has now approved R535,5m in funding from this envelope, of which R444m are for companies at which black South Africans hold either a controlling stake or have at least 25% equity.

We should be proud of efforts to broaden the base of the economy, promote entrepreneurship and to foster efforts at greater equity in the economy. Financial incentives should of course be only one of a number of elements to support wider levels of entrepreneurship in society in order to achieve these objectives. Transformation is good social policy. It is good economics too. Government has a legislative mandate to promote these measures and during 2019, an overwhelming majority of citizens voted for political parties which supported broad-based empowerment.

 

-END-

Reply:

The pandemic together with the impact that it has on the economy is placing consumers, workers, firms and vulnerable members of society under enormous pressure.

In order to combat the rapid spread of COVID-19 as effective as possible and limit the damage to the economy, Government has taken a number of measures that have been publicised. Further measures continue to be under consideration.

During the course of addressing both the pandemic and the destructive and other effects of the disaster, the Ministry and Department has been reviewing provisions of legislation within its mandate, including the Competition Act and the National Credit Act, to identify measures that can be taken responsibly to support families and businesses in distress.

On 20 March 2020, I gazetted an exemption from sections 4 and 5 of the Competition Act, to enable banks to meet and agree on terms to support consumers and small businesses in distress. This includes payment holidays and debt relief for businesses and individuals in financial distress; limitations set on asset repossessions of businesses and individuals in financial distress; and the extension of credit lines to individuals and businesses in financial distress.

In respect of the National Credit Act, while the Act imposes prudent measures to mitigate against reckless lending by credit providers, it also contains provisions that are aimed at assisting distressed consumers in cases of disaster or other unforeseen emergencies. These include both the emergency loan provisions; and the public interest loan provisions in the Act. I am advised that, in terms of the Act, the provisions relating to reckless credit equally do not apply to either emergency loans or public interest credit agreements.

In the initial discussion with the Department and the Credit Regulator, there was a recognition of the need for additional finance and facilities that would be required over the period of the COVID-19 national disaster; at the same time, both entities were concerned about the risk of over-indebtedness to vulnerable consumers which may result from reckless lending.

Officials from the Department thus engaged with a range of industry stakeholders on the most appropriate measures to provide additional access to finance to consumers in need, while mitigating any risks which may exist. These engagements included the following:

• Ms Nomsa Motsegare, CEO of the National Credit Regulator;
• Mr Kuben Naidoo, Deputy Governor of the South African Reserve Bank and CEO of the Prudential Authority;
• Mr Lungisa Fuzile, CEO of Standard Bank South Africa;
• Mr. Cas Coovadia, Managing Director of the Banking Association of South Africa at the time;
• Ms. Marguerite Jacobs, General Manager responsible for Legislation & Regulatory Oversight for the Banking Association of South Africa;
• Mr Abdul Waheed Patel of Ethicore, in their capacity as advisors to Microfinance South Africa; and
• Mr Michael Lawrence, Executive Director of the National Clothing Retail Federation.

The National Credit Regulator also engaged with the South African Reserve Bank and relevant Government entities on the matter.

In the course of the discussion with stakeholders, it was clear that the provisions of the National Credit Act were not the only, nor the most important challenge for financial institutions to provide additional credit. Banks in such circumstances are concerned about the repayment of loans advanced. This was a key rationale for the launch of the R200 billion Loan Guarantee Scheme, as a joint effort by the Government, the SARB and commercial banks.

During the consultations, industry stakeholders advised that the emergency loan provisions of the Act would achieve similar objectives to the public interest credit agreement provisions; however further guidelines on the use of the emergency loan provisions would aid the industry.

In terms of the Act, an emergency loan is defined as a credit agreement entered into by a consumer to finance costs arising from or associated with—

• a death, illness or medical condition;
• unexpected loss or interruption of income; or
• catastrophic loss of or damage to home or property due to fire, theft, or natural disaster,

affecting the consumer, a person who is dependent upon the consumer or a person for whom the consumer is financially responsible.

In terms of the Act, no further regulation is required to enable use of the emergency loan provisions, however “reasonable proof of the existence of the emergency” must be obtained and retained by the credit provider. While such “reasonable proof” is not defined in the Act, the National Credit Regulator published a circular on 21 May 2020, to provide guidelines to credit providers on the issuance of emergency loans, and the documentation which constitute “reasonable proof”. These guidelines can be found on the website of the NCR at https://ncr.org.za/documents/Circulars/Circular-05-of-2020-%20Emergency%20Loan%20Guideline.pdf.

The emergency loan definition provides for relief for many of the challenges which consumers will be experiencing during this Covid-19 national disaster, and which may have been specified in any regulation or declaration regarding section 11. Following consultation, I have accepted advice that the emergency loan provisions should be utilised as it requires no additional legislation.

Subsequent to the publication of the emergency loans guidelines, officials from the Department have further engaged with credit providers. I am advised that credit providers have welcomed the guidelines published by the NCR and that BASA have reported that banks have begun to use the emergency loan provisions.

The Department will continue to engage with the sector on the efficacy on these measures. Should the emergency loan provisions in the Act fail to address the challenges which consumers are facing, I may consider which other measures would contribute, and this may include relooking the value of invoking section 11 of the Act to define certain credit agreements as public interest credit agreements.

-- END --

Reply:

The Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (the dtic) supported efforts by Government to provide relief to small businesses, in a number of ways. These include

• Exemptions from certain provisions of the competition legislation to enable small retailers to meet together to discuss engagements with landlords on rental payments and evictions during the period
• Exemptions from the same competition provisions to enable banks and financial institutions to meet to discuss ways of supporting customers, including small businesses, through among others payment holidays and other measures
• Partnerships with development finance institutions to provide funding to among others small businesses
• The issuing of Directions on a number of matters to support clarity and certainty to small businesses, and
• Facilitating the local production of cloth face-masks by inter alia smaller businesses in the clothing industry.

The dtic mobilised resources for COVID-19 relief funding to support companies that are affected by the pandemic. The funding is implemented in partnership with the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC), National Empowerment Fund (NEF) and Small Enterprise Financing Agency (sefa) as an industrial loan facility, to assist manufacturers of identified critical goods to combat the spread of corona virus. Furthermore, the department has granted an extension period for submission of applications and claims to companies affected by the pandemic across various incentive programmes administered by the Industrial Financing Branch.

During the Portfolio Committee meeting held on 26 May 2020, I addressed the overall approach by the Department to transformation. In short, transformation of the economy is both a social and economic imperative. The bitter legacy of the past has not been reversed – the process of colonial dispossession took place over more than 300 years and inherited privilege (assets, skills and networks) reproduces itself beyond the removal of apartheid laws. The Constitutional values of human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms require active steps for their realisation.

The goal of economic inclusion remain critical during the pandemic, as a number of smaller, more recently-established businesses owned by black South Africans, may be particularly vulnerable.

The economy’s long-term growth rate will remain constrained if the level of involvement by tens of millions of citizens, black South Africans, women and young people remains low. The purpose of affirmative processes and laws is to enable this base to be broadened and to foster wider levels of enterprise in society.

The funds deployed are available to all South African businesses, subject to the specific mandate of an entity. For example, the NEF provides funding to companies that meet its criteria, as set out in its legislation and policies. The IDC provides funding to black industrialists, in terms of section 3(c) of the Industrial Development Act. Both the IDC and NEF have also provided funding to companies with a mix of shareholding between black and white South Africans.

In addition to these efforts, the Department has also supported efforts to promote greater levels of local procurement, which can boost the participation of small businesses in the economy.

-END-

Reply:

The Parliamentary Question was received prior to the move of the country from Alert Level 4 to Alert Level 3. As the Honourable Member will know, effective, 1 June 2020 the entire country has moved to Alert Level 3, which permits a substantial reopening of economic activity.

As I noted in a recent Parliamentary Question, each alert level reflects a careful balance between the risk of infection and the readiness of the healthcare system. President Ramaphosa outlined the five levels of the risk-adjusted framework when he addressed the nation on 23 April 2020. As indicated by the President, when he stated:

“Level 5 means that drastic measures are required to contain the spread of the virus to save lives.

Level 4 means that some activity can be allowed to resume subject to extreme precautions required to limit community transmission and outbreaks.

 

Level 3 involves the easing of some restrictions, including on work and social activities, to address a high risk of transmission.

Level 2 involves the further easing of restrictions, but the maintenance of physical distancing and restrictions on some leisure and social activities to prevent a resurgence of the virus.

Level 1 means that most normal activity can resume, with precautions and health guidelines followed at all times.”

When determining which economic activity may be permitted under each of the alert level, Government has considered a number of elements, including, but not limited to:

• The level of social distancing which can be maintained between co-workers and/or customers during the ordinary course of business;
• How essential the functioning of the sector is to other businesses, including its export profile and contribution to GDP and jobs
• Whether the sector performs critical services in the value chain of other economic sectors in South Africa;
• Whether the sector has been able to develop appropriate health and safety protocols and whether the sector has evidenced preparedness with regards to personal protective equipment;
• Whether the opening of the sector will result in substantially greater demand for public transport, and whether the sector is able to manage this increased demand by staggering working hours, or providing private transportation options; and
• The economic impact of re-opening the sector on both the sector itself and the broader economy.

A careful balancing had to be achieved between the legitimate desire of the sectors and investors concerned to reopen as rapidly as possible with the critical consideration of saving lives. In addition, the cumulative effect on health risks of reopening a number of different sectors and economic activities at the same time, had to be considered.

As I also indicated in an earlier reply to a Parliamentary Question:

the dtic has been working closely with industry from manufacturing, construction and retail to get updates on infections and to identify solutions which can be rolled out to the industry.

The success of each level proposed, and the allocation of economic sectors in particular levels, is measured by the contribution to containing the spread of the virus and flattening of the curve of infections. Where necessary, changes are made to the extent of economic activity to the wider objectives of saving lives and protecting livelihoods.

The industry classification system was explained at a joint meeting of Parliamentary Committees dealing with Trade, Industry and Competition portfolio, on 1 May 2020, setting out criteria and the application of the three systems in the country moving from Level 5 to Level 4.

Government has engaged with a number of organisations, from business associations, trade unions, political parties, premiers of provinces, individual businesses and religious institutions to receive feedback on the systems and to consider representations on proposed changes.

The incremental opening of certain sectors of the economy is intended to limit the spread of the virus, and to ensure that any spikes in infections can be identified and managed. In addition, it has enabled a greater level of preparedness in society and in the health system than was the case at the start of the pandemic in South Africa.

In the run-up to the decision to move to Level 3, we engaged a number of sectors on these and other relevant considerations. In addition, Government consulted organised Business, Labour and Community representatives at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) which represents big and small business; established and informal enterprises; a wide range of primary, industrial and service sectors; and community organisations.

- END -

Reply:

Effective, 1 June 2020 the entire country has moved to Alert Level 3, which permits a substantial amount of economic activity.

Each alert level reflects a careful balance between the risk of infection and the readiness of the healthcare system. President Ramaphosa outlined the five levels of the risk-adjusted framework when he addressed the nation on 23 April 2020. As indicated by the President, when he stated:

“Level 5 means that drastic measures are required to contain the spread of the virus to save lives.

Level 4 means that some activity can be allowed to resume subject to extreme precautions required to limit community transmission and outbreaks.

 

Level 3 involves the easing of some restrictions, including on work and social activities, to address a high risk of transmission.

Level 2 involves the further easing of restrictions, but the maintenance of physical distancing and restrictions on some leisure and social activities to prevent a resurgence of the virus.

Level 1 means that most normal activity can resume, with precautions and health guidelines followed at all times.”

When determining which economic activity may be permitted under each of the alert level, Government has considered a number of elements, including, but not limited to:

• The level of social distancing which can be maintained between co-workers and/or customers during the ordinary course of business;
• How essential the functioning of the sector is to other businesses, including its export profile and contribution to GDP and jobs
• Whether the sector performs critical services in the value chain of other economic sectors in South Africa;
• Whether the sector has been able to develop appropriate health and safety protocols and whether the sector has evidenced preparedness with regards to personal protective equipment;
• Whether the opening of the sector will result in substantially greater demand for public transport, and whether the sector is able to manage this increased demand by staggering working hours, or providing private transportation options; and
• The economic impact of re-opening the sector on both the sector itself and the broader economy.

A careful balancing had to be achieved between the legitimate desire of the sectors and investors concerned to reopen as rapidly as possible with the critical consideration of saving lives.

As I indicated in an earlier reply to a Parliamentary Question:

the dtic has been working closely with industry from manufacturing, construction and retail to get updates on infections and to identify solutions which can be rolled out to the industry.

The success of each level proposed, and the allocation of economic sectors in particular levels, is measured by the contribution to containing the spread of the virus and flattening of the curve of infections. Where necessary, changes are made to the extent of economic activity to the wider objectives of saving lives and protecting livelihoods.

The industry classification system was explained at a joint meeting of Parliamentary Committees dealing with Trade, Industry and Competition portfolio, on 1 May 2020, setting out criteria and the application of the three systems in the country moving from Level 5 to Level 4.

Government has engaged with a number of organisations, from business associations, trade unions, political parties, premiers of provinces, individual businesses and religious institutions to receive feedback on the systems and to consider representations on proposed changes.

The incremental opening of certain sectors of the economy is intended to limit the spread of the virus, and to ensure that any spikes in infections can be identified and managed. In addition, it has enabled a greater level of preparedness in society and in the health system than was the case at the start of the pandemic in South Africa.

In the run-up to the decision to move to Level 3, we engaged a number of sectors on these and other relevant considerations and looked too at the aggregate effect of multiple sectors resuming work at the same time. In addition, Government consulted organised Business, Labour and Community representatives at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) which represents big and small business; established and informal enterprises; a wide range of primary, industrial and service sectors; and community organisations.

Where certain economic activities remain restricted during Alert Level 3, Government is actively engaging with some of the sectors to conduct an appropriate risk assessment and develop the necessary health and safety protocols to enable the safe re-opening of the sector.

- END -

Reply:

1. I am advised by the Director-General that no tenders were awarded. To address the safety of staff and utilizing the guidelines issued by the Department of Public Service and Administration, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was procured through a quotation process. Masks, gloves and sanitizers were bought to the total value of R188 794.

2. The Department advised that standard supply chain management procedures were followed with no deviation and further that all procurement procedures followed the relevant National Treasury prescripts.  

3.  In light of the above, it seems that no statement is required; but should circumstances require a statement to be made, I do so.

-END-

Reply:

Directions on e-Commerce were gazetted on 14 May 2020 (gazette no 43321).

The directions provide clarity on what goods may be transacted and the protocols which must be observed by retailers, courier and delivery services used by e-commerce retailers.

A copy of the Directions may be accessed from the Department’s website.

-END-