Questions & Replies: Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries

Share this page:
2011-11-09

THIS FILE CAN CONTAIN UP TO 25 REPLIES.

SEARCH ON THE TOPIC/KEYWORD YOU ARE LOOKING FOR BY SELECTING CTRL + F ON YOUR KEYBOARD

QUESTION 1931

Question 1931 for written reply: Mr T D Lee (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(a) How many (i) international flights and (ii) domestic flights were undertaken by (aa) her and (bb) her deputy minister using (aaa) military aircraft, (bbb) chartered aircraft or (ccc) commercial aircraft during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available, (b) what class did she and her deputy minister travel in each case and (c) what amount did her department spend with regard to each specified flight? NW2169E

REPLY:

(a) How many

(aa) Minister

(i) Twenty four (24) – International flights

(ii) Seventy four (74) - Domestic flights

(aaa) none - military;

(bbb) Two – charter flights

(ccc) total of (i) and (ii) which amounts to ninety eight (98)

(b) (i) International flight classes

· Thirteen business class

· Two economy

· Nine first class

(iii) Domestic flight classes

· Sixty three business class

· Eleven economy class

(c) Amounts for each case

(i) R869,798 (international)

(ii) R476,363 (domestic)

(aaa) nil (military)

(bbb) R43,777 (charter flight)

(ccc) total of (i) and (ii)

(bb) Deputy Minister

(i) Three (3) – International flights

(ii) Forty four (44) - (domestic flights)

(aaa) none - military

(bbb) none

(ccc) total of (i) and (ii) which amounts to forty seven (44)

(b) (i) International flight classes

· Three business class

(iii) Domestic flight classes

· Thirty four business class

· Ten economy

(c) Amounts for each case

(i) R66,896 (international)

(ii) R240,899 (domestic)

(aaa) nil (military)

(bbb) nil (charter flight)

(ccc) total of (i) and (ii)

QUESTION 1897

Question 1897 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr I.M. Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) Whether she has employed ministerial special advisors; if so (a) what are the duties of each advisor, (b) at which post level was each appointment made, (c) what is the salary level of each advisor, (d) what is the duration of the employment contract entered into with each specified advisor and (e) why was it necessary to appoint each advisor? NW2 135E

REPLY:

(1) Yes.

(1)(a) This question is answered in table format below.

(1)(b) Refer to (1)(a).

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

(1)(d) Refer to (1)(a).

(1)(e) Refer to (1)(a).

Appointments of Special Advisors

Duties of Special Advisors (1)(a)

Post level

(1)(b)

Salary level

(1)(c)

Duration of employment contract (1)(d)

Reason of appointment

Appointment 1

· Management, prioritisation and coordination of International Relations engagements

· International trade development engagements, facilitation and investment promotion

· Global and Regional Multilateral Organisations engagements, relationship management

Compensation level IV

Compensation level IV

01/10/2010- linked to the term of office of the Minister

In terms of Section 12A of the Public Service Act, 1994.Read together with the Dispensation for the appointment and remuneration of Special Advisers.

Appointment 2

· Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) matters.

· Implementation of the signed performance agreement.

· Management of State Owned Entities (SOEs) and associated institutions reporting to the Minister

Compensation level IV

Compensation level IV

01/01/2011- linked to the term of office of the Minister

In terms of Section 12A of the Public Service Act, 1994.Read together with the Dispensation for the appointment and remuneration of Special Advisers

QUESTION 1832

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 29 JULY 2011 [IQP No 20 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1832 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr J J Mc Gluwa (ID) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1)(a) How many rural harbours are situated in the province of the Western Cape and (b) what is the physical state of repair of each of the specified harbours;

(2) whether a commission of enquiry was established to deal with the state of repair of these specified harbours; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2065E

REPLY:

(1) (a) The Department does not have any data on the number of rural harbours in the province. The only harbours the department can account for are the 12 (twelve) fishing harbours provided for in the Marine Living Resources Act of 1998. These are located in Stilbaai, Struisbaai, Arniston, Gansbaai, Hermanus, Gordonsbay, Kalkbay, Houtbay, Saldanha bay, St Helena Bay, Laaiplek and Lamberts bay.

(b) These harbours are in a functional physical state and generally provide the service required by the fishing industry and other users.

(2) A commission of enquiry has not been appointed to our knowledge, and the department is not in a position to speculate the reasons for this.

QUESTION 1820

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 JULY 2011 [IQP No 19 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1820 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) What internal policies and steps relating to food safety and labeling does her department follow in accordance with the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, Act 54 of 1972, to ensure the safety of food products and adulterants that are sold to the public;

(2) whether her department has agreements with other countries and national and international food safety authorities to share information on foodstuffs found to contain prohibited or adulterant substances; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of each agreement;

(3) whether, in view of the fact that China recently banned food containing Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), her department has any testing facilities to perform tests on food products containing the substance; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of such facilities;

(4) what is her department's current position on food products containing DEHP;

(5) whether she will make a statement on the matter? NW2055E

REPLY:

(1) According to the interpretation of parliamentary query 1820; questions 1 – 4 relate to the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, Act 54 of 1972. The Act is administered under the Directorate Food Control of the Department of Health.

QUESTION 1809

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 JULY 2011 [IQP No 19 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1809 for written reply: National Assembly, Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) What are the relevant details of the fishing quotas attached to the owners of a certain vessel (name and details furnished);

(2) whether the owners of this vessel are permitted to land whole sharks as part of their catch; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2042E

Reply:

(1) The vessel is authorised to undertake commercial fishing of Swordfish.

(2) Sharks are designated by-catch in this sector except for Thresher, Hammerhead and Oceanic white tip sharks, which must be released if caught. Permit holders may either opt to keep the fins attached to the trunk of a shark or cut the fins while onboard the vessel during a fishing trip. If the Permit holder opts to cut the fins, both the fins and trunks must be landed together at the first point of landing. The maximum weight of fins landed shall not exceed 8 % of the total weight of shark trunks landed. If the Permit Holder chooses to keep the fins attached to the trunk then this ratio does not apply.

QUESTION 1803

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 JULY 2011 [IQP No 19 -2011] THIRD SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1803 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

1) What were the reasons for the Magwa Tea Project being (a) looted and (b) abandoned

by workers in February 2011;

(2) What is the total extent of harm inflicted as a result of this uprising in terms

of (a) deaths, (b) vehicles being (i) destroyed and (ii) stolen and (c) crops

destroyed;

(3) What (a) is the total estimated loss caused by this uprising and (b) amount is

needed to resuscitate this project;

(4) (a) what is the total amount of government funds spent on this project since its

inception and (b) when is it envisaged that the projected income will again

exceed its running costs? NW2036E

REPLY:

1 (a) & (b) The looting and abandonment of the estate took place as a result of the resumption

of a strike initiated in February 2010, demanding a 104% wage increase.

2 (a) One death of a security supervisor employed by external security company,

Thomboland Security CC was reported.

2 (b)

(i) Three private vehicles that belong to employees and 1 company vehicle were

destroyed.

(ii) There were no vehicles reported stolen.

2 (c) There was no damage to the tea plantation per se, however the loss of harvestable

tea amounts to approximately, 5400 tons of green leaf (2500 tons of black tea

production for financial year 2010, another 2500 tons for 2011 and 400 tons in

2013 due to limited pruning and fertilization).

3 (a) The total loss of R140m is estimated, consisting of R108m in production and R32m in property including vandalised housing.

3 (b) It is estimated that approximately R75m is required, based on the pre-February

2010 position that included R32m to repair/replace property and R43m towards operational costs).

4 (a) The total amount of Government Grants from inception is R88.8m.

4 (b) All factors (e.g. exchange rate, international tea supply and demand input cost inflation) kept constant, the estate will break even when the annual black tea production exceeds 3300 tons of which the estate has the potential to produce 3500 tons annually.

QUESTION 1694

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 24 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 18 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

1694 Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) what is the detailed expenditure breakdown for the Ministry sub-programme under Programme 1: Administration in the (a) 2007-08, (b) 2008-09, (c) 2009-10 and (d) 2010-11 financial years;

(2) (a) what was the actual budget increase each year, expressed as a percentage, for funds allocated to this sub-programme and (b) how is the increase for each specified financial year justified? NW1908E

REPLY:

(1) The expenditure for the Ministry is as follows:

SCOA Economic Classification

2007/08(a)

2008/09(b)

2009/10(c)

2010/11(d)

R'000

R'000

R'000

R'000

Compensation of employees

6 012

8 942

10 470

11 581

Goods and services

9 901

12 743

10 406

16 800

Transfers and subsidies

83

49

362

1 248

Payments for capital assets

187

350

2 881

2 116

Payments for financial assets

-

11

-

4

Total

16 183

22 095

24 119

31 749

(2) (a)

2008/09(2)

2009/10

2010/11

35,4%

9,2%

31,1%

(b) In 2008/09 the budget of the office of the Deputy Minister was transferred from the former Department of Land Affairs to that of Agriculture, which accounted for the increase in that financial year.

In 2009/10 the increase was inflation related, while in 2010/11 the Ministry incurred substantial costs in relation to the formation of the new Department, especially the incorporation of the portfolios of Forestry and Fisheries Management into the Department. Certain consultancy costs related to the re-organisation of the Department were carried by the Ministry, since these needed to be undertaken independently of the Department. In addition the Portfolio Committee directed the Ministry to undertake certain investigations and audits into the functioning of various aspects of the Department, and the costs of these were covered by the Ministry.

Overall the expenditure by the Ministry reflects significantly enhanced interaction with the relevant sectors of the expanded portfolio, including agricultural organisations, forestry associations and the many interest groups around fisheries.

QUESTION 1648

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1648 for written reply, National Assembly: Mrs H.N. Ndude (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) Whether the government has taken all the necessary measures to combat the entry of the sub-strain of e-coli that was identified in Germany recently; if not, why not; if so, what are the details of the Government's (a) preparedness and (b) plans to deal with the threat? NW1855E

REPLY:

1. The Department of Health (DoH) is has been receiving emergency alerts from the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) on the E. coli outbreaks. The DOH has been sharing these INFOSAN alerts with the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF).

(a) The DoH is on high alert at ports of entry and the DAFF inspectors at these centres are assisting in inspection of regulated products.

(b) The DoH as the department carrying the legal mandate is in a better position to give more details regarding the plans to deal with the threat.

QUESTION 1638

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1638 for written reply, National Assembly: Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

Whether South Africa participated in the latest World Health Organisation (WHO) survey on public health pesticide registration and managemant practices by WHO member states; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1843E

REPLY:

1. The Department of Health is the national contact authority for the matters relating to the World Health Organisation (WHO). The DoH is responsible for the coordination of country comments and responses for matters relating to the WHO. The DAFF's involvement in terms of the survey questionnaire on the registration of pesticides and management practices stems from the Fertilizers, Farm Feeds, Agricultural Remedies and Stock Remedies Act, 1947 (Act No 36 of 1947). This Act regulates or prohibits the importation, sale, acquisition, disposal or use of fertilizers, farm feeds, agricultural remedies and stock remedies; provides for the designation of technical advisers and analysts; and provides for matters incidental thereto.

The DAFF has responded to the WHO questionnaire on the registration of pesticides and management practices. The response to the questionnaire was forwarded to the DoH for consolidation as the questionnaire contained questions broader than the DAFF mandate.

QUESTION 1628

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1628 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the

Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1410 on 7 June 2011, she is able to provide the total individual tonnage of abalone harvested by each individual or entity rights holder during the period 1 July 2010 to 31 October 2010; if not, why not; if so, what was each individual (a) tonnage and (b) rights holder's allocation of the total allowable catch during the specified period? NW1833E

Reply:

The Abalone Right Holders' individual tonnage of abalone harvested as well as their allocation of the total allowable catch for the period 1 July 2010 to 31 October 2011 are depicted in the attached spreadsheet. The column titled "2009/10 catch" answers the (a) part of the question while the column titled "2009/10 quantum allocation" answers the (b) part of the question".

QUESTION 1613

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1613 for written reply, National Assembly: Mrs S.V. Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) Whether any trials and/or tests were conducted on a certain product (name furnished), which is sold as cheese, before it was made available to the public; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of such trials and/or tests;

(2) (a) which authority authorised the trading license of this product and (b) how is the term cheese allowed to be used for non bovine products? NW1816E

REPLY:

1. The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) is responsible for the "Regulations relating to dairy products and imitation dairy products" published by Government Notice No. R. 2581 of 20 November 1987, as amended, published in terms of the Agricultural Product Standards Act, 1990 (Act No, 119 of 1990). These regulations have quality standards that manufacturers have to adhere to before products are marketed. The DAFF officials visited the company in January 2011 based on reports received on the operations of the company. During the visit, the officials from the DAFF explained the requirements in terms of the prescripts of the Agricultural Products Standards Act, 1990. The DAFF forwarded a copy of the Regulation R.2581 to the company in February 2011. The company then produced labels for the products that were produced and these were shared with the DAFF and were rejected by the DAFF in March 2011 as these did not comply with the labeling requirements in terms of Regulation R. 2581. The company was advised by the DAFF to rectify the deviations from labeling requirements observed on the labels submitted. The company then requested for a dispensation to deviate from the prescribed labeling requirement by using the word "Manufactured" instead of "Imitation" to precede the word "cheese" on their labels. The DAFF rejected this request for such a dispensation in April 2011. The DAFF is intending on taking legal action against the company and is still exploring options regarding this case.

2. (a) Which authority authorized trading license?

The Agricultural Products Standards Act, 1990 does not carry any provision that prescribes the authorisation of trading licenses.

(b) How is the term cheese allowed to be used on a non-bovine product?

The Regulations relating to dairy products and imitation dairy products, R2581 of 20 November 1987 makes provision for three categories of products depending on the percentage content of dairy in their ingredient list, namely Primary Dairy Products, Modified Dairy Products and Imitation Dairy Products. Non-bovine products may be labeled as imitation dairy products.

QUESTION 1612

DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

Question 1612 for written reply, National Assembly: Mrs. S.V. Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) Whether she has been informed of a complaint by a certain person (name furnished) regarding artificial additives and dairy substitutes; if so,

(2) whether she has launched an investigation into this complaint; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1815E

REPLY:

1. The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) regulates mainly the quality (grading) of Dairy products under the Regulations relating to the Dairy and Imitation Dairy Products (R2580 and R2581 of 20 November 1987, as amended) of the Agricultural Products Standards Act, 1990. Regulation 2581 under regulation 4(7) prescribes that "a primary dairy product may contain other foodstuffs and food additives to the extent permissible under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act 54 of 1972)". Food additives are regulated under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act 54 of 1972) which is administered by the Department of Health. The Department of Health promulgated the Food Labeling and Advertising Regulations which were published in the Government Gazette No. R 146 of 01 March 2010. The implementation of Regulation 146 is 01 March 2012.

The Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries is informed of the issues relating to the transgressions in terms of the Agricultural Products Standards Act, 1990.

2. The issues raised by the complainant, have been under investigation by the DAFF since January 2010 when his first complaint on the misleading information in the selling of imitation cream to consumers with labels on the products reflecting fresh cream. The misleading information was on a number of confectionery products including but not restricted to cakes and doughnuts. The DAFF initially scoped the magnitude of the non compliance and in May 2010 concluded that this matter was widespread and also involved the mandates of the Department of Health. The DAFF met with the DoH in June 2010 and the DAFF committed towards pursuing the misleading information case. In August 2010 the DAFF issued a notice to retail sellers of imitation cream informing them of the correct labeling requirements for the products. The notice also informed these retailers that the DAFF inspectors will be monitoring compliance. Since the issuance of the notice and follow up inspections from the DAFF, there has been improvement in terms of compliance. The DAFF continued with monitoring inspections. However the DAFF still experienced some non compliance mainly in KwaZulu Natal (KZN) and the DAFF responded to the non compliances. With certain stores found to be consistently non compliant, the DAFF then had a meeting with the South African Police Service (SAPS): Commercial Crime Unit (CCU) in March 2011 to assess the possible way-forward for the case. At this meeting it was agreed to deal with this matter as a 'test' case and further agreed on processes and procedures towards building the case. The DAFF concluded on its investigations in April 2011 and has submitted the samples emanating from the investigations for testing. The first batch of results of the samples is available and as soon as the entire tests are completed, the DAFF will submit the complete investigation dossier to the SAPS CCU for further evaluation and investigation.

QUESTION 1583

1583 Mr R N Cebekulu (IFP) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

(1) Whether the consignment of 85 tractors and equipment that was delivered to KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga provinces as part of her department's mechanisation programme has been distributed to recipients; if not, why not; if so, which (a) projects have benefited from the tractors and equipment and (b) which communities under the AmaKhosi (traditional leaders) have benefited from the project;

(2) whether she has found that there had been irregularities in the procurement processes for the specified equipment; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether the irregularities have affected the delivery of tractors and equipment to the communities; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether she has instituted an investigation into the specified irregularities; if not, why not; if so, when will the investigation be completed? NW1785E

REPLY:

(1) YES. The DAFF mechanization programme is aimed at supporting provincial mechanization programmes and strategies. In Mpumalanga, this fleet of tractors is part of the Masibuyele Emasimeni programme that is owned by the state, managed by a service provider, employs tractor drivers and ensures that every family in need of mechanization receives the service free of charge. The same is the case in Kwazulu Natal, the state owns the tractors, manages them, employs tractor drivers, trains them and ensures that every land lying fallow, either belonging to Amakhosi's or not, gets the mechanization service when needed free of charge. This is how the said provinces implemented their programmes and strategies:

· Mpumalanga Province:

Mpumalanga received a consignment of 85 tractors with 355 sets of implements. The tractors and implements were handed over by the honorable President of the Republic of South Africa President J G Zuma on the 17th June 2010 at Marapyane Sports Ground in Dr J S Moroka municipality.

The Province managed to distribute all the tractors and implements to all the 18 municipalities of the Mpumalanga Province. The Province developed a strategy which was approved by the Mpumalanga Provincial Cabinet and which guided the utilization of the tractors. The tractors and implements were distributed mainly to Land and Agrarian Reform beneficiaries. The Province prioritized cooperatives and other farmer entity formations for the utilization of tractors.

It is important to note that the 85 tractors were an addition to the already existing fleet of tractors Mpumalanga provided to its farmers through the Masibuyele Emasimini programme. Mpumalanga already had 187 tractors under the Masibuyele Emasimini programme. The addition of 85 tractors increased the number to 272 tractors.

The addition of 85 tractors was a big boost to the Province since the initial tractors were mainly serving the subsistence farmers. With the addition of 85 tractors the Province managed to extend the service to the Land and Agrarian Reform beneficiaries. A sum total of over 12 835 hectares was serviced.

The 85 tractors and implements benefited farmers in the three districts of Mpumalanga and the allocation was as follows:

District

No of Tractors

No of Projects benefited

Individual Beneficiaries Benefited

Ehlanzeni

31

17

699

Gert Sibande

35

16

337

Nkangala

19

7

572

Total

85

40

1608

Areas that benefited the most are the former homeland areas where there is a bigger concentration of population and most of the areas are under Traditional Leaders. The following attached is a list of projects that received the services:

  • Kwazulu Natal Province
  • With regard to the delivery of 85 tractors and distribution thereof, this was commissioned and completed prior to the planting season for 2010/2011.

    a) Tractors have been distributed to all the Province's 11 Districts as per the distribution table below. It should be noted that the consignment of 85 tractors was additional to the fleet already procured and in position of the Department hence the total number is in excess of 190 tractors.

    b) A sum total of over 9000 hectares were serviced as a result as illustrated in the table attached, with almost 200 AMAKHOSI areas participating.

    (2) No. There were no irregularities in the procurement of the said tractors. A deviation from the tender process was made in an effort to deliver before the planting season and to meet the timelines set for the Presidential Launch, which happened in Mpumalanga on June 17 2010; which was to be followed by Kwazulu Natal Province. The cheapest quotations were awarded the business.

    (3) No, as explained above delivery was not affected. In fact, we managed to deliver before the start of the planting season for both provinces.

    (4) No, there was no need for an investigation as no irregularity occurred on the said tractors.

    QUESTION 1558

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    1558. Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) How many commercial fishing rights have been allocated (a) in total and (b) in the Western Cape;

    (2) whether she intends delegating any regulatory authority with regard to fisheries to the Western Cape provincial department of environmental affairs and development planning as provided for in sections 78 and 79 of the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, (a) what functions are to be transferred and (b) what are the further relevant details;

    (3) whether this transfer of functions will be accompanied by a transfer of budget allocation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1725E

    Reply

    1. (a) 2920 commercial fishing rights in total (b) approximately 80% (approximately 2336) in the Western Cape.

    2. No. Fisheries is a national competency.

    3. No. Fisheries is a national competency.

    QUESTION 1557

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 17 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    1557. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether she intends reviewing the current abalone fish levy; if not, why not; if so, what is the justification for the current levy? NW1724E

    Reply

    All fees are reviewed annually including the abalone levy. The current fees were set after a consultation process with industry. The levies are contributing towards the research and compliance cost of the abalone industry.

    QUESTION 1455

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 03 JUNE 2011 [IQP No 14 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    1455 Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    a) On how many occasions since 1 March 2010 did her office hire a vehicle to transport (i) her and (ii) her Deputy Minister and (b) in each case, (i) what was the cost of hiring the vehicle, (ii) for what reason was the vehicle hired, (iii) for how many days, (iv) what (aa) make and (bb) model of vehicle was hired and (v) what total distance was travelled? NW1622E

    REPLY:

    The Ministerial Handbook Chapter 5 on Official vehicles states that "Members at a national level may be provided with one vehicle for use in Cape Town and one vehicle for use in Pretoria". It further provides for "Use of Incidental Vehicles for official purposes away from respected seats of office". Members are allowed to make use of incidental or rented vehicles when on official duty. The rented vehicles should be vehicles befitting for Ministerial use and in these instances the vehicles hired have been various makes and models of Group "G" vehicles.

    In such cases the Handbook allows the cost of incidental / rented vehicles for official use to be borne by the relevant department.

    These hired cars are used on official duty for direct interaction with communities and stakeholders outside Gauteng and Cape Town as a critical part of the Public Participation programmes of Ministers. These enable Ministers to fulfil their duties and meet their ever demanding schedules.

    The department has hired 23 cars during the time under review.

    The cost has been R837 621-19

    The total distance travelled has been 30 743km

    QUESTION 1418

    1418. Mrs C Dudley (ACDP) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether, shortage in light of worldwide concerns for the wheat harvest, any preparations have been made to prevent any unexpected national food; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1532E

    Answer:

    Wheat imports for the current 2010/11 marketing season (1 October 2010 to 30 September 2011) are projected to 1,7 million tons, to date 1,1 million tons have been imported. Imports were mainly from Argentina (51%) and the USA (29%). The projected rand value of the imports will amount to R4,9 billion (applying an average inland import parity price of R2 957/ton on Argentinian wheat).

    It may be noted that the Russian Government has announced that the export ban on wheat will be lifted on 1 July 2011. The country's total grain harvest may expand by as much as 48% to 90 million tons this year, the Russian Agriculture Ministry estimates. Exports of wheat are estimated at 13 million tons.

    According to the intentions of farmers to plant survey undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in April 2011, wheat plantings for the 2011 production season are expected to be about 600 000 ha, an increase of slightly more than 7% compared to the last seasons' plantings of 558 100 ha. Applying a 5 year average yield of 2,85 t/ha to the intentions to plant figure, a wheat crop of approximately 1,7 million tons is expected for the coming season, which is 21,4% more than the last seasons' crop of 1,4 million tons. Local consumption of wheat amounts to approximately 3 million tons. Therefore, taking pipeline requirements into consideration, imports of 1,6 million tons of wheat are expected for the coming 2011/12 marketing season.

    Ideally, if the profitability of wheat production improved through better producer prices and reduced input costs, local production of wheat would also see an improvement. Additional research into wheat cultivars/yield optimization is also being undertaken to enable farmers to scale up production.

    QUESTION 1410

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 21 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 12 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1410 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the

    Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) (a) On what date did the recently ended abalone harvesting season (i) commence and (ii) close and (b) what was the total allowable catch (TAC);

    (2) (a) how many legal abalone fishers in total participated in harvesting this TAC, (b) what was the breakdown of TAC according to individual fisher or fishing entity holding abalone rights and (c) in the case of each fisher or entity, what were the turfs in which they were permitted to fish;

    (3) (a) what was the total tonnage of abalone harvested during the previous abalone harvesting season, (b) what was the individual tonnage harvested by each individual or entity rights holder and (c) what was the individual tonnage of abalone harvested from each turf;

    (4) whether any steps were taken against rights holders who harvested more than their individual TACs; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (5) whether rights holders were permitted to fish outside their allocated turfs; if not, why not; if so, how can this be justified? NW1578E

    Reply:

    (1) (a) (i) 1 July 2010; (ii) 31 October 2010 (b) The TAC was 150 tonnes of abalone.

    (2) (a) Three hundred and three (303) abalone Right Holders; (b) The TAC was split on a proportional basis based on 2003/2004 season's allocation and the allocation ranged from 352kgs to 3456kgs; (c) The Right Holders had to harvest their allocations in two to three secondary zones ranging from secondary zones A1, A2, A3; B1 and B2; E1 and E2; F; G1, G2 and G3. The map below depicts the secondary zones for the commercial abalone fishery.

    Map showing the secondary zones for abalone commercial fishery.

    (3) (a) 148.5 tonnes of abalone; (b) The Right Holder's total abalone catch ranged from 0 to 3499kgs, (c) The Right Holder's abalone catch per secondary zone ranged from 0 to 1285kgs.

    (4) The mass of abalone over-catches were deducted from the current season's allocation of the concerned Right Holders.

    (5) Yes. Rights for the first allocations in 2003/2004 for Right Holders were granted allocations in zones other than their own secondary zones, for example all Right Holders are allowed to harvest some of their allocations in Zone F (Robben Island), in addition to their respective secondary zones. Furthermore, since the inception of the current fishery in 2003/2004 Zones C and D never had any zonal allocations and all the Right Holders in those zones have been fishing in adjacent secondary zones.

    QUESTION 1342

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 21 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 12 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1342 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask

    the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether her department has instituted an investigation into the cause of large amounts of abalone and other crustaceans dying off the coast of Melkbosstrand on or about 10 April 2011; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (2) whether any steps have been taken as a precautionary measure to prevent abalone divers and other fishers from accessing the sea in this area; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether her department has consulted with the (a) Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) City of Cape Town about this event; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

    (4) whether she will make a statement on the matter? NW1488E

    Reply:

    (1) Yes. There were several reports of mortalities in the region of Cape Town [Scarborough to Melkbosstrand] over the past few weeks. This year has been a little unusual in that high biomass phytoplankton blooms have been present south of Cape Columbine since December. They have been particularly evident off Yzerfontein and more recently in Table Bay. It is possible that these blooms have led to low oxygen events, which are caused when available oxygen is consumed by large volumes of dead plankton when the latter die off after such blooms. The mortality at Melkbosstrand was investigated by the Department. Water sampling shortly after the event at Melkbosstrand indicated that the oxygen levels were exceptionally low (low enough to have caused the observed mortalities), but there were no indications of toxicity such as are sometimes caused by harmful algal blooms of various species. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) also diverted a research vessel to the area shortly afterwards and it was confirmed that low oxygen levels were widespread, also in the vicinity of Robben Island.

    (2) Yes. Public warnings have been issued by both Departments (DAFF and DEA), including an alert to right holders in the Melkbosstrand area to stop fishing in the area with immediate effect until further notice. Even though there is no sign of toxicity, dead organisms should never be consumed or processed under any circumstances.

    (3)(a) and (b) Yes. DAFF consulted with DEA, which has also responded to Cape Town disaster management.

    (4) Not at this stage.

    QUESTION 1295

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 21 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 12-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1295 for written reply: National Assembly, Adv De W Alberts (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    How many (a) African, (b) Coloured, (c) Indian and (d) White persons are currently employed at public institutions that report to her in terms of Schedules 1 to 3D of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999? NW1436E

    REPLY:

    With respect to the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF)

    Below please find a breakdown of the Employment Equity statistics for employees currently employed by DAFF.

    RACE /GENDER

    TOTAL

    WHITE MALE

    300

    WHITE FEMALE

    327

    COLOURED MALE

    331

    COLOURED FEMALE

    180

    INDIAN MALE

    31

    INDIAN FEMALE

    31

    AFRICAN MALE

    2855

    AFRICAN FEMALE

    2265

    TOTAL

    6320

    Agricultural Research Council (ARC)

    It is respectfully submitted that the ARC currently employed 2194 employees in the following categories:

    EE DEMOGRAPHICS - TOTAL EMPLOYEES PER OCCUPATIONAL GROUPING: 31/03/2011

    ARC Occupational Group

    Male:

    Female:

    Total

    % Black

    % Female

    African

    Coloured

    Indian

    White

    African

    Coloured

    Indian

    White

    Executive Management

    3

    1

    1

    5

    100%

    20%

    Senior Management (Core)

    6

    6

    1

    1

    14

    50%

    14%

    Senior Management (Support)

    5

    2

    2

    2

    11

    82%

    18%

    Middle Management (Core)

    18

    1

    1

    32

    2

    5

    59

    37%

    12%

    Middle Management (Support)

    10

    3

    5

    2

    20

    75%

    35%

    Researchers (Including Specialist Researchers)

    81

    10

    4

    114

    61

    5

    5

    123

    403

    41%

    48%

    Technical

    58

    11

    1

    107

    77

    5

    82

    341

    45%

    48%

    Research Support

    159

    35

    11

    87

    22

    67

    381

    80%

    46%

    Support

    120

    6

    2

    19

    110

    20

    2

    112

    391

    66%

    62%

    Artisans

    27

    5

    24

    56

    57%

    0%

    Farm personnel

    14

    12

    14

    1

    41

    66%

    2%

    Labourers

    343

    60

    3

    61

    3

    2

    472

    99%

    14%

    Grand Total

    844

    142

    9

    335

    408

    55

    7

    394

    2194

    67%

    39%

    CHART 2: EE DEMOGRAPHICS - % TOTAL EMPLOYEES PER GENDER & RACE - 31/03/2011

    \s

    CHART 3: EE DEMOGRAPHICS PER RACE - 31/03/2011

    \s

    National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC)

    Below please find a breakdown of the Employment Equity for persons currently employed by NAMC.

    a) African = 30

    b) Coloured = 0

    c) Indian = 0

    d) Whites = 15

    Total 45

    Table A

    Job category

    Employee demographics by occupational level as of 31st March 2011

    White

    Female

    White

    Male

    Black

    Female

    Black

    Male

    TOTAL

    %

    CEO and Senior Managers

    0

    2

    2

    3

    7

    15.5%

    Senior Researchers

    0

    1

    0

    2

    3

    6.7%

    Senior Economist

    5

    0

    0

    2

    7

    15.5%

    Economist

    1

    1

    3

    2

    7

    15.5%

    Non- core staff

    5

    0

    10

    6

    21

    46.7%

    Total

    11

    4

    15

    15

    45

    100%

    Perishable Products Exports Control Board (PPECB)

    PPECB EMPLOYEE (DIVERSITY) PROFILE AS A PERCENTAGE (%) – MARCH 2011

    (Rounded to the whole number)

    A

    C

    I

    W

    PWD

    TOTAL

    A

    C

    I

    W

    PWD

    TOTAL

    MALE

    26

    16

    3

    20

    0.3

    65.3

    FEMALE

    17

    7

    1

    9

    0.3

    34.3

    TOTAL

    43

    23

    4

    29

    1

    100

    PPECB EMPLOYEE (DIVERSITY) FIGURES

    A

    C

    I

    W

    PWD

    TOTAL

    A

    C

    I

    W

    PWD

    TOTAL

    MALE

    91

    56

    11

    71

    1

    230

    FEMALE

    59

    26

    4

    32

    1

    122

    TOTAL

    150

    82

    15

    103

    2

    352

    Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP)

    OBP has in its employ 157 African, 41 white, 4 coloured and 2 Indian people.

    NCERA Farms (Pty) Ltd

    There are 32 employees at Ncera, 29 Africans and 3 whites

    Race

    Gender

    Total

    Male

    Female

    African

    20

    9

    29

    White

    2

    1

    3

    Total

    22

    10

    32

    QUESTION 1154

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 08 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 11-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1154 for written reply, National Assembly: Ms D. Carter (COPE) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether the Government has put measures in place in (a) 2008, (b) 2009 and (c) 2010 to ensure that crop production favours water wise and ecologically sustainable plants and cultivars; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case? NW1277E

    REPLY:

    1. Yes

    2. South Africa is a water stressed country. This is mainly due to our relatively low rainfall in mostly parts of the country and other related matters. The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has been engaged in a number of initiatives over the past five years to promote water efficiency. These initiatives include the following:

    · Good agricultural practices. Farmers are encouraged to adopt cultivation practices that conserve water. These practices include mulching, crop rotation, strip cropping, minimum tillage, etc. These practices ensure that water loss is minimised and at the same time ensuring it is available for crop production.

    · Rehabilitation of irrigation schemes. DAFF, together with provincial departments of agriculture, is busy rehabilitating a number of old irrigation schemes, particularly in former homeland areas. This process involves replacing irrigation equipment with those that uses less water in order to improve water use efficiency.

    · Drought tolerant crops. Farmers are encouraged to adopt drought tolerant cultivars as part of the farming systems. Breeding programmes. DAFF is supporting a number of breeding programmes at the Agricultural Research Council and the Water Research Commission. These programmes aimed at developing cultivars that can be produced well under water stressed conditions in this country.

    · Water harvesting technologies. DAFF together with provinces is promoting the adoption of water harvesting technologies by our farming communities. These technologies had proven to be effective in terms of increasing crop yields even in marginal areas.

    QUESTION 1096

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1096 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Which countries have banned South African export products due to the outbreak of the foot-and-mouth disease;

    (2) whether these bans affect products from all parts of South Africa; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, why;

    (3)(a) how long will it take for the bans of each country to be lifted and (b) what is the estimated loss of income that this ban on exports will have on producers and exporters? NW1218E

    REPLY

    (1)South Africa has self-imposed a ban on exports of cloven hoofed animals and products thereof which were not treated to inactivate the virus. This was following the country losing its free FMD status. Over and above this self-imposed suspension the following table outlines countries which have banned commodities from South Africa

    Country

    Commodities banned

    Australia:

    Ruminant embryos.

    Botswana:

    Cloven hoofed animals and unprocessed products, including livestock feeds.

    Exclusions: Heat treated products (UHT milk, pet food, pharmaceuticals, cheese, etc.)

    Namibia:

    Cloven hoofed animals and unprocessed products

    European Union:

    Game meat.

    Exclusions: Game meat produced prior to 11 February 2011.

    Zimbabwe:

    Cloven hoofed animals and unprocessed products

    (2) This ban affects products from the entire country with the exception of the Kruger National Park and the surrounding game farms, was previously recognized by the OIE and our trading partners as a zone free of FMD without vaccination. It was from this area (zone) where cloven hoofed animals and their products could be trades with internationally. With the incident in KZN, the country lost this zoning and can therefore not be regarded a zone free any longer. Over and above that, our certifying veterinarians are required by their trading partners to certify that the country of origin is officially free of FMD, and this can no longer be certified by these veterinarians.

    (3)(a) Free trade will only commence in a large scale following the country being re-instated by OIE. This can only be done at the General Session in May 2012. Individual trading partners negotiations are taking place to accept processed products from the country. Over and above that, negotiations with our neighbouring countries are also taking place with some guarantees being given to enable trade to resume. The National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC) has been tasked to estimate these losses to different industries and this report will be shared

    QUESTION 1095

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1095 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether her department acted to prevent the spread of foot-and-mouth disease from Mozambique by ensuring that the required vaccination of animals in the controlled zone was carried out; if not, why not; if so, (a) how often were these animals vaccinated and (b) how much vaccination is being used in each case;

    (2) whether the observation zone was regularly inspected; if not, why not; if so, (a) on which dates were they inspected and (b) what are the findings for each of these inspections? NW1217E

    REPLY

    (1)No. The control measures which are put in place for the different controlled areas of the country prohibit South Africa from vaccinating in the (former) protection area in the north of KZN, unlike in Limpopo and Mpumalanga where vaccination is practiced. The outbreak in Mozambique was over 200 km north of Maputo, far from the boundary with KZN and these outbreaks therefore did not pose any risk to South Africa and no measures were instituted.

    (2) Animals in this observation zone were routinely inspected. At no stage was any suspicion of disease noted by either the state veterinarian, his animal health technicians nor the farmers in the area.

    QUETSION 1094

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1094 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    1) (a) What action did her department take at the onset of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in Mozambique in December 2010 to prevent the spread of the disease to South Africa, (b) when did her department first learn of the outbreak of the disease in Southern Mozambique and (c)(i) when and (ii) where were the first cases of the current outbreak of the disease in KwaZulu-Natal (aa) identified and (bb) confirmed;

    (2)(a) how long after the outbreak of the disease was confirmed was she informed of the fact and (b) what steps did she take to prevent the spreading of the disease;

    (3) whether any military forces were deployed to close off the area to contain the disease; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1216E

    REPLY

    (1)(a) The control measures which are put in place for the different controlled areas of the country prohibit South Africa from vaccinating in the (former) protection area in the north of KZN, unlike in Limpopo and Mpumalanga where vaccination is practiced. The outbreak in Mozambique was over 200 km north of Maputo, very far from the boundary with KZN, which therefore did not pose any risk to South Africa and therefore no measures instituted.

    (1)(b) The Directorate Animal Health keeps itself well updated with the occurrences of diseases worldwide for trade purposes. The outbreak in Mozambique, like any other significant outbreak anywhere in the world, gets the attention of the Director immediately it is reported to the OIE.

    (1)(c)(i)&(ii) the first occurrences of the current outbreak in KZN were noticed on results received on the 11th February, of animals in diptanks within the protection zone (west of Ndumo game reserve)

    The outbreak has not been confirmed as an outbreak since the two most critical criteria used for an outbreak have not been seen to date, that is clinical signs of the disease and isolation of the virus responsible for this outbreak. This has, however, been treated as an outbreak and reported to the OIE due to the presence of sero-positive animals in an area where there should not be positive animals and where it cannot be proven that these animals have been recently moved into this area.

    (2)(a) Immediately

    (2)(b) Further investigations were conducted to determine the extent of this incident. Animal movement out of the area was immediately prohibited, and trade of animals and products out of the country was also prohibited.

    (3)The Department has requested the assistance of the SAPS, SANDF and Traffic departments in setting up and manning roadblocks.

    QUESTION 1093

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1093 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) What amount has her department budgeted for maintaining the foot-and-mouth disease barrier fence between KwaZulu-Natal and Mozambique (a) in the (i) 2007-08, (ii) 2008-09 and (iii) 2009-10 financial years and (b) during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available.

    (2) Whether her department found that the budgeted amounts were sufficient in each specified year; if not, what steps did her department take to rectify the situation.

    (3) Whether she had been informed of the shortfall in funds to maintain the fence in each case; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) when and (b) what steps did she take to rectify the situation? NW1215E

    REPLY

    (1)The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries does not budget for this function, the budget used for maintenance of the international fence is received from the Department of Public Works on an annual basis as transfers. The National Directorate: Animal Health at DAFF is using a budget of approximately R 12 million per year, of which R 6 million are subsidized by the Department of Public Works (this amount unfortunately is being reduced annually unilaterally by DPW), to maintain the animal disease control fences that have been erected on the South African border. These funds are for the entire fence with Mozambique, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Botswana and Namibia.

    It should be noted, however, that the function of international border control does not lie with the National Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) and its Animal Diseases Act, Act 35 of 1984, our mandate is to prevent the accidental crossing of stray animals for disease control purposes. The responsibility for securing all international borderlines rests with the SANDF as per the recent cabinet resolution. DAFF is in constant liaison with the BCOCC and the newly created Border Management Agency regarding the agricultural needs on South Africa's borderlines. The negotiations are ongoing and a comprehensive plan will be revealed by the relevant Agency as and when it is available.

    (a) Below is the expenditure for the Pongola (KZN/Moz border) area for the said years.

    2007 - 2008

    R 1,092,500.00

    2008 - 2009

    R 1,186,500.00

    2009 - 2010

    R 1,204,000.00

    2010 - 2011

    R 1,357,900.00

    (2)The amount received from the DPW is never sufficient and this matter has been discussed with them (DPW) every year with no success.

    (3)No. The responsibility for securing all international borderlines rests with the SANDF as per the recent cabinet resolution. DAFF is in constant liaison with the BCOCC and the newly created Border Management Agency regarding the agricultural needs on South Africa's borderlines. The negotiations are ongoing and a comprehensive plan will be revealed by the relevant Agency as and when it is available.

    QUESTION 1092

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1092 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    1) Whether she has been informed of the (a) state of and (b) extent of the damage to the (i) border fence and (ii) foot-and-mouth disease barrier fence between KwaZulu-Natal and Mozambique; if so, (aa) by whom, (bb) when and (cc) how was she informed;

    (2) Whether the information was supported by verifiable documentation; if not, in each case, (a) why not and (b) how did she verify its credibility; if so,

    (3) Whether the documentation is available to the public; if not, why not, in each case; if so, where can it be obtained;

    (4) Whether her department has taken any steps to repair or re-erect the damaged fences after it was informed of the problem; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (5) Whether she intends to (a) inspect the barrier fence and (b) invite the portfolio committee to accompany her; if not, why not, in each case; if so, (i) when and (ii) what are the further relevant details? NW1214E


    REPLY


    (1) No. The responsibility for securing all international borderlines rests with the SANDF as per the recent cabinet resolution. DAFF is in constant liaison with the BCOCC and the newly created Border Management Agency regarding the agricultural needs on South Africa's borderlines. The negotiations are ongoing and a comprehensive plan will be revealed by the relevant Agency as and when it is available.


    (2) Ref to (1) above: N/A


    (3)N/A


    (4)An effort has been made to strengthen and electrify the animal disease control fences along international borders where it was possible and necessary due to non-animal pressures on this fence. This includes the fence near the KZN-Mozambique border.


    (5) (a) The fence in question is constantly patrolled and repaired by government officials. At this moment there is no plan by the Ministry to inspect the fence. (b) Whenever necessary that plan will be made and relevant stakeholders will be invited. (i) The date and time will be communicated. (ii) N/A

    QUESTION 1090

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 01 APRIL 2011 [IQP No 10 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1090 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr M Swart (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Why was the R18,9 million which was included in the Adjustments Estimates and requested on an urgent basis by her department for combating classical swine fever and foot-and-mouth disease not expended in the third quarter of the 2010/11 financial year;

    (2) whether she has found that the timeous expenditure of the amount would have averted the current outbreak of foot and mouth disease in KwaZulu-Natal; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1212E


    REPLY:

    (1) The Adjustments Appropriation Act, 2010 (Act No. 23 of 2010) was published in Government Gazette No. 22840 of 3 December 2010. The funds were only made available by National Treasury on 7 December 2010 after enactment. A payment of R3 918 925,54 was made on 22 December 2010 in respect of classical swine fever. In respect of the purchasing of foot and mouth disease vaccines, a payment of R4 567 887,66 was made on 9 December 2010 and a further payment of R3 432 112,34 was made on 23 March 2011 as this consignment was only delivered in March 2011. In respect of the combating of the spread of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in Limpopo expenditure to the amount of R6 329 296,38 was made in the course of the 2010/11 financial year.

    (2) The amounts referred to above were to control and eradicate classical swine fever and the combating of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in Limpopo. The current outbreak of foot and mouth diseases occurs in KwaZulu-Natal. The outbreaks happened in different provinces and have different control measures. There is therefore no link between the control and the prevention of these diseases.


    QUESTION 1072

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: MONDAY 25 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 9-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 1072 for written reply, National Assembly: Ms D. Carter (COPE) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has any measures in place to ensure the proper regulation of contracts to facilitate the ideal diversification of crops prior to contract farming; if not, why not; if so, (a) what measures and (b) what are the further relevant details? NW1194E

    REPLY:

    (1) Yes.

    Provincial Departments of Agriculture are involved in the process of securing contracts between farmers and retailers or any other clients needing the production of a particular crop. In such cases, there are measures in place that allow for government intervention should it happen that stipulations in the contract are not adhered to by either party. In instances where government was not involved, then the responsibility lies with the farmers to seek justice in their own capacities. Thus far, the regulation of contracts has not necessarily been targeted at facilitating the ideal diversification of crops, but primarily to secure markets for farmers in an effort to ensure income generation, growth and sustainability of their farming enterprises.

    QUETSION 995

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 09-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 995 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has undertaken any value stream reviews in order to ascertain which posts and positions should be (a) annulled and (b) combined to achieve savings that could be directed to frontline services; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1113E

    REPLY:


    Due to the amalgamation of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries functions, the department was subjected to a restructuring process which was recently approved by the Minister and implementable on 1 April 2011.


    Once implemented, SMS members will be requested to assess the effectiveness of the new structure and propose the necessary refinements to their post establishments. The Organizational Development Committee will then be tasked to examine these proposals and make recommendations for the DG or Minister's approval.


    A reasonable period for this exercise will be three to six months – with effect from 1 April 2011.

    QUESTION 994

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 08 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 994 for Written Reply, National Assembly: Ms D Carter (COPE) asked the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether the Department was consistently analysing whether the top four food retailers, Checkers, Pick ʼn Pay, Woolworths, and Spar were in fact controlling more than half of all grocery sales in the country and whether as a result of obtaining unprecedented market power were now (a) keeping savings to themselves rather than passing them on to consumers, (b) pushing farmers to the brink of bankruptcy, (c) switching to imports, (d) affecting local food processors, and (e) impacting negatively on the country's food security; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in respect of each of the above? NW1112E

    REPLY:

    1. It is critical to note from the outset that the investigation and analysis of market power by any individual firm or group of individual firms is the preserve of the Competition Commission as provided for in the Competition Act, 1998 (Act 89 of 1998) ("the Act"). It is therefore not the express responsibility of the Department to analyse and monitor market power among firms or companies. Market power is defined in the Act as the power of a firm to control prices, or to exclude competition or to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, customers of suppliers. A firm is said to be dominant in a market if it has at least 45% of that market or has less than 35% of that market but has market power. Issues relating to abuse of market power by dominant firms are appropriately dealt with through Section 5 and 8 of the Act.

    It is also important at this stage to bring to the attention of honourable members, especially Ms Carter, the Competition Commission findings of the supermarket industry probe. The Commission initiated an investigation against Pick 'n Pay, Shoprite, Woolworths, Spar, Massmart and Metcash ("supermarket chains"). The investigation followed allegations that the supermarket chains may have contravened the Act. Part of the investigation has now been concluded and the investigation focused on the retail of key staple foods, namely, poultry; bread and maize meal; milk, fats and oils; and canned fish.

    The supermarket investigation followed from the Commission's prioritisation of food markets in the context of public perception of high (and rising) grocery prices, increasing farm-to-retail price spreads, high market concentration, significant barriers to entry and high profit margins of the major retailers. These issues relates directly with the questions by Ms Carter.

    Competition concerns identified within the supermarket sector by the Commission during the investigation include exclusive lease agreements, information exchange, category management and concentration of buyer power. The investigation revealed that there was insufficient evidence to show contraventions in terms of the Act pertaining to abuse of buyer power, category management and information exchange. The remaining area of concern is the use of long term exclusive leases particularly where supermarkets have market power and it is in this particular area that the Commission's investigation is still continuing.

    (a) keeping savings to themselves rather than passing them on to consumers as a result of unprecedented market power

    To verify or reject this allegation, the price formation mechanism in supply chains food must be investigated. Such investigation will have to pay particular attention to market power, price formation at different points in the supply chain, and costs and margins at each stage of the value chain. The challenge for governments is always to ensure that potential social welfare losses resulting from possible misallocation of resources and possible abuse of market power are avoided. This is precisely what competition legislation is, among other things, meant to achieve. Given the vertically integrated nature of the agro-food industry, the transmission of prices along the vertical stages of the supply chain are likely to happen through via proprietary information. This makes it rather difficult to determine which specific aspects in the chain are responsible for changes in the margins between farm gate and retail prices. However, the investigation by the Commission found no evidence to suggest that supermarkets were abusing their power in contravention of the Act.

    Whether savings are passed on to consumers depends largely on the efficiency and equity of price transmission. Research indicates that there are several asymmetries in price transmission in food marketing chains. They include: (1) changes in farm and wholesale prices are not fully transmitted to consumer prices; (2) changes in consumer prices are not related to short-run changes in farm prices but follow medium- and long-run changes in farm prices with a lag; and (3) downstream changes in consumer prices shown a longer time lag than upstream changes do. This is mainly the result of the asymmetry in the adjustment process, which indicates whether retailers do pass on price increases while price decreases are only partially passed on to the consumer.

    (b) pushing farmers to the bring of bankruptcy

    During the supermarket investigation by the Commission smaller suppliers raised concerns with the difficulty of complying with a range of allowances and rebates demanded by retailers. Whether farmers share these concerns is a matter that could not be backed by evidence. The commission is concerned that the practices of supermarkets may place smaller suppliers at a disadvantage relative to the big suppliers. This concern means that the sustainability of small suppliers may be at stake. The Commission urged supermarkets to facilitate entry of small suppliers (including farmers) by changing their procurement policies and proactive disclosure of information on entry requirements. The fact that farmers have in the recent past switched from supplying fresh produce markets to selling directly to supermarkets should serve as an indication that they are comfortable with supermarkets as a viable alternative marketing channel.

    (c) switching to imports

    Honourable members will be aware that in every free market environment any shortage resulting from insufficient supply is likely to be met through imports. This is very critical if food prices are to be maintained at levels that will be affordable to all, especially the poor.

    (d) affecting local food processors

    The supermarket investigation by the Commission found no evidence that suggest that supermarkets were abusing their buyer power in contravention of the Act. While larger suppliers alluded to tough negotiations with supermarkets over pricing, they have not indicated that there has been an impact on their margins and investment capability. The concerns raised by small suppliers as highlighted in (b) also apply to this question.

    (e) impacting negatively on food security

    According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food, which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. It is important to note that the Commission could not find evidence of collusion on pricing of the food items it isolated (items listed above) for investigation between the retail chains. The products are high volume and low margin items across the retail chains and the supermarkets use low prices on these items to attract customers on a regular basis. It cannot therefore be reasonably concluded that the actions of the four retail outlets impact negatively on food security.

    QUESTION 993

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 8-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 993 for written reply: National Assembly, MS D CARTER (COPE) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether she has found that agriculture was the main absorber of labour during the period 1 June 2009 to 1 February 2011; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1111E

    REPLY:

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in July – September, 2009 (Q3:2009)

    Table B shows a decline in employment in the Agricultural industry across the three quarters. Out of 10 industries, agriculture was the 8th highest employer between July and September 2009.

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in Jan – March, 2010 (Q1:2010)

    Between July-Sept and Oct-Dec 2009, total employment increased from 12 885 to 12 974. Agricultural employment decreased during that period.

    Between Oct-Dec 2009 and Jan-Mar 2010, total employment decreased but agriculture employment increased from 615 to 650, ie a total of 35 000 people were absorbed by agriculture. In this quarter, agriculture had the highest increase in employment as compared to other industries.

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in April – June, 2010 (Q2:2010)

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in Jul – Sep 2010 (Q3:2010)

    Table B (Q3:2010) indicates an increase in employment in Agriculture. During this period, Agriculture was amongst the top four industries which created employment.

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in Oct – Dec 2010 (Q4:2010)

    Employment in agriculture decreased by 2.0%.

    Key findings of QLFS conducted in Jan – Mar 2011 (Q1:2011)

    All this tables they show that agriculture is not the main absorber of labour

    QUESTION 977

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 8-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 977 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr J H van der Merwe (IFP) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (a) What percentage of land (i) in total and (ii) in each province is agriculturally regarded as (aa) high production land, (bb) marginal land and (cc) low production land, including arid land, and

    (b) what percentage of the specified categories of land is in the possession of (i)(aa) white persons and (bb) juristic persons under the control of white persons, (ii)(aa) black persons and (bb) juristic persons under the control of black persons, (iii)(aa) brown persons and (bb) juristic persons under the control of brown persons, (iv)(aa) persons of Indian origin and (bb) juristic persons under control of persons of Indian origin, (v) non-South African citizens and (vi) juristic persons under the control of diverse racial groups?

    REPLY:

    (a) The percentage of land regarded as agricultural land, as defined under Act 70 of 1970 is:

    (i) As a total for South Africa – 77.4%

    (ii) Percentages per province:

    i. Eastern Cape: 68.8%

    ii. Free State: 94.6%

    iii. Gauteng: 53.6%

    iv. KwaZulu-Natal: 54.7%

    v. Mpumalanga: 65.4%

    vi. Northwest: 67.1%

    vii. Northern Cape: 88.8%

    viii. Limpopo: 58.4%

    ix. Western Cape: 92.7%

    The definition of agricultural land as used in Act 70 of 1970 is restricted to land in private ownership. The former self governing territories and homeland are thus excluded in the aforementioned percentages. The Department is currently in the process of compiling a policy aimed at the protection of agricultural land that will include all agricultural land in South Africa.

    (aa -cc) The percentage of land per potential class is indicated in the table below using land capability as the determining factor. The land capability assessment methodology interprets soil, terrain and agro-climatic data to provide an indication of the dry-land agricultural potential for a specific area. The assessment was based on the Land Type data and is therefore only suitable for national level assessments. Land capability order A (Classes I and II) is suitable for intensive crop production, order B have a moderate (Class III) to marginal (Class IV) potential for crop production, order C (Classes V-VII) is suitable for grazing and forestry while order D normally includes very steep areas that is not suitable for agricultural purposes. The current refinement of the land capability database to render the scale of data suitable for application at local municipal level is of the utmost importance to assist municipalities in the daunting task of proper land use planning and to ensure that land that is worthwhile to be protected for agricultural purposes are protected.

    Province

    Percentage of land capability class

    Arable land

    Non arable land

    I

    II

    III

    IV

    Arable land

    V

    VI

    VII

    VIII

    Eastern Cape

    0

    0.1

    2.2

    4.9

    7.3

    8.5

    16.2

    52

    16

    Free State

    0

    0.1

    10.7

    15.5

    26.4

    26.8

    11

    28.7

    7.3

    Gauteng

    0

    9.1

    44.7

    7.6

    61.5

    3.4

    21.8

    2.9

    10.4

    KwaZulu-Natal

    0

    1.8

    23.5

    12.8

    38.1

    7.2

    29

    17.1

    8.6

    Mpumalanga

    0

    2.2

    33.1

    12.5

    47.8

    7.7

    23.7

    11.3

    9.6

    Northwest

    0

    0.1

    10.1

    16.9

    27.1

    15.9

    11.9

    38.1

    7

    Northern Cape

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0.2

    0.1

    85.9

    13.8

    Limpopo

    0

    0.4

    14.7

    11.3

    26.3

    14.2

    12

    37.5

    9.9

    Western Cape

    0

    0.1

    5.9

    8.2

    14.2

    3

    12.5

    48.3

    22

    The area of crop land already converted through major urban and mining developments almost equals the size of the Kruger National Park as indicated in the table below. This assessment is based on the recently completed Land Cover change project (based on the 2005 Land Cover data) that formed part of the Land Assessment in Dry-land Areas (LADA) programme and the National Land Capability geo-referenced database.

    The methodology applied in the land cover change project used 500m x 500m cells that equal an area of 25ha per cell and the dominant land use (>50%) per cell. This implies that all irrevocable transformed areas smaller than 13 ha were excluded in the results. Permanently transformed area smaller the 13 ha includes features such as roads, rural dwellings, open cast mining, small residential and industrial developments which will increase the irrevocable transformed area significantly. Further studies to quantify the extent of these areas are needed.

    Land Capability

    Total area

    Area irrevocably transformed

    Remaining area

    Order

    Class

    % of total

    ha

    % of class

    ha

    % of class

    ha

    A

    I

    0.00

    2,733

    3.92

    107

    96.08

    2,626

    II

    1.54

    1,878,750

    8.67

    162,966

    91.33

    1,715,783

    B

    III

    11.48

    14,006,241

    7.40

    1,035,875

    92.60

    12,970,365

    IV

    13.49

    16,450,419

    4.74

    780,181

    95.26

    15,670,237

    Total arable

    26.51

    32,338,144

    6.12

    1,979,131

    93.88

    30,359,013

    C

    V - VII

    63.21

    77,103,116

    1.25

    962,005

    98.75

    76,141,110

    D

    VIII

    10.07

    12,284,214

    1.11

    136,805

    98.89

    12,147,408

    Total non arable

    73.29

    89,387,330

    1.23

    1,098,811

    98.77

    88,288,519

    Water

    0.20

    246,079

    100.00

    246,079

    0.00

    Total

    100.00

    121,971,554

    2.73

    3,324,021

    97.27

    118,647,532

    (b) No information for the second part of the question

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

    Table below show the statistics on land delivery per province from 1994 to January 2011 for Restitution and Redistribution and Tenure Programmes: Total hectares transferred since 1994: 6 063 687ha. Details are below.

    Table 1: Land Delivery: 1994 to January 2011 for Redistribution and Tenure Reform

    PROVINCE

    HECTARES

    EASTERN CAPE

    379 905.7232

    FREE STATE

    363 423.1933

    GAUTENG

    38 016.3890

    KWA-ZULU NATAL

    571 036.5106

    LIMPOPO

    97 075.0589

    MPUMALANGA

    357 829.4014

    NORTHERN CAPE

    1 132 810.1998

    NORTH WEST

    288 090.4352

    WESTERN CAPE

    132 148.1510

    TOTAL

    3 360 335.0624

    Source: DRDLR, Redistribution and Tenure Reform Programme

    Table 2: Land Delivery: 1994 to January 2011 for Restitution Programme

    PROVINCE

    HECTARES

    EASTERN CAPE

    96 728

    FREE STATE

    51 452

    GAUTENG

    16 378

    KWA-ZULU NATAL

    654 994

    LIMPOPO

    541 926

    MPUMALANGA

    405 863

    NORTHERN CAPE

    559 634

    NORTH WEST

    372 544

    WESTERN CAPE

    3 833

    TOTAL

    2 703 352

    Source: DRDLR, Restitution Programme

    QUESTION 891

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 08-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 891 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr D A Kganare (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has taken any measures to limit the predation by jackal and caracal which has escalated to such an extent that it is causing the loss of thousands of sheep and goats each week and is threatening the survival of small-stock farming; if not, why not; if so, (a) what measures and (b) with what results? NW959E

    REPLY:

    (a) Yes. The Department works hand in hand with the Department of Environmental Affairs on this issue. The Department is directly involved in the Predator Management Forum (PMF) that includes the industry (NWGA, Mohair SA, the RPO, Wildlife Ranchers SA (WRSA) and the Department of Environmental Affairs. This Forum has a research arm that was recently constituted to look into the real facts (figures) and ways in which predators ( largely jackals and caracals ) are being controlled at present. This needs to be documented as a first step.

    In addition, additional research will be done on successful methods to ensure the effective use of these where feasible.

    Currently, there is an imbalance between predation and production and this needs to be rectified. This could include trapping and destroying predators in production areas to get the natural balance back to normal and we have been reviewing work done in the United States where coyotes and caracal pose similar problems. Control measures in the USA include leg holding devices and the poison 10-80 that has an active component similar to that found in a toxic plant in South Africa – namely 'gifblaar" .

    This toxin is bio degradable and could be used in other ways beside poison collars – but this needs further discussion as there are objections at present to any form of baiting

    The Directorate: Animal Production is also finalizing a proposal to declare predation as an area specific national disaster and we are in consultation with DEA over the possibility of supporting the manufacture and distribution of coded leg holding devices to be in a position to monitor the impact on predation and to see if it will be possible to manage these on a national basis.

    Naturally, this would require the full cooperation of the affected sectors

    QUESTION 879

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 11 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 6-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 879 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department intends to put measure in place with a view to ensuring that contract farming is regulated to prevent price manipulation by the corporate sector; if not, why not; what are the relevant details?

    REPLY

    South Africa has mechanisms in place to safeguard against any form of unfair price practices. The Competition Commission is the authority responsible for enforcing the relevant legislation in this regard. However, the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has the responsibility to empower and support farmers through extension advice and training in order to enable them to make informed business choices, including entering into economically beneficial contractual agreements with buyers of their produce. Through the National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC), which is tasked with monitoring of food prices as well as margins along the food value chain, DAFF continues to work with the Competition Commission to share information and provide alerts in case of suspected uncompetitive pricing behaviour by parties in the food in the food sector.

    QUESTION 878

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 11 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 6-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 878 for Written Reply, National Assembly: Mr D A Kganare (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether she and her department will consult with commercial farmers and their representative bodies in the drive to transform the agricultural sector to include more individuals from previously disadvantaged communities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW958E

    REPLY:

    The Minister for the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has and will continue to consult, interact and engage with all relevant stakeholders in the agricultural sector for the purpose of brining about transformation. The transformation of the sector is one of the huge delivery points for DAFF, and the involvement of commercial farmers and their representative bodies through DAFF's strategies and programmes and other initiatives is recognized and encouraged.

    To this effect, the following is highlighted in the DAFF's 2010/11 Strategic Plan:

    For agriculture, forestry and fisheries the focus will be on accelerating delivery on food security, rural development linked to land reform and skills development. Our strategic priorities for 2010/11 to 2012/13 will therefore be to:

    Ø Speed up economic growth and transform the economy to create decent work and sustainable livelihoods

    RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM

    Revival of the rural economy is one of the main priorities of government. The Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) was launched on 17 August 2009 in Giyani, Limpopo Province by the Honourable President, Mr Jacob Zuma, as a key driving project to revive the rural economy.

    To achieve this, a three-pronged strategy for agrarian transformation, rural development and land reform will be implemented through cooperation between government and the private sector.

    We can only attain our goals through our commitment to build strong partnerships and continue to strengthen stakeholder relations with our partners in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector. Together, we will strategise to improve the sector and to re-establish our country as net exporter of excellent quality products to the African continent and the rest of the world.

    I indicated, during the 2010 World Food Indaba (World Food Day) at the South African Reserve Bank, on 14 October 2010 that "the food crisis presented an opportunity for increased investment in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. Countries are on the lookout for markets to satisfy their local consumption. This demand has increased investment in arable land, potentially making this sector attractive. It opens up opportunities for profitable joint ventures, equity share schemes and BBBEE partnerships to flourish, at the same time ensuring equitable distribution of wealth".

    QUESTION 865

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 08-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 865 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has succeeded in ensuring food security by supporting farmers to meet the country's need for (a) chicken, (b) beef, (c) dairy produce, (d) grains and cereals and (e) oil seeds; if not, (i) what quantities of the above essential foods were being imported, (ii) what percentage of the total demand did the imports constitute, (iii) where did the imports originate from in each instance, (iv) what was the cost of these imports and (v) why has the Government become dependent on imports of these essential foods? NW942E

    REPLY:

    A - Beef Production in South Africa

    Table 1 below show that South Africa does not produce enough beef for the domestic market even if the number of cattle slaughtered has increased considerably from 1998/9 to 2007/08.

    Table 1: Total cattle slaughtering, production and consumption of beef

    Period

    Slaughtered Cattle

    Production

    Consumption

    Number

    Kilograms

    Kilograms

    1998/99

    1,756,384

    512,000,000

    560,000,000

    1999/00

    2,121,988

    625,000,000

    671,000,000

    2000/01

    1,735,102

    525,000,000

    555,000,000

    2001/02

    1,933,610

    574,000,000

    603,000,000

    2002/03

    1,958,447

    610,000,000

    644,000,000

    2003/04

    1,985,107

    632,000,000

    675,000,000

    2004/05

    1,981,505

    672,000,000

    723,000,000

    2005/06

    2,266,932

    763,900,000

    822,000,000

    2006/07

    2,314,566

    836,700,000

    897,000,000

    2007/08

    2,140,250

    808,800,000

    859,000,000

    A large percentage of beef animals is supplied by feedlots. Imports of red meat decreased by 11, 5% from 50 123 tons in 2008/09 to 44 378 tons in 2009/10 (25, 4% lower than the average of approximately 59 522 tons for the five years up to 2009/10).

    Imports: Beef imports amounted to 7 961 tons, an increase of 8, 5% from the 7 338 tons imported during 2008/09, but 41, 3% lower than the five-year average of 13 568 tons up to 2009/10.

    B - Chicken Production in South Africa

    According to the report from Agricultural Statistics produced in 2011, Poultry meat domestic production has been increasing between year 2005 and 2009

    Year

    Poultry meat

    Unit

    1 000 t

    2005

    1,109.02

    2006

    1,176.46

    2007

    1,223.45

    2008

    1,327.56

    2009

    1,371.40

    2010

    1,413.94

    In 2009, poultry meat imports increased to 231 303 tons – an increase of 4,3% from the 221 661 tons imported in 2008.

    Imports: The imports of broiler meat from January to June 2010 was 127 902 tons – an increase of 10, 3% from the same period in 2009. During 2009, about 72% of South African poultry imports originated from Brazil and 14% came from Argentina.

    C- Grain and cereal production

    Summer grain

    The projected closing stocks of maize for the current 2010/11 marketing season is 2,840 million tons, which is 33,3% more than the previous season (2,131 million tons). This increase can mainly be attributed to the higher production of maize during the 2009/10 production season.

    Exports: Important export destinations are the BLNS countries (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland), Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The first half of the 2010/11 season also shows exports to, inter alia, Kenya, Korea, Kuwait, Somalia and Spain. South Africa normally has the capacity to cover the maize import needs of neighboring countries experiencing shortages. Normally, the window of opportunity for exports of domestic maize lasts only until the end of October, when the harvesting of the US crop and US exports start.

    Closing stocks of sorghum at the end of March 2011 are estimated at 44 200 tons, which is considerable less (52, 6%) than the previous season (93 200 tons). This decrease can mainly be attributed to the smaller sorghum crop of the 2009/10 production season. South Africa, a net importer of wheat, relies on imports from, inter alia, Argentina, Canada and the USA to meet its domestic demand. During the 2009/10 season, approximately 65% of the wheat that was needed for domestic consumption was produced locally, while an estimated 1,3 million tons were imported.

    2010/11 Projected Annual Grain and Cereal Balance Sheet as at 28 February 2011 (1 000 tons)

    Maize (May to April)

    Sorghum (April to March)

    White

    Yellow

    Total

    Supply

    Opening stocks

    1 362

    769

    2 131

    93,2

    SAGIS Opening Stocks

    1 362

    769

    2 131

    93,2

    Gross production

    8 252

    5 169

    13 421

    235,9

    Commercial production

    7 830

    4 985

    12 815

    196,5

    Subsistence agriculture

    422

    184

    606

    39,4

    Total domestic supply

    9 614

    5 938

    15 552

    329,1

    Plus: Imports

    -

    -

    -

    -

    Total supply

    9 614

    5 938

    15 552

    329,1

    Demand

    Consumption

    6 128

    4 018

    10 146

    213,6

    Commercial: Human

    4 200

    340

    4 540

    182,8

    Animal (feed)

    1 500

    2 800

    4 300

    8,8

    Gristing

    60

    20

    80

    -

    Seed for planting purposes

    16

    14

    30

    -

    Other (grains released to end-consumers + withdrawn by producers + retentions on farms)

    352

    844

    1 196

    22,0

    Subsistence agriculture

    422

    184

    606

    39,4

    Total domestic consumption

    6 550

    4 202

    10 752

    253,0

    Plus: Exports

    860

    1 100

    1 960

    31,9

    Products

    60

    50

    110

    -

    Whole maize

    800

    1 050

    1 850

    -

    Total demand

    7 410

    5 302

    12 712

    284,9

    Closing stocks (2011)

    2 204

    636

    2 840

    44,2

    Pipeline requirements (45 days of commercial consumption)

    710

    390

    1 100

    23,6

    Domestic surplus

    2 354

    1 346

    3 700

    52,5

    Surplus/ shortage above pipeline

    1 494

    246

    1 740

    20,6

    SAGIS closing stocks as at end of January 2011

    3 690

    1 528

    5 218

    86,3

    From 1 May 2010 up to 25 February 2011, the progressive white and yellow maize exports stands at 647 529 and 895 037 tons, respectively. This brings the progressive grand total of exports to 1,543 million tons (Source: SAGIS).

    It is important to note that for the current marketing season yellow maize exports surpassed white maize exports. White maize exports thus, has to increase as it is specifically white maize that has a high ending stock for the mentioned marketing season.

    The projected closing stocks of wheat for the 2010/11 marketing season is 519 000 tons, which is 10,4% less than the previous season (579 000 tons). This decrease can mainly be attributed to the smaller wheat crop for the current 2010/11 marketing season.

    D - Dairy Products in South Africa (2008/9-2010/11)

    Year

    March to February2

    Butter

    Cheese

    Condensed milk

    Whole milk powder

    Skimmed milk powder

    Creamery butter

    Total3

    Factory cheese

    Total4

    2000/01

    2001/02

    2002/03

    2003/04

    2004/05

    2005/06

    2006/07

    2007/08

    2008/09

    8 923

    10 961

    8 531

    11 231

    12 814

    *

    *

    *

    *

    8 926

    10 964

    8 534

    11 234

    12 817

    *

    *

    *

    *

    35 281

    37 752

    35 200

    36 717

    36 832

    *

    *

    *

    *

    35 331

    37 802

    35 250

    36 767

    36 882

    *

    *

    *

    *

    20 221

    23 376

    24 066

    24 851

    25 125

    *

    *

    *

    *

    10 369

    12 728

    12 500

    12 290

    15 272

    *

    *

    *

    *

    8 112

    12 078

    19 086

    12 455

    13 138

    *

    *

    *

    *

    The imports of milk and milk products decreased by 3, 4%, from 37 664 tons in 2008 to 36 389 tons during 2009. In 2010, the imports of dairy products were expected to decrease by 66, 8% to 12 077 tons, owing to improvement in local milk production.

    E - Oil Seeds

    During the 2009/10 production season, the bulk of the sunflower crop was produced in the Free State (46%) and North West (37%) provinces. The contribution of sunflower seed to the gross value of field crops during the season is approximately 5, 6%, compared to the 47, 6% of maize – the largest contributor.

    Soya beans contribute approximately 4, 9% to the gross value of field crops, and the estimated average annual

    gross value of soya beans for the past five seasons up to 2009/10 amounts to R106 million.

    The contribution of groundnuts to the value of field crops is approximately 2,6% and the average annual gross value of groundnuts for the five years up to 2009/10 amounts to approximately R536 million.

    While the estimated area planted to canola decreased by 0, 7% from 35 060 ha in 2009 to 34 820 ha in 2010, production is expected to decrease by 1, 7% from 40 350 tons to 39 650 tons. The decrease in production can most likely be ascribed to a number of factors, with the main one probably being low and fluctuating yields. During this period, some canola producers in the Western Cape experienced extensive damage by slugs and isopods.

    Reasons why South Africa is importing

    While 13% of South Africa's land can be used for crop production, only 22% of this is high-potential arable land. The most important limiting factor is the availability of water. Rainfall is distributed unevenly across the country, with some areas prone to drought. Almost 50% of South Africa's water is used for agriculture, with about 1.3-million hectares under irrigation.

    Even though today, South Africa is not only self-sufficient in virtually all major agricultural products, but is also a net food exporter. Most of these essential foods are imported.

    According to the DAFF report on Agricultural Trends (2010) The area to be planted for grains and cereals in the production seasons is usually influenced by a combination of factors such as relatively low producer price levels, the above-average crop harvested during the past three seasons, high stock levels and relatively high production costs. Farmers sometimes plant less crops e.g. maize owing to the huge surplus of maize experienced in the country. According to the South African Agricultural Baseline projections published by the Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy (BFAP). Because of the surplus, maize prices dropped, leaving farmers with excess maize that they could not sell at a reasonable price.

    South Africa imports large amounts of meat. The opportunity for growth in the meat industry still exists, not only because of expected growth in demand for poultry meat, but also as imports make up a sizeable percentage of consumption. Feed costs have always been a significant issue in the poultry industry and remain so, even though prices of maize and soya as well as the main raw materials in broiler feed have showed marked decreases since 2009. Feed prices, however, did not show similar decreases. The profit margins of the broiler industry are expected to remain tight. The broiler industry is also experiencing pressure because of the downturn in consumer spending. High imports remain a threat in the event of a weakening in local demand. Milk production is expected to increase by 2, 4% during 2010. Demand for milk has also improved slightly since 2009. Producer prices are expected to decline during the summer of 2010.

    QUESTION 807

    Question 807 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 11 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 6-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Whether (a) her department or (b) any of its affiliated entities have purchased any tickets for the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011; if not, why not; if so, (i) what process has been followed to purchase these tickets, (ii) how many tickets have been purchased, (iii) for which matches, (iv) what has been the total cost of these tickets, (v) what are the reasons for purchasing these tickets, (vi) to whom will each of these tickets be allocated and (vii) on what was the decision for the allocation of these tickets based? NW878E

    REPLY:

    (1)(a) No

    (b) No

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
    WRITTEN REPLY
    QUESTION 665
    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT
    Question 665 for written reply: National Council of Provinces, Mr V A Manzini (DA-Mpumalanga) asked the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1)(a) What is the estimated amount of wattle under plantation in the country and (b)

    what is the total break down of this for each province;

    (2) whether the Government approves an expansion of wattle plantations in the country; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether her department has made any efforts to control the spread of wattle in order to prevent infestation in areas outside of plantations; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether there are any bio-controls in use to prevent infestation of wattle outside of plantation areas; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;



    (5) whether wattle growers have lobbied against the application of any bio-controls; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details?

    Below is the information on the extent of wattle plantations and a breakdown according to provinces where there is an occurrence of such plantations

    Table1. Showing a provincial breakdown of wattle plantations

    Province

    Area (ha)2002

    Area (ha) 2005

    Area (Ha) 2008

    Mpumalanga and Limpopo

    19 000

    15 000

    14 000

    KwaZulu-Natal

    92 000

    91 000

    79 000

    Western Cape and Eastern cape

    1500

    2 000

    2000

    TOTAL

    112 500

    108 000

    98 000


    2. "The invasive potential of commercially farmed Acacia species could be substantially reduced by inducing sterility through gamma radiation of seed or the production of triploids through chromosome doubling techniques. Flowering in plants grown from irradiated seed can be significantly reduced. In an effort to address the shortage of timber in the country, the department supports the conversion of informal stands/wattle into well managed plantations. Department of Water Affairs (DWA) has a unit which is responsible for regulating Forestry as Stream Flow Reduction. The unit is called Stream Flow Reduction Activities (SFRA). SFRA has developed the yield enhancement guidelines, meant for the purpose of guiding the conversion process on a sustainable manner.

    3. Between 2000 and 2010, 176,345 ha of invasive Acacia mearnsii, Acacia dealbata and Acacia decurrens (black, silver & green wattle, respectively) were mechanically cleared by the Working for Water programme at a cost of R326 million (Working for Water, unpublished data). These figures do not include clearing between 1996 (when Working for Water began) and 1999, clearing by other agencies and firewood harvesting, so the clearing effort was definitely greater.

    4. In the case of Acacia species with economic benefits, only biological control agents that do not damage vegetative plant parts have been considered. Five species of seed weevils in the genus Melanterius (which feed on ripening seed pods) and two species of cecidomyiid flies that form flower-galls have been released. While the large seed production and large existing seed banks mean that extremely high and consistent damage rates over many seasons are required before the densities of these species will be affected in the absence of other control measures, reductions in seed production can reduce spread rates.

    5. Commercial producers have agreed to the release of biological control agents that limit seed production.

    QUESTION 646

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: MONDAY 07 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 04 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 646 Mr M J Ellis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1)(a) What efforts are being made to curb abalone poaching around the Cape Peninsula, (b) how many compliance and enforcement officers are allocated to work in this area, (c) at which offices are they based, (d)(i) how many suspected abalone poachers have been arrested around the Cape Peninsula since 1 January 2010 and (ii) at what location did each arrest take place and (e) how much abalone has been confiscated from poachers around the Cape Peninsula since 1 January 2010;

    (2) Whether the poaching of abalone is trending upwards around the Cape Peninsula; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what will be done to reverse the situation? NW691E

    Reply

    1(a) The Monitoring Control and Surveillance Chief Directorate has ongoing operations both on land and sea around the Cape Peninsula and Robben Islands; with the co-operation of other law enforcement agencies such as SAPS Special Task Force, SAPS divers, SARS and SANParks.

    (b) Ten (10) sea patrol officials and thirty one (31) officials on land

    (c) The officials are based in Cape Town, Hout Bay, Kommetjie and Kalk Bay

    (d) (i) 56 arrests

    (ii) Robben Island, Hout Bay, Smitswinkel Bay, Cape Point, Kommetjie, Melkbos and Sea

    Point

    (e) Units of abalone confiscated: 9586

    2. The information that the Department receives regarding the level of poaching comes primarily from confiscations. Because the abalone are often transported away from the location from which they were poached, it is not always a simple matter to identify the exact location from which confiscated abalone were removed. For this reason, it is not possible to determine estimates of poaching on fine scales (such as the Cape Peninsula). The level of poaching is therefore estimated across the commercial abalone fishing areas. The model estimates of poaching indicates that the numbers of abalone poached over the last few years has been decreasing, although this is still higher than the resource can sustain in the long term. Interestingly, the mass of abalone poached has decreased even faster than the numbers, meaning that smaller and smaller abalone are being poached, presumably as it becomes more and more difficult for poachers to find large abalone as the stocks decline.

    QUESTION 645

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: MONDAY 07 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 4-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 645 for written reply: National Assembly, Mrs SV Kaylan to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether the investigation referred to in her reply to questions 2039 on 16 August 2010 and 3053 on 23 November 2010 has now been completed; if not, why not; if so, what were the outcomes of the investigation;

    (2) whether any action has been taken against any officials as a result of the investigation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether the report has been made public; if not, why not; if so, where can it be accessed? NW690E

    Reply

    (1) Yes, the investigation by SAPS has been completed;

    (2) The Department is still busy finalising its internal investigation, based on the SAPS report.

    (3) The report will be made available upon completion of the investigation.

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
    WRITTEN
    REPLY
    QUESTION
    643
    DATE OF PUBLICATION:FRIDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT
    Question 643 for written reply:
    National Council of Provinces, Mr H B Groenewald (DA-WC) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1)With reference to her reply in the National Assembly to question 3318 on 4 November 2011 (details furnished), on which research did her department base its assessment on night fishing in the Breede River;

    (2)whether her department has considered (a) restricted zone fishing, (b) permanent catch and release fishing, (c) the ban of net fishing, (d) other fishing methods and (e) any other alternatives; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

    (3)whether her department has any plans to enforce the proposed moratorium on night fishing in the Breede River; if not, why not; if so, (a) what plans and (b) what are the further relevant details? CW792E

    REPLY:

    (1) The assessment and subsequent recommendations were supported by data from a number of research initiatives, the primary ones being:

    (a) A formal stock assessment that showed the stock of dusky kob (Argyrosomus japonicus) to be collapsed and currently at 2% of pre-fished levels.

    (b) A long-term catch-monitoring programme that has been running for the last 10 years provided much of the Breede Estuary catch data. Catch analysis indicated that most of the adult (larger than 110 cm) dusky-kob caught in the Breede Estuary was caught at night whereas similar quantities of juveniles were caught throughout the day. It was also evident from this data that dusky kob could be further protected in the Breede without impacting much on angler catches of other species.

    (c) A long-term fishery-independent research programme that has been monitoring juvenile fish recruitment and survival in the Breede (and other estuaries) for the last 10 years. This programme measures fish response to fishing, freshwater flow and other anthropogenic and environmental variables.

    (d) Population genetics studies that indicate discrete populations of dusky kob on the South African coastline that would respond positively to population and estuary-specific management measures.

    (2) There are a number of existing restrictions (bag and size limits) for all three local species of kob for recreational, subsistence and commercial fishers. These vary depending on geographical region.

    (a) The night-fishing ban is a temporal measure under the Marine Living Resources Act. Restricted-zone fishing is being considered along with zonation of other activities in the Breede Estuary. This aspect is dealt with in detail in the Breede Estuary Management Plan. Estuary Management Plans are a requirement of the Integrated Coastal Management Act and administered by the Department of Environmental Affairs.

    (b) Socio-economic surveys revealed that, although there is a positive change in angler ethics towards catch-and-release, most of the anglers in the Breede Estuary would still like to retain some of their catch to eat. Observer information indicated that there are no commercial or subsistence fishers in the Breede Estuary but some recreational anglers, although relatively affluent, are selling a substantial part of their duskykob catch.

    (c) Gillnet and beach-seine fishing is (with one exception) prohibited in the Breede and all other estuaries in South Africa. There has been a request from concerned angler groups, the Lower Breede Conservancy and Breede Estuary Management Forum, to assess the merits of prohibiting the use of "rapala type" lures as these cause high mortalities of dusky kob and are therefore not conducive to catch-and-release. Fisheries Research staff are collaborating with other research institutions on this issue.

    (d) There are no real other alternatives but the Breede Estuary is being seen as a test case that, if it works, could be rolled out to other estuaries that are important nursery and aggregation habitats for dusky kob and other fish species.

    (3) There is limited DAFF compliance presence on the Breede Estuary. The Lower Breede River Conservancy is assisting the Department with compliance enforcement on the estuary and the Department is currently engaging with them for increased compliance enforcement, dependent on funding.

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION 642

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 642 for written reply: National Council of Provinces, Mr H B Groenewald (DA-WC) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether, with reference to her reply in the National Assembly to question 3318 on 4 November 2011 (details furnished), a detailed report was compiled which documented major findings; if not, why not; if so,

    (2) whether this report will be made available to the public and interested parties; if not, why not; if so, (a) when, (b) where will it be made available and (c) by when will she make a final decision on this matter;

    (3) whether her department will consider providing any assistance to persons and businesses within the communities that will be affected by such a ban; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? CW791E

    REPLY:

    (1) No, not yet. The Department is in the process of summarizing the comments.

    (2) No. On matters like these it is not normal practice that comments are published. The Minister will consider the comments and make an executive decision on the matter. The Minister's decision will be made available to the public and interested parties.

    (3) No. This is a recreational and not a commercial fishing activity. The Department is not anticipating that individuals and businesses will be affected by the ban on night fishing or that they would require any assistance.

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

    WRITTEN REPLY

    QUESTION 629

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 629 for written reply: National Council of Provinces, Mr K.A. Sinclair (COPE-NC) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    With reference to her department's Annual Report for the 2010-11 financial year, what are the reasons for only 78% of performance agreements of senior management being submitted by the end of the fourth quarter? CW774E

    REPLY:

    As declared in the department's Annual Report for the 2010/11 financial year, 89% of performance agreements of senior management were submitted as on 30 September 2010. Internal transfers of SMS members during the reporting period had an impact, at that stage, on the conclusion of their performance agreements.

    Please find the Annual Report for 2010/11 here: www.pmg.org.za/questions/Q629-2011report.pdf

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
    WRITTEN REPLY
    QUESTION 611
    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 611 for Written Reply:
    MR O DE BEER (COPE-WC) asked the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether the Government has conducted any investigations into the reasons why maize was exported at R1 400 a ton while the local price was R2 900 a ton; if not, why not; if so, what were the findings of the investigations?

    REPLY:

    It is important to first indicate to the Honourable Member, that the price of maize, which is an internationally traded commodity, is determined at the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) through the interplay between global supply and demand. The South African maize price is derived from the CBOT price and is quoted daily in most daily papers as well as at the South African Futures Exchange (SAFEX). The futures prices are quoted in the daily papers or sites for the next 24 months and potential buyers can use the quoted prices to enter into futures contracts to buy maize at the published prices. In a situation where one wants to buy maize, the procedure is that you are required to buy a call option at SAFEX that provides the right to buy a certain quantity of maize (minimum quantity is 100 tons) at a predetermined price before a preset deadline for delivery at an agreed date.

    The statistics available to the department does not provide any indication that maize was ever exported for as low as R1 400/ton for the period under consideration. It is also not reflected anywhere in the available statistics that maize trades for R2 900/ton in the domestic market. According to statistics obtained from South Africa Grain Information Service, the average maize FOB price (export price) for the period starting from January 2011 to September 2011 is about R2105.53/ton with the highest export price of R2 332.89/ton being reached in September 2011. Domestic prices were below R2 000/t for the most part of the period under consideration and only reached a R2 000/ton mark in August 2011 and increased slightly in September 2011 to about R2 200/ton. Should maize be exported at a price lower than the domestic price, the practise would constitute dumping, a breach of international trade rules (competition rules) that maize farmers in importing countries will not permit.

    In short, the Department has not undertaken any such investigations because the information at the Department's disposal has not, in any way, suggested that South African exporters exported maize for less than the domestic producer prices.

    QUESTION 594

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: MONDAY 07 MARCH 2011 [IQP No 4-2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 594 for written reply: National Assembly, ADV L H Max (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

    (1)(a) Which travel agencies or travel service providers does her department use currently and (b)(i) how and (ii) when were they appointed in each case;

    (2) what was the (a) budgeted amount and (b) actual amount paid to each specified service provider for departmental travel expenditure in the (i) 2007-08, (ii) 2008-09 and (iii) 2009-10 financial years? NW637E

    REPLY:

    (1)(a) Travel with Flair

    (b) (i) Competitive bidding process

    (ii) 1 April 2010

    (a) Budgeted amount

    (b) Actual amount paid

    (2)(i)

    R53,333 million

    R48,914 million

    (ii)

    R74,887 million

    R58,680 million

    (iii)

    R58,761 million

    R38,204 million

    QUESTION 576

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Mr M J Ellis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) (a) Where is the dive ban mechanism that was instituted to curb abalone poaching currently in place and (b) for how long has it been in place in each case;

    (2) whether her department intends lifting the dive ban now that the commercial abalone fishery is open again; if not, why not; if so, when;

    (3) (a) what effect has the dive ban had on the levels of abalone poaching where this mechanism has been used, (b) when last has her department taken administrative action to review whether or not to keep the dive ban in place? NW479E

    Reply:

    (1) (a) The dive ban and specific areas affected were published in Government Gazette No. 30542 (dated 3 December 2007) and Government Gazette No. 30716 (dated 1 February 2008). These have not been changed.

    (b) Since 2007 and 2008 respectively.

    (2) No, because there is still a need for the protection of wild abalone (Haliotis midae) from poaching. However, the commercial abalone Right Holders have been exempted from the dive ban to enable them to harvest their allocations.

    (3) (a) The dive ban has been effective in some affected areas because it has assisted Fishery Control Officers to control poaching, as no person is allowed to dive in the banned areas except the Right Holders who have been exempted. Comparative levels of poaching are currently being estimated.

    (b) The dive ban has been reviewed annually when setting the Abalone TAC (Total Allowable Catch).

    QUESTION 555

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 3 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 555 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (COPE) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether the department has fully implemented its greening programme, including the Million Trees Programme; if not, why not; if so, (a) what success has been achieved, (b) which communities have benefited from this programme and (c) how have these programmes contributed to improving the livelihoods of the communities that were reached;

    (2) What steps will have to be taken by her department to extend the programme nationwide? NW605E

    REPLY:

    (1) Yes, the department is successfully implementing its greening programme and has in the past three years been able to reach and exceed its million trees target. It must however be noted that the million trees target is a national target that must be met collectively by municipalities, private institutions, non-governmental institutions and other civil society organisations. The department plays a coordinating and leadership role.

    QUESTION 554

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 25 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 3 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 554 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms. D. Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department had been able to producer (a) quarterly economic analysis and forecast reports and (b) monthly crop estimates reports in the past year, if not, why not, if so, what are the relevant details? NW604E

    REPLY

    a) The Department produces the Quarterly Economic Overview of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Sector report (previously called the Quarterly Economic Analysis and Forecast report) on a quarterly basis. The Quarterly Economic Overview of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Sector analyses economic developments, performance of and expected economic trends in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector through the analysis of : i) The global overview of the agricultural economy, ii) The state of the domestic economy in agriculture, forestry and fisheries, and iii) The outlook of the agricultural economy. This publication is available on the Department's website www.daff.gov.za under the path: Publications / Economic Analyses / 2010 Economic Overview of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Sector.

    b) Crop estimates reports are released on a monthly basis. The National Crop Estimates Committee, coordinated by the Department, is responsible for estimates of area, by province, planted to particular summer grain and winter cereal crops and regularly updated estimates of the expected crop sizes by province. Summer crops include white maize, yellow maize, sunflower seed, soya-beans, groundnuts, sorghum and dry beans, while winter crops include wheat, malting barley and canola. The monthly reports are available on the Department's website www.daff.gov.za/crop estimates or www.daff.gov.za/links/food security statistics/ crop estimates and also on the South African Grain Information Service website www.sagis.org.za/crop estimates.

    QUESTION 488

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: WEDNESDAY 27 OCTOBER 2010 [IQP No 30 -2010] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 488 for Written Reply, National Assembly: Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether (a) her department or (b) any (i) agency or (ii) institution which receives transfers from her departmental budget employs staff to perform the duties set out in the Minimum Information and Security standards (MISS) that were adopted by Cabinet on 4 December 1996 or any subsequent version of the MISS; if not, why not, in each case; if so, in each case, (aa) how many and (bb) what (aaa) is the job title, (bbb) is the employment level, (ccc) are academic qualifications, (ddd) is the salary and (eee) are the other benefits of each specified staff member? NW531E

    REPLY:

    (a) Yes, the posts are allocated to the establishment of the Directorate: Security Services.

    (aa) There are 8 posts (6 X posts filled and 2 X posts are vacant):

    (aaa) 1 X Director: Security Services

    1 X Deputy Director: Information Security

    1 X Assistant Director: Information Compliance

    1 X Information System Security Specialist

    1 X Document & Risk Management Officer

    3 X Vetting Officers.

    (bbb) 1 X Director: Security Services

    1 X Deputy Director: Information Security (11)

    1 X Assistant Director: Information Compliance (9)

    1 X Information System Security Specialist (9)

    1 X Document & Risk Management Officer (8)

    3 X Vetting Officers (1 X 10 & 2 X 8)

    (ccc) 1 X Director: Security Services (BA Honours in Police Science)

    1 X Deputy Director: Information Security (B Tech in Security Management)

    1 X Assistant Director: Information Compliance (BA in Administration)

    1 X Information System Security Specialist (Vacant)

    1 X Document & Risk Management Officer (Bachelor in Economics)

    1 X Vetting Officer (BA Degree in Social Science)

    1 X Vetting Officer (B Tech in Correctional Services)

    1 X Vetting Officer (Vacant)

    (ddd) 1 X Director: Security Services (R685 242.00)

    1 X Deputy Director: Information Security (R425 467.00)

    1 X Assistant Director: Information Compliance (R276 713.00)

    1 X Information System Security Specialist (R206 982.00) - Vacant

    1 X Document & Risk Management Officer (R45 086.00)

    1 X Vetting Officer (R339 187.00)

    1 X Vetting Officer (R232 148.00)

    1 X Vetting Officer (R216 426.00) – Vacant

    (eee) Director: Security Services level 13

    Basic Salary R411 120.00

    Home Owners Allowance R108 996.00

    Non Pensionable Allowance R8976.00

    Service Bonus R34 260.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R20 400.00

    Pension R53 436.00

    Total R685 242.00

    Deputy Director: Information Security level 11

    Basic Salary R297 804.00

    Home Owners Allowance R19 272.00

    Non Pensionable Allowance R18 000.00

    Non Pensionable Allowance R20 448.00

    Service Bonus R24 817.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R6 360.00

    Pension R38 712.00

    Total R425 467.00

    Vetting Officer Level 10

    Basic Salary R258 348.00

    Home Owners Allowance R9 600.00

    Service Bonus R21 529.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R16 080.00

    Pension R33 576.00

    Total R339 187.00

    Information Compliance level 9

    Basic Salary R210 084.00

    Home Owners Allowance R9 600.00

    Service Bonus R17 507.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R12 168.00

    Pension R27 300.00

    Total R276 713.00

    Vetting Officer level 8

    Basic Salary R174 120.00

    Home Owners Allowance R9 600.00

    Service Bonus R14 510.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R11 232.00

    Pension R22 632.00

    Total R232 148.00

    Vetting Officer level 8 (Vacant)

    Basic Salary R191 532.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Pension R24 888.00

    Total R216 426.00

    Document Security and Risk Management Officer level 8

    Basic Salary R176 736.00

    Home Owners Allowance R9600.00

    Service Bonus R14 728.00

    Bargain Council R48.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Medical R21 000

    Pension R22 968.00

    Total R245 086.00

    Information Security System Specialist level 9 (Vacant)

    Basic Salary R227 676.00

    Bargain Council R6.00

    Pension R29 592.00

    Total R257 274.00

    QUESTION 392

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    392. Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department is on track in developing seven initiatives for increased access to biosecurity services for all beneficiaries over the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW426E

    Bio-security services include animal and plant health services, food safety services and support mechanisms for all these services including food safety measures, laboratory services, border control measures and inspectorate services. According to the FAO definition of Bio-security "(it) encompasses all policy and regulatory frameworks (including instruments and activities) to manage risks associated with food and agriculture (including relevant environmental risks), including fisheries and forestry". Bio-security is composed of three sectors, namely food safety, plant life and health, and animal life and health.

    (a) Food safety

    · The Department is on track in crafting the framework for the Food Safety Agency. In this regard, a country profile has been concluded and the department has been in consultation with the Department of Trade and Industry on the proposed policy framework for a Food Safety Agency.

    · Currently various promotional activities are ongoing to increase awareness on food safety matters.

    (b) Plant life

    · Surveillance on exotic plant pests and diseases; and controlled pests and diseases in terms of the Agricultural Pests Act, 1983 are currently being conducted. These surveillance programmes include the Bactrocera invadens survey in Limpopo; Aster Yellow Plasma survey in the Western Cape; the Citrus Greening survey in the Eastern Cape and Golden Cyst Nematode survey on potato growing areas of the country.

    · With regard to plant health, the major focus is on promotion and awareness on bio-security matters. Awareness/ promotional materials are developed on an ongoing basis and distributed through the departmental website and participation in appropriate departmental, provincial and other events.

    · Ongoing associated activities include visits to provinces to inform subsistence and small scale farmers on bio-security services offered by the Department for the purpose on local trading and import and export.

    · Diagnostic services for plant pests and diseases are provided by DAFF, however these are in support of the regulatory services domain rather than as commercial laboratory services. Current diagnostic capacity therefore provides only for supporting phyto-sanitary export programs and import regulatory measures, primarily interceptions of phyto-sanitary non-compliance and post entry plant quarantine. Much still needs to be done to broaden the services to all.

    · In order to promote the provision of basic plant health services at production level to subsistence and smallholder farmers, work is continuing on a strategy to harness fragmented national capacity and knowledge to ensure coordinated basic plant health services that are closely linked to the national extension programme.

    · On plant production, the Department is finalizing input support package for small holder farmers.

    (c) Animal Life

    · For the financial year 2011/12 treasury approved R80 million for the Primary Animal Health Care and Compulsory Community Service (CCS) combined activity in the first year. Funding will be approved for three financial years in succession.

    · Animal health technicians will be equipped with tools necessary to deliver basic services to all. Animal health technicians will deliver PAHC (Primary Animal Health Care) services to beneficiaries in rural areas.

    · Diseases and conditions that will be of priority in the Primary Animal health care will be vaccination of preventable diseases (especially those which are communicable to humans like Rift Valley Fever, Rabies, Anthrax, training and provision of basic services like calving problems, taking samples for abortions; Vector born infectious diseases that are fatal to animals and other health conditions that will assist in improving human health. Furthermore, animal husbandry and management skills that will benefit animal production in a sustainable agriculture for subsistence and smallholder farmers will be implemented.

    · Animal recording and Improvement schemes will be reviewed to broaden the services and ensure that communal farmers improve their livestock.

    QUESTION 391

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    391. Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether her department has taken any steps to relieve the shortage of veterinarians in the rural areas (details furnished); if not, why not; if so, (a) what steps, (b) with what measure of success and (c) what are the further relevant details? NW425E

    REPLY

    Yes, the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries has taken steps to relieve the shortage of Veterinarians in the rural areas.

    DETAILS

    Veterinary services in South Africa play a critical role in ensuring animal health and food safety. This in turn supports food security, agricultural economic growth and agricultural risk management. The Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries has developed short and medium term interventions to improve the delivery of Veterinary services.

    These are:

    Short term

    · The introducing of a compulsory community services programme (similar to that of some health professionals like Dentists and Medics) for newly qualified veterinarians, focused on rural areas. There is a draft Bill currently before Cabinet in this regard.

    · Negotiating with other countries for the training of Veterinarians

    Medium term

    · Expansion of the bursary scheme for the training of Veterinarians, which started in 2004

    · Transforming the faculty of Veterinary Science at Onderstepoort, University of Pretoria, and looking into the possibility of having another faculty at another institution

    · Introducing a primary animal health care programme to deliver basic services.

    · Equipping animal health technicians to ensure the delivery of basic services.

    · Finalising a policy on the provision of public veterinary services

    · Ensuring co-ordination of activities amongst the Faculty of Veterinary science, Onderstepoort Biological Products and the ARC-Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute.

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

    · Since the inception of the scheme in 2004, fifty four (54) deserving young people were awarded bursaries to study Bachelor of Veterinary Science (BVSc) at the University of Pretoria.

    · Analysis of the fifty four (54) BVSc bursary holders:

    ü Twenty eight (28) completed their studies between 2005 and 2010.

    ü Three (3) are expected to complete this year (2011 academic year)

    ü Two (2) are currently doing 4th year level of study.

    ü One (1) is currently doing 5th year level of study.

    ü Ten (10) are currently on their 6th year level of study.

    ü Ten (10) are first year students.

    · Annually the department allocates on average ten (10) bursaries for BVSc.

    · All the students allocated DAFF bursaries to further their studies in one of the identified scarce and critical skills in agriculture, forestry and fisheries are South African citizens and they sign a contract to serve the department upon completion.

    · The table attached indicates the profiles/details and academic progress of all students allocated bursaries to study BVSc since inception of the External Bursary Scheme in 2004 – 2011.

    QUESTION 390

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 390 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (COPE) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether the Department had succeeded in ensuring that its accelerated transformation and growth programmes in the forestry sector had been successfully carried out from the date of the implementation of the Forest Sector Charter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW424E

    REPLY:

    The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has established a Charter Implementation Unit spearheaded by a Programme Manager at a Chief Director level to oversee inter-departmental participation and attainment of the targets set for the government. In addition to this, the Department also increased its human capacity to include the establishment of three Chief Directorates including the capacity to deal with Research and Development.

    Funding of the Forest Sector Charter Council has been made available. To date, the DAFF has contributed R 2 064 507.00 towards the Council. In addition to this, R 430 000.00 was made available for the development of the monitoring and reporting system.

    The Department has also committed to provide funding for the EIAs to ensure that applications are issued and afforestation can commence in the 30 000 hectares that was identified through the Letsema project.

    The major challenge in implementing the Charter has been funding for the different initiatives such as the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) required for the processing and issuing of afforestation licenses, seed funding for fire insurance and the Enterprise Development Fund. The integration of Forestry and Fisheries with the Department of Agriculture provides a number of opportunities especially access to funding. DAFF is currently in a process of realigning its funding so that it can cover all the subsectors in the Department, e.g. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

    The Forest Sector is doing well in terms of socio-economic and enterprise development. Much room for improvement, however, exists in the areas of management control and skills development.

    QUESTION 351

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 351 for written reply: National Assembly, Mrs J F Terblanche (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether any efforts are being made to monitor the compliance levels of fishers with interim relief permits; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (2) what is the (a) interim relief quota breakdown for each region and (b) estimated extent of overfishing for each region where applicable;

    (3) whether any action is being taken against fishers with interim relief permits who are found to have harvested more than their prescribed allocations; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (4) whether any measures are in place to ensure that exported west coast rock lobster harvested by interim relief fishers comes from a legal and certifiable source; if not, (a) why not and (b) how can this be justified; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (5) whether the extent of harvesting of west coast rock lobster by interim relief fishers is driving down the market price for the species; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, how will she deal with this situation? NW376E

    Reply:

    (1) Fishers involved in the interim relief are managed by fishing exemptions issued to verified individuals against approved criteria. Ongoing verification to check whether fishers still meet the verification criteria is conducted for the duration of the interim relief exemptions and action is taken against those who no longer meet the criteria. Exemptions are issued with exemption conditions which explains what they are to do and not to do. Each person is issued with a landing book to record catches landed and catches sold. Landings are monitored by the Departmental Fishery Control Officers. Challenges encountered are discussed at stakeholder representative meetings.

    (2) (a) A total allocation of 200 ton of west coast rock lobster has been made available to a maximum number of 1500 fishers.

    (b) There is currently no estimate with regard to overfishing available (Annexure A is attached).

    (3) Yes. Over-catches are confiscated and transgressors prosecuted. A total of 67 fines have been issued to interim relief fishers since the start of the season. The transgressions were mostly for permit conditions, the landing of rock lobster tails only, undersize rock lobsters and for catching females with eggs. Only 10 fines were issued for harvesting more than their prescribed allocation.

    (4) One of the requirements for the export permit is that proof of purchase must be attached to the application. On receipt of an export application reconciliation is conducted to check whether each exemption holder did not exceeded his/her monthly allocation of 80 lobsters per month. As a control mechanism, fishers who have exceeded their allocation are reported by the Local Fishery Compliance officer for initiation of legal action and to confiscate over-catches.

    (5) There is no proof that the harvesting of west coast rock lobster by interim relief fishers is driving down the market price for the species. At least 95% of the SA caught west coast rock lobster is exported as the local market is not prepared to match the price that can be obtained on the export market. The export price is an "international price" driven by supply and demand from across the world and the total South African supply to this market is far too low to have an effect on this price. The price that the local right holders receive from the exporters is directly linked to this international price and the supply of rock lobster from interim relief fishers (less than 10% of the local supply) does not influence it in any way.

    QUESTION 348

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: TUESDAY 15 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 348 for oral reply: National Assembly, Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) (a) How many kilograms or tons of abalone have been confiscated in the 2010-11 financial year, (b) what is its value and (c) where was it confiscated in each case;

    (2) what happens to the funds raised from the sale of the confiscated abalone;

    (3) what is the extent of the steps taken and measures implemented by her department to prevent the poaching of abalone? NO4340E

    REPLY:

    (1) (a) The amount of abalone confiscated is the following:

    2010 – 57637.39 kg

    2011 to date – 45356.47 kg

    These values include both wet (shucked) and dried abalone.

    (b) The Department has valued the abalone at R250/kg (wet) and R560.76/kg (dry). This is the value attributed to stock on hand, and not necessarily the value of stock sold.

    (c) Mostly in the Overberg and Western Cape around Robben Island.

    (2) The funds raised from the sale of confiscated abalone are transferred into the Marine Living Resources Fund and used to meet the objectives of the Marine Living Resources Act, 1998 (Act 18 of 1998). This includes Monitoring, Control and Surveillance where the objective is to strengthen our compliance and enforcement efforts to combat poaching as well as Research.

    (3) A database is kept of the number of illegal abalone that is confiscated. Samples of the confiscated abalone are also measured and weighed to monitor trends in the size of the poached abalone. These records span the period 1994 to 2011. The Department monitors catches at landing sites to ensure that what is landed was caught legally. Inspections are being conducted at Fish Processing Establishments (FPEs) and random inspections at exit points. Illegal FPEs are also identified, closed down and Operators are prosecuted.

    There are increased enforcement efforts in terms of human capacity as well as surveillance equipment and resources. The Department is currently working jointly with other law enforcement agencies to combat abalone poaching.

    The Department is currently experiencing the following challenges in monitoring illegal trading of abalone:

    · Insufficient human capacity and the need for more patrol vessels.

    · Cooperation between poorer communities and poachers.

    · The need for investments in effective technology to monitor suspects, for cargo inspection and all border posts or ports of entry and exit.

    However, the Department has the following future plans for combating the illegal trade of abalone:

    · To improve and strengthen relationships with other law enforcement agencies both nationally and internationally

    · Strengthening the implementation of the Integrated Fisheries Security Strategy

    · To embark on a multipronged strategic approach to reduce poaching that would include amongst others the following:

    o Targeted research focused on possible links between poverty and poaching

    o Initiate projects in poor fishing communities to create alternative livelihoods

    o Strengthen law enforcement efforts.

    QUESTION 328

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: TUESDAY 15 NOVEMBER 2011 [IQP No 39 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 328 for oral reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) Whether she intended renting safe and affordable housing in Pretoria and Cape Town when it became evident that housing would not be provided through the Department of Public Works; if not, why not; if so, (a) why was this option not pursued and (b) what are the further relevant details;

    (2) what measures does she intend to implement to ensure that her office selects the most cost effective accommodation options for her in terms of the (a) economic realities and (b) safety and security standards? NO4317E

    Reply:

    Following a complaint to the Public Protector by the honourable member, the matter is being investigated. The comprehensive response will include the matter of rented accommodation, and it would therefore not be appropriate to provide further information at this stage.

    QUESTION 273

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    273. Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) How many documents have (a) her (i) ministry and (ii) department and (b) any (i) institution or (ii) agency which receives transfers from her departmental budget classified as (aa) top secret, (bb) secret, (cc) confidential and (dd) restricted under the provisions of the Minimum Information Security Standards that were adopted by the Cabinet on 4 December 1996 in the (aaa) 2005-06, (bbb) 2006-07, (ccc) 2007-08, (ddd) 2008-09 and (eee) 2009-10 financial years;

    (2) what is the (a) name and (b)(i) rank or (ii) employment level of the official who decided on the classification at each specified public body? NW294E

    Reply

    (1) All documents generated by the Government are classified, according to the MISS regulations, at the appropriate level.

    (2) Officials responsible for the classification of documents comply with the MISS regulations in terms of their own individual security clearance and employment levels.

    QUESTION 187

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 10 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 1 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 187 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has utilised the Marine Living Resources Fund to intervene actively in the rebuilding of commercially important depleted fish stocks; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW203E

    Reply:

    The Fisheries Branch of DAFF and the Marine Living Resources Fund have, over the past approximately 10 years, initiated and supported the development of stock recovery plans for four commercially important depleted fish stocks. Recovery plans are thus currently being implemented for Hake, West Coast Rock Lobster, South Coast Rock Lobster and Abalone. The primary objective of these recovery plans is to recover the resources to the levels at which they provide the largest sustainable catches, while at the same time maintaining viable fisheries for these resources.

    The time required for a resource to recover depends on:

    a) The current status of the resource. Thus the poorer the status of a particular resource the longer it is likely to take to recover.

    b) The fundamental ability of the resource to recover. This is a result of the biology of the animals themselves and the rate at which they are able to reproduce and recover, and is outside of human control.

    c) The desired continued fishery harvest. Fastest recovery can be achieved if there is no fishing at all on the resource. However, this is not a practical option, and the speed of recovery is therefore balanced with social and economic considerations.

    d) The effects of environmental factors. Environmental factors can have unforeseen, unpredictable and profound influences on the recovery of resources.

    Direct intervention to rebuild fish stocks usually takes the form of re-seeding and ranching programmes in which juveniles are bred in a hatchery and then placed in the sea to grow to maturity. The ability to perform re-seeding programmes depends on the capability to breed large quantities of animals in captivity (large quantities are required because the vast majority do not survive to be harvested). In South Africa at present this technology is only available for abalone.

    The Marine Living Resources Fund has recently completed a thorough exercise to develop guidelines for abalone ranching and re-seeding. This has included the identification of suitable areas for ranching and re-seeding and investigation of the possible negative effects on wild stocks (through introduction of diseases, etc.), on 'sister' stocks, and on the environment, and how to mitigate against these. The guidelines are expected to be published in due course.

    The Marine Living Resources Fund is being utilized to cover the operational costs of the Fisheries Branch of the Department. This include funding research, compliance and monitoring as well as resource management. Collectively, this has led to the conservation of threatened marine resources and consequently the rebuilding of commercially important fish stocks such as abalone, hake, west coast rock lobster and linefish. There are also specific plans to rebuild rock lobster, abalone, hake and Linefish stocks in the Department's new strategic plans.

    QUESTION 186

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 10 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 1 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 186 for written reply: National Assembly, Ms D Carter (Cope) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department has taken any steps to ensure that all the holders of commercial fishing rights in the 21 commercial fishing sectors have complied with the conditions under which the rights were granted to them at the time of the completion of the first phase of revision in March 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW202E

    Reply:

    Yes. The Department has been ensuring that the commercial Right Holders meet the conditions under which the rights were granted to them through the implementation of the Marine Living Resources Act and the Regulations promulgated there under. Fishing rights were granted in 2005/2006. Permits were issued subsequently and conditions accompanied the permits. These permit conditions alluded to a Fishery Review Process that would be conducted from time to time over the duration of the fishing right. In 2009, preceding the actual reviews the Department informed Right Holders (RHs) of the process, the purpose of it and what would be required of the RH.

    The Department consulted RHs and Industry Associations on the criteria to be used to review their performance. Road shows were held to assist RHs in the Custer C & D fishing sectors and an electronic process was followed with RH's in the Cluster A & B fishing sectors. Besides an information brochure that was compiled for the information of RHs, a telephonic query line as well as email accounts were opened to assist RHs in understanding and participating in the process. Reviews are in the process of being concluded and results will be released to RHs shortly.

    QUESTION 159

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 10 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 1 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 159 for written reply: National Assembly, Mr M J Ellis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    (1) What amount in levies was collected from fishing rights holders during the 2009-10 financial year;

    (2) whether all invoices for these levies have been sent to rights holders for the 2010-11 financial year; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (3) whether there have been cases during the 2010-11 financial year where fish levies have been collected without invoices having been issued; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, how can this be justified;

    (4) whether, in the cases where such levies have been collected without invoices having been issued, her department will refund the levies with interest until such time as invoices are issued; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

    (5) on which legal provision does her department rely when it collects fish levies in cases where no invoices have been issued? NW172E

    Reply:

    (1) R 53 million.

    (2) Yes, invoices are posted.

    (3) No. all invoices are raised and collected through declarations made by the rights holder.

    (4) Collections cannot be done in absence of an invoice.

    (5) No such cases have been identified. Collections cannot be done in absence of invoices.

    (6) No such cases have been identified. Collections cannot be done in absence of an invoice

    QUESTION 121

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 121: Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    What (a) statutory provisions, (b) regulations, (c) policy instruments and (d) practices govern the (i) classification, (ii) protection against the release or access, (iii) protection for other purposes such as preservation and (iv) release upon request for access of (aa) documented information and (bb) undocumented information held by (aaa) her department or (bbb) any other entities who receive budgetary transfers from her department? NW133E

    REPLY:

    Information security is authorised and guided by the following:

    (a) Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996;

    National Archives and Record Services of South Africa Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996) and regulations;

    Protection of Information Act, 1982 (Act No. 84 of 1982);

    Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No. 2 of 2000)

    (b) National Archives and Record Services of South Africa Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996) and regulations and MISS.

    (c) Minimum Information Security Standards (MISS); Security Policy;

    (d) (i) Author of the document in terms of MISS and Security Policy

    (ii) Protection of Information Act, 1982 (Act No. 84 of 1982);

    (iii) National Archives and Record Services of South Africa Act, 1996 (Act No. 43 of 1996) and regulations

    (iv) (aa) Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No. 2 of 2000)

    (bb) All departmental policies and prescripts

    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
    ORAL REPLY/WRITTEN REPLY
    QUESTION 118
    DATE OF PUBLICATION:

    Question 118 oral reply: National Council of Provinces, Mr D A Worth (DA-NC) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether, with regard to the African Ministerial Conference on Climate-Smart Agriculture organised by her (details furnished), any tenders were awarded by her department in this regard; if so, in respect of each tender that was awarded, (a) what services were rendered and (b) what are the details of the tender process that were followed to appoint each company? CO719E

    REPLY:

    No.

    The two main cost items for the African Ministerial Conference were the accommodation and conference facilities, and the services of an Events Coordinator for the conference. The costs of the accommodation and conference facilities were covered by the World Bank who entered into a contract directly with the Westcliff Hotel in Saxonworld, Johannesburg, the venue where the conference was held.

    Similarly, other conference activities, including the costs of the Events Coordinator, were covered by the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) and the department. The FAO contracted the events coordinator directly. The Event Coordinator was responsible for procuring a range of services including sound equipment; simultaneous translation services; branding and promotional materials; printing and recording services; gifts and ICT equipment.

    The department covered the costs of the services rendered by other government departments, namely security services, emergency medical services, accreditation, VIP Protection and transport, South African Police Services. The gala dinner and the accommodation costs of support staff were sourced through the Department's travel agent: Travel with Flair. Approval, for these costs as well as for various additional costs was obtained from the Accounting Officer of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries through the normal supply chain management procedures.

    QUESTION 82

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: FRIDAY 18 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 2 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:† [Interdepartmental transfer on 15 February 2011]

    (1) Whether organisations involved in organised agriculture have made an appeal to have the maize surplus of the 2010 harvest processed into bio fuel; if so,

    (2) whether there will be tax rebates if additional employment opportunities are created; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW92E

    REPLY

    (1) Yes. An appeal was received from Grain SA to have the maize surplus of the 2010 harvest processed into bio-fuel. However, as South African does not yet have an approved bio-fuel policy, there was no policy framework within which the application could be considered, nor any formal mechanism for dealing with the appeal. The Departments of Economic Development (EDD), Trade and Industry (the dti) and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) are currently developing a bio-fuel policy for consideration by Cabinet.

    (2) The detail and content of the proposed Bio-fuels Policy, including policy options such as incentives, tax rebates and conditionalities are still to be finalised.

    QUESTION 32

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 10 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 1 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 32 for written reply: National Assembly: Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether the onus is upon her department to calculate annual levies for fishing permits; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, why were fishing permit holders calculating it themselves? NW41E

    Reply:

    The levy system is based on a similar system utilised by South African Revenue Services (VAT system) which is a self-assessment system. The onus of calculating levies is dependent on the whole mass landed by the rights holder, who is in better position to make a legal declaration on the mass caught. The calculation will be verified by the department to check whether the correct levy rate per tonnage was used.

    QUESTION 31

    DATE OF PUBLICATION: THURSDAY 10 FEBRUARY 2011 [IQP No 1 -2011] SECOND SESSION, FOURTH PARLIAMENT

    Question 31 for written reply: National Assembly, Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries:

    Whether her department complied with a court order to provide fishing permits during the period 5 January and 12 January 2011; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) why and (b) what measures will she take to remedy the situation? NW40E

    Reply:

    Catch, transport and export permits were issued to the Right Holder concerned. The situation has been addressed and resolved.