Questions & Replies: Water and Environmental Affairs

To enable long term sustainable use and development for the applicant whilst conserving and protecting the downstream environment, (natural - river ecosystem and estuary and human) the conclusion of the above reasons is key to issuing of the licence.

The water use licence will only be issued upon the finalisation of the information mentioned in (a)(i) above. As part of the Drought Intervention in the Southern Cape amidst the severe climate variation (worst drought occurrence of 1:130 years) between January 2009 and January 2011, the Department's approved R35.5 million for the construction of the Malgas Pump Station through the Department's Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant funding over the fiscal years 2009/2010, 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 to augment the George Local Municipality bulk infrastructure funds to ensure long term bulk water supply security.

The licence will secure a long term average water abstraction of 2.4 million cubic metres per year, whilst the maximum probable abstraction would be limited to
4.2 million cubic metres per annum.

The funding of the Malgas Pump Station and Pipeline networks formed part of a drought intervention to secure water for the George Local Municipality. A further Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant allocation of R78 million over fiscal years 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 as well as Drought Relief Grants of R90 million rand was allocated to the George Local Municipality for the construction of an effluent reuse plant that could supply up to 30% of the towns average daily demand.

-2-

(b)(i) No, the Department has not issued a water use licence for raising the spillway at the Garden Route Dam in George due to the following reasons:

The issuing of the water use licence is dependent on issuance of positive Records of Decision from the Department of Environmental Affairs.

The Department of Water Affairs still has to finalise the Comprehensive Reserve of the Resource Directed Measures of the Outeniqua Coastal River Systems.

(b)(ii) The water use licence will only be issued upon the finalisation of the information mentioned in (a)(i) above.

(b)(iii) As part of the Department's Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant funding, the Department allocated an amount of R14 million over fiscal years 2010/2011 (R5.5m) and 2011/2012 (R8.5m) for the construction of raised Garden Route Dam Spillway.

The funds for 2010/2011 were used to prepare the earthworks, foundations of the spillway and reconstruct the discharge monitoring control systems. The funding allocated for year 2011/2012 is earmarked for physical construction of the raised spillway.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 November 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether Transnet has been found to have been in transgression of any environmental laws during its expansion project at Durban harbour since 1 January 2008; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so,

(2) whether her department intends taking any steps against Transnet to rectify the situation; if not, why not; if so, what (a) steps and (b) are the further relevant details;

(3) whether she has put any measures in place to ensure that Transnet does not transgress the relevant environmental laws again; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY:

1. Transnet transgressed the National Environmental Management Act (107 of 1998) ("NEMA") in that it failed to obtain an environmental authorization as required by section 24 read with section 24F prior to commencing with eight listed activities associated with the expansion project. Transnet reported these transgressions to the Department and submitted a section 24G NEMA application in respect of these listed activities.

2. The Department has processed the section 24G application submitted by Transnet. An administrative fine of R560 000 was issued to Transnet and the fine was paid on 05 October 2011. The Department issued Transnet with an environmental authorization on 25 October 2011. This authorization allows Transnet to continue with the development subject to specific conditions, inter alia, requiring that Transnet comply with an approved environmental management plan (EMP) and setting stringent standards for the fuel storage tanks and associated infrastructure.

3. The Department will closely monitor compliance with the authorization issued following the s24G application. In addition, a number of other facilities operated by Transnet (in Amanzimtoti, Pietermaritzburg and Ladysmith) have been identified for focused compliance monitoring activities and should contraventions be detected, administrative action will be taken to rectify such non-compliances.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 November 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether she has found that the Government's planned installment of new nuclear energy generating capacity will assist in attaining a low carbon emission trajectory in the period beyond 2025; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) how was this conclusion reached and (b) what are the relevant details;

(2) what (a) is the status of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) applications for each of the proposed locations of new nuclear power stations and (b) role does (i) she and (ii) her department perform on the National Nuclear Energy Executive Coordinating Committee;

(3) whether her department has to develop any new capacity or skills to deal with the proposed new nuclear build; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY

1) Nuclear energy is recognised in the department's climate change Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios (LTMS) as one of the sources of electricity with the potential to significantly reduce South Africa's current greenhouse gas emissions. As such, 27% nuclear energy is modelled as a component of the LTMS' "Start Now" action package and this is scaled up to 50% in the LTMS' "Scale Up" action package to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. With this it is acknowledged that nuclear energy is capable of producing large amounts of energy with near-zero carbon emissions, and therefore, the appropriate mix of technologies, including nuclear, have the potential to ensure that South Africa meets its climate change mitigation undertakings.

2)(a) An application for the Nuclear 1 power station has been received. This application identifies three possible siting alternatives for the power station, namely: Thyspunt (Eastern Cape between Oyster Bay and St. Francis Bay), Bantamsklip (Western Cape) and Duinefontein (Western Cape – adjacent to the Koeberg site which is the site of the only existing nuclear power station in the country).

The Department has received the revised draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which is currently under review. After the Department's comments have been incorporated, the Final EIR will be submitted to the Department as well as to Interested and Affected Parties for further consideration.

2)(b) As the environmental impact assessment (EIA) responsible authority, the appropriate role, if any, of the Minister or the department in the National Nuclear Energy Executive Coordinating Committee is still being considered.

(3) Although the department believes there is no need for new full-time appointments within the Department to specifically deal with the nuclear build, the Department has appointed an independent external review panel to assist with the review. The review panel comprises a team of experts including: Environmental Impact Assessment Specialist, Nuclear Specialist (International: UK), Botanist, Legal expert and a Social Specialist. The Department works very closely with the review panel, and the latest activities which include a workshop between the relevant role players within the Department and the review panel was held in June 2011.

QUESTION NO. 3643

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 40)

3643. Mr T D Lee (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 3215 on 8 November 2011, she has been informed that since 27 October 2011 there have been continuous incidences of overflowing sewage from sewerage infrastructure within the Baakens River Catchment; if so, what steps has her department taken to rectify the situation; if not,

(2) whether she will investigate the matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether any (a) pre-notices and/or (b) notices of intention to issue a directive or directives have been issued against the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality since 27 October 2011 for pollution events in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW4424E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) No, the Department was not informed about continuous incidences of overflowing sewage from sewerage infrastructure within the Baakens River Catchment. However, on receipt of this question, on 18 November, the Department conducted an investigation of the alleged pollution, and the findings revealed that there were no signs of pollution within the Baakens River Catchment. Such findings were also confirmed by the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality.

(2) Yes, the Department conducted an investigation on 18 November 2011 into the alleged overflowing sewage, and the findings revealed that there were no signs of pollution within the Baakens River Catchment.

(3)(a) No pre-notice was issued for pollution of the Baakens River Catchment as the investigation did not reveal the alleged sewage spillages into the river and/or nature reserve.

(3)(b) No notice was issued for pollution of the Baakens River Catchment as the investigation did not reveal the alleged sewage spillage into the river and/or nature reserve.

QUESTION NO. 3642
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 40)

3642. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to her reply to question 2977 on 24 October 2011, (a) what are the details of the international reports on fracking that her department has been following and (b) who in her department is responsible for following the said reports;

(2) why has the (a) diminution of aquifers and (b) contamination of water been identified as major concerns to her and her department;

(3) what (a) international networks has her department been using to distinguish between sound technical and sensationalist reports and (b) are the details of the fracking-related reports that her department considers to be technically sound;

(4)whether her department intends to develop a policy in relation to fracking; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW4423E

REPLY:

(1)(a) The Department has studied various reports as part of the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA) Working Group set up by the Department of Mineral Resources. These reports include the USA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports, the 90 Day report of the Subcommittee on Shale and Hydraulic Fracturing report to the Secretary of the Energy Advisory Board, and the Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports to mention but a few. Technical papers and reports from Canada, Europe and Australia, where hydraulic fracturing for shale gas development is taking place, have also been consulted.

1)(b) There are several experts in the Department with a lot of experience in water resources protection and management; however, the entry point is Mr Helgard Muller, acting Deputy Director-General: Policy and Regulation.

(2) The diminution of aquifers and contamination of water resources are the major concerns because they are the major observed/identified risks involved that affect the mandate of the Department.

(3) The United States Geological Survey (USGS), the EIA and the EPA are some of the international networks that the Department is using through the PASA Working Group because of the professional and unbiased track record of these entities.

(4) The Department has the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) as its tool but there is also a process currently being explored to check if it is enough to cover hydraulic fracturing and, if not, what needs to be done to ensure adequate control.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 November 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether her department is proactive in assisting local government with the knowledge and tools to face challenges resulting from climate change; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY

1. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) regards local government as one of the key strategic climate change stakeholders. This is also confirmed in the articulation of the role of local government in the Green and the White Paper Policy documents. It is important to note that climate risk, impacts and vulnerability are predominantly taking place at local level.

2. Since 2010, DEA in collaboration with GIZ [formerly known as the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ)], Department of Cooperative Governance and the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) have developed the climate Change Municipality Toolkit Project. Five district municipalities have been identified as pilot areas: (a) Thulamela in the Vhembe district, Limpopo Province, (b) Emfuleni in the Sedibeng district, Gauteng, (c) Baffulo City Metropolitan, Eastern Cape (d) Amatole district, Eastern Cape (e) Nxuba municipality, Eastern Cape. The overall objective of this project is to assist municipalities to integrate climate change issues into local development planning.

3. The key focus of the project is to assist municipalities to effectively respond to climate related challenges as well as providing them with tools and the required knowledge resources to enable them to meet their sustainable development objectives. This planning tool will assist municipalities to integrate climate change into their policies, strategies, plan etc and implement measures to curb and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

4. As part of the development of the terms of reference and scope for this project, the following were listed as key activities to be undertaken in the development of the toolkit:

· Identify sectors and livelihoods that are vulnerable to current and future climate variability & change, including extreme weather events. This includes the assessment of climate risks when planning projects and investments; for example, infrastructure planning, including projects such as roads, railways, dams, etc.

· Consider the short and long-term consequences of climate change

· Documentation of existing coping and adaptation strategies mechanisms

· Identify municipal needs, including identification of climate risks and how to respond to those risks

· Climate proofing development in municipalities

· Tool to include climate projections

· Alignment with the recently approved South African climate change response policy etc

5. Some of the knowledge and tools that DEA is providing or assisting local government in order for local government to effectively deal with climate change challenges are:

(a) The South African Risk and Vulnerability Atlas project focuses on local government vulnerability. This project is being championed by various Departments including the Departments of Environmental Affairs; Science and Technology (DST) and SALGA. DEA has been at the fore front of championing climate change adaptation issues and has been partnering with DST on the Risk and Vulnerability Atlas project. This project provides an opportunity to various stakeholders to exchange ideas and share information on the climate change adaptation issues. The project also assists both DEA , DST and local government to understand climate change impacts and adaptation options at local level.

(b) DEA is also working with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) through the National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC). DEA's role in this structure includes providing strategic support and guidance on the National Disaster Advisory Forum particularly on climate change adaptation issues including the Early Warning System. DEA also forms part of the National Disaster Management Task Team. Both the National Disaster Advisory Forum and the National Disaster Management Task Team meetings are held on a quarterly basis, and DEA is consistently represented at these meeting.

(c) DEA is also assisting local government to develop local government climate change adaptation plan. A framework was developed and provided to local government for inputs. Owing to the fact that risks and vulnerability impacts are taking place at local level, local government is expected to devise plans that would demonstrate how the sector is responding towards climate change challenges in the country. It is equally important to note that this framework emanates from the National Climate Change Response Policy Framework.

(d) DEA also continually conducts bilateral discussions with the local government stakeholders which include SALGA, South African Cities Network and COGTA on issues on issues related to climate change impacts, awareness raising, risk and vulnerability and the adaptive capacity and low level of resilience within the local government level.

(e) In addition to this, the knowledge base around climate change and its challenges is shared when the Department in collaboration with SALGA and the different provincial departments mandated with the concurrent function of environment jointly have capacity building workshops on environment and climate change, wherein municipalities are engaged and assisted in finding possible solutions around the challenges faced by them on a day to day basis.

(f) COP 17 gives the Department another platform to share best practices around dealing with the issues and challenges of climate change. Recently, the Department in collaboration with SALGA and SACN hosted the South African Mayors Conference on Climate Change, which took place from the 9th – 11th of October at Emperors Palace in Ekurhuleni in preparation for the upcoming 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to be held in Durban from the 28th November until the 09th December. The conference main objective was to gather all mayors from all South African municipalities in order to share one voice and adopt a declaration stating the local government's commitment towards climate change.

Lastly, DEA believes thatthe integration of adaptation into sectoral policies at all governmental levels is key to a long- term reduction in the vulnerability of ecosystems, economic factors, landscapes and communities to climate change impacts. Integrating climate change adaptation into all main policy actions and measures at levels of government would benefit from an enhanced sharing of information on current and planned adaptation activities. Local government is at the forefront of national response to the impacts of climate change. This is both in terms of ensuring sustainable and resilient infrastructure and development. Many of the interventions to curb climate change and adapt to its impacts, fall within the ambit of local government responsibilities. These include: community awareness and behavior change, new planning approaches to urban development, infrastructure development, and disaster management, etc.

QUESTION NO. 3606

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 40)

3606. Mrs C N Z Zikalala (IFP) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether any officials in her department (a) have been investigated, (b) are currently under investigation and (c) have been charged for alleged (i) corrupt or (ii) fraudulent activity; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether any disciplinary action has been taken against employees of her department for (a) fraud and/or (b) corruption; if so, (i) how many instances of disciplinary actions have (aa) been finalised and (bb) not been finalised and (ii) in each case, (aa) what sanctions have been meted out and (bb) how long has it taken to finalise such disciplinary actions;

(3) Whether she has found that her department has adequate investigative capacity inclusive of manpower and infrastructure in respect of disciplinary proceedings; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW4384E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) Yes, there are officials that have been investigated.

(1)(b) Yes, there are officials who are currently under investigation.

(1)(c)(i) No, there are no officials who have been charged for alleged corruption.

(1)(c)(ii) Yes, there are officials who have been charged for alleged fraudulent activities. During the period, April 2009 to November 2011, there were fifteen (15) cases of fraud reported relating mainly to fraudulent Subsistence & Travel claims, Social Grant and fraudulent qualifications; all the offenders were found guilty and dismissed, save for the Fraudulent Social Grant cases wherein the DPSA gave a directive that offenders be given a final written warning and suspension without pay not exceeding three (3) months.

(2)(a) Yes, disciplinary action has been taken against employees of the Department for fraud and corruption.

(2)(b)(i)(aa) To date fifteen (15) cases have been finalised.

(2)(b)(i)(bb) Falls away.

(2)(b)(ii)(aa) To date there has been a total of ten (10) dismissals, five (5) final written warnings coupled with suspensions without pay for a period not exceeding three (3) months.

(2)(b)(ii)(bb) At Labour Relations it takes an average of three months from the date of investigation to the completion of a disciplinary hearing, including sanction.

(3) Currently the Directorate: Employee Relations structure comprises of 4 investigators including a Director Employee Relations, who conduct all the investigations and assist line managers to initiate the disciplinary proceedings and enquires as is prescribed by Resolution 1 of 2003.

However, it is only some instances when expertise is sourced from sister Departments within the Public Service, which may lead to delays as case progression is determined by their availability.

The Department is currently conducting a functional analysis on the viability of continuing in this manner, which the Business Process Re-engineering Committee will be considering.

QUESTION NO. 3527

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 38)

3527. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) When is it envisaged that a permanent Director-General of the Department of Water will be appointed;

(2) whether the disciplinary hearings of the previous (a) chief financial officer, (b) chief information officer and (c) deputy Director-General: Corporate Affairs of the Department of Water have been concluded; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(3) (a) what other vacancies currently exist at senior management level in the Department of Water, (b) how long has the post been vacant and (c) when is it envisaged that the post will be filled? NW4230E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) The interview process for appointing a permanent Director-General has been completed pending the approval by Cabinet.

(2)(a) Yes, the disciplinary hearing of the previous Chief Financial Officer was concluded and he was dismissed on 31 March 2011. The interview has been concluded and appointment is awaiting Cabinet decision.

(2)(b) Yes, the disciplinary hearing of the Chief Information Officer was concluded and the charges were withdrawn.

(2)(c) Yes, the disciplinary hearing of the Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services was concluded on 3 October 2011; the matter is now pending due to a Labour Court Review Application.

(3) Refer to Annexure A for the vacancies currently existing at senior management level.

QUESTION NO. 3526

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 38)

3526. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a)(i) What are the names of and (ii) who are the permanent employers of all external consultants who are members of the Department of Water's task team on business engineering and (b) on what date did each of these persons join the task team;

(2) (a) on what date did the business engineering project commence and (b) what has been the total amount paid to external consultants working on this project since its inception;

(3) since the inception of this project, what (a) have been the key deliverables of the project and (b) are the expected deliverables by the end of the (i) 2011-12 and (ii) 2012-13 financial years;

(4) whether the permanent employees of her department have been informed of the key deliverables under this project; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(5) whether there has been any resistance from permanent employees of her department to the work of the external consultants on this project; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details? NW4229E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a)(i) The team that we have appointed is established in terms of Regulation 20 of the National Treasury Regulations and is known as a Committee of Review/Re –engineering. The names of the Members of the Committee of Enquiry to review and advise the Department of Water Affairs on its Business Process are:

· Mrs Brigitte Mabandla (Chairperson)

· Ms Barbara Schreiner

· Professor G M Nkondo

· Mr Tlhopheho Modise

· Mr Ferdi Zondagh

· Ms Rachel Kalidass

· Mr Abel Dlamini

· Mr Robert Mulder

· Mr Warwick Metcalfe

· Ms Sharlottee Naidu

· Mr Raymond Motsepe

· Dr Themba J Mkhonto

· Mr Joshua Kanjere

(1)(a)(ii) The members of the Business Process Review/Re-engineering Committee have been appointed in their personal capacities and capabilities and bring their individual professional contribution into the work that we do. They have been appointed in terms of Regulation 20 of the National Treasury Regulations and not as consultants of any company or employees of particular companies. The employer(s) of BPR committee members have not been taken into cognisance and do not feature at all in their appointments as each one comes as an individual and not a company or employee.

(1)(b) The members joined the committee of enquiry on 1 July 2011 apart from Mr Joshua Kanjere who joined the committee as from 1 November 2011.

(2)(a) The Business Process Re-engineering project commenced on 1 July 2011.

(2)(b) The total amount paid to committee members working on this project since its inception is R4 898 236.82 and much in line with the amount and quality of work done to date.

(3)(a) Refer to a summary of key deliverables attached as Annexure A.

(3)(b)(i) Refer to a summary of key deliverables attached as Annexure A.

(3)(b)(ii) Falls away, the project is targeted to end on 30 June 2012 and may be reviewed depending on the success rate.

(4) Yes, the permanent employees of the Department have been informed of the key deliverables under this project and are continuously part of implementation of those deliverables

(5) No, there has not been any resistance from permanent employees of the Department regarding the work of the committee of enquiry on this project.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 November 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether any large scale exhibition of carbon and greenhouse reduction technologies is being planned to coincide with the hosting of the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17) in Durban to underscore their importance in saving the planet; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3517. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

Apart from the dedicated and substantial South African Climate Change Response Expo (CCR Expo) that will take place in parallel to COP 17 that will, among others, showcase and highlight numerous "carbon and greenhouse reduction technologies" there are also several practical carbon reduction projects currently underway including:

· the solar water heater project which is being implemented in 17 semi rural and rural clinics in KwaZulu Natal. The project is being coordinated in partnership with the DoE, the GEF, UNIDO, and the Provincial Department of Health.

· Solar powered, energy efficient street lights in and around the ICC COP 17 precinct in partnership with Eskom, Phillips Lighting and Ethekwini Metro.

· Solar powered, energy efficient traffic lights around the ICC COP 17 precinct in partnership with Eskom, Phillips Lighting and Ethekwini Metro.

· 0.5 Mw Solar Farm, La Mercy Landfill Site. This is a Public Private Partnership (PPP) arrangement.

Furthermore, carbon avoidance initiative include green energy donation from Eskom and its power pool partners.

QUESTION NO. 3505

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 38)

3505. Mr X Mabasa (ANC) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether there are any programmes in place to (a) ensure that the rivers which run through South Africa and neighboring countries are kept perennially neat and (b) preserve the sponge source of such rivers; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case? NW4200E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(a) Yes, there is a programme in place to ensure that the rivers which run through South Africa and neighboring countries are kept perennially neat. The ecological health of rivers is monitored through the National Aquatic Ecosystem Health Monitoring Programme, better known as the River Health Programme. Through this programme, the State of the River report is generated, with specific management recommendations for implementation within the relevant catchments.

(b) Chapter 3 of the National Water Act, 36 of 1998 (NWA), sets out measures that need to be undertaken to ensure the protection of water resources within the context of sustainable use. The Department is in the process of classifying water resources in the Vaal, Olifants (which is part of the Limpopo river system), Olifants-Doorn and Crocodile (West) Marico Water Management Areas (WMA). The determination of classes in these WMAs and the setting of the corresponding Resource Quality Objectives will ensure that the required level of protection for these water resources is determined to facilitate a balance between protection and use of water resources in these WMAs.

In addition, the recommended ecological condition for many of the major river systems have been determined at different levels of confidence to define the required water quality, quantity and habitat specifications for these water resources as an indication of optimal functioning of ecosystems to support ecological goods, services and attributes of water resources. These specifications are incorporated into water use licenses as a proactive measure to prevent further degradation of water resources such as rivers, wetlands and groundwater.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 November 2011

Mrs M A A Njobe (Cope) to ask the Minister for Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether his department has developed any policies to prevent dumping of waste around human settlements which is a threat to (a) the environment and (b) health; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3484. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

The Department has developed legislation to curb the disposal of waste in inappropriate places, including next to human settlements. The National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act No. 59 of 2008) has recently been promulgated and deals directly with such issues.

Section 16 (1)(c) places a general duty on everybody to ensure that waste is disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. Sub-section 16 (1)(d) further requires that waste be managed in such a manner that it does not endanger the health of the people or the environment or cause a nuisance through noise, odour or visual impacts.

Section 26(1) of the Act further prohibits the unauthorized disposal of waste which is likely to cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health and well being. Section 27(2) (a) also prohibits any person from discarding waste in any manner onto public places, vacant land, streams, streets or roads, or any other general public area, except in a container or a place specifically provided for that purpose.

Non-compliance with this legislation is considered an offence in terms of Sections 67 (1)(a) and (b). The penalties in relation to these sections include a fine not exceeding R10, 000, 000.00 or imprisonment not exceeding 10 years or both such fine and imprisonment and R 5, 000, 000.00 or 5 years imprisonment or both such fine and imprisonment, respectively.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 November 2011

Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) How many copies of each annual report that was produced by (i) her departments and (ii) the entities reporting to her were commissioned for print in the 2010-11 financial year, (b) how many copies were actually printed and (c) what were the (i) total and (ii) individual costs of printing these reports;

(2) (a) who printed each specified report, (b) how was the specified printer decided upon and (c) on what date did the specified printer deliver the report to the specified entity;

(3) whether any of the specified reports that had been printed were found to be unsatisfactory; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, (a) which reports, (b) for which entity, (c) by which printer, (d) what action was taken and (e) what were the costs?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3422. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

BACKGROUND

It must be noted that both the department and its entities commission the printing of annual reports as separate processes from one another, which printing follows a clear procurement process which is based on the PFMA. In all instances, the PFMA was followed in commissioning the current printing of the annual reports for 2010/11. Although there is a difference in the range of prices, it must be noted that these reports are not homogenous and therefore do not carry the same cost. The quotation decided upon on database and/or called for quotations, depended on the submission/applications received by each entity or the department.

(1) (i) The Department of Environmental Affairs commissioned printing of 1000 copies of annual reports for the 2010/11 financial year. (b) All of the 1000 copies were printed and (c) (i) the total costs was R 78 471.86 and (ii) the individual cost of each report amounted to R 78.50.

(ii) - The South African Weather Services (SAWS) commissioned printing of 600 copies of annual reports for the 2010/11 financial year. (b) All of the 600 copies were printed and (c) (i) the total costs was R 186 152.42 and (ii) the individual cost of each report amounted to R 325.25.

- The South African Botanical Institute (SANBI) commissioned printing of 1000 copies of annual reports for the 2010/11 financial year. (b) All of the 1000 copies were printed and (c) (i) the total costs was R 156 260.00 and (ii) the individual cost of each report amounted to R 156.00

- The South African National Parks (SANParks) commissioned printing of 1000 copies of Annual Reports for the 2010/11 financial year. (b) All of the 1000 copies were printed and (c) (i) the total costs was R 163 248.00 and (ii) the individual cost of each report amounted to R 163.25

- Isimangaliso Wetland Park commissioned printing of 1200 copies of annual reports for the 2010/11 financial year. (b) All of the 1200 copies were printed and (c) (i) the total costs was R 107 376 and (ii) the individual cost of each report amounted to R89.48

(2) - The Annual Report of the Department of Environmental Affairs was printed by Bhubezi Printers (PTY) Ltd. The printing company was obtained from the Department's supply chain management database, and appointed through the supply chain management process. The company delivered the reports on 30 of August 2011.

- The report of the SAWS was printed by a Pretoria base company called Blackmoon. (b)The printing company was obtained through a Request for Quotation (RFQ) process, where supplier were requested to submit quotations based on the specification set for the job.(c) The company delivered the reports 20 August 2011.

- The report for SANBI was printed by Shumani Mills Printing. (b)The printing company was obtained through the quotation process from the supplier database. (c) The company delivered reports on the 29 August 2011.

- The report for SANParks was printed by Shereno printers CC. (b) Three printing companies from the SANParks database were requested for quotations and designs. Shereno printers CC were appointed based on price and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) criteria. (c) The annual report copies were delivered on the 26 August 2011.

- The report for iSimangaliso was printed by Draft FCB. (b) following procurement process-quotes were received. (c) The annual reports were delivered on the 26 August 2011.

(3) All copies of the reports printed for the Department and its Public Entities were in a satisfactory condition.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 November 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

1) What (a) total number of environmental impact assessment (EIA) applications has her department received since 1 January 2011 for (i) wind and (ii) solar energy projects and (b) is the breakdown for each province;

2) whether (a) wind and (b) solar energy projects require full EIA processes; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

3) whether her department has the requisite skills for processing the specified applications; if not, what steps has she taken to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details;

4) what key challenges is her department facing in processing EIA applications for the specified projects?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3420. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

1)

2) Any construction of facilities or infrastructure (i.e. solar or wind energy) for the generation of electricity where the electricity output is more than 10 megawatts (MW) but less than 20 MW; or the output is 10 MW or less but the total extent of the facility covers an area in excess of 1 hectare requires a basic assessment process as it triggers Activity 1 of GN R544 of the NEMA EIA Regulations of June 2010 and process. But if the electricity output to be generated is 20 MW or more, then a full EIA process is required as it triggers Activity 1 of GN R545 of the NEMA EIA Regulations of June 2010.

3) The department has dealt with these applications for the past two years and has requisite skills.

4) There is high interest in renewable energy and as a result, the department has received increased volumes of these applications, but we will do our best to manage the workload and avoid the creation of a new back log on ordinary day to day EIAS.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 November 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) What (a) is the status of each species of dwarf chameleon and (b) are the key threats to the populations of these various specified species;

(2) whether there are any initiatives to raise awareness about the need to protect the various species of dwarf chameleons; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether there has been any increase in the harvesting of species of dwarf chameleons from their natural habitats for sale to private persons; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether there are any policies in place to deal with the (a) harvesting and (b) selling of these specified species; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what policy in each case?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3419. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) (a) According to the IUCN Red List Assessment done in 2008, 2 species of Dwarf chameleon (Bradypodion) are listed as Threatened; one species (Elandsberg Dwarf chameleon) is listed as Critically Endangered; and one species (Serato's Dwarf chameleon) is listed as Endangered. The Southern African Reptile Conservation Assessment subsequently initiated in 2005 recognised 17 described species of Dwarf chameleon, 7 of which are classified as Threatened. These are - Endangered: B. caffer (Pondo Dwarf Chameleon), B. caeruleogula (Beardless Dwarf Chameleon) and B. taeniabronchum (Elandsberg Dwarf Chameleon); and four species are listed as Vulnerable, i.e. B. kentanicum (Kentani Dwarf Chameleon), B. melancephalum (Kwazulu Dwarf Chameleon), B. pumilum (Cape Dwarf Chameleon) and B. thamnobates (Natal Midlands Dwarf Chameloen). A further three species are listed as Near Threatened: B. dracomontanum (Drakensberg Dwarf Chameleon), B. nemorale (Qudeni Dwarf Chameleon) and B. ngomeense (Ngome Dwarf Chameleon)

(b) The biggest threat to all of these species is habitat transformation attributed to overgrazing by domestic livestock, clearing of land for agriculture, fuel-wood collection, invasion by introduced plants, and urbanization. Many of the species of Dwarf Chameleons have very restricted distributions.

(2) Yes, the Southern African Reptile Conservation Assessment, coordinated by the South African National Biodiversity Institute, is a database developed to facilitate the accurate mapping of species' geographical distributions. This information will contribute towards the updated conservation assessments for all reptile species and improve the knowledgebase available to improve conservation planning relating to reptiles.

(3) There seems to be an increase in the illegal harvesting of species of dwarf chameleons from natural habitats and offered for sale to private persons. Due to the illegal nature of the activity, detailed information of these elicit activities are not always available, but provinces indicated that arrests in this regard are increasing.

(4) (a)Yes there are policies in place and (b) Currently, only Smith's Dwarf Chameleon (Bradypodion taeniabronchum) is listed through a notice as a Protected Species in terms of section 56(1) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 and permits are required to carry out restricted activities (including harvesting, selling) with a listed species. Activities involving indigenous reptile species are also regulated in terms of provincial legislation. Additionally, thirteen of these Bradypodion species are listed on the CITES Appendix II. Meaning that all trade in specimens of species included in Appendix II shall be in accordance with the provisions of this CITES Regulations. Further surveys are required to refine the area of occupancy estimate.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 November 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her department is engaging with the Department of Mineral Resources regarding areas that (a) should be declared off limits to mining and (b) it intends declaring as protected areas in terms of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, Act 57 of 2003; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(2) whether there are any areas that her department intends declaring as protected areas, but that the Department of Mineral Resources are objecting to; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3418. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1)(a) Yes. Following a discussion between the Ministers of Water and Environmental Affairs and Mineral Resources in July 2011, an interdepartmental task team has met and made recommendations for the Ministers regarding mining and sensitive areas. A further discussion aimed at consideration of the task team recommendations, is set to take place between the two Ministers by December 2011.

(b) Yes. In terms of section 31(a) of the National Environmental Management Act, 2003, all national organs of state affected by a proposal notice must be consulted.

(2) Yes. The department has published a notice to declare the Nuwejaars Wetland Protected Environment. After an objection was lodged by the Department of Mineral Resources, the relevant portion is to be reconsidered for the discussion referred to in 1(a) above.

QUESTION NO. 3410

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 NOVEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 36)

Mr M Swart (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether, with reference to only 26 municipalities attaining Blue Drop status for water quality and 75% of sewerage treatment plants not being up to Green Drop status at the end of the 2009-10 financial year, she intends taking any steps to assist municipalities to improve their performance with regard to their management of water quality and sewerage treatment plants; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) Whether any mechanisms have been put in place to define and clarify the responsibilities in this regard between local and district municipalities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW4095E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) The primary objective of the incentive-based regulation approach adopted within the context of the Blue Drop and Green Drop Certification Programmes is to ensure improvement in the management of drinking water quality and wastewater services respectively. This was achieved if one considers the performance trend of the past three years (since the inception of these programmes); which implies that the Department does not measure success by the number of Blue Drop and Green Drop allocations alone, but on all aspects that form part of this progressive regulation initiative.

The consultative auditing, conducted by my Department with the affected municipalities, is the first process of providing guidance on improving overall management, but with a specific focus on planning, risk management, operations and maintenance as part of asset management and treatment process optimisation (to improve quality). This is a process that precedes the reporting cycle and is highly valued by the sector for the capacity building element as been reported at various fora.

Further initiatives include programmes such as the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme (ACIP) and Regional Bulk Infrastructure Programme (RBIG), to assist with capital projects within the context of water supply and wastewater. A Rapid Response Unit was also established to serve those municipalities found to be in dire need for urgent guidance to improve as pointed out by the Blue Drop and Green Drop reports.

(2) It is the responsibility of the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (CoGTA) to assign powers and functions to municipalities. All municipalities that are authorised by the said Minister to serve as water services authorities (WSAs) are responsible for functions assigned by the Water Services Act, 1997 (Act 108 of 1997). So for each and every area in this country there is only one WSA and all the functions assigned in the Water Services Act, 1997 will rest with it regardless of the fact whether this is a local or district municipality.

QUESTION NO. 3361

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3361. Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether any bonuses were paid to (a) junior and (b) senior employees of the Department of Water in the 2010-11 financial year; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (i) how many employees received bonuses in each case, (ii) what criteria were used to determine to whom bonuses were to be paid and (iii) how much money was spent on bonuses (aa) in each case and (bb) in total? NW4022E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) No bonuses were paid to junior employees as the performance assessments for bonuses for the junior employees (levels 1-12) of the Department for the financial year 2010/2011 have not as yet been finalised.

(1)(b) No bonuses were paid to senior employees of the Department as the moderation process for performance assessments for senior managers (levels 13-16) of the Department for the financial year 2010/2011 have not as yet been finalised.

(1)(b)(i) None.

(1)(b)(ii) Falls away.

(1)(b)(iii) Falls away.

(1)(b)(iii)(aa) Falls away.

(1)(b)(iii)(bb) Falls away.

QUESTION NO. 3333

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3333. Mr L Ramatlakane (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether there has been a change of scope with regard to the construction of the Gariep Dam in the Free State; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what is the financial implication in this regard, (b) how many persons are currently employed through this project and (c) what is the (i) age, (ii) gender and (iii) nationality of the employees of this project;

(2) whether the construction of this dam will meet the deadline; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY:

(1) There has been no change in scope with regard to the construction of the Gariep Dam. The Gariep Dam was constructed and officially opened by the State President in 1972. It has subsequently functioned in an operational phase to stabilise flows in the Orange River, generate hydro-electric power and supply water at higher assurance levels to users downstream and the Eastern Cape as supplied via the Orange-Fish Tunnel.

(1 Ira) Refer to (1) above.

(1)(b) Refer to (1) above.

(1 )(c) Refer to (1) above.

(2) Falls away.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28 October 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) What number of (i) boat-based whale watching and (ii) dolphin watching permits have been awarded for each location during the most recent round of permitting and for how many months of the season may the specified permit holders conduct their operations;

(2) whether the Department of Environmental Affairs is investigating opportunities to expand the number of (a) boat-based whale watching and (b) dolphin watching permits along the (i) KwaZulu-Natal and (ii) Eastern Cape coasts; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(3) whether she has found that climate change can be expected to have an effect on the ranges of dolphins and whales along the coast; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) what number of people is estimated to be employed in legal (a) boat-based whale watching and (b) dolphin watching operations?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3328. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1)

(a) a total number of 23 permits, which provide for the viewing of both dolphins and whales species, and, which is referred to as Boat Based Whale Watching (BBWW) permits, have been awarded to operators in the areas mentioned in Table 1 below:

(b) These operators may operate all year round, since their permits are issued annually.

Table 1: Number of BBWW permits allocated per area

(2) No. The Department of Environmental Affairs is not investigating opportunities to expand the number of BBWW permits along the KwaZulu Natal and Eastern Cape Coasts, since these were significantly expanded during the permit allocation process. In the Eastern Cape there were previously no BBWW exemption holders, and in KwaZulu Natal there was only one exemption for St Lucia. Despite the increase in available permits, applications were not received from 4 areas (Port St Johns, East London; Port Alfred and Transkei) where permits were available in the Eastern Cape. As a result, only 3 permits were allocated in the Eastern Cape. In KwaZulu Natal, applications were not received from the Shelley Beach area, and a total of 6 permits were allocated. Furthermore, due to the low numbers of whales, and the migratory nature of the species found in both KwaZulu Natal and in the Eastern Cape, the potential for expansion of permits is limited. However, the current operations will be monitored and the Department will review the BBWW sector, based on scientific and other relevant factors linked to the success of their operations, to ensure that an optimal number of permits is used.

(3) Currently there is not enough evidence to link climate change to the ranges of whales and dolphins along the South African coast, although changes could be expected. The range of the humpback and southern right whales (the main species viewed in BBWW operations) lies between their Southern Ocean feeding grounds and the South African east, south and west coasts where they breed. Both species are showing increasing numbers along our coast and that of Namibia, but as the species were historically commercially exploited, this is likely to represent a recovery of a population post protection, and not a climate change response. On the other hand, international studies show that the ranges of dolphins could already be affected by long-term environmental changes including by shifts in the distribution of their prey. To be able to resolve such potential climate change impacts better, the Department and partner organisations are currently embarking on a programme to monitor whales and dolphins over longer time scales around the South African coast and the Southern Ocean.

(4) The number of persons employed directly in BBWW operations varies between 6 and 10 persons. Therefore using an average of 8 persons per permit, the estimated direct employment is 184 persons. In addition there are many closely linked jobs such as in the hospitality and transport sectors.

QUESTION NO 3327

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3327. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) What are the names and locations of mines that have been operating without valid water licences since her reply to question 347 on 21 June 2011;

(2) what has been the progress of the mines operating without water licences at the time of her reply with regard to their (a) applying for and (b) being granted water licences;

(3) whether she has taken any steps to ensure that mines operating without water licences obtain water licences; if not, why not; if so, what steps;

(4) whether any further (a) directives or (b) pre-directives have been issued against the mines operating without water licences in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, since her reply; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3985E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Refer to Annexure A, Table 1 for names and locations of mines that have been operating without valid water licences since my Department's reply to question 347 on 21 June 2011.

(2)(a) Refer to Annexure B, Table 2 for progress of the mines operating without water licences at the time of my Department's reply to question 347 on 21 June 2011 with regard to their applying for water use license.

(2)(b) Refer to Annexure C, Table 3 for progress of the mines operating without water licences at the time of the Department's reply to question 347 on 21 June 2011 with regard to being granted water licences license.

(3) Yes, the Department has embarked on a special initiative, the Letsema Project, to expedite the process of issuing water use licenses. The aim of this project is to eradicate backlog (s) in mining and all other water use license applications.

(4) A total of (a) three pre-directives and (b) two directives were issued to date. Refer to table below.

QUESTION NO 3324

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3324. Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1276 on 20 May 2010 and lapsed question 3423 on 31 January 2011, her department has done any formal assessment of sandmining operations completed to date to assess the effect of mining conducted by Mr L Fourie and a certain company (name furnished) on the (a) integrity of the Mokolo River, (b) pollution of the river and (c) availability of water to surrounding water users; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether her department has been informed of any cases where surrounding water users have not been able to fully exercise their water rights because of sandmining in the river; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether any action has been taken against the miners in this regard; if not, why not; if so, what action? NW3982E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a)(b)(c) Yes, the Department conducts assessment of the effects of sand mining in Mokolo River at Mr L Fourie and his company mining sites through monthly site inspections and taking of water samples (i.e. for water quality analysis).

Water is allowed to pass through the sand mining site and that there were no lawful water abstraction points which was interfered with or damaged and sand material near any lawful water abstraction points is not removed. Due to the geological (i.e. soil and rock types) formations in upper catchment of the Mokolo River, the sand recovery rate is higher and there is no significant pooling / damming effect.

Water quality samples are taken at upstream and downstream points of the sand mining sites to detect water pollution of the sand mining activities. Based on the available samples analysis data, there is no significant variation detected.

(2) Yes, the Department has received several complaints regarding sand mining in general since the start of construction of the Medupi Power Station. On several sites, inspections conducted by the Department with the latest being on 21 October 2011, there was no evidence or practical indication that water use entitlements of lawful water users were violated or deprived. In most cases it was established that due to the historical provisions of the Water Act of 1956 (Act repealed by National Water Act , 1998 (Act No.36 of 1998) that gave riparian rights, property owners next to water resources (i.e. Mokolo River) emphasised riparian rights in the gist of their complaints.

This was more evident as some complainants were willing to trade sand in exchange for economic/financial benefit (i.e. excising riparian rights) and some applied to the Department of Mineral Resources for sand mining permits while supposedly against sand mining. In one recorded case of damage to water abstraction point that occurred over the past two years, agreed compensation to the affected user was done through facilitation by the Department of Mineral Resources.

(3) No action was taken specifically as it relates to water users not being able to fully exercise their water rights as this category of complain was never factually presented to the Department. The Department following its own programme of monthly inspection has instructed the sand miners to ensure that, there is no excessive clearance of vegetation or inducement of erosion on the river banks and that there is no interference with or destruction of lawful water abstraction points. On one sand mining site, the rehabilitation of river banks was done by planting of indigenous grass and trees.

QUESTION NO. 3323

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3323. Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether, with reference to her replies to question 1276 on 20 May 2010 and lapsed question 3423 on 31 January 2011, the water use general authorisation in possession of Mr L Fourie and a certain company (details furnished) is valid; if not, why not; if so, (a) when was it issued, (b) what is the (i) name and (ii) designation of the official that issued it, (c) until when is this authorisation valid and (d) what are the relevant terms of the authorisation;

(2) whether the holder of the permit had to report to her department on a regular basis; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3981E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Yes, the water use general authorisation in possession of Mr L Fourie and his company is valid.

In response to question (1)(a), (1)(b)(i), (1)(b)(ii) and (1)(c), see the table below:

Table 1 below reflects the date when the general authorisation was issued, the details of the official and the date until when the water use general authorisation is valid.

(1)(d) The water use general authorisation is subject to the Mr Fourie and his company complying with the conditions of the water use general authorisation and having a valid mining permit in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No. 28 of 2002).

(2) Mr Fourie and his company are required by the water use general authorisation to monitor water quality by taking water samples at upstream and downstream points of the sand mining site on a bi-weekly basis in the first three months of sand mining activity and thereafter on a monthly basis. The water samples are analysed by M&L Laboratories in conjunction with the Medupi Power Station Joint Venture Construction.

The results of the water quality are submitted to the Department's Limpopo: Regional Office for the assessment of impacts. Furthermore, the conditions of the water use general authorisation requires that no damming of water should occur (i.e. normal river flow is allowed to pass through the sand mining site) and that all lawful water abstraction points are not interfered with during sand mining.

The sand mining site is inspected by the Department's Regional Office: Limpopo at least once every month during sand mining activities (i.e. sand mining is done during low river flows seasons based on demand and is not continuous).

QUESTION NO 3322

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3322. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 575 on 30 March 2011, the Wesmine/Wescoal coal washing operation adjacent to the Jackaroo plant has been granted a water use licence since 30 March 2011; if not, what is the current status in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether her department has conducted any recent investigations to determine whether the operations' disposal of waste water has polluted surrounding water courses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3980E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) No, the Wesmine / Wescoal washing operation (coal washing plant) has not applied for the water use license from the Department.

(2) No, the Department has commented on the Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Management Plan which the Wesmine / Wescoal washing operation submitted to the Mpumalanga Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism as part of the consultation process. The report contained investigations done on the operation's activities which have the potential to pollute the environment which includes the operations' disposal of waste water.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28 October 2011

Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to her reply to question (a) 1129 on 3 June 2011 and (b) 2460 on 3 October 2011, why are the suppliers of the new radar systems mentioned in the reply to 1129 different from the one mentioned in the reply to question 2460 (details furnished);

(2) whether the two replies refer to the same tender for the supply of radar systems; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, how was this conclusion reached;

(3) with reference to her reply to question 871 on 4 May 2010, what is the role of a certain demonstration of higher value (DHV) company (name furnished) in relation to the above two companies with respect to any matters related to radar systems in the SA Weather Service?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3319. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

1. (a) The response to Question 1129 on 3 June 2011 relates to the professional consulting

services provided by the SAWS to Selex Gematronik for the installation of radar systems in Libya in December 2010.

(b) The response to question 2460, Saab Grintek Technologies relates to the appointment of the contractor for the SAWS Tender 0101.

The contract for the "Design, Supply, Delivery, Construction and Commissioning of New Weather Radar Systems and Associated Equipment", (SAWS 0101) was awarded to Saab Grintek Technologies. The original equipment manufacturers (OEM) of the radar systems itself, as sub‑contracted by Saab Grintek Technologies, were Selex Gematronik.

2. The two replies do not refer to the same tender.

The response for Question 1129 was for professional consulting services provided by SAWS to Selex Gematronik for the installation of radar systems in Libya in December 2010; whereas the response to Question 2460 related to the awarding of the tender SAWS 0101.

The provision of consulting services to Selex Gematronik were within the competence of SAWS which forms part of its commercial mandate and was independent of the purchase of the New Weather Radar System (SAWS 0101).

3. SSI are contracted by SAWS and are responsible for assisting SAWS with the management of new radar project. To the knowledge of SAWS, SSI have no direct relationship with either SAAB Grintek Technologies or Selex Gematronik, other than the peer review of the work done by both parties in the execution of the New Radar Project.

QUESTION NO. 3316

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 28 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 35)

3316. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to the media statement by her department on 20 October 2011 (details furnished), what are the names of the interested and affected parties whose views she took into consideration;

(2) whether she has found that the Water Tribunal will still be able to adjudicate the appeals against the granting of the licence fairly; if not, why not; if so, how was this conclusion reached;

(3) when is the Water Tribunal expected to adjudicate on the matter;

(4) whether she will consider petitions by other entities awaiting confirmation on water use licences for her intervention in getting suspensions lifted; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(5) whether she intends to take steps to ensure that the management of the Vele Colliery will include all interested and affected parties into the management forum that the mine is expected to establish; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3974E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) The names of the interested and affected parties who submitted their views through their legal representative, the Centre for Environmental Rights are:

· Mapungubwe Action Group;

· Endangered Wildlife Trust;

· Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists;

· Peace Parks Foundation;

· Birdlife South Africa; and

· Wilderness Foundation.

(2) The lifting of the suspension on the water licence and the appeal before the Water Tribunal are two separate processes which do not influence each other. The lifting of the suspension is an interim measure pending the outcome of the appeal before the Water Tribunal. The decision to lift the suspension does not in any way influence the outcome of the Water Tribunal appeal. The appeal is lodged in terms of section 148(1) of the National Water Act (NWA), 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) and the request to lift the suspension is in terms of section 148(2)(b) of the NWA.

(3) The Water Tribunal is an independent body which determines its processes independently from the administration of the Department. It will therefore be difficult for the Department to indicate as to when the Water Tribunal will adjudicate on the appeal.

(4) Yes, any person whose water licence is suspended by virtue of an appeal that is lodged with the Water Tribunal can in terms of section 148(2)(b) of the National Water Act, submit a request for the lifting of the suspension of the water licence pending the adjudication of the appeal.

(5) In terms of condition17 of Appendix II on the licence conditions, the Vele Colliery Mine is required within three months of the issuance of the water licence to establish a Monitoring Forum which among its stakeholders include interested and affected parties and should the mine exclude any of the forum's stakeholders, such a conduct will be a breach of a condition of the water licence and if such exclusion is brought to the attention of the Department, the Department's Control, Monitoring and Enforcement Component will intervene by ensuring that the mine is in compliance with the water licence conditions.

QUESTION NO. 3257

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)

3257. Mr D A Kganare (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether the South African Municipal Workers Union of the Free State informed her of allegations of tender irregularities at Bloem Water; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so,

(2) whether she will investigate the allegations; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether she has been informed that as a result of interaction between some shop stewards and her advisor, these shop stewards has since been suspended; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether she intends taking any steps to protect these whistle blowers; if not, why not; if so, what steps;

(5) whether she will make a statement on the matter? NW3873E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Yes, a letter was received from the South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU) containing various allegations of mismanagement and corruption at Bloem Water.

(2) I am in the process of appointing an independent auditor to investigate the allegations by SAMWU. The copy of the terms of reference will be submitted to me for approval before the auditor is appointed.

(3) The shop stewards of SAMWU were suspended, charged and subsequently dismissed following internal disciplinary hearings. The charges were unrelated to the interaction with my advisor. Whistle blower protection is embodied in government policy.

(4) All whistleblowers, irrespective of whether they are SAMWU shop stewards or not, must and will be protected if we want to win the war on corruption. If the whistle blower requires protection it will be provided according to Government regulations.

(5) No, it must still be established whether the allegations by SAMWU can be substantiated. An appropriate decision to issue a statement or not will be based on the outcome of the investigations.

QUESTION NO. 3235

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)

3235. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to her reply to question 2064 on 30 August 2011, when will the compliance monitoring and enforcement unit be fully functional in each of the other regional offices of the Department of Water;

(2) (a) why have fully functional compliance monitoring and enforcement units not been established thus far in each of these specified regional offices and (b) what is the intended purpose of the Department of Water to have fully functional compliance monitoring and enforcement units in each of the regional offices? NW3848E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) As indicated the response to question 2064, the Department conducted a Recruitment Drive process and a number of technical positions including those related to the Compliance, Monitoring and Enforcement (CME) were filled as part of the process. So far out of the 95 post mentioned in question 2064, only six (6) posts have been filled. However, there remain challenges with candidates who meet all the Occupational Specific Dispensation (OSD) requirements. The Department plans to have the CME adequately staffed by 2012/13 financial year.

(2)(a) The Department has historically centralised the CME function and the initial approach was to assist facilities and industries to obtain water use authorisations and also to achieve compliance with the National Water Act, 1998, (Act No. 36 of 1998). The Department has since prioritised the regulation function and the decentralisation of this function is being implemented.

(2)(b) The Department intends to have fully functional CME units throughout the country to enable it to be more effective in its regulatory function and improve water resource management across spheres of government. Further, due to the transgressions in terms of the National Water Act, 1998, (Act No. 36 of 1998), the Department is mindful of the need to have qualified and competent technical people to monitor the nation's water resource thus to ensure compliance to the provisions of the
National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998).

QUESTION NO 3216

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)

3216. Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Since her reply to question 1904 on 18 August 2010, what are the results of the (a) chemical and (b) bacteriological analyses of the samples that had been taken since
7 May 2010;

(2) whether the Department of Water Affairs has taken any action to compel compliance with discharge standards and pollution prevention measures in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what (a) action and (b) has been the response by the responsible parties in each case? NW3828E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) The results of the chemical and bacteriological analysis of the water samples that had been taken from the Swartkops River during the financial years 2011/11 and 2011/12 are combined on the attached Annexure A and B.

(1)(b) Falls away.

(2)(a) Yes, the Department has since issued a letter of non-compliance to the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality on 29 July 2011 regarding the non-compliance of the final effluent discharges as well as the pollution of the Swartkops River by the sewage spills. This was followed by a notice in terms of section 19(3) of the National Water Act of intention to issue a directive dated 19 September 2011.

(2)(b) The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality has failed to present a plan of action demonstrating strategies planned to address the issues raised in the letter of non compliance as well as the notice of intention to issue directive. The Department will now follow the internal enforcement protocol and issue a directive to the Municipality to comply with the provisions of the Nation Water Act.

QUESTION NO 3215
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)
3215. Mrs AT Lovemore (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Since her reply to question 1903 on 18 August 2010, what are the results of the (a) chemical and (b) bacteriological analyses of the samples that had been taken since 5 May 2010;

(2) whether the Department of Water Affairs has taken any action to compel compliance with discharge standards and pollution prevention measures in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what (a) action and (b) has been the response by the responsible parties in each case? NW3827E

REPLY:

(1)(a) The results of the chemical analysis of the water samples that had been taken from the Baakens River during the financial year 2010/11 and the interpretation report are attached as Annexure A and Annexure C respectively.

(1)(b) The results of the bacteriological analysis of the water samples that had been taken from the Baakens River during the financial year 2010/11 are attached as Annexure B and Annexure C.

(2) No, the Department has not taken an action against the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality yet. However, to assist the Municipality in managing the sewer infrastructure within the Baakens River Catchment, the Department supported the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality with their water use license application. The water use license was issued in terms of Section 21(c) and (i) of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No.36 of 1998) on 29 March 2011. The water use license allowed the Municipality to upgrade an existing bulk sewer collector pipeline in the Baakens River Catchment; by replacing the existing 600mm diameter pipe with a 700mm diameter sewer pipeline for 1502m length. The upgrading of the sewer line will reduce the manhole blockages leading to sewage spillage into the Baakens River and that will prevent further deterioration of the Baakens River water quality. The upgrading had already been completed in the beginning of October 2011 and a handover inspection was undertaken on 27 October 2011.

(2)(a) Falls away

(2)(b) Falls away

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 21 October 2011

Mr L W Greyling (ID) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

What amount in orders has been placed, with each specified travel agency that has been contracted by her office, (a) in the 2010-11 financial year and (b) during the period 1 April 2011 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3183. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(a) In the 2010-11 financial year, the Department contracted three service providers namely, Wings Naledi in an amount of R37 550 971, Sure Flywell in an amount of R14 018 322 and Hlophe Shuttle Services in an amount of R2 139 462, which totals R53 708 755. This amount includes the 10% service fee of the service providers. The Department uses travel management companies, because we do not have the expertise and travel agents system to deal with the dynamism associated with travel.

(b) From 1 April 2011 to 30 September 2011, the Department contracted three service providers namely, Travel with Flair in an amount of R18 811 599, Seekers Travel Management in an amount of R3 017 901 and Hlophe Shuttle services in an amount of R1 332 854. There was an outstanding amount from the 2010-11 financial year paid in the 2011-12 financial year amounting to R3 081 500 for Wings Naledi Travel and R2 745 703 for Sure Flywell. The total amount paid is R28 989 557, which includes the 10% service fee of the service providers.

The above response should be read in the context that the mandate, core functions and the strategic objectives of the Department of Environmental Affairs require officials to travel and engage domestic and international stakeholders and clients. Therefore, the travel costs spent is justified to facilitate the travelling requirements of the organisation. The officials also often travel between the Department's Cape Town offices and the Head Office in Pretoria, as well as from Pretoria to Cape Town to attend Portfolio Committee, Select Committee; FOSAD Clusters and Cabinet Committee meetings.

The Department is involved in a number of international negotiations as we are servicing more than 20 Multilateral Environmental and Governance Agreements and are also extensively involved in regional (SADC) and Continental (AU) programmes. During the financial year 2010/11 45% of the travel costs spent, was for international travel and 54% for domestic travel. For the period 1 April 2011 to 30 September 2011, 65% of the travel costs spent, was for domestic travel and 35% for international travel.

The cost associated with the abovementioned travel is thoroughly and responsibly facilitated and documented.

QUESTION NO 3183

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)

3183. Mr L W Greyling (ID) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

What amount in orders has been placed, with each specified travel agency that has been contracted by her office, (a) in the 2010-11 financial year and (b) during the period 1 April 2011 up to the latest specified date for which information is available? NW3742E

---00000---

REPLY:

(a) Wings Naledi Corporate (WNC) and Travel With Flair (TWF) are travel agencies used by my office for the services of:

· Air travel (domestic and international trips)

· Accommodation (domestic only)

· Insurances when travelling

· Car hire

· Conference bookings

· Travel agency fees

The amount paid to WNC was R 3,010,166.00 and TWF was paid an amount of R 495 369.00

(b) No payments were made to Wings Naledi Corporate from 01 April 2011 only Travel with Flair was paid an amount of R 985 590.00 as at 31 October 2011 for the services mentioned in (a).

QUESTION NO 3176

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 21 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 33)

3176. Mrs C Dudley (ACDP) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her department intends relocating the Inkomati Catchment Management Authority (ICMA) head office to another building in Nelspruit; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the reasons for the move which will incur increased expenditure;

(2) whether she has found that it would be more cost effective for the ICMA to remain in its current location and to negotiate for upgrades with the Landlord rather than to move to a new location where additional costs for tenant installations will be required; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether she has considered concerns regarding the new building being further from bus and taxi ranks, requiring staff to spend more time travelling to and from work; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether, with reference to the directives from the office of the President regarding overspending on grandiose buildings or unnecessary relocations, she has found that this additional expenditure will impact on allocations to services delivery to low income and poverty areas; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3700E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) The department did not have a role to play in the decision of the Inkomati Catchment Management Agency (ICMA) to relocate their head office to another building in Nelspruit. In terms of the National Water Act, the day- to- day administration and general management of the Inkomati Catchment Management Agency (ICMA) is the purview of the management and leadership of the ICMA which is accountable to the Governing Board of ICMA. The Governing Board, which also accounts to the Minister, took a resolution to look for more suitable office space and as such invited public tenders or bids for the provision of office space over a five year term.

The reasons for seeking more suitable office accommodation as investigated and implemented by the Board are inter alia:

· The current lease expired in July 2011;

· The existing staff has increased by 26 new entrants, since July 2011 due to further delegated functions, among other reasons;

· The current office space does not meet the requirements of the ICMA in many respects such as insufficient security, parking space and maintenance of common areas. The ablution facilities are also not adequate in terms of hygiene and access by disabled persons;

The carport was damaged by a storm more than six months ago, and is still not repaired;

· The current office space does not have appropriate storage, records and archive space/facilities.

(2) As stated in paragraph one above, the relocation was not only about the cost. The shortcomings referred to in paragraph one above of the current building were raised with the landlord but were never resolved. Furthermore, with the increase in the staff complement of the ICMA, the current office space would not have been adequate.

(3) The new building is within the central business district of Nelspruit and is within walking distance from the bus terminus and taxi ranks as well as from the current office space. The difference in time to walk between the new office space and bus terminus and taxi ranks does not differ by more than five minutes. Busses do pass the new office space as well.

(4) There is no overspending by the ICMA in this regard and the relocation is necessary for reasons outlined in paragraph (1) above. It is also important to mention that ICMA would be paying the same rates as Statistics SA who have also recently relocated to the same new building. As the latest annual report and strategic plans submitted by the ICMA indicate, the ICMA is rendering cost effective water resource management services.

QUESTION NO. 3149

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3149. Mr L Ramatlakane (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her department's dam building programme in Limpopo is (a) on schedule, (b) meeting required specifications and (c) holds any benefits for the poor people in Limpopo; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether any incidents of corruption have been reported in the construction of the dams, including Nandoni and De Hoop Dam; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what checks and balances have been put in place in this regard;

(3) whether people receive clean tap water from Nandoni and De Hoop Dams; if not, why not; if so, which dams supply the tap water;

(4) whether distribution from the Dam is in good condition; if not, why not; if so, why (a) do the people of Nzhelele, Phiphidi and Shayandima regularly experience long water shut-offs and (b) does the Makhado municipality regularly close off communities' tap water for hours and days without notice;

(5) whether her department intends to ensure that (a) people's constitutional right to water is protected in this regard and (b) this constitutional provision is complied with in Limpopo; if not, in each case, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details in each case? NW3676E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) The Department's building programme of in Limpopo is behind schedule.

De Hoop Dam:

The Olifants River Water Resource Development Project (ORWRDP) Phase 2A (De Hoop Dam) is scheduled for completion by the end of 2012. Unfortunately the work was delayed due to inclement weather, two industrial actions and additional groundwork work had to be carried out because of unforeseen excavation challenges.

The ORWRDP (Bulk Distribution System) was also delayed because the Trans Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA) could not obtain private funding to start this work in time. This resulted in the Department requesting the National Treasury for funding, causing a delay of this project. The Department is planning to re-prioritise its CAPEX budget to make room for this project. The plan is to begin this project in April 2012 under the re-prioritised part of the plan. The project is estimated to be completed by 2016 as a conservative forecast; however, on an accelerated basis we are looking at completing it at 2015.

.

Nandoni Dam:

The dam was completed in 2005; however the construction of the Nandoni Bulk Distribution System must still be completed.

· During a meeting with the Traditional Leaders, Executive Mayor, Senior officials of the District and Local Municipalities, officials of the Department and also the community representatives at Nandoni Dam on 21 November 2011, concerns were raised with respect to the delay in the completion of the Nandoni Bulk Distribution System and the outstanding recommendations of the Office of the Public Protector Report dated 2009 (some of which are deemed to be outside of the Department's mandate and responsibilities). All of these recommendations to are to be dealt with by the Department in terms of cooperative governance arrangements.

· I have since instructed the Department to ensure that this project is prioritised and fast tracked in terms of the accelerated action plan to ensure that the communities receive reliable water supply services as soon as possible. In response to the Public Protector Report the Department was instructed must meet with the Office of the Public Protector (OPP) and community representatives on 22 November 2011 to finalise all outstanding matters relating to the dam and also to form a task team to resolve disputes and other complaints with reference to the above report (by the Public Protector Report) and to complete most of this work by the middle of the next year 2012.

Nwamitwa Dam:

Funds are currently available for phase one (1) of the Greater Letaba Water Augmentation Project which will be use for the Implementation Plans, the rehabilitation and repairing and refurbishing of existing municipal water infrastructure in this area which including water treatment plant and boreholes to ensure reliable water supply infrastructure in the interim.

It should also be noted that with regards to the proposed Nwamitwa Dam the record of decision has been received recently allowing the Department to proceed with the preparatory work which is required prior to commencing with construction. Refer below for programme schedules:

· Phase 1 – Refurbishment of existing infrastructures (commence 2012);

· Phase 2 – Raising of Tzaneen dam (late 2012);

· Phase 3 – Building of Nwamitwa dam (start 2013);

· Phase 4 – Nwamitwa bulk distribution (start 2014); and

· Phase 5 – Nwamitwa secondary distribution (start 2015).

(1)(b) Yes, the Department's dam building programme in Limpopo is meeting the required specifications.

(1)(c) Yes, the Department's dam building programme in Limpopo holds benefits for the poor as drinking water will be available to them in the various areas where the dams are being built including the neighbouring villages. The projects will also brings with socio economic development. (i.e. the development of agricultural irrigation schemes and utilising sub-contractors and operators from the area).

(2) To date no incidences of corruption have been reported to me on the De Hoop Dam and the bulk distribution system from the De Hoop Dam around the Nebo Plateau. There are suspected irregularities on the Nandoni project, which resulted in the installation of faulty pipes. Currently, this project and its related processes are undergoing a forensic audit. Once the forensic audit is completed, the necessary corrective actions and recommendations will be implemented. Related legal issues are being handled by the state attorneys.

The systems in place to deal with incidences of corruption include:

· the reporting of the incident to the relevant departmental structures which include the Internal Audit, Risk Management and Labour Relations units as well as any other relevant external organs of state;

· the immediate investigation of the incident to establish the relevant facts and evidence; and

· the delivery of the incident report to the relevant manager/s for implementation of the findings.

(3) No, currently nobody is receiving drinking water from the De Hoop Dam as it is still under construction. The Nandoni Dam is supplying potable water to some users i.e. to 259 000 people (of the total potential of 1 163 000 people in the Vhembe District) who will be served after the completion of the Nandoni Bulk Distribution System. These people who are not yet receiving water from Nandoni Dam at this point in time are utilizing water from boreholes, Vondo Dam, Albasini Dam and Middle Letaba Dam.

(4) No, the distribution of water from the Dam is not what it should be due to the following reasons:

· The scheme is old as it was constructed in 1963/4 which makes it 47 years old.

· The scheme initially consisted of a 560 kVA hydro-electric power plant, a 1 750 kℓ/day purification plant, a pumping station, two reservoirs with a combined capacity of 2 200 kℓ and 11 km of pipelines. The current capacity of the scheme is 64 mega liters of water a day. The scheme is currently using Eskom power. Water was to be supplied to all the villages between Phiphidi and Sibasa, including the towns of Sibasa, Makwarela and Shayandima and Tshilidzini hospital.

(4)(a) The Shayandima and Phiphidi community do experience water shutoffs for short periods due to the following reasons:

· the aging infrastructure of the scheme;

· budget constraints to refurbish the old infrastructure and or the upgrading of the purification plant;

· the village reservoir and the reticulation;

· budget constraints to perform preventative maintenance;

· a combination of infrastructure bottle necks; and

· demand management and cost recovery measures which are not in place.

As a solution, the Department initiated a refurbishment programme which commenced in 2003/4 to refurbish the plant, buildings and the reservoir, and the work was transferred to the Vhembe District Municipality (DM) as the water services authority (WSA) who is busy with the refurbishments and the replacing of the A/C pipes. The demand-exceeding-supply-challenge will be addressed by the Nandoni Water Scheme which is expected to be ready and functioning in 2013. There is an advertised bid to construct a bulk pipeline and a reservoir that will be linked to the Nandoni Water Scheme. The bid is currently at adjudication stage.

The Nzhelele community experience water shutoffs for long periods due to the following reasons:

· there is a need for refurbishment of the old infrastructure and/or the upgrading of the purification plant, village reservoir and the reticulation;

· unavailability of cost recovery measures;

· vandalism of infrastructure and;

· unauthorised connections of water pipes.

As a solution, the Department initiated a refurbishment programme which commenced in 2003/4 to refurbish the plant, buildings and the reservoir; and the work was transferred to the Water Service Authority (WSA).

The WSA has upgraded the Mutshedzi water treatment plant and it has been commissioned this year. However, the plant is still not meeting the demand and is to be further upgraded as the Phase 6 project. The WSA has advertised the bid for the refurbishment and upgrading of the bulk pipeline and boreholes. The briefing session was held on 24 November 2011.

(4)(b) Water is not available for 24 hours as the Makhado Local Municipality is a large area that covers schemes including the Nzhelele, Kutama-Sinthumule, Albasin, Middle-Letaba, Tshitale, Tshakhuma, Vondo and borehole schemes. Yes, the communities are notified whenever water cut-offs are expected, and the communities are aware that water is only available certain hours per day since the reservoirs have to be filled first before water can be released to the reticulation systems.

(5)(a) Yes, the Water Services Act, 1997 (Act No. 108 of 1997) and the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) are aligned with the Constitution of the country which makes the provision of water a right for all South Africans. The Department is structured in such a way that these two laws are being rolled out and implemented.

(5)(b) Yes, the projects are ongoing to ensure that there is access to water for our people in Limpopo in accordance with the Constitution.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether her department has put any interventions in place to ensure that rural women in particular have access to state support when faced with the challenges of climate change; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3144. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

As noted in the National Climate Change Response Green Paper – "…although climate change provides a changing context and new challenges to the way government does its work, the basic work remains the same and, hence, government's roles and responsibilities remain the same." Hence, the question of interventions to ensure that rural women in particular have access to state support when faced with the challenges of climate change must be directed to the Ministry having jurisdiction over such matters, namely the Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform.

Notwithstanding the above, the Department of Environment Affairs has been working very closely with the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform as well as various stakeholders including women's organizations on climate change adaptation related activities and the results of much of this work is now reflected in the new National Climate Change Response White Paper. For example, the White Paper specifically contains the following principle that will guide the achievement of South Africa's climate change response objectives - "Special needs and circumstances – considering the special needs and circumstances of localities and people that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, including vulnerable groups such as women, and especially poor and/or rural women; children, especially infants and child-headed families; the aged; the sick; and the physically challenged."

The White Paper also notes that – "Women, as primary care-givers, are put under additional strain looking after sick and elderly household members whilst maintaining a household. This leaves them less time to earn a livelihood putting cyclical pressure on them as they often neglect their own health in prioritising the health of others." In respect of rural settlement responses, the White Paper commits South Africa to – "Empower local communities, particularly women who are often primary [agricultural] producers, in the process of designing and implementing adaptation strategies." With respect to disaster risk reduction and management, the White Paper commits South Africa to – "Collaborate with social networks such as community organisations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), women and farmers' organisations, and the Adaptation Network to help raise awareness and to transfer technology and build capacity."

Furthermore, the Department is also represented on the National Disaster Management Advisory Forum (NDMAF). This is a Technical Forum established by the Minister for Provincial and Local Government in terms of section 5 of the Disaster Management Act No. 57 of 2002. The Forum is a body in which national, provincial and local government and other disaster management role-players (including South African Weather Services, CSIR, Agricultural Research Council; the Water Research Commission and other research institutions) consult one another and co-ordinate their actions on matters relating to disaster management. Climate change related issues including early warning systems, disaster risk management and related climate change adaptation issues are discussed in these meetings.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether her department has made recycling more accessible to all as a way of disposing of waste; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, how (a) has her department created awareness about recycling as a sustainable means of disposing waste, (b) does her department intend to take this endeavour forward and (c) does her department intend to incorporate all South Africans in utilising recycling as a form of waste disposal?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3143. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

a) The Department indeed supports recycling and encourages all sectors, including the public to explore reduction, re-use and recycling options before disposal to landfill. This is reflected in the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008), which is founded on the principles of the waste hierarchy. The Waste hierarchy is an internationally acclaimed and accepted principle of good waste management. It advocates for reducing the generation of waste where possible, exploring ways of re-using, recycling and recovering energy from some of the waste streams before disposal to landfill. This is contrary to the manner in which waste has historically been managed in the country, where disposal to landfill has been the first option. This approach therefore requires all relevant government spheres and departments, the private sector and communities in general to change their approach towards waste management.

b) Specifically, the National Waste Management Strategy, which has been approved by Cabinet, places an obligation on municipalities to initiate separation of recyclables from general waste at points of generation, i.e. at household level. In order for this to be a success, all members of the community have to be involved.

The Waste Act also makes allowances for the private sector to prepare and submit Industry Waste Management Plans (IWMPs). Currently priority sectors are waste tyres, packaging waste, electrical and electronic waste and the lighting industry. The fundamental principle again in this regard is the waste hierarchy. The different sector IWMPs are required to follow the principles of the waste hierarchy while also ensuring that their recycling initiatives create jobs. This is a key strategic move for the department in ensuring that the private sector takes responsibility for the waste they produce, whilst also contributing towards the imperatives of this country such as job creation. Currently the department is reviewing plans from the tyre and packing sectors. Public participation is a key component of the drafting of these IWMPs to ensure public awareness and input into these plans.

c) Awareness creation is an ongoing function of the department, starting with the consultations during the drafting of the aforementioned pieces of legislation and the subsequent strategies. Further consultation and awareness creation is carried out by the department through different programmes and initiatives. The Pollution and Waste Chief Directorate specifically has a sub-directorate that offers support to municipalities, other sector departments and stakeholders generally. As part of the functions of this unit, messages relating to recycling are communicated to a wide range of stakeholders. As a way of supporting the small businesses in this sector, the department offers financial support to a wide range of recycling initiatives through its Social Responsibility Programme.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether she has found that any biodiversity is lost annually due to the informal trade in wild animals and plants in Cape Town; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) which animals and plants are endangered as a result of the said informal trade and (b) how is her department dealing with this matter?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3142. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

The matter in question could be best addressed and managed by the Western Cape conservation provincial authority or Cape Nature in close cooperation with the Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality. The management of provincial and local conservation areas and subsequent protection of species is one of the functions that provincial authorities should prioritise. The issue in question or the scale thereof was not brought to the attention of the national government for special intervention. National government however, has developed legislation and national frameworks or norms and standards to assist provinces in discarding their functions in this regard. Examples of these are the National Environment Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) , National Environment Management: Protected Areas Act as well as their subsequent regulations like the Threatened or Protected Species(TOPS) regulation are some of the tools to be used for the protection of species. Furthermore, local government and individuals are accommodated in the provisions of the legislation through among others the development and implementation of species management plans as provided for in Section 43 of NEMBA. Provinces have their specific provincial acts or ordinances that specifically deal with the same issues and such should be applicable in this instance.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether any applications have been received by her department to declare new nature reserves on private land; if so, (a) in which provinces and (b) how many applications have been received for each province;

(2) whether the process for the successful declaration of the respective applications is on course; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3141. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) No. Private Nature Reserves, as Nature Reserves are declared by the Provincial MECs according to section 23(3) of Natural Environmental Management Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act no 57 of 2003)

(2) Refer to the above

QUESTION NO 3119

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO, 31)

3119, Ms L D Mazibuko (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether the Vogel Vlei irrigation scheme has been established in terms of an Act of Parliament; if so, (a) which Act, (b) on what date (i) was the scheme initially published in the Government Gazette and (ii) did it come into existence, (c) what is the (c)name and (ii) designation of the departmental official who keeps the founding documents of this irrigation scheme and (d) what is the current status of the scheme? NW3643E

·--00000---

REPL Y:

(a) The Vogelvlei Water Control Area (near Gouda in the Western Cape) was established in terms of the Irrigation and Conservation of Water Act, 1912 (Act 8 of 1912), and or Irrigation Amendment Act, 1934 (Act No. 46 of 1934).

(b)(i) The Vogelvlei Dam Government Water Control Area was first gazetted on 6 June 1947, Proclamation number 131.

(b )(ii) The Vogelvlei Government Water Work was completed in 1952.

(c)(i) There is no official in the department who keeps the founding document of this irrigation and scheme, as all founding documents are kept at the Government National Archives. (c)(ii)

(d) Presently, the scheme is known as the Berg River (Vogelvlei Dam) Government Water

Scheme, supplying water for agricultural use to the Lower Berg River Irrigation Board and water for domestic and industrial purposes to the City of Cape Town and other towns in the West Coast District Municipal area. The Lower Berg River Irrigation Board was established in terms of the Water Act, 1956 (Act No. 54 of 1956) and is still functional. The board is still in the process of transforming to a Water User Association.

QUESTION NO 3118

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3118. Ms L D Mazibuko (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether the Voëlvlei Dam in the Western Cape has audited financial statements; if not, why not; if so, where can a copy of these statements be obtained;

(2) whether accurate records are kept on the (a) end-users that receive water from this dam and (b) amounts of water they receive; if not, why not, in each case; if so, where can these records be accessed;

(3) whether she has been informed of any litigation against her department concerning contested ownership of the land on which the dam is built or the surrounding land; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what (a) are the relevant details, (b) is the status of such litigation and (c) was her department's response to this litigation? NW3642E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Voelvlei Dam does not have its own audited financial statements because it is part of the Department's Water Trading Entity infrastructure asset, as a result, any expenditure and revenue generated from this dam is accounted for through the Department's Water Trading Entity financial statement.

(2)(a) Yes. Accurate records are available on the end-users that receive water from this dam. However, the financial system of the Department is structured in such a way that each and every dam is a cost centre as well as a profit centre. This system enables the Department to apportion expenditure appropriately as well as realise revenue generated from the infrastructure.

(2)(b) Yes. Accurate records are available on the amount of water that end-users receive because all water users per dam are measured according to the water pricing strategy of 2007 and information thereof can be accessed from our operational offices.

(3)(a) I have not yet been briefed about any litigation against my department concerning the contested ownership of land on which the dam is built or any surroundings thereof. I have subsequently instructed my department to give me a full briefing on the matter..

(3)(b) As soon as I am fully briefed on the matter I shall be able to advise on the status of such litigation;

(3)(c) My Department's response to such litigation would be guided by the information that I would receive from the internal briefing.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Dr J C Kloppers-Lourens (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) What is the name of the entity that has been contracted to clean her department's offices in Pretoria and (b) when was this entity appointed;

(2) whether, at the time of considering the tender for this cleaning contract, there were specifications in the tender documents regarding the use of eco-friendly cleaning products by the bidding entities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether her department has found that the cleaning products that are being used to clean her department's offices are eco-friendly; if not, what steps will be taken to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached;

(4) whether the cleaning products that are being used are biodegradable; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(5) whether the cleaning products are accredited under any green or eco-friendly accreditation system, if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3116. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) (a) The Department of Environmental Affairs does not use a contractor to render cleaning services in Pretoria. The service is rendered by staff appointed for this purpose. (b) This question falls away.

(2) In light of the response in point 1(a) above, this question falls away.

(3) The cleaning products used are as far as the Department could determine from the product labels eco-friendly.

(4) The cleaning products used are as far as the Department could determine from the product labels bio-degradable.

(5) The Department is not sure whether the products are accredited with any green or eco-friendly accreditation, but will look into this aspect in the future. .

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 October 2011

Dr J C Kloppers-Lourens (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to her reply to question 2822 on 1 December 2010, on what date was each rhino that was sold directly to a certain person (name furnished) removed from the park for delivery;

(2) on what date was each of the rhinos sold to (a) a certain person (name furnished), (b) a certain person (name also furnished), (c) a certain person (name also furnished) and (d) a certain person (name also furnished) and reflected as having been delivered to the person mentioned in paragraph (1);

(3) whether she has found that these were the only rhinos that came into possession of the said person during the period reflected in her reply; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether, with reference to her reply to question 2459 on 26 September 2011, measures have been put in place to prevent the said person from obtaining rhinos through third parties who buy rhinos directly from the Kruger National Park; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

3115. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) Adult male, removed from the park on 24 June 2008.

Adult male, removed from the park on 21 May 2009

Adult female with heifer calf, three adult males, three young males, removed from the park on 11 June 2009.

Two adult females and two bull calves, two adult males, adult female and heifer calf, removed from the park on 18 June 2009.

Adult female and heifer calf, adult female and bull calf, removed from the park on 23 June 2009.

Adult male removed from the park on 1 October 2009.

(2) (a) Adult female and bull calf, adult female and heifer calf, three adult males, one young male removed from the park on 24 July 2009.

Two adult females and two bull calves, one adult female and heifer calf, two adult males, removed from the park on 28 July 2009.

Two adult females and two heifer calves, removed from the park on 30 July 2009.

(b) Three adult males, three subadult males, removed from the park on 16 October 2008

(c) Four adult males, removed from the park on 29 July 2008

(d) Five young adult females, removed from the park on 8 July 2009.

(3) It is not possible for SANParks to be certain that the rhinos listed above were the only rhinos from the Kruger National Park (KNP) that came into the possession of the said person. Rhino translocations between members of the private sector are regulated by provincial conservation authorities.

(4) SANParks has no measures to specifically prevent the said person from obtaining rhinos from third parties that buy rhinos directly from the KNP because this is regulated by provincial conservation authorities. SANParks has the following measures to prevent the sale of rhinos from the KNP to persons that may be considered unsuitable to possess rhinos:

· Prospective buyers must complete a questionnaire to stipulate the end destination where the animals will be offloaded, indicating the suitability of the end destination, both from the ecological and security points of view. The suitability of the destination is taken into consideration in allocating rhinos to a prospective buyer.

· The offer to purchase forms completed by a prospective buyer state: "SANParks shall be entitled in its absolute discretion to accept or to reject this offer in whole or in part".

· The Conditions of Sale state: "SANParks shall have the right to withdraw all or some of the white rhino from the bidding process at any time before a valid Sales Agreement in respect of all or any of such rhino has been concluded".

QUESTION NO. 3113

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3113. Mrs J F Terblanche (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether there is a complete and up-to-date asset register for Voëlvlei Dam in the Western Cape; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) (a) on what date was the last audit of assets at the Voëlvlei Dam conducted and (b) what are the names and designations of the officials who conducted the audit;

(3) whether all assets at the dam were accounted for at the last audit, i.e. 2010-11; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether any theft of assets of the dam, most notably copper cables, has occurred since 1 January 2010; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;

(5) whether she has found that the management of the dam is in a good state of affairs; if not, what steps will she take to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3637E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Yes, there is a complete and up-to-date asset register for Voelvlei Dam in the Western Cape

(2)(a) The last audit of assets at the Voelvlei Dam was done on 17August 2011.

(2)(b) The names and designations of the officials who conducted the audit are as follows:

· Ms N Bilana – Chief Provisioning Administration Clerk;

· Mr J Jordaan – Senior Provisioning Administration Clerk; and

· Ms L Magalie – Senior Water Control Officer.

(3) All assets at the Dam were accounted for at the last audit with the following noted: one (1) item was identified as obsolete / redundant and transported to the disposal store at the Worcester office.

(4) The theft of copper cables reported since January 2010 were those of the Telkom lines that provided communication to the area, some of the gates and fences on the servitude road.

(5) The management of the dam and infrastructure has been found to be in a good state of affairs.

QUESTION NO 3112

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3112. Mrs J F Terblanche (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Who is the owner of (a) the land within the perimeter fence on which the Voëlvlei Dam in the Western Cape is situated and (b) all portions of land that are immediately outside the fence;

(2) whether the Department of Water has any policy that permits employees of the department to farm or keep livestock on land owned or managed by her department; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether any employee of the Department of Water who works at the Voëlvlei Dam is keeping livestock (a) for himself or (b) on behalf of a third party (i) inside or (ii) outside the perimeter fence of the dam; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, (aa) what is the (aaa) name and (bbb) designation of the employee and (bb) how can this practice of keeping livestock be justified;

(4) whether the employee has entered into a lease agreement with the Department of Water or any other state entity to keep livestock on the relevant piece of land; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3636E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) The land within the perimeter fence of the Voëlvlei Dam in the Western Cape is owned by the Republic of South Africa.

(1)(b) All portions of land that is immediately outside the fence of the Voëlvlei Dam is owned by the Republic of South Africa.

(2) There is no specific policy for the keeping of live stock. There is however a Departmental Circular, Circular 24 of 1994 (dated 23 March 1994) that allow employees of the Department, who stay on Government Schemes, to keep livestock for own use on State Land surrounding the dam.

(3)(a) Yes, as far as we are informed the employee is keeping livestock for himself.

(3)(b) No, as far as we are informed the employee is keeping livestock for himself and not on behalf of a third party.

(3)(b)(i) Inside and outside the perimeter fence of the dam but on the land that was expropriated for the purposes of the dam and registered in the name of the State. One of the farms expropriated is farm Vogel Valley No. 207. A small portion of the farm Vogel Valley No. 207 is cut off from the main farm 207 by district road No. R46. This portion of land is also State land managed by the Department.

(3)(b)(ii) Inside and outside the perimeter fence of the dam but on the land that was expropriated for the purposes of the dam and registered in the name of the Republic of South Africa. As stated under (3)(b)(1) a small portion of the farm Vogel Valley No. 207 is cut off from the main farm by district road No. R46.

(3)(aaa) Mr J Barnes.

(3)(bbb) Mr. Barnes is a Water Control Officer in the Department of Water Affairs.

(3)(bb) Most of the Department's schemes are not close to towns and by allowing the employees to keep livestock they become self sufficient and can meet their own needs.

(4) No. No lease agreement with employee (Mr. J Barnes) is in place.

The conditions, set out in terms of Departmental Circular 24 of 1994, regarding the keeping live stock on state land, was addressed with Mr. Barnes on 5 October 2011 at Voëlvlei dam by the Director: Southern Operations (DWA). This was done following a query received from a member of the public, a certain Mr. Helius Walters. Mr. Barnes was instructed to adhere to the conditions of the relevant circular and reduce his live stock to the numbers stated in Circular 24 of 1994.

Mr. Walters, who was present on the day (5 October 2011), at Voëlvlei dam, indicated that he was the claimant in a pending land claim court case against the Republic of South Africa pertaining to the land on which Voëlvlei Dam was built.

QUESTION NO. 3111

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3111. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) What is the expected date of completion of phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP), (b) why is there a need for phase 2 of the LHWP and (c) what is the (i) expected number of Basothos that will need to be relocated and (ii) the extent of the landmass that will be covered by phase 2 of the LHWP;

(2) whether there are measures in place to ensure good governance in (a) the awarding of tenders and (b) project management; if not, what steps will be taken to rectify the situation in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(3) whether she has been informed that a certain person (name furnished), who has been convicted by a Lesotho court for accepting bribes during phase 1 of the LHWP, has recently been appointed by the Lesotho Highlands Commission and will be involved in phase 2 of the LHWP; if so, what is the position in this regard; if not,

(4) whether she will investigate the matter? NW3635E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) The expected date of completion of Phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP) is July 2020.

(1)(b) Phase 2 of the LHWP is required to provide sufficient water resources to augment the Vaal River system which supplies Gauteng and the surrounding areas. The implementation of Phase 2 will therefore ensure continued water availability for these socio-economically growing areas from the Vaal System to meet current and projected demands at adequate assurance of supply until about 2045.

(1)(c)(i) The feasibility study identified about 2 550 people from 17 villages that may need to be relocated. The Lesotho government has handled this kind of a project before when Katse Dam was constructed and we are confident that even in this instance they will handle it with the necessary duty and care.

(1)(c)(ii) The extent of the landmass that will be covered by Phase 2 of the LHWP is 5 040 hectares.

(2)(a) There are existing measures in place to ensure good governance such as the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority's Procurement Policy and the Anti-Corruption Policy that is currently being considered by stakeholders such as the World Bank, the Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA), the Lesotho Attorney General's office, the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority (LHDA) and the Lesotho Highlands Water Commission (LHWC).

Both Cabinets of South Africa and Lesotho have ensured that there is an inclusion of a clause that ensures anti-corruption and good governance, in the recently signed Memorandum of Understanding for this development.

In addition, the LHWC will establish an independent oversight body that will be responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of all the procurement processes regarding the project.

(2)(b) The LHDA is in the process of appointing a Project Management Unit (PMU) that will be responsible for the implementation of Phase 2. The PMU is expected to be in place by January 2012.

(3) Yes, I was informed of such an appointment. I have raised objection on the matter with the Minister responsible for water affairs in Lesotho, who acts on behalf of the Lesotho government. We have also sought a comprehensive legal opinion that also backs our objection. The Lesotho government has later reconsidered this appointment which they had made. The latest information I have received is that the Lesotho Cabinet has since decided to remove the said incumbent from any involvement with LHDA and LHWC. They have however, also been given a copy of our legal opinion which they will study for purposes of informing their State Law office in Lesotho.

(4) There is no need to investigate the matter as it has already been processed.

QUESTION NO 3105

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3105. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) What is the state of compliance by the Sapref refinery in Durban including its storage facilities at Island View with the relevant (a) water, (b) waste and (c) air quality legislation as at the latest specified date for which information is available;

(2) (a) what are the dates of all inspections by compliance officers of the Department of (i) Environmental Affairs and (ii) Water Affairs to the refinery since 1 January 2008 and (b) in each case, what are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the officers who conducted the inspections;

(3) whether any (a) directives or (b) notices of intention have been issued against the refinery for any transgressions since 1 January 2008 in terms of the (i) National Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998, (ii) National Environmental Management: Waste Act, Act 59 of 2008, (iii) National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, Act 39 of 2004 and (iv) National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) What was the response of the refinery in the case of each (a) directive and (b) notice of intention to issue a directive? NW3629E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) With regard to compliance with the water legislation, the Sapref Refinery and their Island View storage facility discharge water containing waste via the eThekwini Municipal sewer system under a Schedule Trade Effluent Permit which is regarded as a Schedule one water use. The water containing waste is treated by the Ethekwini Municipality at the Southern Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW) before disposal via a sea outfall pipeline. The Ethekwini Municipality scored 90.6% for the pervious Green Drop assessment period with the Southern WWTW earning a prestigious green drop with a score of 92.3%.

The Sapref Refinery forms part of a number of other companies that are collectively responsible for groundwater remediation of the Island View Complex. The companies working within the Island View Complex are tenants of the Transnet National Ports Authority and they are currently involved in the remediation of the entire Island View Complex. The work to date includes extensive groundwater monitoring, risk assessment and status quo investigations. The Sapref Refinery (Island View site), together with officials from the Department of Water Affairs, are part of the Groundwater sub-committee group which meets every two months.

(1)(b) & (c) Firstly, with regard to air quality, since 1 April 2010, the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality has been the responsible Air Quality Licensing Authority and they have not reported any significant, Sapref-related, compliance concerns to the national department since taking over this responsibility.

Notwithstanding the above, with regard to waste and air quality legislation, a comprehensive compliance inspection took place on 5-6 August 2008 at the Sapref refinery, as well as the Island View storage facility. Since then, various authorisations have been replaced and / or the facility has been issued with new authorisations. In order to ensure compliance, the Department facilitates continuous supervision through regular engagements with Sapref. The Department is also aware that monthly meetings are held between eThekwini Health as the current licensing authority for National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (NEM:AQA), to discuss and provide feedback in terms of the facility's performance in relation to, amongst others, its Atmospheric Emission License and its Scheduled Trade Permit (STP).

The engagement occurs on a quarterly basis where officials from the following authorities are represented:

· Kwa-Zulu Natal Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Development;

· eThekwini Health;

· Department of Water Affairs

In preparation of these quarterly meetings, a "Quarterly Environmental Compliance and Performance Report" is compiled by the facility representatives and submitted to all attendees for review. The report is a comprehensive summary detailing the environmental performance of the facility during the past quarter, with particular focus on the following:

· Number, nature, as well as the action taken in response to complaints received during the quarter;

· Non-compliances related to applicable legislation as well as authorisations and / or permits;

· Enforcement action taken by authorities in respect of the non-compliances detected (b-above)

· Emergency incidents, if any;

· Process upsets, if any;

· Media reports, if any;

· Status updates on all authorisations applied for and/ or required;

· Environmental improvements implemented in the quarter;

· Environmental improvements planned for the next quarter;

· Engagement with authorities, apart from this meeting; and

· Data in the form of quarterly monitoring results and graphs (i.e. air, waste and water).

Items discussed at these meetings include the following:

· Report on action items from previous meetings;

· Feedback from Sapref on the "Quarterly Environmental Compliance and Performance Report";

· Sapref Progress Report on Environmental Improvement Programmes;

· Discussion and questions on the "Quarterly Environmental Compliance and Performance Report"; and

· Action items to be completed prior to the next quarterly meeting.

The last quarterly compliance meeting was held on the 8 August 2011, where the following issues were addressed:

a) Water:

According to Sapref's effluent quality report, there were a number of occasions where the Phenols & Sulphide concentrations were higher than required. During these occasions, the effluent was diverted from the Southern Works discharge to Sapref's internal buffer systems until the effluent was once again within the required limit.

b) Waste:

Sapref has been issued with two waste management licences recently and although compliance to these were not assessed at this engagement, Sapref did report on the volumes generated and disposed of at both the refinery and Island view.

c) Air:

There was a process upset at the Sulphur Recovery Unit 14 on 23 April 2011. This caused Sulphur Dioxide (SO₂)exceedences which led to various complaints from the surrounding community during this period. This matter has been reported to the eThekwini municipality which is dealing with the issue.

(2)(a) & (b) As noted above, a comprehensive strategic environmental compliance inspection was conducted on 6 August 2008; this inspection was conducted by the following individuals from the following government institutions:

Department of Environmental Affairs:

· Sthembiso Hinani - Assistant Director (ASD): Air Quality Management

· Wiseman Rikhotso - ASD: Compliance Monitoring

· Makgomo Mushwana - ASD: Air Quality Management

· Mazwi Lushaba - Director: Air Quality Management

· Anben Pillay - Deputy Director (DD): Compliance Monitoring

· Vanessa Chetty - ASD: Compliance Monitoring

· Prince Mkhonto - ASD: Air Quality Management

· Nolu Matebese - ASD: Enforcement

Kwa-Zulu Natal Department of Agriculture and Environmental Affairs:

· Xolani Makhanya - Senior Environmental Officer (SEO): Compliance, Monitoring & Enforcement

· Sengalela Mgaga - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Brenden Perumal - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Dan Mkhwanazi - DD: Uthukela District

· Stewart Green - ASD: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

· Sidwell Ngcamu - SEO: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

· Khethiwe Dlamini - ASD: Pollution & Waste Management

· Jomo Mbatha - DD: Zululand

· Nathi Mqadi - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Nasreen Mansoor - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Mischelle Govender - ASD: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

· Phumelele Msimang - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Senzo Radebe - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Mpho Sebole - SEO: Pollution and Waste Management

· Shireen Mahabeer - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Ntokozo Nkosi - ASD: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Glorius Mhlanga - SEO: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

eThekwini Municipality

· Jason Reddy - Pollution Control Officer: eThekwini Health

· Ronnie Chetty - Pollution Control Officer: eThekwini Health

An environmental compliance inspection was also conducted on 25 January 2011. This inspection was conducted by the following officials from the following government institutions:

Department of Environmental Affairs:

· Stewart Green - DD: Section 30

· Armstrong Simelane - ASD: Compliance Monitoring

· Brenden Perumal - ASD: Administrative Enforcement

· Phila Dlamini - ASD: Section 30

Kwa-Zulu Natal Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Development;

· Nasreen Mansoor - SEO: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement

· Rishal Sooklal - SEO: Pollution and Waste Management

eThekwini Municipality

· Peter Roberts - Pollution Control Officer: eThekwini Health

(2)(a)(ii) & (b) (ii) An inspection by compliance officers of the Department of Water Affairs was done on 5 August 2008 and it was conducted by Ms Renelle Pillay: Assistant Director, Water Quality Management.

(3)(a)(i) (ii) & (iii) In relation to the comprehensive strategic environmental compliance inspection conducted on 5-6 August 2008, the following administrative enforcement intervention have occurred:

· The Compliance Inspection Report was finalised and issued to Sapref during October 2009, affording the facility until November 2009 to make representations to the findings enclosed in the report.

· Sapref's representations were received in November 2009 and reviewed by officials from this Department.

· An Enforcement strategy was drafted, in order to address concerns relating to air quality, waste management as well as water quality.

· The Department has also engaged Sapref in an APPA registration certificate review process and eThekwini Municipality is now processing the Atmospheric Emission License application.

· Subsequent to the drafting of the Enforcement strategy, the Department issued Sapref with a letter dated 7 June 2010, requesting additional information to guide its decision as to whether or not to proceed with enforcement action against the facility. The requested information was provided by Sapref on 21 June 2010, and the Department decided not to pursue enforcement action as all of the concerns raised were adequately addressed.

· In relation to the environmental compliance inspection conducted for the TEL project at Sapref on 25 January 2011, the Department is in the process of addressing the findings of this inspection through an administrative enforcement process. Sapref has been afforded an opportunity to make representations in line with the requirements of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act ("PAJA"), and at the time of responding to your query, no final decision has been taken in that regard.

(3)(a) & (b) (iv) In relation to the Department of Water Affairs, no directives or notices of intention have been issued since 1 January 2008 in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) as the company has undertaken the required remedial work and no further contraventions have been brought to the attention of the Department.

(4) Falls away

QUESTION NO. 3098

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3098. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether she has been informed of rising water levels in the Sterkfontein Caves; if not,

(2) whether she will investigate the situation; if so,

(3) whether her department is investigating the chemical composition of the water to determine if it is acid mine water drainage; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3622E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Yes, the Department is aware of a slight rise in the water level in the Sterkfontein Caves as indicated in the study conducted by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) on behalf of the Department. The rise in the water level in the Sterkfontein Caves amounted to 1.9 m between early 2007 to mid 2010 and more recently (June 2011) the water level has reached a height of 2.8 m above the October 2007 level. The water level rise is, however, not attributable to decant of the acid mine drainage within the Western Basin.

(2) Yes, the situation has been investigated by the CSIR on behalf of the Department and its findings have been included in the study report. However, the situation is being monitored with interventions planned should it be necessary.

(3) Yes, the chemical composition of the water to determine if it is acid mine water drainage has also been investigated by the CSIR on behalf of the Department and its findings have been included in the study. The chemistry of the water shows negligible impact from the mine water over a time-span of 10 years, revealing very little fluctuation in chemical composition between four sampling events bracketed by the period from April 2001 and January 2011. A more complete comparison of cave water chemistry is provided by reviewing analytical records dated April 2001, April 2005, April 2010 and January 2011. Based on these results, there was a slight increase in sulphate from 58 mg/L in May 2010 to 71 mg/L in January 2011. This slight increase in sulphate level is not uncommon in groundwater. However, there was a decrease in electrical conductivity values from 62 to 56 mS/m which suggests an improvement in the water quality. The pH value changed from 7.1 and pH 7.8 and has become less acidic. The iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) levels in the Cave water were below the respective detection limits of 0.020 mg/L and 0.005 mg/L.

The above results confirm that the Sterkfontein Caves are not affected by the decanting of acid mine drainage from the Western Basin.

QUESTION NO 3043

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3043. Mr S J Masango (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether the construction of the water purification plant at the Victor Khanye municipality in Mpumalanga has been completed; if not, why not; if so, (a) when was the plant completed, (b) which company was awarded the tender to construct the plant, (c) at what cost and (d) when will the plant be commissioned;

(2) whether this plant will be used to purify water supplied from nearby boreholes; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3531E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) Yes, the water purification plant at the Victor Khanye Local Municipality in Mpumalanga was completed on 30 June 2010.

(1)(b) The following companies were appointed to construct the plant based on the funding from the Mpumalanga Provincial Government:

· Moedi Consulting Engineers;

· Mkhwanazi Construction (Civil);

· Waterskilld Pty (Ltd); and

· Port Ferry Electrical.

(1)(c) The total cost of the contract was R76 386 775.10 with an additional variation order of R5 788 254.83 based on the extended scope of work.

(1)(d) The water purification plant will be commissioned as from the first week of
November 2011, which is the date the Victor Khanye Local Municipality proposed with the Mpumalanga Provincial Government. The water purification plant could not be commissioned after completion due to further work that needed to be done to upgrade and refurbish the Botleng and Delmas Pump Stations that supply water to the purification plant.

(2) Yes, the plant will be used to purify water supplied from nearby equipped boreholes that is composed of six (6) boreholes from the A field, seven (7) boreholes from the
B field and four (4) boreholes from the C field.

QUESTION NO 3009

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 14 OCTOBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 31)

3009. Dr A Lotriet (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether (a) her departments and (b) any entity reporting to her was approached by a certain political organisation (name furnished) to contribute to its 66^th birthday celebrations; if so, in each case, (i) which entities and (ii) what was the (aa) nature and (bb) value of the contribution that was requested;

(2) whether (a) her departments and (b) any of the specified entities reporting to her agreed to the request; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, (i) who approved the request, (ii) what was the justification for the agreement to the request and (iii) from which budget will the contribution be paid;

(3) whether (a) her departments and (b) any of the specified entities reporting to her made financial contributions to the said political organisation without being approached for such financial contributions; if so, in each case, (i) what amount will be contributed, (ii) from which budget, (iii) who made the decision to provide the specified funds to the said political organisation and (iv) how is this (aa) decision and (bb) amount justified;

(4) whether (a) her departments and (b) any of the entities reporting to her rely on any (i) statutory and (ii) policy provisions in (aa) agreeing and (bb) making such contribution; if not, in each case, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details? NW3493E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) The Department or its entities were never approached by a certain political organisation to contribute to its 66^th birthday celebrations.

(2) Falls away.

(3) The Department or its entities did not make any a financial contribution to the political organisation.

(4) Falls away.

QUESTION NO 2977

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 23 SEPTEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 30)

2977. Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether her department has been following reports of the (a) diminution of aquifers and (b) contamination of water in the United States, Queensland, Australia, and elsewhere in the world as a result of fracking; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3454E

---00O00---

Yes, the Department is indeed following international reports on fracking and these includes diminution of aquifers as well as contamination of water as these two aspects are also major reasons of concern to me and the Department.

The Department continually uses its technical expertise and international networks to ensure that we distinguish between sound technical and multitude of sensationalist reports. International experience, knowledge and legislation combined with our own unique geo-hydrological situation will be used to develop a policy position that can guide possible future applications for water use licenses.

QUESTION NO. 2976

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 23 SEPTEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 30)

2976. Mrs H N Ndude to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her department has given mines a directive with regard to acid mine drainage (AMD); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what is the current directive that has been given to mines regarding AMD and (b) which mines have not complied with the said directive

(2) whether her department intends to issue a new directive to mines regarding their role in AMD; if not, why not; if so, what will the new directive include? NW3453E

REPLY:

(1) No, since May 2010, none of the Witwatersrand mines have been issued with any directives in respect of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD). The Department is instead working closely with the existing mines to achieve specific short-term interventions including, among others, the use of existing mine water treatment plants for the management of AMD in the area.

(1)(a) Falls away.

(1)(b) Falls away.

(2) Yes, the Department intends to invoke sections 19 and 20 notices in terms of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) that will direct defunct and existing Witwatersrand mines to participate in AMD management solutions. Through the Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (currently acting as an implementing agent for the short-term AMD management solution), depending on the outcome of work being done and conclusion of investigation of solutions that may be used, the mines may be issued with directives that will require them to contribute towards the costs of the implementation of the short-term solution.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether all vessels that sailed along the coast were requested to collect samples of household and industrial plastics in the oceans surrounding the coast in order to gauge the extent of plastic pollution and its consequences on marine life and our economic prosperity; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,

(2) whether she will put measures in place to achieve sustained monitoring of plastic pollutants in the oceans around our coast; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2975. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

1. No.

The sailing of vessels along the coast is controlled by the South African Maritime Authority (SAMSA) and Transnet National Ports Authority.

2. No.

South Africa has participated in a United Nations Environment Programme funded project in 2007 to assess the extent of marine litter, including plastic pollutants, in the Western Indian Ocean Region. The study collected information on the distribution and effects of marine litter and a regional report was prepared. The study concluded that, in the case of South Africa, there is sufficient knowledge on trends in the distribution of marine litter and the scale of the problem. Whilst it is acknowledged that ongoing monitoring should take place to determine future trends, at this stage my Department has no vessels, nor the capacity, to carry out such monitoring.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

With reference to her reply to question 1734 on 23 August 2011, what are the (a) quantities and (b) descriptions used in respect of each of the exporter/importer transactions?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2935. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

This question requires new information as such it was referred to the provincial MEC responsible for environment. In terms of the Threatened or Protected Species Regulations the MECs' responsible for environment have been designated as Issuing Authorities. The MECs delegated the issuing of permits to the relevant officials within each province. The details relating to the quantities and descriptions of importer/exporter transactions in the provinces should therefore be obtained from the provinces, we are however awaiting the response from provinces. The Honourable Member will be provided with the information as soon as my Department receives it from the relevant provinces.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mrs J F Terblanche (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether the Government has conducted any studies into the (a) effect on and (b) extent of plastic nurdles in our marine environment; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether she intends to introduce any legislation or regulations to reduce the extent of plastic pollution in the marine environment; if not, why not; if so, what (a) progress has her department made with planning and drafting the said legislation or regulations and (b) are the further relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2931. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

1. No. The Department has not carried out studies on the effect and extent of plastic nurdles in the marine environment. Such studies have been done locally, by the Percy FitzPatrick Institute at the University of Cape Town (the Institute), and regionally, by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). In 1994 the Institute conducted a survey on the distribution of plastic nurdles around the South African coast. In 2007, UNEP carried out a study to collate existing information about the extent of marine litter in the Western Indian Ocean Region. As part of the study, the Institute collected information on marine litter and its impacts in South Africa, the results of which were incorporated into a regional report.

2. No. The solution is not to introduce new legislation but to strengthen existing controls over solid waste management on land, and to promote waste reduction and public awareness. Marine plastic pollution also emanates to a lesser degree from shipping activities at sea. Measures to control ship-source pollution are implemented by the Department of Transport.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mrs J F Terblanche (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

With reference to her reply to question 2935 on 16 December 2010, (a) why has the SA Weather Services Amendment Bill not been tabled in Parliament and (b) when is it expected to be tabled?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2930. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(a) Unfortunately, the process leading up to the tabling in Parliament took longer than initially anticipated.

(b) The Bill has already been certified by the Chief State Law Adviser and is ready to be introduced in Parliament. I will submit a letter to the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces in compliance with Joint Rule 159 during the current recess. The Government Notice indicating my intention to introduce this Bill in Parliament will be published on 30 September 2011.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

With reference to her reply to question 259 on 11 March 2011, (a) what were the destination countries for the export of Panthera leo in all the listed categories from the Free State province in (i) 2009 and (ii) 2010, (b) in each case, what is the name of the (i) exporter and (ii) end recipient receiving the goods and (c) what are the quantities and descriptions that was used in respect of each of the specified exporter/importer transactions listed?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2929. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

This question requires new information as such it was referred to the provincial MEC responsible for environment. In terms of the Threatened or Protected Species Regulations the MECs' responsible for environment have been designated as Issuing Authorities. The MECs delegated the issuing of permits to the relevant officials within each province. The details relating to the quantities and descriptions of importer/exporter transactions in the provinces should therefore be obtained from the provinces, we are however awaiting the response from provinces. The Honourable Member will be provided with the information as soon as my Department receives it from the Free State Province.

QUESTION NO 2928

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 23 SEPTEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 30)

2928. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) With reference to the 2011 edition of the Green Drop Report, (a) which municipalities and water service authorities, that did not satisfy the overall performance of the wastewater service management during the reporting period, have submitted a corrective action plan to the Department of Water within 30 days of the release of the report as stipulated in the report and (b) on what date was this corrective action plan submitted;

(2) (a) what are the names of the municipalities and water service authorities that did not submit a corrective action plan and (b) in each case, (i) why was a corrective action plan not submitted and (ii) what was the response of her department in this regard? NW3399E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) Listed below are Water Service Authorities (WSA) that the Department received responses from in the form of action plans (as per the request of the Green Drop 2011 Report) with dates the action plans were submitted.

(2)(a) Listed below per province are Water Services Authorities (WSA) that failed to comply with the requirement to submit a corrective action plan.

(2)(b)(i) The Department officially informed the municipalities of the Green Drop requirement for a corrective action plan to be submitted. Reasons for non-compliance to the requirement have not been provided. However, the Department recently completed training of the inspectors for the Blue Drop 2012 reporting cycle which will include an on-site verification process of the wastewater management situation.

(2)(b)(ii) Lack of progress at municipal wastewater operational and management level noticed during the on-site verification process will result in regulatory action taken in accordance with the departmental enforcement protocol. Depending on each situation, the Department will expedite supportive measures where justified.

QUESTION NO 2893

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 23 SEPTEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 30)

2893 Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her departments has placed any (a) companies or (b) persons on the List of Restricted Suppliers, thereby prohibiting the public sector to do business with them; if so, in each case, what is the (i) name of said entity or person, (ii) nature of their business, (iii) reason for restricting this service and (iv) date on which they were restricted;

(2) whether any of the implicated (a) companies or (b) persons have since been removed from the list; if so, in each case, (i) which entity or person, (ii) when and (iii) what is the reason for removing the specified company or person from the list;

(3) whether her departments has conducted any business with any of the (a) companies that or (b) person who have been removed from the list; if so, in each case (i) with which companies or persons, (ii) with regard to which services, (iii) for which time period and (iv) why did her department engage the specified company or person despite previous conduct? NW3364E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1) No.

(2) No.

(3) No.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether her departments has placed any (a) companies or (b) persons on the List of Restricted Suppliers, thereby prohibiting the public sector to do business with them; if so, in each case, what is the (i) name of said entity or person, (ii) nature of their business, (iii) reason for restricting this service and (iv) date on which they were restricted;

(2) whether any of the implicated (a) companies or (b) persons have since been removed from the list; if so, in each case, (i) which entity or person, (ii) when and (iii) what is the reason for removing the specified company or person from the list;

(3) whether her departments has conducted any business with any of the (a) companies that or (b) person who have been removed from the list; if so, in each case (i) with which companies or persons, (ii) with regard to which services, (iii) for which time period and (iv) why did her department engage the specified company or person despite previous conduct?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2893. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) (a) or (b)(i) (ii)(iii)(iv)No companies or persons were placed on the list of restricted suppliers by the Department of Environmental Affairs

(2) (a)or (b) (i)(ii) and (iii) ; Not applicable

(3) (a) or (b) (i) (ii)(iii) and (iv) Not applicable

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 September 2011

Ms M R Shinn (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether the intention of the former Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism to declare the area around the Prince Edward Island a Marine Protected Area (MPA) (details furnished) has been abandoned; if not, (a) why was the Prince Edward Island not included in the list provided in her reply to question 644 on 25 March 2011 and (b) what are the details with regard to (i) submissions received from (aa) the public and (bb) government entities in response to the proposal and (ii) work being done towards declaring the area in question around the island an MPA?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2839. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

No, the intention to declare the area around the Prince Edward Island a MPA has not been abandoned.

(a) The Prince Edward Island Marine Protected Area (MPA) was not included in the list provided by the Minister in reply to Question 644 on 25 March 2011, because that list contained only the names of MPAs that had already been declared.

(b) (i) (aa) The submissions received from the public were largely in favour of the Prince Edward Island to be declared as a Marine Protected area. Submissions included support from international NGOs such as the WWF and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Only two objections were received, one of which was from a company with fishing interests in the region. The other objection was from an academic involved in Fisheries Sciences.

(bb) South African Government entities were fully consulted during the development of the proposal and were in support thereof.

(ii). The proposal to declare the Prince Edward Island as a Marine Protected area has now been amended to accommodate some of the concerns raised in the two objections, and will be taken forward during the next six months.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether her department has taken any decision regarding the Kyoto Protokol's second commitment period and its future legal form; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2792. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

Parliament has ratified both the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or the Convention) and its Kyoto Protocol. The Convention places general legal obligations on all Parties; firstly, to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses (GHG's) or otherwise referred to as GHG mitigation; secondly, to adapt to the negative impacts of climate change; thirdly, to implement, promote and cooperate in climate change related technology, science, education and awareness programmes; fourthly, to report efforts to mitigate, adapt, implement, promote and cooperate. The Convention also places additional specific legal obligations on developed countries (Parties listed in Annex 1 of the Convention) to undertake quantified GHG emission reductions commitments (targets); as well as to provide financial, technology and capacity building support to enable developing countries to fulfill their general legal obligations to mitigate, adapt, implement, promote, cooperate and report.

The Kyoto Protocol was developed to elaborate tools/mechanisms for how developed countries (Annex 1 Parties) will meet quantified emission reduction commitments and is a separate legally binding instrument with mechanisms to monitor and enforce compliance. Kyoto set up a procedure of step-wise GHG emission reductions over a series of time periods, termed commitment periods. The 1^st commitment period under Kyoto began in 2008 and will end in 2012. The level of mitigation ambition for the 1^st commitment period of individual Annex 1 Party Quantified Emission Limitation or Reduction Objective (QELRO) targets which are listed in Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol, collectively add up to an emission reduction target of 5.2% below 1990 levels by 2012. However, the world's largest historical emitter of GHG's – the USA has not joined Kyoto, which has created an imbalance in the 2 track climate change regime under the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol.

In 2005, the international community began the process of negotiating the QELRO targets for Annex 1 Parties for a 2^nd commitment period beyond 2012 and in parallel a 2^nd track of negotiation was opened under the Convention to provide for comparable effort by the USA and enhanced action by developing countries, in particular large emerging developing countries. Even though the 2012 deadline for the adoption of a Kyoto Protocol 2^nd commitment period is fast approaching, these 2 track negotiations have not been finalized as yet.

The unresolved issues include the fact that the USA appears to have difficulty in committing to a legally binding Convention outcome comparable with Kyoto and furthermore, that other developed countries that are Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, such as Japan, Russia and Canada have announced that they will not take on a 2^nd commitment period. These countries cite the reasons for their position as the fact that large emerging developing countries, who are their main economic competitors, and who will in the future be responsible for an increasingly large proportion of GHG emissions are not similarly obligated to take on binding emission reductions under this current 2 track UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol climate change regime. They maintain that this situation makes the system unbalanced, environmentally ineffective and unfair. This scenario creates a difficulty for those Annex 1 Parties who are willing to consider taking on a 2^nd commitment period as this group of developed countries escape Kyoto with its more stringent accounting rules and its compliance mechanism. Furthermore, they also have concerns that the large emerging developing countries are not similarly bound and both situations place them at an economic disadvantage.

The nature of the climate change challenge is such that no single country or group of countries can solve the problem – it requires a global solution with concerted and cooperative effort by the whole international community. Given that South Africa is both highly vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change and simultaneously is a large GHG emitter with a significant part to play in the global effort – the country's cabinet approved position in these negotiations has consistently held that the current multi-lateral, rules-based climate change regime under the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol must be preserved, unless and until an alternative pro-development, pro-poor multi-lateral rules-based system is developed and adopted.

In this context, South Africa holds the view that Annex 1 Parties to the Kyoto Protocol must undertake legally binding QELRO's for a 2^nd commitment period through the adoption of a ratifiable amendment to its Annex B, as this maintains the legally binding status of their commitments which are subject to the compliance mechanism. South Africa also holds that the level of ambition for Annex 1 Parties QELRO's under Kyoto must be in line with what the latest science indicates is required to address the global challenge of climate change. This level of ambition is specified in the 4^th Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as being an absolute GHG emission reduction of between 25% and 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. In this regard South Africa supports the call by the African Group for a reduction of at least 40% by 2020. On the negotiations under the Convention track, South Africa has also consistently held that the final outcome should be legally binding; firstly, to ensure comparable mitigation effort by the USA (and others Annex 1 Parties unwilling to take on a 2^nd commitment period) and thereby, enabling those Annex 1 Parties willing to do so – to undertake 2^nd commitment period QELRO's under Kyoto; secondly, to ensure legally binding obligations on developed countries to provide through effective tools/mechanisms the financial, technology and capacity building support required to enable developing country mitigation and adaptation action; and thirdly, to ensure a fair contribution to global climate change efforts by developing countries in accordance with the provisions and principles of the UNFCCC and in the context of their sustainable development priorities, in particular contributions from large emerging developing countries.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether the poaching of elephants for ivory has increased since 2009; if so, (a) how many elephants have been poached for their tusks since 2009 and (b) what measures have been put in place to ensure that the poaching of elephants will not follow the same route as rhino poaching in the past two years?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2791. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

No.

(a) Zero (0)

(b) South Africa is implementing the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)'s Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants Programme, this includes the monitoring of populations and activities involving elephants.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mrs H N Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

Whether the hotels and conference venues to be used by the seventeenth Conference of the Parties (COP17) of the United Nations Convention on Climate Change were required to use light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and demonstrate in other ways how they were actively contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2790. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

Greening of the hospitality sector commenced prior to the hosting of the 2010 FIFA World Cup (FWC). Post the 2010 FWC, funds were secured through the United Kingdoms' Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), for hosting of awareness-raising workshops on greening the hospitality sector. The workshops were held in Durban, Johannesburg and Cape Town. Further, of the 100 accommodation facilities invited to participate in the workshop, 62 entered into a further monitoring and evaluation of low- or no-cost measures implemented in their respective facilities, pertaining to energy efficiency, waste management and water conservation. Following the implementation of the project, the department together with the National Department of Tourism and Eskom, embarked on awareness-raising roadshows. Five of the nine provinces were identified as recipients of the workshops. Workshops have been completed in KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo provinces, with Gauteng, the North West and Mpumalanga provinces remaining. Linked to the programme, the Ethekwini Metro, also identified as a key partner for roadshows in KwaZulu-Natal, is in the process of implementing several complementary initiatives. These include:

· Responsible Accommodation Campaign Forums: The Responsible Accommodation Campaign Forums have been running over September and October 2011 and are actively promote responsible tourism, creating awareness about Climate Change and the COP17 event and include special presentations by key speakers at each Forum. The key purpose of the forums is to assist accommodation facility owners and operators with knowledge development, as well as the provision of ideas and tools for engaging in increasingly responsible operations.

· Responsible Accommodation Campaign: Certification - Accommodation facilities are encouraged to view responsible tourism certification criteria and obtain information on the different certification systems.

· Responsible Accommodation Campaign: Visitors Charter: As part of the COP17 Responsible Accommodation Campaign, a Visitors Charter has been identified as a key awareness raising tool for delegates and visitors during COP17. Delegates and visitors will be able to sign up to the charter at their accommodation establishments and commit to the principles of the charter.

· Responsible Accommodation Campaign: Self Assessment Tool: A self-assessment tool has been designed to assist accommodation establishments to evaluate their performance against the National Minimum Standards for Responsible Tourism.

The earlier-mentioned initiatives address awareness-raising in the hospitality sector. The project has a two-pronged approach: Awareness-raising on the one hand and the implementation of retrofits for a select number of Bed and Breakfast establishments with solar water heaters, low flow showerheads and energy efficient lighting (including light emitting diodes). This aspect of the project has not commenced as yet. Although, post the awareness-raising workshops which were held in KwaZulu-Natal, several accommodation facilities have entered into monitoring of consumption patterns for energy, water and waste management, which have little or no cost implications.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(a) In view of the current rate of poaching of (i) white and (ii) black rhino, when is it expected that there will be a net decline in the rhino population, (b) what is the (i) estimated number of (aa) white and (bb) black rhino in South Africa and (ii) total number of (aa) white and (bb) black rhinos in (aaa) State-run, protected areas and (bbb) on private ranches?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2761. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(a) (i) & (ii) At the current rate of poaching, the population will not decline. The white rhino populations' birthrate (5%) exceeds the poaching rate (approximately 2%) and therefore the population will not decline in the immediate future. The black rhino populations' birthrate is 4.8% and the poaching rate is 1% and therefore the population will not decline in the immediate future. If poaching continues to escalate in the manner it escalated from 2007 until 2011, the populations will decline. It is not possible to say if or when that will happen.

(b) (i) (aa) & (bb) Total population of approximately 20 000. (ii) Due to security reasons the detailed information cannot be made available.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) Whether there is any risk of the Vredefort Dome being delisted as a United Nations Environment Programme World Heritage Site; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether the area covered by the above world heritage site has to date had any kind of legal status as a protected area; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether there is a management authority in place to manage this world heritage site; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, (a) what are the outstanding issues that need to be resolved before a management authority can be implemented and (b) when is a management authority expected to be in place?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2758. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) No, the World Heritage Committee has acknowledged the efforts undertaken by South Africa as a State Party to finalise the outstanding process towards ensuring effective management of the site in terms of international best practice. Furthermore, a list of actions has been recommended for priority implementation in the interest of conservation.

(2) In terms of domestic law the area has partial protection due to its inclusion on the World Heritage List. Efforts are underway towards ensuring full legal protection. A draft Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) is being finalised between all parties in order to strengthen cooperation towards legal declaration of the area and establishment of a management authority in line with the World Heritage Convention Act.

(3) Yes, the Free State and North West provincial governments are currently managing their respective areas. As indicated in (2) above, plans are underway towards the establishment of a management authority in line with the relevant provisions of the World Heritage Convention Act

(a) Formalisation of the MoA and consultation with relevant stakeholders.

(b) As soon as consultation, as prescribed by law, has been concluded, the Management Authority will be established.

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 16 September 2011

Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) Who is the preferred service provider that is used by her departments for the hiring of vehicles and (b) why is the specified service provider preferred;

(2) whether her departments have a fixed contract with the specified service provider; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) what is the (a) name of the service provider and (b) reason for using the specified service provider in each instance where vehicles have been hired for use by her or her Deputy Minister since March 2010?

HANSARD

PAPERS OFFICE

2722. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

1. (a) The department does not have a preferred service provider for the hiring of vehicles. Travel agents appointed by the department utilise any car rental service provider depending on the competitive rates applicable for that particular day, based on demand and availability of the type of vehicles required in a particular area.

(b) N/A

2. Yes. The department has a fixed contract with two travel agents, namely Travel With Flair and Seekers Travel to assist the department in managing travel and accommodation bookings.

QUESTION NO. 2722

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 16 SEPTEMBER 2011

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)

2722. Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) Who is the preferred service provider that is used by her departments for the hiring of vehicles and (b) why is the specified service provider preferred;

(2) whether her departments have a fixed contract with the specified service provider; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) what is the (a) name of the service provider and (b) reason for using the specified service provider in each instance where vehicles have been hired for use by her or her Deputy Minister since March 2010? NW3183E

---00O00---

REPLY:

(1)(a) The Department uses Phakisaworld Fleet Solutions for the hiring of vehicles.

(1)(b) Phakisaworld Fleet Solutions was appointed as per the Public-Private Partnership Agreement by the National Department of Transport (custodian) and the National Treasury (regulator) as a transversal contract.

(2) Phakisaworld Fleet Solutions was appointed for a period of five (5) years ending on 30 November 2011. The contract makes provision for permanent leased vehicles and ad hoc vehicles as per the agreement.

(3) The service provider for the hiring of vehicles by the Ministry is Travel with Flair and the Deputy Minister uses Hlophe Business Enterprises as a subcontractor to Travel with Flair. Travel with Flair was appointed as a service provider for two (2) years from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2012.