Questions & Replies: Question & Replies No. 1526 to 1575

Share this page:
2009-11-16

Search this file by selecting Ctrl + F on your keyboard

[PMG note: Replies are inserted as soon as they are provided by the Minister]

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

FOR WRITTEN REPLY

QUESTION 1575

DATE OF PUBLICATION OF INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09/10/09

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER 20-2009)

Mr D C Smiles (DA) to ask the Minister of Basic Education

(1) Whether her department organized or hosted (a) an imbizo, (b) a seminar, (c) conference and (d) any other function during the period 1 January 2006 up to the the latest specified date for which information is available; if so (i) on what date, (ii) what was the total amount spent on each, (iii) what is the breakdown of the cost in each case and (iv) how many guests attended in each case;

(2) Whether there were any related costs for the travel and accommodation of guests for each of the events; if so, in each case, (a) what were the costs and (b) what was the breakdown of these costs;

(3) Whether any member of the Cabinet was present at any of these events; if so, (a) who, (b) in what capacity and (c) why ? NW1981E

REPLY:

1. I was only appointed in May 2009, therefore I can only account for the period starting in May 2009. No IMBIZO was held in 2009.

2. The DoBE Teenage Pregnancy Report was launched at a seminar hosted by UNICEF; costs can be ascertained with UNICEF.

3. No conferences have been hosted by the DoBE during my term of office to date.

4. No functions have been hosted by the DoBE during my term of office to date.

5. The National Teacher Development summit was hosted by the ELRC and ETDP SETA.

6. The President's Interaction with principals was co-hosted by the DoBE, which contributed R 300,000.00 and by the private sector. The President was present in his capacity as President of South Africa. The MEC's for Education and the Premiers also attended as leaders of Government in their various capacities.

QUESTION NO 1573

Mr D J Maynier (DA) to ask the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

"In the light of the release of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee's annual report for the 2008-09 financial year, (a) how many import permits were (i) authorised and (ii) refused and (b) in each specified case, what (i) was the name of the exporting state, (ii) was the (aa) category, (bb) type, (cc) quantity and (dd) value of the conventional weapons and (c) what were the reasons why the import permits were refused?"

REPLY:

The total number of Import Permits authorised and issued in 2008 is 1635. In view of the fact that no refusals were granted, all the other sub-questions within this Parliamentary question do not arise.

QUESTION NO 1572

Mr D J Maynier (DA) to ask the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

"In the light of the release of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee's annual report for the 2008-09 financial year, (a) hoe many export permits were (i) authorised and (ii) refused and (b) in each specified case, what (i) was the name of the importing state, (ii) was the (aa) category, (bb) type, (cc) quantity and (dd) value f the conventional weapons and (c) what were the reasons why the export permits were refused?"

REPLY:

The total number of Export Permits authorised and issued in 2008 is 2895. In view of the fact that no refusals were granted, all the other sub-questions within this Parliamentary question do not arise.

QUESTION NUMBER: 1570

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 OCTOBER 2009

Mr M Swart (DA) to ask the Minister of Finance:

(1) Whether all (a)(i) offices and (ii) sites of his department and (b) entities reporting to him adhere to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Act 85 of 1993; if not, (aa) why not, (bb) which facilities fail to adhere to the Act, (cc) where are they situated, (dd) what (aaa) aspects of the Act does each such facility not comply with and (bbb) action has been taken in each case; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) (a) how often should each facility be inspected and (b) when last was each facility inspected? NW1976E

REPLY:

(1) (a) & (b) Yes.

(2)

§ National Treasury:

(a) Once per annum

(b) In September 2008

· Accounting Standard Board:

(a) Annually

(b) In October 2009

· Development Bank of South Africa

(a) Monthly

(b) In September 2009

· Financial Intelligence Centre

(a) After every six months

(c) In November 2009

· Financial Services Board

(a) Quarterly

(b) In June 2009

· Government Employees Pension Fund

(a) Quarterly

(b) During the 2nd quarter of the 2009/2010 financial year.

· Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors

(a) Annually

(b) In March 2009

· Land and Agricultural Bank of South Africa

(a) Once a year

(b) Head Office: Done almost daily

Kroonstad: 20 August 2009

Bloemfontein: 20 August 2009

Bethlehem: 21 August 2009

Heidelberg: 25 August 2009

Modimolle: 26 August 2009

Polokwane: 26 August 2009

Middleburg: 27 August 2009

Ermelo: 27 August 2009

Nelspruit: 28 August 2009

Vryheid: 08 September 2009

Pietermaritzburg: 09 September 2009

Lichtenburg: 22 September 2009

Vryburg: 23 September 2009

Rustenburg: 23 September 2009

Upington: 28 September 2009

Calvinia: 28 September 2009

George: 29 September 2009

Beaufort West: 30 September 2009

Cradock: 30 September 2009

Port Elizabeth: 01 October 2009

Potchefstroom: 21 July 2009

· Office of the Ombud for Financial Services Providers

(a) Every six months

(b) In February 2009

· Office of the Pension Funds Adjudicator

(a) Every three months

(b) In October 2009

· Public Investments Corporation

(a) Annually

(b) In April 2009

· South African Revenue Service

(a) Monthly

(b) In September 2009

· South African Special Risk Insurance Association

(a) Monthly

(b) In September 2009

FOR WRITTEN REPLY

QUESTION NO 1566

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

1566. Mrs P C Duncan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her department organised or hosted (a) an imbizo, (b) a seminar, (c) conference and (d) any other function during the period 1 January 2006 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if so, (i) on what date, (ii) what was the total amount spent on each, (iii) what is the breakdown of the cost in each case and (iv) how many guests attended in each case;

(2) whether there were any related costs for the travel and accommodation of guests for each of the events; if so, in each case, (a) what were the costs and (b) what was the breakdown of these costs;

(3) whether any member of the Cabinet was present at any of these events; if so, (a) who, (b) in what capacity and (c) why?


REPLY:

(i)(a) Yes, My Department hosted three lmbizo during the period in question. Two of these were done in Kwa-Zulu Natal, while one was held in the Eastern Cape.

(i)(b) No, My Department has not organized a seminar during the period in question

(i)(c)(i) Yes, My Department has had a number of conferences during the period in question.

The years in which these conferences fall are indicated in the brackets. These include Symposia associated with the National Water Week (2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009), National Sanitation Week (2006,2007 and 2008), Weed Buster Week (2006,2007,2008 and 2009), Water for Growth and Development Summit (2007), HELP Southern Symposium (2007), Municipal lndabas (2008), Waste Discharge Management and Water for Growth and Development (2008), launch of a Women's Organisation (2008), eight Provincial Water Sector lzindaba (2009), and 2" Africa Water Week (2009), Stakeholder launch for Water for Growth and Development (2009).

(i)(c)(ii) The amount spent on each is specified in the breakdown of the costs below as required in question (l)(c)(iii). Note that this breakdown is provided only in cases where this information is readily available.

(i) (c) (iii) The cost breakdown for specific event/conferences/seminar/lzimbizo is presented in table 1 below for cases where this data is readily available.

(1 ) (c) (iii) The cost breakdown for specific event/conferences/seminar/lzimbizo is presented in table 1 below for cases where this data is readily available.

Table 1

COST ITEM

ASSOCIATED COST

IZIMBIZO

2006 KZN Imbizo

R506.200.00

2008 KZN Imbizo (200 one)

R478,548.00

2008 Eastern Cape Imbizo

R374.000.00

CONFERENCES/SEMINARS

2008 Municipal lndaba

R2,000,000.00

2009 Water for Growth & Development Stakeholder Launch

R800,000.00

2009 Regional Water Summit

R1.600.000.00

Africa Water Week

R6.000,00O.00

Water Indaba 2009

R600,000.00

2008 Youth Summit

R814,571.20

Waste Discharge Management

R 1,659,694.36

OTHER FUNCTIONS

Budget Vote 2006

R50 000.00

Budget Vote 2007

R289,204.00

Budget Vote 2008

R232.344.00

Budget Vote 2009

R366,38.40

National Water Week 2006

R 4,000,000.00

National Water Week 2007

R 6,500,000.00

National Water Week 2008

R16.000,000.00

National Water Week 2009

R7.000,000.00

National Arbor Week 2006

R690 000.00

National Arbor Week 2007

R730.000.00

National Arbor Week 2008

R900,000.00

National Arbor Week 2009

R1.798,889.44

Weed Buster Week 2006

R500,000,00

WeedBuster Week 2007

R690,551.00

WeedBusterWeek 2008

R710,000,00

WeedBuster Week 2009

R800,146.22

National Sanitation Week 2006

R1,500.000.00

National Sanitation Week 2007

R1,800,000.00

National Sanitation Week 2008

R2,300.000.00

2nd Africa Week

R7,000,000.00

(2) The costs shown in Table 1 include all the costs My Department incurred.

(3)(a) Yes. Members of Cabinet are invited and often attend, Imbizo, Conferences. Seminars and any other functions.

  • The Minister of Mineral and Energy, Ms B Sonjica attended the Imbizo.
  • Deputy President Ms P Mlambo-Ngcuka attended the Municipal Water Indaba of 2008.
  • Minister in the Presidency, Mr. T Manuel attended the 2nd Africa Water Week of 2009.
  • (3)(b) Minister B Sonjica attended in her capacity as Minister of Minerals and Energy. Deputy President P Mlambo-Ngcuka attended in her capacity as Deputy President of the Republic and Minister T Manual attended in his capacity as Minister in the Presidency.

    (3)(c) Minister B Sonjica attended the Joint Water and Electricity imbizo because the electricity function fell within the Department of Minerals of Energy, of which she was the Minister.

    Deputy President Ms P Mlambo-Ngcuka was the keynote speaker at the Municipal Water lndaba in 2008.


    Minister T Manual attended on behalf of the President and also delivered a keynote address.

    QUESTION NUMBER: 1565

    DATE FOR PUBLICATION: 9 OCTOBER 2009

    DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 15 DECEMBER 2009

    MRS P C DUNCAN (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER OF WOMEN, CHILDREN, AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES:

    Whether her department renders any services pertaining to diversion programmes in terms of the Child Justice Act, Act 75 of 2008; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1971E

    Response

    The Ministry for Women, Children and People with Disabilities is not responsible for diversion programmes. Instead the Department of Justice is the key and lead department in this regard.

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    FOR WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION NO. 1563)

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER

    2009 1NTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20-2009

    Dr A Lotriet (DA) to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture:

    Whether the framework for Community Arts Centres has been approved by her and the MECs'; if not, why not; if so, what is the timeframe of implementation of the framework?

    REPLY:

    (1) The Policy Framework has not yet been approved by me and the Provincial MECs.

    The framework needs to be revised and updated first. The updating has been completed and provinces are in the process of giving inputs into the policy framework so that as government, we can have one consolidated and common vision for community arts centres.

    The implementation is envisaged to start in the 2010/2011 financial year.

    DEPARTMENT: JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

    REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION FOR WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION NO.: 1558 DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 OCTOBER 2009

    1558. Mr A T Fritz (DA) to ask the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

    (1) (a) How many Family Advocate Offices exist, (b) where is each office located, (c) how many advocates are employed at each office, (d) what is the case load for each advocate at each office, (e) what was the case load for each advocate at each office in the (i) 2007-08 and (ii) 2008-09 financial years and (f) what is the (i) average, (ii) shortest and (iii) longest time to finalise a case at each office;

    (2) whether the Children's Amendment Act, Act 41 of 2007, is fully operational in this regard; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will it be fully operational; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1964E

    Reply:-

    (1)(a) The offices of the Family Advocate are located nationally at sixteen (16) service points in the country. The current establishment of the Family Advocate includes both Family Advocates and Social Workers. The latter are appointed as Family Counsellors in terms of the Mediation in Certain Divorce Matters Act 24 of 1987.

    (1)(b)(c)(d)(e) The details requested by the Honourable Member are indicated in the table below. I would also like to advise the Honourable Member that the offices of the Family Advocate are located in rural, semi-urban and urban areas. The service sites are close to public transport areas and/or the Courts.

    Each service point in a province conducts ad hoc, periodic services in different areas within the province. Such services relate to inter alia:- mobile services, information sessions and outreach programmes.

    The focus of such services is the rural/indigent/previously disadvantaged/ economically disadvantaged communities/parties. Such services would emphasise the role of the Family Advocate and processes related thereto.

    No of offices

    Where are offices located

    Number of Family Advocates during 2007/08

    Number of Family Advocates during 2008/09

    Number of Family Advocates employed

    2009/10

    (current)

    Case load 2007/08 per Family Advocate

    Case load 2007/09

    per Family Advocate

    3

    Port Elizabeth

    East London

    Mthatha

    5

    3

    3

    5

    3

    3

    5

    3

    3

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    230 x 5

    95 x 3

    64 x 3

    265 x 5

    121 x 3

    65 x 3

    2

    Pretoria

    Johannesburg

    5

    5

    6

    7

    6

    7

    * 2 Senior Family Advocates

    193 x 5

    200 x 5

    159 x 6

    205 x 7

    1

    Northern Cape

    4

    3

    4

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    344 x 4

    344 x 3

    2

    Bloemfontein

    Welkom

    4

    4

    4

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    58 x 4

    92 x 4

    3

    Durban

    Pietermaritzburg

    Newcastle

    5

    1

    1

    6

    2

    1

    6

    2

    1

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    124x 5

    271 x 1

    197 x 1

    144 x 6

    208 x 6

    184 x1

    1

    North West

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    185 x 2

    214 x 2

    3

    Nelspruit

    Middleburg

    Ermelo

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    123

    67 x 2

    3

    Cape Town

    George

    Worcester

    7 (3 vacancies for the majority of the period = 4)

    1

    0

    7 (1vacancy = 6)

    1

    1

    7

    1

    1

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    289 x 4

    236 x 1

    No office

    184 x 6

    102 x 1

    1

    Limpopo

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    12

    12

    (f) There are numerous factors which hamper the expeditious resolution of matters in the various offices. These factors are:-

    (i) The high percentage of urgent matters with onerous short return dates. Compliance with such court dates often becomes an extremely labour intensive exercise resulting in many other matters that Advocates are seized with being held in abeyance;

    (ii) Advocates travel long distances in rural, semi-rural areas in order to consult with parties;

    (iii) High conflict and complex matters cannot be dealt with hastily as it compromises a qualitative output;

    (iv) Psychological assessments and other expert reports that result in assessments take a considerable time to finalise. Such matters are monitored consistently but not finalised until the expert reports become available;

    (v) The Family Advocate has to obtain the outcome in a criminal case before a final report can be submitted in a civil matter i.e. a parent may be charged with rape, fraud, murder and the guardianship and in such matters the care and contact issues cannot be resolved until the criminal court has given judgement in the matter;

    (vi) Follow-up enquiries take place after the initial interview for various purposes; such as monitoring care and contact arrangements, assessing the interim care and contact arrangement the Family Advocate has put in place, failed mediations in which assessments need to take place and in matters where one party only appears for the matter and the other party has to still be consulted;

    (vii) Home visits takes place to enable the Family Advocate to see children in their natural surroundings and in situations in which the children are most comfortable in. These occur in certain identified matters and are subject to the schedule of the case management team, the children and the parties;

    (viii) The intense influx of queries (public and telephonic) relating to the Children's Act results in work schedules being constantly re-arranged;

    (ix) Long trials and voluminous court documentation; and

    (x) Poorly drafted documents by people who are not legally represented.

    Further constraints are experienced when parties are represented and unrepresented in the following manner:-

    Unrepresented parties

    Lack of understanding of court processes and the role of the Family Advocate in the court process

    One of the main problems that the Family Advocate experiences is that the parties often do not understand the court process and the role of the Family Advocate within that court process, in the following way:-

    · The parties do not know, for example, how to go about opposing an action and often views the investigation process within the Office of the Family Advocate as an appropriate forum to voice their opposition to the divorce action or at least some of the prayers contained in the Particulars of Claim of the Plaintiff;

    · Parties consider the Office of the Family Advocate as a "family court" and believe that the function of the Office of the Family Advocate is to adjudicate the matter and to ultimately give an order in the matter;

    · Once the Family Advocate's report has been completed and made available to the parties, the parties do not understand that they are then required to set the matter down and that they are responsible for ensuring that the matter is seen through to completion;

    · The Family Advocate can assist them in the enforcement of the order;

    Although all attempts are made to address these problems by providing the parties with the necessary information, parties are overwhelmed by the process.

    Lack of understanding about the powers and functions of the Office of the Family Advocate

    A further problem with unrepresented parties is that they often do not understand the function of the Office of the Family Advocate. The following serves as some examples:

    · Parties mistakenly believe that the Office of the Family Advocate provides counselling services and that the consultation is aimed at providing the parties with an opportunity to vent their anger, get closure or, in some cases, attempt reconciliation;

    · Parties mistakenly believe that the Office of the Family Advocate has powers similar to the statutory powers of social workers and that Family Advocates can remove children from situations where there is a risk of harm; and

    · Parties mistakenly believe that Family Advocates are lawyers who can represent them in court.

    These issues are usually dealt with by providing the parties with the relevant information.

    Lack of understanding about legal concepts

    · Unrepresented parties, not having been briefed by a lawyer before attending a consultation in our office often do not understand legal concepts such as "guardianship", "care" and "contact". This problem is largely dealt with through information sessions before consultations and continuous provision of information during the consultation.

    Problems contacting parties

    · On a practical level, it is often more difficult to contact unrepresented parties as the telephone numbers provided by parties often change and the Office of the Family Advocate is not notified of a change in contact details etc.

    Some of the abovementioned problems are compounded when one party is represented, while the other not, as the unrepresented party looks to the Office of the Family Advocate for guidance and, very often, harbours the belief or expectation that the Family Advocate can represent their interests.

    Furthermore, Attorneys don't always understand the legislation and would not advise their clients correctly regarding the role of the family advocate. Further clients attend mediation or interviews primed to promote the litigation process. There is considerable time spent in engaging, changing mindsets and convincing attorneys that they should not be promoting litigation viz. mediation.

    Notwithstanding such challenges the Family Advocate provides consistent reports to the court and the parties. Such interim reports address the further aspects in dispute the interim care and contact arrangements, and the further conduct of the matter. This serves to illustrate the child's best interest are not compromised pending the process of assessment or mediation;

    (2) My Department is not in a position to provide clarity on the final date for the complete promulgation of the Children's Act 38 of 2005 other than to state that the identified date is the 01st April 2010. Currently 43 Sections of the Children's Act 38 of 2005 has been in operation since 2007. There are various budgetary and resource constraints with regard to its implementation. My Department and the Department of Social Development will be having discussions to finalise the process of the implementation in this regard.

    QUESTION NO: 1586

    DATE SUBMITTED:

    MR J SELFE (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

    (1) Whether all offices and sites of her Department and entities reporting to her adhere to the Occupational Health and Safety Act (Act No 85 of 1993) if not, why not; if so, when;

    (2) Which facility fail to adhere to the Act, where are they situated, what aspects of the Act does each such facility not comply with and action has been taken in each case, if so what are the relevant details

    (a) How often should each facility be inspected and when last was each facility inspected? NW1992E

    REPLY

    1.The Department of Correctional Services complies with the Occupational Health and Safety Act (Act No 85 of 1993) in terms of the following provisions:

    (i) Section 16 which empowers the National Commissioner as the Chief Executive Officer of the Department to appoint all the Regional Commissioners and Area Commissioners to ensure that OHS is properly discharged in the department in terms of section 16(2) and the appointment letters are available.

    (ii)

    The department also adheres to section 17(1) of the OHS Act in that 70 % of the Health and Safety Representatives from the total number required have been appointed in writing throughout the country. In terms of legislation the ratio is 1:100 for office and 1:50 for workshop and the department has adopted 1:50 for both office and workshop in order to create more capacity to improve compliance with the Act. To this end 1764 statutory appointees such as Health and Safety Representatives, First Aiders in terms of General Safety Regulation and Fire Fighters as part of good practice have been appointed in writing. A total of 50% Statutory Appointees namely Health and Safety Representatives 10%, First Aiders 20% and Fire Fighters 20% have been trained,

    (iii) The Department has established Levels 1, 2 and 3 Occupational, Health and Safety Committees in line with section 19 of the Act in all regions and Head Office. These committees hold meetings but not as regularly as required due to financial constraints and lack of training in others. Level 1 is the OHS meeting at centre level, Level 2 OHS meeting at Management Area and level 3 is the OHS meeting at Regional level. The department has also established the OHS Management Committee which is repsoble to provide support and address technical issues raised by Committees at all levels. This committee meets on a quarterly basis.

    (iv) The department has completed occupational hygiene risk assessment and medical surveillance as a pilot project at Pollsmoor Management Area (October, 2008) as part of compliance with the relevant Regulations of the OHS Act (Detail report is available).

    (v) Due to high prevalence of TB and overcrowding in the correctional centers, the department has proactively conducted TB Screening between January and September 2009 for 744 officials who were allegedly exposed to TB.

    (vi) Health and Safety Representatives are expected to inspect the facilities in their areas on a monthly basis and the OHS Coordinators should inspect the facilities on a quarterly basis. The Health and Safety inspections are conducted periodically by Health and Safety Representatives, all the OHS Coordinators in the regions and Inspectors throughout the country. For instance, inspections have been completed in 2009 for the following areas:

    § Head Office building,

    § Pretoria Management Area, Official Accommodations for unmarried officials and Kwaggasrand,

    § Zonderwater and Kroonstaad Training Colleges,

    § Bethal Management Area,

    § Witbank uniform warehouse,

    § Goodwood Management Area

    § Umtata Management Area and

    § Waterval Management Area

    2. The department recognizes the complexity of the legislation and the resultant difficulties with which compliance with the OHS in some areas is not achieved due to a number of reasons. These noncompliance issues relate to maintenance of the buildings and hygiene standards, and the regularity of the occupational hygiene risk assessment and medical surveillance. The department also is confronted with financial difficulties which compromises compliance in some instances such as occupational health risk assessment for each site which must be conducted once every 24 months, and accredited training for statutory appointees by recognized institutions.

    (a) Consequently, all facilities are not 100% compliant to the OHS Act and the department (July- September 2009) was at 43% compliant level. The department has identified OHS as one of the risk areas that have to be mitigated and progress on mitigation is reported quarterly to the Risk Management Committee.

    QUESTION NO.: 1558

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 OCTOBER 2009

    1558. Mr A T Fritz (DA) to ask the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

    (1) (a) How many Family Advocate Offices exist, (b) where is each office located, (c) how many advocates are employed at each office, (d) what is the case load for each advocate at each office, (e) what was the case load for each advocate at each office in the (i) 2007-08 and (ii) 2008-09 financial years and (f) what is the (i) average, (ii) shortest and (iii) longest time to finalise a case at each office;

    (2) whether the Children's Amendment Act, Act 41 of 2007, is fully operational in this regard; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will it be fully operational; if so, what are the relevant details?NW1964E

    Reply:-

    (1)(a) The offices of the Family Advocate are located nationally at sixteen (16) service points in the country. The current establishment of the Family Advocate includes both Family Advocates and Social Workers. The latter are appointed as Family Counsellors in terms of the Mediation in Certain Divorce Matters Act 24 of 1987.

    (1)(b)(c)(d)(e) The details requested by the Honourable Member are indicated in the table below. I would also like to advise the Honourable Member that the offices of the Family Advocate are located in rural, semi-urban and urban areas. The service sites are close to public transport areas and/or the Courts.

    Each service point in a province conducts ad hoc, periodic services in different areas within the province. Such services relate to inter alia:- mobile services, information sessions and outreach programmes.

    The focus of such services is the rural/indigent/previously disadvantaged/ economically disadvantaged communities/parties. Such services would emphasise the role of the Family Advocate and processes related thereto.

    No of offices

    Where are offices located

    Number of Family Advocates during 2007/08

    Number of Family Advocates during 2008/09

    Number of Family Advocates employed

    2009/10

    (current)

    Case load 2007/08 per Family Advocate

    Case load 2007/09

    per Family Advocate

    3

    Port Elizabeth

    East London

    Mthatha

    5

    3

    3

    5

    3

    3

    5

    3

    3

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    230 x 5

    95 x 3

    64 x 3

    265 x 5

    121 x 3

    65 x 3

    2

    Pretoria

    Johannesburg

    5

    5

    6

    7

    6

    7

    * 2 Senior Family Advocates

    193 x 5

    200 x 5

    159 x 6

    205 x 7

    1

    Northern Cape

    4

    3

    4

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    344 x 4

    344 x 3

    2

    Bloemfontein

    Welkom

    4

    4

    4

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    58 x 4

    92 x 4

    3

    Durban

    Pietermaritzburg

    Newcastle

    5

    1

    1

    6

    2

    1

    6

    2

    1

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    124x 5

    271 x 1

    197 x 1

    144 x 6

    208 x 6

    184 x1

    1

    North West

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    185 x 2

    214 x 2

    3

    Nelspruit

    Middleburg

    Ermelo

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    123

    67 x 2

    3

    Cape Town

    George

    Worcester

    7 (3 vacancies for the majority of the period = 4)

    1

    0

    7 (1vacancy = 6)

    1

    1

    7

    1

    1

    * 3 Senior Family Advocates

    289 x 4

    236 x 1

    No office

    184 x 6

    102 x 1

    1

    Limpopo

    2

    2

    2

    * 1 Senior Family Advocate

    12

    12

    (f) There are numerous factors which hamper the expeditious resolution of matters in the various offices. These factors are:-

    The high percentage of urgent matters with onerous short return dates. Compliance with such court dates often becomes an extremely labour intensive exercise resulting in many other matters that Advocates are seized with being held in abeyance;

    Advocates travel long distances in rural, semi-rural areas in order to consult with parties;

    High conflict and complex matters cannot be dealt with hastily as it compromises a qualitative output;

    Psychological assessments and other expert reports that result in assessments take a considerable time to finalise. Such matters are monitored consistently but not finalised until the expert reports become available;

    The Family Advocate has to obtain the outcome in a criminal case before a final report can be submitted in a civil matter i.e. a parent may be charged with rape, fraud, murder and the guardianship and in such matters the care and contact issues cannot be resolved until the criminal court has given judgement in the matter;

    Follow-up enquiries take place after the initial interview for various purposes; such as monitoring care and contact arrangements, assessing the interim care and contact arrangement the Family Advocate has put in place, failed mediations in which assessments need to take place and in matters where one party only appears for the matter and the other party has to still be consulted;

    Home visits takes place to enable the Family Advocate to see children in their natural surroundings and in situations in which the children are most comfortable in. These occur in certain identified matters and are subject to the schedule of the case management team, the children and the parties;

    The intense influx of queries (public and telephonic) relating to the Children's Act results in work schedules being constantly re-arranged;

    Long trials and voluminous court documentation; and

    Poorly drafted documents by people who are not legally represented.

    Further constraints are experienced when parties are represented and unrepresented in the following manner:-


    Unrepresented parties

    Lack of understanding of court processes and the role of the Family Advocate in the court process

    One of the main problems that the Family Advocate experiences is that the parties often do not understand the court process and the role of the Family Advocate within that court process, in the following way:-

    The parties do not know, for example, how to go about opposing an action and often views the investigation process within the Office of the Family Advocate as an appropriate forum to voice their opposition to the divorce action or at least some of the prayers contained in the Particulars of Claim of the Plaintiff;

    Parties consider the Office of the Family Advocate as a "family court" and believe that the function of the Office of the Family Advocate is to adjudicate the matter and to ultimately give an order in the matter;

    Once the Family Advocate's report has been completed and made available to the parties, the parties do not understand that they are then required to set the matter down and that they are responsible for ensuring that the matter is seen through to completion;

    The Family Advocate can assist them in the enforcement of the order;

    Although all attempts are made to address these problems by providing the parties with the necessary information, parties are overwhelmed by the process.

    Lack of understanding about the powers and functions of the Office of the Family Advocate

    A further problem with unrepresented parties is that they often do not understand the function of the Office of the Family Advocate. The following serves as some examples:

    Parties mistakenly believe that the Office of the Family Advocate provides counselling services and that the consultation is aimed at providing the parties with an opportunity to vent their anger, get closure or, in some cases, attempt reconciliation;

    Parties mistakenly believe that the Office of the Family Advocate has powers similar to the statutory powers of social workers and that Family Advocates can remove children from situations where there is a risk of harm; and

    Parties mistakenly believe that Family Advocates are lawyers who can represent them in court.

    These issues are usually dealt with by providing the parties with the relevant information.

    Lack of understanding about legal concepts

    Unrepresented parties, not having been briefed by a lawyer before attending a consultation in our office often do not understand legal concepts such as "guardianship", "care" and "contact". This problem is largely dealt with through information sessions before consultations and continuous provision of information during the consultation.


    Problems contacting parties

    On a practical level, it is often more difficult to contact unrepresented parties as the telephone numbers provided by parties often change and the Office of the Family Advocate is not notified of a change in contact details etc.

    Some of the abovementioned problems are compounded when one party is represented, while the other not, as the unrepresented party looks to the Office of the Family Advocate for guidance and, very often, harbours the belief or expectation that the Family Advocate can represent their interests.

    Furthermore, Attorneys don't always understand the legislation and would not advise their clients correctly regarding the role of the family advocate. Further clients attend mediation or interviews primed to promote the litigation process. There is considerable time spent in engaging, changing mindsets and convincing attorneys that they should not be promoting litigation viz. mediation.

    Notwithstanding such challenges the Family Advocate provides consistent reports to the court and the parties. Such interim reports address the further aspects in dispute the interim care and contact arrangements, and the further conduct of the matter. This serves to illustrate the child's best interest are not compromised pending the process of assessment or mediation;

    (2) My Department is not in a position to provide clarity on the final date for the complete promulgation of the Children's Act 38 of 2005 other than to state that the identified date is the 01st April 2010. Currently 43 Sections of the Children's Act 38 of 2005 has been in operation since 2007. There are various budgetary and resource constraints with regard to its implementation. My Department and the Department of Social Development will be having discussions to finalise the process of the implementation in this regard.



    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION 1555

    INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER [No 20-2009]

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 October 2009

    1555. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform:

    (1) Whether, with reference to his reply to Question 966 on 10 September 2009, his department informed all farm owners in writing that their farms were being de-gazetted; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (2) what were the reasons for each of the (a) 30 claims that were found to be invalid and (b) 29 claims that were de-gazetted;

    (3) whether any other claims were found to be invalid and/or could be de-gazetted; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether all land claims have been investigated before gazetting; if not, (a) why not and (b) what steps have been taken to ensure that a full investigation takes place in all cases; if so,

    (5) whether the process of investigating claims have included all communities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1961E

    THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM:

    (1) Yes. All respective land owners were informed in writing that their farms were being de–gazetted.

    (2)(a) & (b) Please refer to the table hereunder.

    Province

    Claim description

    2(a) Reason for invalidity

    2(b) Reason for de-gazetting

    Gauteng

    1. Koppieskraal

    portion 1

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non – compliance with section 2 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994

    (Act No 22 of 1994).

    The owner submitted more evidence which indicated that the claimants did not have any link to the properties.

    2. Hartebeesfontein, Vogelzang and Hekpoort

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Further research had to be conducted on certain properties and some land owners indicated that there is no link of claimants to their properties. Claim did not meet certain requirements of section 2 of the Act.

    North West

    1. Elandsfontein

    440 JQ

    Non–compliance on certain properties in the claim.

    Claim was previously consolidated without written undertaking. Claim restricted to portions with registered rights.

    2. Krelingspost 425 JQ

    3. Schietfontein 437 JQ

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made presentations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act 1994 as amended.

    Evidence only links community to one portion. Other portions were occupied by labour tenants hence the community claim was de-gazetted.

    4. Barolong Boo Phoi

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The claim was gazetted as part of a block gazette with other properties. However, after a research was conducted on certain properties it was found that the claimants did not have any link to the properties.

    5. Bessiesvlei

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The land owners submitted evidence for proof.

    6. Langlaagte

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non – compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Wrong properties which were not part of the claimed properties were gazetted and had to be withdrawn.

    7. Rysmierbult 88 IQ

    Community

    (Zamenskomst 86

    IQ – 16 portions)

    Non–compliance on certain properties and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Claimants only entitled to claim one portion of the Farm Zamenskomst. No evidence linking claimants to other properties.

    Eastern Cape

    1. Zwaartwater

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    After a detailed research was conducted, it was discovered that the actual dispossession occurred prior 1913.

    Northern Cape

    1. Vaalharts

    Non–compliance on certain properties/ farm where the dispossession took place prior 1913.

    These farms were gazetted based on a preliminary research. The Commission is busy conducting a detailed research. Once a claim is gazetted section 11(7) of the Act is applicable to all land owners. Therefore the decision was taken to de-gazette the whole claim pending the completion of a detailed research report. All land claims found to be valid will be gazetted.

    Free State

    1. Marydale

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Just and equitable compensation received.

    2. Makgoloaneng

    Claim was found to be frivolous and vexatious.

    De-gazetted because the incorrect property was gazetted.

    3. Altona

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    De-gazetted because the incorrect property was gazetted.

    Limpopo

    1. Mmaboi

    Community:

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act. It should be noted this only relates to certain farms or properties as the land claim is lodged on more than two properties.

    De-gazetted in 1996 due to counter claims.

    2. Ntshabeleng

    Tau Mankotsane

    Tribe

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act. It should be noted this only relates to certain farms or properties as the land claim is lodged on more than two properties.

    De-gazetted in 1995 due to counter claims.

    3. Manenzhe

    Community

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The claim was de-gazetted in 2005 due to lack of sufficient information supporting their claim which was then dismissed.

    4. Makgoba

    Community

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act. It should be noted this only relates to certain farms or properties as the land claim is lodged on more than two properties.

    Wrongfully gazetted and was therefore de-gazetted. Land claims were lodged on more than one farm and properties. The RLCC: Limpopo gazetted more than what was lodged and it was concluded to exclude those which were not affected and de - gazetting in 2004.

    5. Letsoalo MD

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act. It should be noted this only relates to certain farms or properties as the land claim is lodged on more than two properties.

    Wrongfully gazetted and was therefore de-gazetted.

    6. Nape Community

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Wrongfully gazetted.

    7. Motse Community

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act. It should be noted this only relates to certain farms or properties as the land claim is lodged on more than two properties.

    There is a court judgement and no community known as Motse. Individual claims were merged and referred to as Motse farms which did not appear on the claim form and were gazetted by mistake.

    8. Motlhabatse Community

    Non–compliance and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Farms which did not appear on the claim form were gazetted and the land owners challenged that.

    9. Morogolo Community

    Gazette notice needed to be amended.

    The claim was de-gazetted as a result of de-merging Risinga community and Mazimanombe community now known as Risinga.

    10. Mawela

    Community

    This claim is valid however, claimants opted for alternative redress.

    Claimants opted for alternative land, farms were de –

    gazetted to indicate that they are no longer affected by the claim.

    11. Hutton Family

    Claim valid as urban land claim.

    Not de-gazetted (its inclusion was an error).

    Western Cape

    1. Erf 1486 Good

    Wood

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The said land claim is covered under urban claims and was de-gazetted as it did not meet the criteria as outlined in section 2 of the Act.

    KwaZulu- Natal

    1. Skhonyane

    Community

    Non–compliance and land owners made representations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Inadequate and insufficient information was presented by claimants to the Commission and land owners disputed the land claim; and submitted their presentation and information to prove non- compliance of the said claim.

    Mpumalanga

    1. Sheba Community

    Non–compliance and land owners made representations which proved non – compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    Inadequate and insufficient information was presented to commission by claimants and land owners disputed the land claim and submitted their presentation and information to prove non compliance of the said claim.

    2. Lomshiyo

    Community

    Non–compliance with section 2 of the Act and land owners made presentations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The case was found to be invalid by the court and the instruction was to do further research.

    3. Daisy Kopje

    Non–compliance, land owners made presentations which proved non– compliance with section 2 of the Act.

    The case was found to be invalid by the Supreme Court of Appeal. It was clear on the land claim form that claimants lodged a claim on only certain portions of the farm. However, the RLCC: Mpumalanga gazetted the whole farm.

    (3) No. All Regional Land Claims Commission (RLCC) Offices are in the process of conducting research on land claims. Once this process is completed, a decision would be taken on the validity of land claims and whether to de-gazette.

    (4) Yes.

    (a) & (b) Fall away.

    (5) Yes. Rules 3 and 5 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act No 22 of 1994) requires all RLCC Offices to investigate a claim to determine entitlement to restitution of a right in land and this process includes consultation with communities.

    QUESTION 1554

    INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER [NO 20-2009]

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 October 2009

    1554. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform:

    (1) Whether the Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights, in negotiating prices, inform farmers of the value of the land as determined by the valuators; if not, why not;

    (2) whether any applications in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000, were received by the Commission in order to access information with regard to the claim, value and other information relevant to the acquisition of farms; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, how many applications were received;

    (3) whether any of these applications were opposed and/or rejected by the Commission; if so, (a) why and (b) what were the total legal costs involved? NW1960E

    THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM

    (1) No. The valuation report is an expert report that is commissioned to assist the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights in the negotiation process. However, land owners are free to conduct their own valuations.

    (2) Yes. 24 applications were received.

    (3) No.

    (a) & (b) Fall away.

    QUESTION NO 1559

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009

    (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

    1559. Mrs D van der Walt (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

    (1) Whether her department has approved the pumping of water from the old Union Tin Mine in Mookgopong, Limpopo; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (2) Whether the quality of water was tested prior to the construction of the pipeline; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) Whether (a) an environmental impact assessment and (b) a feasibility study was done in this regard; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) What is the (a) financial cost of the project and (b) Mookgopong municipality's Blue Drop Certificate status? NW1965E

    REPLY:

    (1) No, the pumping of water (which should be a transfer of water entitlement) from the Old Tin Mine is not approved by My Department. The Mookgopong Municipality has entered into a contract with Duikel Beleggings Pty Limited (current water entitlement holder) and no application has been submitted to My Department by the Municipality. However, the project for pipeline installation and the upgrading of the purification plant has been approved by My Department for Municipal Infrastructure Grant recommendation purposes.

    (2) Yes, the quality of water was tested in July and December 2007 and June 2009 and revealed good quality on all parameters with the exception of high iron and manganese as well as slightly elevated arsenic (refer to the table 1 below). However, with treatment (to remove iron and manganese), the water would be suitable for human consumption.

    Table 1: Water quality results

    Parameters (mg/l)

    Sample

    Recommended Water Quality Class (Class 1)

    SANS 241-2006

    July 2007

    December 2007

    Iron (Fe)

    10

    11

    0.5-1.0

    0.2

    Arsenic( As)

    0.048

    0.03

    0.01-0.05

    0.010

    Manganese (Mn)

    1.98

    1.77

    0.1-0.4

    0.100

    (3)(a) An Environmental Impact Assessment was done and the Record of Decision has been issued the Limpopo Department of Economic Development and Tourism.

    (3)(b) The Feasibility study was also conducted.

    (4)(a) The cost of the upgrading of the pipeline from the Old Union Tin Mine is R5, 1 million. The amount for the pre-purification plant to extract the chemical content will only be determined during the detailed design stage by the engineers.

    (4)(b) Mookgopong Municipality's Blue Drop assessment was not done due to the fact that the Municipality did not submit required documents such as water safety plan, process control, monitoring programme, drinking water quality results, drinking failures response management, publication of drinking water quality performance, drinking water asset management for the assessment. Further, the Municipality had no representation during the assessment week. The Department is currently in the process of ensuring that the Municipality adhered to the requirements.

    QUESTION NO: 1557

    QUESTION PAPER NO 10: 21 AUGUST 2009

    DATE SUBMITTED:

    MR AT FRITZ (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

    (1) Whether there are any correctional centres that accommodate fewer than 100 inmates; if so, (a) what is the (i) name and (ii)location of each of these centres, (b) what is the ration between inmates and Correctional Services officials in each case and (c) what are the costs incurred to keep each centre operational.

    (2) Whether it is financially viable to operate these centres; if not, what is the position in this regard; it so, what are the relevant details.

    (3) Whether any plans are in place for the future of each of these correctional centres; if not, why not; if so, what plans.NW1963E

    REPLY

    (1) (a+b) There are 48 correctional centers that accommodate fewer than 100 inmates and the list is attached as Annexure A. Annexure A will provide the name of the town where the facility is located, the province, capacity and actual accommodation, sentenced and unsentenced inmate population as well as the ratio of inmates per official of the department.

    (c) Attached is Annexure 'B' providing the cost per each centre for 2008/9 and 2009/10 (end of Oct), respectively.

    (2) The department is currently looking at measures to standardize the optimal facility required to manage a correctional centre. This work will require expertise capacity that will be sourced from ongoing collaboration between DCS, National Department of Public Works and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).

    (3) The outcome for this standardization will provide options about the future of these facilities as their existence are not only relevant for DCS but the entire Criminal Justice System. The options will consider all relevant facts from the status of some as national monuments, upgrading, renovation and closure possibilities. There are already instances where some of these facilities are under upgrading, for example the centre at Calvinia will be upgraded from the current capacity of 41 to 500 inmates. At the Parole Board Summit held in September 2009, the Minister issued a directive whereby all centres with less than 100 inmates must be audited as part of a feasibility study in order to enable the Department to determine whether it is viable to continue operating such small centers.


    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION NO 1546

    (Internal Question Paper No 29 - 2009)

    Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional

    Affairs:

    1. What is the (a) name of each of the 17 municipalities that have not implemented the Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act, Act 6 of 2004, and (b) reason for the non-implementation;

    2. whether he will provide any assistance to ensure that these municipalities comply; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    3. whether there will be any financial implications in this regard; if so, from which Budget will this be funded?

    Answer

    1. According to the Department's records, there are 13 municipalities that have not complied with the implementation of the Local Government: Municipal Property Rates Act, Act 6 of 2004. This figure represents statistics provided to the Department by the provincial departments responsible for local government as at 30 July 2009.

    Click here: A List of Municipalities that did not implement the Municipal Property Rates Act on 1 July 2009

    QUESTION NO 1542

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 12 OCTOBER 2009: AS MEMO 0390 -2009

    "1542. Mrs SV Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Science and Technology:

    (1) Whether her department developed and adopted a policy providing guidelines for the appointment of persons with a criminal record; if so (a) when was the policy (i) developed and (ii) adopted and where can a copy of the policy be obtained; if not,

    (2) Whether her department has any plans in place to develop and adopt such a policy; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) Whether her department does any pre-employment screening of potential employees for criminal records; if not, why not; if so what are the relevant details

    (4) Whether any employees with criminal records are currently employed by her department; if so (a) how many and (b) what is their (i) job level and (ii) occupational category?

    NW194E

    REPLY:

    (1) The Department of Science and Technology does not have such a policy in place.

    (2) The DST will review its Recruitment and Selection policy which will incorporate the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and Public Service Commission (PSC) guidelines for vetting of recommended employees for appointment.

    (3) Yes, pre-employment screening is done through MIE, previously known as KROLL, a service provider which is recognised by NIA and the PSC.

    The Department will use the following factors to manage the risks that may be posed by employees already appointed:

    · Nature of transgression/criminal acts committed.

    · The risk posed by the transgression in relation to the requirements and nature of the job to be performed.

    · Age of the person at the time of the transgression.

    · Frequency of similar/correlating transgressions.

    · Time that has elapsed since the job applicant was convicted.

    · Educational qualifications of the job applicant.

    · Employment history and previous performance assessment of the job applicant.

    · Misrepresentation of criminal status or withholding of information.

    4. Yes.

    (a) 12 employees with a criminal record are employed.

    (b) (i) Their job levels are 13, 12, 10, 8, 7, 6 and 5.

    (ii) Senior management, highly skilled supervision, highly skilled production and skilled.

    QUESTION 1536

    INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER [No 20-2009]

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 October 2009

    1536. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform:

    (1) Whether his department developed and adopted a policy providing guidelines for the appointment of persons with a criminal record; if so, (a) when was the policy (i) developed and (ii) adopted and (b) where can a copy of the policy be obtained; if not,

    (2) whether his department has any plans in place to develop and adopt such a policy; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether his department does any pre-employment screening of potential employees for criminal records; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether any employees with criminal records are currently employed by his department; if so, (a) how many and (b) what is their (i) job level and (ii) occupational category? NW1941E

    THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM:

    (1) No. The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) adheres to the current policy framework provided by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA).

    (a)(i)-(ii) & (b) Fall away.

    (2) No. The DRDLR will continue adhering to the current policy framework provided by the DPSA.

    (3) Yes. With effect from 1 January 2008 all senior management service posts are subjected to pre-employment screening by the National Intelligence Agency (NIA).

    (4) Yes.

    (a) Three.

    (b)(i) Levels 4, 10 and 16.

    (ii) Messenger, security and senior management service respectively.

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION 1535

    INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER [No 20-2009]

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 October 2009

    1535. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform:

    (1) Whether his department organised or hosted (a) an imbizo, (b) a seminar, (c) conference and (d) any other function during the period 1 January 2006 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if so, (i) on what date, (ii) what was the total amount spent on each, (iii) what is the breakdown of the cost in each case and (iv) how many guests attended in each case;

    (2) whether there were any related costs for the travel and accommodation of guests for each of the events; if so, in each case, (a) what were the costs and (b) what was the breakdown of these costs;

    (3) whether any member of the Cabinet was present at any of these events; if so, (a) who, (b) in what capacity and (c) why? NW1940E

    THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM:

    (1)(a) and (b) No.

    (c) and (d)(i)-(iv) Yes. Conferences and functions were held for purposes such as strategic planning and land hand-overs.

    The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform has 93 travel accounts in total, operated by various offices, each of which held and financed its own conferences and functions. In an exhaustive effort to respond to the questions raised, the only information which is currently available is the expenditure for "venues and facilities", this being the item under which conferences and functions were paid for. This item covers all the required services and products in relation to conferences and functions. Therefore, the Department reliably presents its expenses for conferences and functions held during the specified periods in the table hereunder.

    (2)(a)-(b) and (3)(a)-(c) Yes. However, as indicated above, it is difficult to get all records dating back to 2006. Hence, the challenge to break down these figures in the format requested.

    DATE

    EXPENDITURE UNDER ITEM VENUES AND FACILITIES

    01 APRIL 2006 – 31 MARCH 2007

    R15,765,663.12

    01 APRIL 2007 – 31 MARCH 2008

    R26,428,245.72

    01 APRIL 2008 – 31 MARCH 2009

    R28,065,663.10

    01 APRIL 2009 – 30 OCTOBER 2009

    R5,066,178.57

    TOTAL

    R75,325,750.51

    QUESTION NO 1527

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009

    (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

    1527. Mr M J Ellis (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

    (1) What are the risks of climate change to the water sector identified by her department;

    (2) whether her department is taking any measures to promote adaptation to climate change in the water sector; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether a study has been conducted to determine the costs the water sector will incur in adapting to climate change; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether any measures are being examined to finance adaptation to climate change in the water sector; if not, why not; if so, what measures? NW1932E

    REPLY:

    (1) In terms of South Africa's Water Resources, scenarios suggest that climate change will affect the Water Sector in two ways – water availability and water quality.

    (2) Yes. To date, a number of measures and initiatives have been undertaken by My Department, notably the following:

    · The development of a framework on Water for Growth and Development which comprise of a number of strategic measures, such as promoting water conservation and water demand management, diversifying the water mix, strengthening institutional capacity, improve water quality, nurturing attitudinal and behavioral changes towards the value of water and ensuring that water is placed at the centre of all planning decisions.

    · Reconciliation strategies for water management areas which explore the supply and demand in each water management area;

    · Monitoring of water resources at a national scale.

    (3) No. Instead My Department is continuously developing Water Augmentation Schemes which are at a separate cost, depending on the specific water requirements and local circumstances. Such Water Augmentation Schemes are linked to reconciliation strategies which are conducted on a continuous basis – in order to address quantified water needs.

    (4) No. Only when water augmentation schemes and water conservation programmes have been planned, will the Department allocate funding. In some cases Water Management Institutions (WMI) and Metros will fund such initiatives.

    QUESTION 1544

    DATE OF PUBLICATION OF INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER : 09/10/09 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER 20-2009

    DR JC Kloppers-Lourens (DA) to ask the Minister of Basic Education :†

    Whether the department has any plans to introduce political literacy as part of its broad curriculum; if not why; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1949E

    Reply:

    No. The National Curriculum Statement is a high knowledge curriculum that is informed by the principles of human rights, inclusivity, environmental and social justice. As an example, Life Orientation, a compulsory subject for all learners, deals with Citizenship in detail. It covers the following areas:

  • Bill of Rights: Content, rights and responsibilities of South African citizens, role of government. Incidences of human rights violations and impact on individual and society.
  • Diversity: Various contexts of citizenship; diversity in day-to-day relationships and society at large.
  • Various political parties, interest groups, lobbying groups, etc. and their principles, processes and procedures in addressing the interests of civil society.
  • Participation in and/or involvement in constitutions, elections, representation of constituencies, mandates, lobbying, advocacy, running of meetings.
  • Participation in local community structures, such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs), community-based organisations (CBOs), faith-based organisations (FBOs), Community Police Forums, Representative Councils of Learners (RCLs), community clubs, etc.
  • QUESTION 1533

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: MONDAY 09 OCTOBER 2009 [IQP No 20 -2009]

    FIRST SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1533 for Written Reply, National Assembly: Dr. L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether her department developed and adopted a policy providing guidelines for the appointment of persons with criminal record: if so, (a) when was the policy (i) developed and (ii) adopted and (b) where can a copy of the policy be obtained; if not,

    (2) whether her department has any plans in place to develop and adopt such a policy; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    3) whether her department does any pre-employment screening of potential employees for criminal records; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether any employees with criminal records are currently employed by her department; if so, (a) how many and (b) what is their (i) job level and (ii) occupational category? NW1938E

    REPLY:

    (1) Yes, the Department of Agricuture has a draft policy developed by the Director: Security Services. This policy must still be subject to consultation with the social partners. In the interim the Department is applying the guidelines of the Personnel Suitability Checks (PSC) as provided by the DPSA in a circular on the Implementation of the National Vetting Strategy in the Public Servce dated 23 November 2007.

    (2) Yes, as indicated in (1) above.

    (3) Yes.

    (4) Yes.

    (a) 14 employees

    (b) (i) The job level ranges from salary level 1 until salary level 11.

    (II) The occupational categories are:

    Farm Aid (salary level 1);

    Housekeeping Executive (salary level2);

    Tradesman Aid (salary level 2);

    Senior Accounting Clerk (salary level 5);

    Administration Clerk (salary level 6);

    Student Bursary Counsellor (salary level 7);

    Key Control Planning Officer (salary level 7);

    Meat Inspector (salary level 8);

    Control Security Officer (salary level 8);

    Senior Agricultural Scientist (salary level 9);

    Chief Agricultural Food and Quarantine Technician (salary level 9);

    Senior Agricultural Economist (salary level 10);

    ICT Project Manager (salary level 11); and

    Assistant Director (salary level 11).

    It must be mentioned that 10 of the 14 persons are existing employees whose criminal details were discovered after they had applied for higher positions. The nature of the criminal records are ten years and older and are not First Schedule offences in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act No. 51 of 1977, as amended.

    NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION 1556

    INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER [No 20-2009]

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: 9 October 2009

    1556. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform:

    (1) Whether all (a)(i) offices and (ii) sites of his department and (b) entities reporting to him adhere to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Act 85 of 1993; if not, (aa) why not, (bb) which facilities fail to adhere to the Act, (cc) where are they situated, (dd) what (aaa) aspects of the Act does each such facility not comply with and (bbb) action has been taken in each case; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (2) (a) how often should each facility be inspected and (b) when last was each facility inspected? NW1962E

    THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM:

    (1)(a)(i) Yes, although in some instances there has only been partial compliance with the provisions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act No 85 of 1993). There are unfortunately also a few instances where there has been no compliance at all and these matters are being addressed with the relevant land owners. Please refer to Annexure A for details of offices which have partially complied with Act No 85 of 1993.

    (ii) The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) does not have such structures under its administration.

    (b) No. The Ingonyama Trust Board's administrative component is accommodated in the same offices as the Provincial Rural Development and Land Reform Office: KwaZulu-Natal, which does not adhere to Act No 85 of 1993.

    (aa)-(dd)(aaa) & (bbb) Please refer to Annexure B for details of offices that do not

    adhere to the provisions of Act No 85 of 1993.

    (2)(a) Once a month.

    (b) Please refer to Annexures A and B.


    ANNEXURE A TO PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION 1556 OF 2009: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    DETAILS OF ADHERENCE TO ACT NO 85 OF 1993

    List of Offices/entities and their location

    Details of Compliance

    Details of Non-Compliance with the Act

    Action taken in each case

    Details of last inspection

    GAUTENG

    Pretoria

    National Office

    184 Jacob Maré Street

    Owner: State owned

    - Approved Contingency Plan and OHS Policy in place.

    - An appointed and trained OHS Committee in place.

    -Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    – Fire fighting equipment is available but not serviced.

    - Fire drills have not been conducted as yet.

    - In the process of preparing for a fire drill (minutes of meetings available).

    - A request has been made for servicing of the fire extinguishers.

    August 2009

    Pretoria

    Office of the Surveyor-General

    Merino/Rentmeester Building

    Owner: Renier Henning

    - Approved OHS Policy in place.

    - An appointed OHS Committee in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency Plan.

    October 2008

    Pretoria

    Regional Land Claims Commission: Gauteng

    9 Bailey Street

    Owner: State owned

    Arcadia Centre

    Growth Property

    Owner: Heyley Serge

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - An appointed OHS Committee in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency Plan.

    October 2008

    Pretoria

    Provincial Land Reform Office: Gauteng

    Bernetta Building

    Owner: Costa Zervas

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - An appointed OHS Committee in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - OHS structures (first aiders, evacuation officers, and health and safety representatives and fire fighters) are trained.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    October 2008

    Johannesburg Deeds Office

    Marble Towers

    Joburg Skyscraper (Pty) Ltd

    Owner: Maggie Rose

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - An appointed OHS Committee in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - Contingency plan not approved.

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - OHS structures (first aiders, evacuation officers, and health and safety representatives and fire fighters) are trained.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    October 2008


    WESTERN CAPE

    Regional Land Claims Commission, George

    Schamlock Place

    ANB Multi Prop (Pty) Ltd

    Owner: Vera Blon

    - OHS structures are appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress. (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Fire extinguishers are not serviced.

    - Evacuation routes are not clear.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    June 2008

    Regional Land Claims Commission, Cape Town

    Nedbank Centre

    Pyramid Properties

    Owner: Joanne Bofwell

    - OHS Structures are appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress. (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Poor filing systems.

    - OHS Committee not trained.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    May 2008

    Surveys and Mapping Office, Cape Town

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - An approved OHS policy is in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - OHS Committee members not trained.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    June 2008

    Surveyor General & Deeds Registration Offices, Cape Town

    Cape Town

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - An approved OHS policy is in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - OHS Committee members not trained.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    - OHS Committee not functioning according to legal requirements.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    June 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Beaufort West

    SARS Building

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    July 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Bredasdorp

    Owner: J Britz

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    July 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Clan William

    Nip & Ilse be loggings

    Owner: Flip Lochner

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9)

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    June 2008

    Shared Service Center, Mowbray

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    June 2008

    MPUMALANGA

    District Land Reform Office, Ermelo

    23 Taute Street

    Owner: A M Diedericks

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Witbank

    Hi Tech Building

    Middelburg Properties

    Owner: Dion Strydom

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Evacuation procedures are not in place.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    Provincial Land Reform Office, Nelspruit

    Home Affairs Building

    Owner: M C Elliot

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - OHS Committee members not trained.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipments not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping environmental regulation for workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    Deeds Registrar Office, Nelspruit

    25 Bell Street

    Owner: Joe Germemas

    -OHS structures appointed.

    -Approved OHS policy

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - OHS Committee not trained.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    Surveyor General Office, Nelspruit

    Medkor Building

    Owner: Markan Rudge

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    .

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9)

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6)

    - Ventilation mechanism poor.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    LIMPOPO

    Regional Land Claims Commission: Limpopo

    Kagiso House

    Owner: G Moller

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9)

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    Provincial Land Reform Office: Limpopo

    Andrea Building

    Owner: Anette Venter

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - No Fire fighting equipment.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6)

    - Untidy offices.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    Surveyor General Office, Polokwane

    101 Dorp Street

    Owner: N Williams

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - Reporting, recording and investigation of incidents are adhered to.

    `

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Untidy offices.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    KWAZULU NATAL

    District Land Reform Office , Ladysmith

    73 Murchson Street

    Owner: M S Hammingway

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - OHS structure not trained.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Non adherence to national building regulations and South African Bureau of Standards (SABS).

    - No disability access.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Newcastle

    46 Voortrekker Street

    Owner: Dr Singh

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - No fire fighting equipment.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Vryheid

    159 -160 High Street

    Bosveld Properties

    Owner: E Roos

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - No fire fighting equipment.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    Shared Service Center, Pietermaritzburg

    Long Market Street

    Owner: De Bois Markham

    - OHS structures appointed.

    -Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    -Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor sanitary conditions.

    - Ergonomically unsound furniture.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    Regional Land Claims Commission, Pietermaritzburg

    Commercial City

    Owner: Paul Maharaj

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    -Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor sanitary conditions.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    Regional Land Claims Commission, Durban

    Omni Centre

    Owner: Lufo dos Ramos

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor sanitation conditions.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2009

    FREE STATE

    Surveyor General Office, Bloemfontein

    Omni Centre

    Owner: Lufo dos Ramos

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor sanitation conditions.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    January 2009

    Deeds Registrar, Bloemfontein

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    January 2009

    District Land Reform Office, Welkom

    Owner: Tonie Hyes

    GNG Family Trust

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    January 2009

    NOTHERN CAPE

    Regional Land Claims Commission, Shared Service Center and Provincial Land Reform Office: Bloemfontein

    Owner: Tonie Hyes

    GNG Family Trust

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    NORTH WEST

    Regional Land Claims Commission, Mafikeng

    ABSA Building

    Pizzaz Investments

    Owner: Namir Wais Berg

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Brits

    Makelaars Huis

    Owner: Dennis Arrow

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6)

    - Poor filling systems.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Klerksdorp

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    -General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Evacuation routes blocked.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Building non-compliant with the national building regulations (building trembles because it is situated next to a mine).

    - Poor ventilation mechanisms.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    Provincial Land Reform Office, Mafikeng

    Shama Investments Building

    Owner: Mahomed Cassim

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    Deeds Registrar Office, Vryburg

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Building non compliant with the national building regulations.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9)

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    November 2008

    EASTERN CAPE

    Regional Land Claims Office, East London

    Caxton House

    G H I Properties

    Owner: Sonja Denecker

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Building non compliant with the national building regulations.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    Provincial Land Reform Office, East London

    Ocean Terrace

    Owner: Sheryl Fennal

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Building non compliant with the national building regulations.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    District Land Reform Office, Port Elizabeth

    Greenacres Centre

    Owner: Machelle Stoma

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Poor filing systems.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    District Land Reform Office, East London

    Ocean Terrace

    Owner: Sherryl Fennell

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Poor filling systems.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    District Land Reform Office, Umthata

    40 Blackway Road

    Owner: Murray McGrath

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Blocked evacuation routes.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Poor filling systems.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    Deeds Registrar, King Williams Town

    Owner: State owned

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for workplaces, section 6).

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    February 2009

    Shared Service Center, East London

    Ocean Terrace

    Owner: Sherryl Ternal

    - OHS structures appointed.

    - Approved OHS policy in place.

    - General Administration Regulation and General Safety Regulation not fully implemented.

    - Fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6)

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    March 2009

    ANNEXURE B TO PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION 1556 OF 2009: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

    DETAILS OF NON-ADHERENCE TO ACT NO 85 OF 1993

    (1)

    (2)

    (a)(i) and (b)

    List of Offices

    (aa) why not?

    (bb) which facilities fail to adhere to the Act?

    (cc) where are they situated?

    (dd)(aaa) what aspects of the Act does each such facility not comply with?

    (bbb) what action has been taken in each case?

    (b) when last was each facility inspected?

    MPUMALANGA

    District Land Reform Office, Piet Rietief

    30 Koetze Street

    Owner:

    Henry Britz

    - No OHS structure in place.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    Please refer to (a)(i)and (b).

    Piet Retief

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment outdated.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    August 2008

    FREE STATE

    District Land Reform Office, Bethlehem

    Nedbank Building

    Owner:

    EL Dionver

    - No OHS structure in place.

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    Please refer to (a)(i)and (b).

    Bethlehem

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment outdated.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    January 2009

    KWAZULU-NATAL

    District Land Reform Office, Port Shepstone

    41 Bissit Street

    Owner: Mohamed Moosa

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    Please refer to (a)(i)and (b).

    Port Shepstone

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment outdated.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    District Land Reform Office, Richards Bay

    Lakeview Terrace

    Owner:

    N Moodly

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    Please refer to (a)(i)and (b).

    Richards Bay

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting equipment outdated.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    Provincial Land Reform Office includingtheIngonyama Trust Board Administrative Component

    Owner: Daywood Mohamed

    - Lack of capacity to monitor OHS activities.

    Please refer to (a)(i)and (b).

    Pietermaritzburg

    - General Administration Regulation, General Safety Regulation, fire precautionary measures and means of egress (Environmental Regulation for Workplaces, section 9).

    - Fire fighting not serviced.

    - Poor housekeeping (Environmental Regulations for Workplaces, section 6).

    - Poor ventilation mechanism.

    - Poor sanitation conditions.

    - Offices are ergonomically unsound.

    - A detailed OHS risk assessment was conducted, and the Department is in the process of implementing the recommendations of the Report.

    - In the process of customizing the OHS Contingency plan.

    December 2008

    QUESTION NO 1548

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009

    (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

    1548. Ms A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

    (1) Whether, with reference to the Strategic Framework for Sustainable Growth and Development (details furnished), her department has developed any water management strategies; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will such strategies be developed; if so, (i) what are the relevant details and (ii) when were or will strategies be implemented? NW1954E

    REPLY:

    (1) Yes. My department has already developed reconciliation strategies for large Water Systems and Metropolitan Areas, to ensure that enough water will be made available when required. However, these reconciliation strategies have to be rolled out to other urban and rural areas around the country. The internal strategic perspectives (forerunners of catchment management strategies) that have been developed for all water management areas also make provision for the operationalisation of the strategic intervention options as proposed in the Water for Growth and Development Framework (WfGD). The revision of the National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS) is designed within the context of the Water for Growth and Development framework.

    QUESTION NO 1550

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009

    (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

    1550. Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

    (1) With reference to her reply to question 323 on 18 September 2009, which wastewater treatment works are operating without departmental authorisation;

    (2) what measures are in place to ensure that discharges have no negative impact on the receiving environment;

    (3) what action is taken when works continue to operate in spite of (a) not complying with infrastructural requirements and (b) not having adequate capacity to process the wastewater volume and load;

    (4) what action is taken in cases where the municipality has demonstrated an incapacity to compile the required application and authorization documents? NW1956E

    REPLY:

    (1) The Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) operating without authorizations are attached as Annexure 1.

    (2) My Department has set monitoring points upstream and downstream from all discharge sites and monitors them on a monthly basis. All Water Users are required to submit the monitoring results monthly however; My Department conducts regular monitoring to ensure protection of Water Resources. All Waste Water Treatment Works have to comply with the effluent discharge standards as set in Government Notice (GN) 991 of 18 May 1984.

    (3)(a) The owners of Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) are advised about the infrastructural requirements, such as layout and design and optimal operation and maintenance of the treatment works.

    (3)(b) My Department advises owners of the WWTW to upgrade the system or to construct another bigger facility that will be able to handle more volume, load and quantity.

    (4) My Department does assist all municipalities which do not have capacity to compile Water Use applications and authorisation documents.

    QUESTION NO 1549

    DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 09 OCTOBER 2009

    (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 20)

    1549. Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

    (1) Whether the Artificial Recharge Strategy (details furnished) has been finalised; if not, why not; if so, (a) when will it be implemented, (b) what are the further relevant details and (c) when will it be tabled;

    (2) whether managed artificial recharge of aquifers are actively being pursued as a water augmentation mechanism; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether any legislative or other barriers exist which might impede the implementation of managed artificial recharge; if so, (a) what are the relevant details and (b) what action is being taken to address the barriers? NW1955E

    ---00O00---

    REPLY:

    (1)(a) Yes, the Artificial Recharge Strategy was finalised and published in June 2007. Its implementation was initiated in November 2007.

    (1)(b) The Strategy addresses seven (7) themes, namely: Knowledge, Legislation and Regulation, Planning, Implementation, Management, Research and Strategy Implementation. It is available in the Departmental and South Africa's Artificial Recharge Information Centre websites.

    (1)(c) Refer to (1)(a)

    (2) Yes, artificial recharge of aquifers is pursued as a water augmentation mechanism. Furthermore, it is encouraged as another option in water resource planning within reconciliation strategies and other planning initiatives.

    (3)(a) No, legislative measures are meant to complement the implementation of the strategy and this is enhanced by good cooperative governance. However, insufficient information in some areas (e.g. hydraulic properties of the aquifer) might impede the implementation and management thereof.

    (3)(b) Actions to address impediments include the introduction of awareness on the principles of artificial recharge at university level and through the reconciliation studies, ground water potential maps and regular updates of the national groundwater database.