Presidency

2012-12-31

THIS FILE CAN CONTAIN UP TO 25 REPLIES.

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

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION 3245 FOR WRITTEN REPLY

DATE PUBLISHED: 16 November 2012

3245. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to his reply to question 2953 on 7 November 2012, he will formally retract his comments made on 11 October 2012 that a large part of his Nkandla homestead was paid for by his family; if not, (a) why not and (b) how does he reconcile this position with that provided for in the specified reply; if so, when? NW4134E

REPLY:

A necessary distinction must be made between renovations mandated and paid for by the Zuma family as opposed to the security enhancements by government, made on the basis of a security assessment undertaken by a team drawn from the Departments of Defence, Police and State Security.

The renovations mandated by the Zuma family were paid for by the Zuma family.

As a result there is no need for me to retract what I have said previously in and outside Parliament.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 3192

DATE PUBLISHED: 16 November 2012

3192. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the Government intends to measure the (a) size and direction of income inequality and (b) level of poverty relative to wealth and prosperity by means of the Gini coefficient; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (i) on what grounds did he make the statement in his address to the National House of Traditional Leaders at Parliament rejecting the fact that the inequality was widening and (ii) what alternative scientific measures is the Government using to graph income inequality;

(2) whether he will make a statement on the matter? NW3966E

REPLY:

Stats SA has been conducting surveys regarding the income of South Africans since 1995. However, the methodology has improved and the sample used has widened since the surveys first began. For example, the Income and Expenditure Survey which has been conducted every 5 years since 1995 initially used the recall methodology where the subjects were asked to remember facts. Since 2005/06, the diary method has also been used which is in line with international best practice. Given the change, there are some comparability issues with the previous methodology. In order to better measure poverty, the Living Conditions Survey was introduced into the survey programme in 2008/09.

To date only one such survey has been conducted and the next one is scheduled to go into the field in September 2013.

From these surveys, the following measures can be calculated:

· Gini coefficient: a measure of inequality within a group of people;

· Poverty headcount: the incidence of poverty within a group of people calculated as the proportion of people living below a particular threshold;

· Poverty gap: the average distance of those below a particular poverty line from that poverty line; and

· Severity of poverty: a measure of how the poorest of the poor are faring in society.

In terms of the Gini coefficient, a score of 1 indicates a completely unequal society while a score of 0 indicates a completely equal society. Based on the results of the latest two IES published by Stats SA and most specifically on expenditure per capita excluding taxes, Gini coefficient has decreased as shown in the table below:

Source	Year	Gini coefficient
IES 2005/2006	2006	0, 67
IES 2010/2011	2011	0, 65

This movement in the Gini coefficient reflects a decrease in the levels of inequality in South African society between 2006 and 2011.

It was on this basis that I rejected assertions that inequality was widening.

Apart from the surveys referred to above, Stats SA uses income per capita quintiles and income per capita deciles to graph inequality. These measures can also be derived using expenditure data from the two surveys mentioned above.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2979

DATE PUBLISHED: 26 October 2012

2979. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he received notice from the Minister of Police in terms of section 3 of the National Key Points Act, Act 102 of 1980, regarding the expenses he must bear as owner of the Nkandla homestead; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) how much of the expenses related to the declaration of his private home as a national key point was he requested to pay;

(3) whether he took any steps to negotiate the amount that he needed to pay in terms of section 3 of the National Key Points Act, Act 102 of 1980; if not, why not; if so, what steps? NW3744E

REPLY:

The Minister of Police has made a determination in terms of the National Key Points Act 102 of 1980 that my residence at Nkandla be declared a National Key Point. I am advised that such determination was made after a security risk assessment was undertaken by a team drawn from the Departments of Police, Defence and Military Veterans and State Security.

The Act makes provision for the declaration of an area as a National Key Point if it appears to the Minister of Police that the loss, damage, disruption or immobilization of such area may prejudice the Republic or its safety or if it is in the public interest to make such a declaration.

I have no input, despite being the owner of the property, as to whether the Minister makes such a determination or not. It is entirely his prerogative. I am equally not surprised that such a determination has been made as has been the case in respect of my predecessors. Mine is to comply with the Ministers directive, based as it is on the broader national interest which is determined by the office which I hold.

The Minister may at any time take all and any steps necessary in respect of the security of such Key Point and the owner will be liable for the cost to the extent determined by the Minister. The Minister has not advised me of any determination he has made in this regard. My expectation is that the Minister will consult with me as the owner in the course of independently making such an evaluation having regard to the work undertaken, as is provided for in the Act.

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2953

DATE PUBLISHED: 26 October 2012

2953. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

With reference to his comments on 11 October 2012 that a large part of the building of his Nkandla homestead was paid for by his family (details furnished), what (a) amount are they contributing to the upgrade of his Nkandla homestead in terms of section 3 of the National Key Points Act, Act 102 of 1980, and (b) will the amount be spent on? NW3713E

REPLY:

The scope of works for the Department of Public Works is limited to the security measures. Thus, the Department only implemented the works in line with security assessments. The President therefore does not have to fund any portion from his own funds as he is not party to the arrangement for the installation of security measures.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2947

DATE PUBLISHED: 26 October 2012

2947. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the accords signed by representatives of (a) the Government, (b) business and (c) labour on (i) procurement, (ii) skills development, (iii) basic education and (iv) the green economy as referred to in his state of the nation address of 2012 (aa) have been fully implemented, (bb) have been evaluated by all three partners and (cc) are meeting the targets that were set and agreed to; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3704E

REPLY:

The Accords signed by representatives of government and social partners during 2011 have commitments made by each signatory.

Constituencies have implemented a number of these commitments.

A common reporting and evaluation template has been developed.

A comprehensive report is being finalized by the constituencies detailing the extent of implementation. This consolidated report, once completed, will be released publicly and information relating to further implementation and progress thereof would be made available.

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2911

DATE PUBLISHED: 19 October 2012

2911. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the Presidential Infrastructure Coordination Commission, which was established after the lekgotla in July 2011, had spearheaded and coordinated any of the Government's infrastructure development programmes (details furnished); if not, why not; if so, what (a) are the details of the projects, (b) progress has been made in each case and (c) are the further relevant details? NW3589E

REPLY:

The Presidential Infrastructure Co-coordinating Commission has begun to coordinate Government's infrastructure programme by developing the National Infrastructure Plan, which was adopted in February 2012.

This Plan integrates and aligns the various separate projects into a coherent framework.

To develop the plan, the PICC worked through over 600 proposed projects in order to prioritise around 300 projects. These projects have been consolidated into 18 Strategic Integrated Projects, or SIPs.

Every SIP is expected to develop a localisation programme; a skills plan that identifies key skill needs, from artisans to engineers; a jobs plan including core targets for youth employment; a green component; a technology plan; and broad-based empowerment programmes.

Ultimately, all the state agencies involved in the SIPs will enter into compacts that specify what they will contribute and how they will be supported.

The PICC has developed a dashboard for reporting on progress in each SIP, with a quarterly report to Cabinet on construction progress and the enablers such as funding, inputs such as steel and bitumen, skills and licensing.

The provincial Premiers are members of the PICC Council, while local government is represented through the metros and SALGA.

The SIPs combine some investments that have been underway for some time with shovel-ready projects and initial ideas. As a result, the progress on individual SIPs varies widely.

We have launched 8 SIP's, bringing together the three spheres of government, appointing a Cabinet member to chair it and appointing a public agency to coordinate the work of state-owned enterprises, departments and development finance institutions.

The other SIPs will be launched in the next few months. The PICC has set up a system to report on progress on the SIPs on a quarterly basis, providing an oversight mechanism and ensuring that delays and blockages are identified and addressed promptly.

The 18 SIPs are as follows:

SIP 1: Unlocking the northern mineral belt with Waterberg as the catalyst

SIP 2: Durban-Free State-Gauteng logistics and industrial corridor

SIP 3: South-Eastern node and corridor development

SIP 4: Unlocking the economic opportunities in the North West Province

SIP 5: Saldanha-Northern Cape development corridor

SIP 6: Integrated municipal infrastructure project

SIP 7: Integrated urban space and public transporting programme

SIP 8: Green energy in support of the South African economy

SIP 9: Electricity generation to support socio-economic development

SIP 10: Electricity transmission and distribution for all

SIP 11: Agri-logistics and rural infrastructure

SIP 12: Revitalisation of public hospitals and other health facilities

SIP 13: National school build programme

SIP 14: Higher Education infrastructure

SIP 15: Expanding access to communication technology

SIP 16: SKA & Meerkat

SIP 17: Regional integration for African cooperation and development

SIP 18: Water and sanitation infrastructure

Progress is now monitored for each SIP, tracking projects under construction as well as those in project planning stages.

As each programme is finalised, additional information will be released.

The Estimates of National Expenditure contain details of certain of the component projects that go into the SIP's. Additional projects are being taken through the budget process and will be finalised in the next budget as well as a review of overall public investment, including elements that are funded off budget.

I am pleased that the Package of Issues in response to the downturn and labour conflict in mining, which we agreed on 17 October 2012 with organized business, labour and community representatives, included a common commitment to building our infrastructure programme.

A number of specific projects were identified which will now be fast-tracked. These include the programme to connect households to the national energy grid, a project to address water leaks and road building and maintenance programmes.

This National Infrastructure Plan is a central lever to restructuring our economy to ensure greater inclusion and solidarity. I welcome the support for this crucial project for our country.

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2863

DATE PUBLISHED: 19 October 2012

2863. Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether all decisions listed under Decision of the President in the Report of the Presidential Task Team established to investigate the non-delivery and/or delays in the delivery of Learner Teacher Support Material (LTSM) in Limpopo schools in the 2012 school year will be subject to further action; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether all recommendations detailed in the report will be subject to further action; if not, (a) why not, (b) which recommendations will be excluded from further action and (c) what action will be taken with regard to the recommendations that have been identified for further action; if so, what are the relevant details of the intended actions with regard to each specified recommendation;

(3) what are the reasons for his acceptance that there shall be (a) no further investigation of and (b) no punitive action against political office bearers who have been mentioned in the report? NW3537E

REPLY:

The following actions have been or are being taken with regard to the decisions of the President:

a. The Minister of Basic Education provided a report on what has been done thus far with regard to the procurement, delivery and supply of LTSM to the affected schools, and on the catch-up plan in Limpopo.

b. The Minister of Basic Education has requested the Public Service Commission to investigate the conduct of the Director-General of the Department of Basic Education

c. The Ministers in the Presidency have started to assist the Minister of Basic Education in fulfilling the tasks and ensuring the implementation of the recommendations of the Presidential Task Team.

Implementation of all the recommendations in the report will receive the attention of the Ministers in the Presidency. In particular:

i. DPME will be assisting the Department of Basic Education to develop a policy for the standardisation of the procurement and distribution of Learner Teacher Support Material. It will also assist the Department to develop its monitoring systems in this regard.

ii. DPME will engage with the Department of Public Service and Administration and the National Treasury regarding the recommendation for sufficient human and financial capacity to be made available to support interventions

iii. The progress of COGTA in developing the "Monitoring, Support and Interventions" (MSI) Bill will be monitored by DPME. DPME will also engage with NT and DPSA regarding the implications of the Bill for the PSA and PFMA.

The report does not recommend punitive actions against political office bearers.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2748

DATE PUBLISHED: 12 October 2012

2748. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) When was the Masibambisane rural development initiative launched;

(2) whether any rural development projects have been handed over to the initiative; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) which projects, (b) why and (c) what are the further relevant details;

(3) (a) how many other rural towns have been revitalised since the 2009 State of the Nation Address and (b) in which provinces? NW3393E

REPLY:

(1) The Masibambisane Rural Development Initiative (MRDI) was initiated in 2001 by the Nkandla community.

(2) No. The MRDI conceptualises its own partnership with the private sector and the government and work closely with these stakeholders and deliver projects to communities. The MRDI is a community driven initiative that assists communities in mobilising resources, from both the private and government sectors. Government provides project based support directly to communities, in line with the methodology proposed in the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP).The Department will continue to work with rural communities in capacity building initiatives, to ensure sustainability of the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme.

(3)(a),(b) DRDLR runs programmes to revitalise rural towns throughout the country to create sustainable rural settlements.

Western Cape:	- Dysselsdorp (renovation of 4 schools and old age home, construction of 10 emergency sandbag houses) - Bella Vista (Development of Economic Hub / Agri Market) - KwaMandlenkosi (Youth Hub,R&R of 5 houses), Beaufort West - Mamre (community park) - Matzikama/ Ebenhaeser (roads, oxidation ponds) - Prince Alfred Hamlet (Walkway Phase II, Upgrading of burial grounds, Swimming Pool, Development of River bank)
Northern Cape:	- Philipstown (housing, fencing)
Limpopo:	- Jane Furse (supporting planning) - Masia (Multi-Purpose Facilities, agricultural venture)
Mpumalanga:	- Mayflower Revitalization (Upgrading of bridges and culverts, roads and coordinating the construction of a regional shopping centre). - KwaNgema (Multi-purpose center, fencing)
Eastern Cape	- Lusikisiki (Precinct Plan) - Flagstaff (Precinct Plan)
Free State:	- Jacobsdal (renovation of Ratanang stadium, multipurpose recreational centre)
Gauteng:	- Devon (Refurbishment of three schools, Solar Boreholes, I-schools Project, animal & veld management projects) - Tambo Springs-Logistical Hub - R28 Development Corridor - Lesedi R42 (Industrial Park)
KwaZulu Natal:	- Umlalazi-Nkandla (Development of Nkandla Smart Growth Centre: Government services; Boarding School; Retail facilities; Light Industrial centre linked to Agro processing, Irrigation schemes, Masibambisane rural development initiative); - uMlalazi (Rural Water Scheme, Construction of 500 VIP toilets); - Mthonjane (Bulk Water pipe and reticulation); - Msinga (Supply and installation of M&E equipment of a borehole)

In addition, programmes to revitalise rural villages and settlements in the country to create sustainable rural settlements have been initiated in:

Eastern Cape	- Mvezo/ Ludondolo Village (150m Bridge & 10km Road, River Valley Catalytic Projects/ pack shed & animal & veld management projects) - Mhlontlo/ Qumu/ Tsolo Village (Fencing of HH garden, arable & grading land)
Western Cape:	- Goedgedacht (Building of POP Centre)
Northern Cape:	- Riemvasmaak/ Sending/ Vredesvallei (ICT Centres, Waste water treatment, Houses, VVAs, Bulk water, community hall, sport facility, VIP Toilets) - Kgomo le Metsi (Water Testing & Drilling of Boreholes in Kgomo le Metsi, ICT Centres, DD, I-Schools) - Geisemap (fencing, provision of water)
Limpopo:	- Muyexe (HH fencing, E-Rap centres, sanitation, community hall, houses, fencing, satellite police station, clinic upgrade, roads, sport facilities), Gonono, Dingamanzi
Mpumalanga:	- Mkhondo/ Donkerhoek and Jabulani villages (Construction of houses, Household solar
Free State:	- Diyatalawa Revitalisation (Transformation of a rural farming community of 50 households into a sustainable green Agri-Village, settlement of 50 houses, Installation of water and sanitation services for each household, Construction of a new school, new schools, ICT Centres, Access roads, Multi-purpose sport facility, Milking palour and 100ha irrigation infrastructure, Students hoste) - Makgolokoeng (Construction of houses, Community hall, Temporary clinic, Multi-purpose sport facility, ICT Centres, Potato sorting and packaging house, 3 Hydroponic Tunnels)

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2661

DATE PUBLISHED: 21 September 2012

2661. Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he has received the final report of the task team announced and appointed by him on 4 July 2012 to investigate the delayed delivery of textbooks in Limpopo; if not, (a) why not and (b) when is it anticipated that the report will be supplied to him;

(2) whether he intends to make the report publicly available; if so, when;

(3) whether action against any official of the provincial or national department of education is recommended in the report; if not, why not; if so, (a) what action, (b) against whom and (c)(i) when and (ii) by whom will each recommended course of action be followed;

(4) what steps does the report recommend in order to prevent a recurrence of the situation that developed in Limpopo in 2012 in any province? NW3279E

REPLY:

Yes, the report was received and it was released on 05 October 2012.

The Task Team recommended that the Public Service Commission should be directed to investigate the roles of the following (b) the Director-General: Basic Education, the Head of Department of Education and the Chief Financial Officer of the Limpopo Education Department (c) (i) within sixty days (ii) the recommended course of action will be made by the Public Service Commission.

The Report recommended that appropriate political oversight in relation to the delivery of textbooks be carefully monitored by government and to ensure that appropriate risk management mechanisms are put in place.

In addition, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that sufficient Human and Financial capacity is available to support the intervention by developing a mechanism where institutional capacity can be deployed as and when the need arises. The said capacity should be located in the Department of Public Service and Administration and the National treasury respectively.

Further, to efficiently manage the budget and to have credible information that will serve as the basis for both costing and procurement (of) Learner Teacher Support Material, a headcount for both learners and teachers in the Province should be conducted and finalized by the end of November 2012 by the DBE Intervention Team.

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2612

DATE PUBLISHED: 21 September 2012

2612. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether he has found that creating the Ministry of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation has resulted in quantifiable improvement in the performance outcomes of the Departments of (a) Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, (b) Public Works, (c) Basic Education, (d) Labour and (e) Police; if not, why not, in each case; if so, in each case, in what (i) manner and (ii) measure were the outcomes superior to the outcomes that were registered during the period 2004 to 2009? NW3222E

REPLY:

The Ministry and Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) have been progressively introducing a range of performance monitoring and evaluation practices since the creation of the Ministry in 2009 and the Department in 2010.

One of the key roles that DPME has played is to facilitate the putting in place and monitoring of delivery agreements for the 12 priority outcomes. The delivery agreements were completed by November 2010, and since then Cabinet has been receiving quarterly progress reports from the coordinating Ministers for each of the outcomes.

The Ministries and Departments of Basic Education, Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, and Police are responsible for three of the outcomes: "quality basic education"; "all people in South Africa are and feel safe" (related to reducing crime); and "a responsive, accountable, effective and efficient local government system". For all of these outcomes, there has been progress and there are challenges still remaining. With regard to basic education for example, since 2009 there have been improvements in the matric pass rate and 90% of the target population is now in Grade R. However, average literacy and numeracy levels as measured by the Annual National Assessments remain unacceptably low; there are still problems with timeous distribution of textbooks at provincial level; and there is still some under-expenditure of school infrastructure budgets. Similarly with regard to reducing crime, since 2009 there has been a steady decrease in overall serious crime, contact and trio crime, but despite this, the levels of serious crime are still too high.

There are remaining challenges in improving the detection of crime and ensuring higher rates of convictions, especially those of perpetrators of serious and violent crime. With regard to local government, since 2009 there have been improvements in access to water, sanitation and electricity infrastructure, but there are concerns regarding the operation and maintenance of this infrastructure in some municipalities and there has been insufficient progress in improving municipal audit outcomes.

Delivery agreements, or sectoral inter-departmental and intergovernmental result-based plans, were generally not in place during the 2004-2009 period. Notwithstanding the mixed results described above, there is evidence that the results-based or outcomes approach is starting to reap benefits in terms of improving cooperative governance, introducing more results-based planning and evidence-based monitoring and evaluation, and increasing the strategic focus of government. Cooperation and collaboration between departments and spheres of government in relation to the achievement of the outcomes has generally improved. The emphasis on measuring and reporting on results is working as a catalyst for change, and some departments are embracing the approach and focusing more on actual results related to strategic targets and on improving their data systems so that the results can be measured accurately.

In addition to the delivery agreements for the outcomes, in the 2011/12 financial year DPME also introduced a process of assessing the quality of generic management practices in national and provincial departments. This involves annual moderated self-assessments, with the aim of developing a culture of continuous improvement in departments. During 2011/12, 65% of national and provincial departments were assessed, including the Departments of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Basic Education, Labour and Public Works. DPME is aiming for 100% assessment in 2012/13. The assessment results for national departments are on the DPME website.

The first assessments were only carried out in 2011/12, and quantifiable improvements will be available by February 2013 after moderation of the 2012/13 self–assessments has been completed. However, departments are required to put in place improvement plans and the aim is to measure improvements in the quality of management practices on an annual basis. The results of these assessments will also be linked to the performance assessment of individual Heads of Department from 2013/14 onwards. DPME is currently working with DCOG and National Treasury to pilot a similar assessment process at municipal level, with a view to starting annual assessments of municipalities in the 2013/2014 financial year.

DPME is also managing various initiatives related to monitoring the experience of citizens when they receive services from government. By 31 August 2012, the Presidential Hotline had received 141 000 cases, of which 86% had been resolved. Relatively high proportions of these cases relate to the Department of Labour (5 810) and the SAPS (4389). The Department of Labour has an excellent responsiveness rate to its Hotline cases, with 99.5% of its cases being resolved by the end of August 2012. The SAPS has been steadily improving its case resolution rate, to 73% by the end of August 2012. A number of cases related to the national Department of Basic Education have also been logged (913), of which 82% had been resolved by the end of August 2012. The national Department of Public Works has had fewer cases (103), and has a 94% resolution rate. There have only been 57 cases related to the Departments of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs at national level but these departments have not yet resolved any of their cases and DPME is engaging with them in this regard.

In addition, DPME is implementing a Frontline Service Delivery Monitoring Programme in conjunction with the Offices of the Premier. This programme involves carrying out unannounced visits to frontline service delivery sites, including schools, police stations, and municipal customer care centres. The objective is to catalyse service delivery improvements to aspects of service delivery quality such as accessibility, queue management and waiting times, dignified treatment, cleanliness and comfort, safety, and opening and closing times. The findings are shared with office supervisors and national and provincial management structures. Repeat visits to sites are indicating that this form of monitoring has had a positive impact at a number of service delivery sites. The results of this frontline service delivery monitoring are also available on the DPME website.

Evaluation is an important element of the work of DPME. In this regard, Cabinet approved a National Evaluation Policy Framework generated by the department in November 2011.

It also approved the first annual National Evaluation Plan, and will shortly be considering the first three-year National Evaluation Plan.

These plans identify a range of strategic government programmes to be systematically evaluated, with the aim of identifying strengths and weaknesses and instituting improvements to the programmes. These evaluation policies and plans were not in place prior to 2009.

The first evaluation to be completed was an evaluation of the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Programme, which is critical for improving results in the basic education sector. The evaluation was carried out jointly by DPME and the Departments of Basic Education, Social Development and Health, which manage the programme. The evaluation report is publicly available on the DPME website, and it identifies a number of weaknesses with the current programme. As a result of the evaluation, the three departments have developed an improvement plan, which will be monitored by DPME.

Three other evaluations related to basic education are currently being commissioned, i.e. an impact evaluation of the School Nutrition Programme; an impact evaluation of Grade R and an implementation evaluation of the Integrated Nutrition Programme. The draft 3-year National Evaluation Plan also includes evaluations of the Funza Lushaka Bursary Scheme and the quality of the National Senior Certificate in the basic education sector. An evaluation of the Community Works Programme under the Department of Cooperative Governance is also planned.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2611

DATE PUBLISHED: 21 September 2012

2611. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the Government has analysed the nature and extent of the humanitarian crisis in and around Marikana since 1 August 2012; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether any government departments have implemented measures to deal with the humanitarian crisis; if not, why not; if so, what (a) measures have been implemented by each specified government department, (b) is the (i) nature and (ii) extent of the assistance offered to the miners and their families for the duration of the strike and (c) are the further relevant details? NW3221E

REPLY:

As the Honourable member will know, the President appointed a Judicial Commission of Inquiry on the Marikana tragedy to establish the facts about and causes of the incidents in which 44 people were killed.

The Commission is in the process of investigating the matter in line with the terms of reference under which it was established. In this regard, government will be informed by the findings of the Commission as to the nature and extent of the humanitarian crisis in the area.

Shortly after the tragedy, government took a decision to support all the families of the 44 people who died in the Marikana tragedy without discrimination.

The Inter-Ministerial Committee on the Marikana tragedy, which is led by Minister Colins Chabane, attended funerals held for the victims.

The members of the Inter-Ministerial Committee expressed condolences on behalf of government and the people of South Africa to the families.

Government provided the necessities as required by families towards arrangement of the funerals and social workers were on hand to provide counselling and social support.

Government representatives from the provinces of Mpumalanga, Free State, Eastern Cape and North West and local governments also represented government in 31 other funerals.

Furthermore, government, through the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, provides support by paying for the transport and accommodation costs of the family members or representatives who wish to attend the Commission's hearings. It is important to note that the Department went as far as changing its regulations in order to accommodate this form of assistance.

The Department of Arts & Culture has plans to move into the area to host community conversations not only as part of building social cohesion but creating a platform for local communities to collectively work on strategies and tactics that would, in future, prevent violent outbreaks that result in property destruction and death. These community conversations are scheduled to take place in the North West, including the Rustenburg area, at the beginning of 2013.

These will not only provide feedback on the outcomes of the National Social Cohesion Summit that took place in Kliptown, Soweto in July this year but create a platform for communities to openly discuss issues that pose a threat to social cohesion with the aim to find solutions.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2610

DATE PUBLISHED: 21 September 2012

2610. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the Government is taking steps to correct the characterisation of South Africa by Human Rights Watch in its World Report 2012 as a country grappling with (a) corruption, (b) growing social and economic inequalities and (c) the weakening of state institutions by partisan appointments and one-party dominance; if not, why not; if so, what steps? NW3220E

REPLY:

We do not agree with the conclusions of the Human Rights Watch Report as encapsulated in the question. The South African Government has many programmes and structures to fight corruption, address social and economic inequalities and strengthen the capacity of the state. The National Development Plan developed by the National Planning Commission (NPC) further provides government with strategies to intensify efforts around each of these challenges.

In respect to part (a) of the question, the National Development Plan identified four areas of focus to strengthen existing anti-corruption policies. They include building a resilient anti-corruption system where designated agencies are well resourced and capable in order to investigate and prosecute corruption; strengthen accountability and responsibility of public servants; strengthen protection of whistle blowers to expand the scope of protection to include those outside the traditional employer-employee relationship and review and reform procurement procedures.

This government has taken consistent and strong measures to address social and economic inequalities. In 1994 we inherited a country with glaring levels of social and economic inequality. Over the past 18 years we have increased access to basic services such as healthcare, education, housing, amongst others, to the majority of people who have been denied these basic human rights.

The latest census data provides the evidence indicating that 85% of people have access to electricity, 78% to formal housing, 92% to piped water, 57% to flush toilets. Our economy has more than doubled in size and 13.4 million people are currently employed compared to only 7.5 million in 1995. Progress has been made. However, as the diagnostic document of the NPC shows income inequality remains a major concern.

The National Development Plan has been endorsed by Cabinet. The core objective of the Plan is the reduction of inequality and elimination of poverty and it proposes that the best way to address inequality is through the prioritization of quality education. The plan includes proper implementation of Employment Equity and land reform in order to address the legacy of our past. Studies show that the greatest contributor to the inequality is wage income caused by unemployment and the huge income differentials. The plan emphasises job creation and making the economy more labour absorptive.

The Public Administration is governed by chapter 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The principles contained in Section 195 (1) and particularly sub-section (i) which states that the "public administration must be broadly representative of the South African people, with employment and personnel practices based on ability, objectivity, fairness, and the need to redress the imbalances of the past to achieve broad representation". As an example of the approach of government to efficiency and non-partisan appointments in the Public Service, the Municipal Systems Amendment Act (2011) was introduced to ensure the application of the constitutional principles stipulated in Section 195. This Act also introduced a prohibition on municipal managers, and those reporting directly to them, from holding political office in a political party. The National Development Plan furthermore, recommends additional steps to increase the professionalisation of the public service and strengthen institutions and governance towards a capable and developmental state.

The creation of the National Planning Commission is, in itself, one of a number of steps taken during the current term to strengthen state institutions and increase the capability of the state. Now for the first time, we have the capacity in government to carry out long-term planning and independent commissioners who provide expert and strategic advice on priorities.

:au+�ieH�� 50%'>

(ee) Not applicable

(ff) Not applicable

(gg) Not applicable

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 2530

DATE PUBLISHED: 14 September 2012

DATE DUE: 28 September 2012

2530. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether, with reference to the warning of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (details furnished) in respect of unemployment, he intends to devise a standalone plan for the immediate implementation of the National Development Programme (NDP); if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether he will also request the National Planning Commission to (a) consult unemployed youth for the purpose of buying into the plan, (b) accelerate attempts to create a public private partnership for infrastructure development and (c) put skills training on a war footing; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3131E

REPLY:

The Cabinet Lekgotla that took place from 4 to 6 September 2012 endorsed the National Development Plan, its objectives and targets. One of the key objectives of the National Development Plan is to create 11 million more jobs and reduce unemployment to 6 percent by 2030. The Lekgotla also acknowledged the NDP as a strategic framework to form the basis of future government detailed planning. This means that implementation plans in each department will be guided by the objectives set out in the plan i.e. creating more jobs.

When the National Planning Commission submitted the draft National Development Plan in November 2011, I requested the Commission to consult with all South Africans on the proposals contained in the Plan. The Plan that was handed to the President in the joint sitting of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces was an outcome of the consultation. The Commission visited all provinces in the country and had dialogue sessions with government, business, organised labour and civil society. Specifically to reach the youth, the Commission hosted a 72 hours online discussion, known as the NPC Jam. Just over 10 000 young people participated. Three NPC videos explaining the plan were produced and posted on YouTube in an attempt to provide viewers with a summary of the diagnostic overview and the plan. There have been over 30 000 hits on the YouTube video. In a further attempt to reach a dedicated youth audience, a partnership was entered into with MiXit where two live chats were hosted providing an opportunity for users to engage with the draft plan.

The plan calls on all South Africans to get involved in implementing it because it is a plan for all sectors. We fully support partnerships in particular where they promote the faster delivery of infrastructure projects and shares risk equally between the partners. Therefore, where appropriate, public-private partnerships will be used.

Skills development has been a major priority of this government. As a result we established the Ministry for Higher Education and Training and the Human Resources Development Council, led by the Deputy President to spearhead our efforts in this area. We have also made the provision of quality basic education the number one priority because we know that skills development requires a solid foundation of basic education. The NDP makes a number of recommendations to accelerate skills development and many of these are already being pursued by the Department of Higher Education and Training.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 2529

DATE PUBLISHED: 14 September 2012

DATE DUE: 28 September 2012

2529. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether he intends taking steps to act against those implicated in unlawful actions which results in adverse judgments against the Government (details furnished); if not, why not; if so, what (a) progress has been made in this regard and (b) are the further relevant details? NW3130E

REPLY:

The Department of Mineral Resources investigated and obtained legal advice in respect of the mentioned cases. The Department determined that the conduct of those officials involved in the administrative decisions which were ultimately reviewed and set aside did not render their actions punishable in law and neither did it amount to misconduct.

As a result, no steps are to be taken against any official as a result of the outcome of the mentioned litigation.

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 2466

DATE PUBLISHED: 7 September 2012

2466. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether he will make public the full unexpurgated report published by the judicial enquiry on the Marikana tragedy; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3069E

REPLY:

The President will on receipt of the final report of the Commission deal with the said report in a manner which acknowledges both the public interest, as well as the principles to which he is enjoined to constitutionally give effect to. The President will further be guided by the recommendations of the Commission. To do otherwise would unfairly prescribe to the Commission the manner in which its recommendations should be framed.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 2456

DATE PUBLISHED: 7 September 2012

2456. Ms A M Dreyer (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the investigation by the Special Investigating Unit into case number 1137/11/2011, Cape Town Police Station and CAS 941/11/2011, Kimberley Police Station, with regard to a certain person's (name furnished) financial affairs, has been completed; if not, (a) why not and (b) when does he anticipate that it will be completed; if so, on what date;

(2) whether the case docket has been handed over to the National Prosecuting Authority; if not, why not; if so, on what date? NW3056E

REPLY:

(1) The investigations into the cases in question have been completed by

the South African Police Service and not the Special Investigating Unit.

(2) Yes , the case was placed on the Court Roll on 2012-11-21 and was

remanded to 2013-03-07.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION 2324 FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 31 AUGUST 2012

2324. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the Deputy President:

Whether the Government has adopted the Zero Hunger concept as a national poverty eradication programme; if not, why not; if so, (a) when was it launched, (b) for how long has it been running, (c) from which government department is it being run, (d) what will be the estimated cost of the programme, (e) what is the overall budget for the concept and (f) what number of projects have been completed? NW2825E

REPLY

Rising food prices fuel the problem of food insecurity, resulting in an increased burden on poverty. The increase in prices of staple foods such as the recent increase in the price of maize by as much as 25 percent from June to July 2012, which was due to a drought and heat in the United States and Eastern Europe, worsens the food security challenge.

Based on information from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, it is clear that the Zero Hunger Programme is a response by the Department to such challenges, under this financial year's theme of "Working Together for Food Security" – a reality. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has partnered with rural development initiatives; national departments; provincial government; municipalities as well as the private sector to ensure eradication of poverty and stimulation of our rural economy.

The Zero Hunger Programme aims to reduce the incidence of food insecurity through improving the capabilities of all South Africans to access nutritious food. The main objective of this concept which is borrowed from Brazil is combating hunger and its structural causes which continue to perpetuate inequality and social exclusion. This will be done through strengthening the Integrated Food Security Strategy and increasing food production and trade.

The Zero Hunger Programme is specifically intended to target 20 highly-deprived municipalities in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu Natal, Limpopo and the North West.

The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has planned to invest R4 billion towards the Zero Hunger Programme which aims to develop smallholder farmers.

The first phase of the Zero Hunger Programme roll-out took place in July 2012 in Bhisho in the Eastern Cape where the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, in conjunction with the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Rural Development and Agrarian Reform.

The plan entails a crop production programme that seeks to plough more than 300 000 hectares of unused arable land. The main beneficiaries of the initiative will be people from rural communities who could work the land for commercial benefit and poverty alleviation.

In supporting provincial departments' agriculture work, some of the developed commodity strategies for agriculture and commodities as well as a turn-around strategy for wheat production and inputs to a support package for winter crops and the Soybean Strategy with the Department of Trade and Industry are not yet funded. However, there is an opportunity for some of their elements to be implemented through the Zero Hunger Programme.

Should the Honourable Member require additional information, he is welcome to contact the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry in this regard.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO.: 2248

DATE PUBLISHED: 24 August 2012

2248. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he intends to issue a decree that the National Development Plan will be implemented (a) across all spheres of government, (b) with immediate effect and (c) in terms of (i) an implementation plan and (ii) a time table; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(2) whether the Cabinet intends approving legislation in support of the implementation of the National Development Plan; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether he intends to utilise any other mechanism to give legal effect to enforcing implementation of the National Development Plan across all spheres of government; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2824E

REPLY:

In July this year the Cabinet Lekgotla discussed extensively the National Development Plan from the National Planning Commission. After serious discussion, the Cabinet Lekgotla adopted the NDP and established a Cabinet Committee to work on the best way to implement it. In the last few months since the Cabinet Lekgotla there has been intensive work aimed at developing the implementation plan. The implementation plan will be presented to the Cabinet at its Lekgotla in January 2013. It is at that point then that Cabinet will take concrete decisions, informed by proposals contained in the implementation plan, on how to take the plan forward.

I am aware there is great interest in our society on the NDP. I wish to advise that we should wait for the implementation plan to be presented to Cabinet in January. I am confident that those who have been entrusted with the responsibility of developing the implementation plan will look at all the options and advise Cabinet accordingly.

The most important point to emphasise is that for the first time in the history of our country we have a single national development plan that all of us, both in government and outside of it, should work together to successfully implement.

�Xet`� �e Plan is the reduction of inequality and elimination of poverty and it proposes that the best way to address inequality is through the prioritization of quality education. The plan includes proper implementation of Employment Equity and land reform in order to address the legacy of our past. Studies show that the greatest contributor to the inequality is wage income caused by unemployment and the huge income differentials. The plan emphasises job creation and making the economy more labour absorptive.

:au+�ieH�� 50%'>

(ee) Not applicable

(ff) Not applicable

(gg) Not applicable

Reply received: November 2012

QUESTION NO. 1880

DATE PUBLISHED: 3 August 2012

1880. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether he received a request from a certain person (name furnished) in April 2011 to investigate allegations of corruption against certain persons (names and details furnished); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2269E

REPLY:

Yes. I had referred the matter to the relevant provincial education department to deal with the matter and report to the Presidency as soon as possible.

The Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Education in Limpopo had appointed an independent audit firm, to probe the allegations made by the certain person referred in the question.

Ironically, the investigation found some wrong-doing on the part of the person who alleged corruption against certain persons in that department; and the person was accordingly discharged from his duties in the Limpopo Department of Education. I have been informed that the person in question is currently challenging his dismissal through the Labour Court.

One of the persons alleged to have been involved in corrupt practices in that department has since left the department, and the other is still in the employ of the department.

I am further informed that the Anti-Crime Task Team (ACTT), established by the National Treasury to investigate all sorts of alleged financial irregularities in Limpopo, is further investigating malpractices alleged by the certain person to me. Because of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the official must be equally protected under our democratic laws.

I have however, been equally informed by the ACTT that should any justification be found to place the official on leave to allow for a proper and uninhibited investigation to take place, that official will be placed on leave and be formally subjected to a disciplinary process as prescribed in the relevant laws of our democratic country.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO. 1629

DATE PUBLISHED: 15 June 2012

DUE DATE: 29 June 2012

1629. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the Government has put any measures in place to achieve a targeted annual reduction in inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient since June 2009; if not, why not; if so, (a) what measures, (b) what results were achieved in each year since 2009 as measured by the Gini coefficient and (c) which provinces reflected a decrease in inequality;

(2) whether the reduction in inequality as per the Gini coefficient is consistently monitored for the (a) Presidency and (b) Government; if not, why not, in each case; if so, in each case, (i) by whom and (ii) what are the further relevant details? NW1953E

REPLY:

(1) and (2)

In the Delivery Agreement for Outcome 4: Job Creation, signed by the Ministers of Finance, Trade and Industry and Economic Development in October 2010, reducing income inequality was recognised as one of the necessary ingredients for a more sustainable path to growth. This view is also strongly put forward in the National Development Plan of the National Planning Commission.

All of the measures currently contained in the Outcome 4 Agreement are aimed at reducing inequality, as well as increasing employment. It is widely agreed in South Africa that reducing unemployment is the most direct path to reducing income inequality. The measures in Outcome 4 include a number of activities under the following seven headings:

1. Faster and sustainable inclusive growth

2. More labour absorbing growth

3. Multi-pronged strategy to reduce youth unemployment

4. Increased competitiveness, to raise net exports, grow trade as a share of world trade and improve its composition

5. Improved cost structure in the economy

6. Improved support to small business and cooperatives

7. Implementation of the expanded public works programme

The coordinating departments report to Cabinet on a quarterly basis on progress in the activities taking place under these headings. They also report on progress against agreed indicators, and one of those indicators is the Gini Coefficient of inequality.

In the delivery agreement it was noted that there is not enough data currently to measure income inequality regularly, and the three departments agreed to approach Statistics South Africa to revise its annual General Household Survey so that it collects and distributes more and better data on incomes. In the meantime the existing data obtained from the five yearly Income and Expenditure Survey has been used as a benchmark. This indicates that the Gini co-efficient is about 0.69 which is a very high level of inequality by global standards.

The Government monitors the Gini Coefficient through Outcome 4. In addition, the Presidency includes several measures of inequality, including the Gini Coefficient in the Development Indicators report which is published annually by the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency. Other than for the years in which the Income and Expenditure Survey is undertaken, the information on Gini Coefficients is based on rough estimations.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO. 1628

DATE PUBLISHED: 15 June 2012

DUE DATE: 29 June 2012

1628. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the statement by his Minister of Higher Education and Training on 29 May 2012 (details furnished) represents the Government's policy on freedom of artistic creativity; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1952E

REPLY:

The Minister of Higher Education and Training was speaking in his capacity as the General Secretary of the South African Communist Party when he made the statement.

The government's position on the matter has always been clearly articulated. We thus reiterate that we continue to respect, protect, and promote freedom of expression as enshrined in our Constitution.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTIONS 1563 FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 8 JUNE 2012

1563. Mr L W Greyling (ID) to ask the Deputy President:

Whether the National Nuclear Energy Executive Coordination Committee (NNEECC) has met since its formation; if not, why not; if so, (a) how many times did they meet, (b) when and (c) what (i) were the issues under discussion and (ii) conclusions were reached? NW1886E

REPLY

Honourable Member, the first meeting of the National Nuclear Energy Executive Coordination Committee is scheduled for August this year. The Technical Committee of the Directors-General has been meeting to finalise the Terms of Reference and other necessary technical plans.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 1487

DATE PUBLISHED: 1 June 2012

DATE DUE: 15 June 2012

1487. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the

Republic:

Whether, with reference to his reply to Question 8 on 22 May 2012 and the Deputy President's reply to Question 1 on 29 February 2012 in the National Assembly, the Government has a position in respect of a certain company (name furnished) conducting business with the State; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1765E

REPLY:

In my reply to the question that the Honourable Member refers to above, I stated that currently, there is no provision in the Constitution that prohibits any business entity from doing business with government, especially if the company follows all applicable business laws and practices.

Similarly, in his reply the Deputy President said that the Chancellor House should not be given favourable treatment in business processes simply on the basis of its political affiliation. Government has enacted a number of laws to ensure that government conducts its business practice in an ethically transparent and fair manner that does not disadvantage any business entity. These include the Public Finance Management Act and the Municipal Finance Management Act. Any business entity that does business with government whether directly or indirectly is equally subjected to these laws.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO. 1486

DATE PUBLISHED: 1 June 2012

DATE DUE: 15 June 2012

1486. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to his reply to question 8 on 22 May 2012 that politicians should not be disadvantaged from doing business, the Government intends not to pursue the draft public sector management framework to address issues that include conflicts of interest arising from public servants doing business with the State (details furnished); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1764E

REPLY:

The matter is being attended to by the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA). I am advised that the DPSA is in the process of drafting the Public Sector Integrity Management Framework and the Framework will be submitted to Cabinet for approval once the necessary consultation has been concluded and approval has been obtained. I am unfortunately unable to comment on the contents of the Framework at this stage.

However, from a supply chain management (SCM) perspective, we need to make mention of the letter and spirit of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA), where these Acts are administered by the National Treasury.

With regards to the PFMA, Section 16A8 of the PFMA Regulations deals with ethical standards in respect of SCM processes in government. In terms of these Regulations, a public servant is permitted to do business with government, subject to a requirement of disclosure of interest and withdrawal from participating in processes relating to the entering into contacts with government.

In relation to the MFMA, which was promulgated after the PFMA, specifically prohibits the award of contracts to persons in the service of the state. In this regard, attention is drawn to sections 44 and 45 of the MFMA Regulations.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 1419

DATE PUBLISHED: 25 May 2012

1419. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether, with reference to his reply to question 606 on 11 May 2012, he has found that the requirement of union/bargaining council agreement for participation in the youth employment incentive scheme, in view of continued opposition from a certain entity (name furnished), will reduce the estimate that the programme will benefit 423,000 South Africans; if not, why not; if so, how does he justify the implementation of the proposal;

(2) whether he has found that most unions or bargaining councils will support the initiative, if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether he intends to take any further steps to ensure that the National Treasury's model for the Youth Wage Subsidy will be implemented as originally tabled; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether he intends to pursue the implementation of the policy regardless of consensus achieved at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) on the proposals; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(5) whether he intends to set a new deadline for the implementation of the policy; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1689E

REPLY:

The discussion paper "Confronting youth unemployment: policy options for South Africa" provides estimates for the potential employment impact of a youth employment incentive. The National Treasury estimates that 423 000 young people from the target age cohort would benefit from the incentive, of which an estimated 178 000 would be net new jobs created. This gives an indication of the employment response to the proposed incentive.

This estimated response was calculated through a modelling exercise, outlined in the discussion paper. Historical employment elasticities were used to calculate the sensitivity of employment changes to changes in gross domestic product (GDP) growth and wages. GDP growth was consistent with National Treasury's Budget 2011 forecast, while wages for the target group were adjusted for the values of the subsidy. The methodology does not factor in unionization, as the subsidy would be available regardless of the union status of the worker.

The actual outcome of any policy proposal is an empirical matter, only discernible after implementation and should be closely monitored and evaluated. The actual outcome would depend on the response of firms to the incentive, the effects of changes in the business climate and the impact of the incentive on young people's labour market participation.

It is correct that the timing and method of introduction of the incentive will have an influence on the outcomes of the incentive, but the magnitude and direction of the impact (positive or negative) is not known a priori.

The National Treasury did not receive any formal submissions of comments on the discussion paper from any trade unions, federations of trade unions or bargaining councils. Cosatu has, however, published a response document on their website that objects to youth employment incentive.

The discussion paper outlined a process of consultation that included inviting formal comments, discussions within the Economic Sectors and Employment Cluster and discussions with social partners through Nedlac. Together, these will culminate in final policy proposals to Cabinet.

This process was established to ensure that all relevant parties have the opportunity to discuss, debate, and raise concerns and to allow policy makers to adjust the design of the proposed youth employment incentive to address where valid concerns have been raised. The policy proposals that will be presented to Cabinet will have emanated from a robust process of consultation, and will therefore represent proposals that enjoy broad support.

The discussions at Nedlac are on-going and part of a broader discussion on the multi-pronged youth employment strategy led by the Economic Development Minister, Minister Patel.

The consultation process referred to above is a robust and genuine engagement, and will determine the specifics of the policy and final design to be presented to Cabinet.

In this regard, the implementation of the policy and the possibility of setting a deadline are under discussion.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 1260

DATE PUBLISHED: 18 May 2012

DATE DUE: 1 June 2012

1260. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the Minister President of the Republic

Whether the Government intends implementing any policy positions to deal with structural defects in the economy that result in (a) unemployment, (b) lack of skilled labour, (c) rising prices, (d) a large public service and (e) a shrinking agricultural sector; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case? NW1456E

REPLY:

Government is committed to reduce the triple challenges of poverty, inequality and unemployment as outlined in the State of the Nation early this year. Job creation, broad-based empowerment measures and broader access to services are key measures to address these challenges.

A year ago, government adopted the New Growth Path, which lays out the core strategies for transforming the economy to provide more opportunities for our people, and to meet the ambitious target of creating five million jobs by 2020. In addition, the Minister of Economic Development has signed four major Accords with NEDLAC to support the implementation of the New Growth Path. These Accords mobilise our social partners around critical objectives in education and training, local procurement and the green economy.

Infrastructure is one of the main job creation drivers identified in the New Growth Path. In this regard, the Department of Economic Development continues to play an important role in the work of the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission (PICC), especially in terms of mobilising technical and social support for the programme. The Infrastructure Plan, which extends over a period of 20 years will stimulate economic growth, create job opportunities on a massive scale and spur industrialization. This will result in an integrated social and economic plan.

The New Growth Path and the Industrial Policy Action Plan point to the critical importance of industrial financing in building our economy. Under the leadership of the Minister of Economic Development, the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) has overseen a substantial increase in lending as well as stronger efforts to support a greener, more employment-friendly economy.

These initiatives have already begun to bear fruit. The Mid-Term Review Report released on 1 June 2012, indicates that although Government has not created sufficient jobs to meet the demand, significant advances have been made in the coordination of growth strategies, the New Growth Path and stakeholder agreements. Government has made progress with labour absorbing industrial development strategies in manufacturing, mineral products, procurement reform and the Jobs Fund. The National Development Plan proposes the creation of 11 million more jobs by 2030 by, among others, expanding the public works programme, lowering the cost of doing business and costs for households and helping match unemployed workers to jobs.

Research conducted in 2011 indicated that we could create jobs in six priority areas, which includes agriculture. As part of government's efforts to revitalise the agricultural sector, we will continue to provide financial and nonfinancial support to small, medium, and micro enterprises, small scale agriculture, as well as cooperatives. We introduced the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme in 2009 to fast track the creation of agricultural enterprises as well as providing financial and technical support to small emerging farmers.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 1148

DATE PUBLISHED: 11 May 2012

DATE DUE: 25 May 2012

1148. Mr M G P Lekota (COPE) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether Ministers report to him on the administration of their portfolios; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1336E

REPLY:

All the Cabinet Ministers have signed performance agreements with the President. The agreements provide the Ministers with targets related to the achievement of the 12 Government priority outcomes. The President meets with his Ministers from time to time to assess their performance against the performance agreements. During these meetings the President and the Ministers discuss progress against the targets in the performance agreements and agree on what needs to be done to address any challenges.

In addition, the performance agreements between the President and the Ministers required the Ministers to develop Delivery Agreements for the 12 outcomes. The Delivery Agreements are inter-departmental and inter-governmental plans for achieving the performance targets which were set out in the performance agreements between the President and the Ministers.

The Delivery Agreements were completed in 2010, and since then the co-ordinating Ministers for each of the outcomes have been presenting quarterly progress reports against the Delivery Agreements to Cabinet.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 1147

DATE PUBLISHED: 11 May 2012

DATE DUE: 25 May 2012

1147. Mr M G P Lekota (COPE) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether he has put any measures in place to coordinate the functions of state departments and administrations since May 2009; if not, why not; if so, what are the outcomes in each case? NW1335E

REPLY:

Beginning in 2009, the current administration has worked hard to reorganize some structures of government in order to streamline functions and to bring about efficiency. We committed to making government work better, faster and smarter by, among others, adopting in 2010 the Outcomes based approach and identified the 12 priority outcomes of our administration.

For this reason we have striven to transform government into a flexible instrument of service; one that would be sensitive and responsive to the legitimate expectations of our people for a better life. This will explain our preoccupation with permeating all spheres of government with integrity and efficiency.

The establishment of the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency to strengthen oversight and accountability has been a major factor in this drive to make government more effective and efficient.

Our work is gradually showing impressive results in some areas. We are pleased to have contributed to the improvement of performance information of Ministries and Departments. I have no doubt that these improvements will enhance performance and service delivery, and also strengthen our people's trust in the work of Government.

To date, we have made significant inroads towards increasing the strategic focus of government, and have introduced rigour into planning, monitoring and evaluation of progress.

In addition to the outcomes approach, the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency has compiled a comprehensive Mid-Term Review report that provided an honest and frank assessment of progress on the work of all government departments against government priorities.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO. 914

DATE PUBLISHED: 20 APRIL 2012

DATE DUE: 8 MAY 2012

914. Mr J Selfe (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

What is the (a) intention, (b) starting date, (c) expected conclusion date, (d) scope and (e) current status of each investigation that is currently being conducted by the Special Investigating Unit (the SIU)? NW1096E

REPLY:

The following investigations, which were all referred to the Special Investigating Unit ("SIU") in terms of section 2(1) of the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act, 1996 (Act 74 of 1996),by proclamation in the Gazette, are currently being prioritised.

A synopsis of the intention and scope, the starting date, the estimated date for conclusion of the investigation and the status of each investigation are indicated in respect of each matter.

1.Kopanong Local Municipality (Free State Province)

1.1Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 July 2006 and 31 March 2009:

- The procurement of consulting or related services by or on behalf of the Municipality and related expenditure incurred in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Municipality.

- The manipulation of the Municipality's supply chain management or procurement processes.

- Any related unauthorised, irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

- Losses or prejudice suffered by the Municipality as a result of the unnecessary or wasteful engagement of consultancy or related services, payments made to consultancy or related service providers notwithstanding their non-performance, incomplete performance or defective performance and the settlement of claims made by consultancy or related service providers for payments not lawfully due to them.

1.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 12 October 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 58 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

1.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 October 2012.

1.4 Current status of investigation

Evidence is being collected and is being analysed.

2. National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

2.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2006 and 18 February 2011:

- The application for and award of grants, the transfer of land or the payment of funds to beneficiaries and the administration thereof by the Department, under the Department's Land Reform Programme, in a manner that was –

(a) contrary to applicable -

(i) legislation;

(ii) manuals, guidelines, practice notes and instructions issued by the National Treasury; or

(iii) manuals, policies, procedures, instructions, prescripts or practices of, or applicable to the Department; or

(b) fraudulent.

- The incurrence of -

(a) irregular expenditure;

(b) fruitless and wasteful expenditure; or

in relation to payments made, land transferred or grants awarded to beneficiaries, suppliers, contractors or service providers, in or relating to the Department's Land Reform Programme.

2.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 18 February 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 8 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

2.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 March 2014.

2.4 Current status of investigation

Thirty investigations have been finalised, which resulted, inter alia, in:

(a) The arresting of four officials and a KwaZulu-Natal ("KZN") businessman on fraud and corruption charges relating to the irregular awarding and administration of land reform grants to the value of R51 million.

(b) The seizure of farms and assets to the value of R51 million in KZN, with additional preservation orders by the Asset Forfeiture Unit ("AFU") pending.

(c) Six matters being referred to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation ("Hawks") of the South African Police Service ("SAPS"), the applicable prosecuting authority and AFU for the institution of criminal proceedings and the seizure of assets as proceeds of crime to the value of R86 million.

(d) The recommendation for the institution of civil proceedings for purposes of making civil recoveries totalling R28 million, where the cause of action resulted from the irregular awarding and administration of land reform grants.

(e) The recommendation for the institution of disciplinary proceedings against officials or employees implicated in the irregularities.

(f) The identification of maladministration and non-compliance with policies.

3. George Local Municipality (Western Cape)

3.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2004 and 9 December 2010:

(a) Losses suffered by the Municipality as a result of unlawful conduct or irregular practices by the Municipality's personnel or persons or entities doing business with the Municipality in relation to payments made to or disposal of municipal land to the George Housing Agency ("GHA") or the corrupt benefitting as a result of the alienation of municipal property.

(b) The procurement of goods, works or services by or on behalf of the Municipality and related expenditure incurred by the Municipality in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Municipality.

3.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 9 December 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 76 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

3.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The investigation is nearly completed.

3.4 Current status of investigation

(a) The SIU came to the conclusion that the former Municipal Manager and the Legal Adviser –

(i) were grossly negligent by taking the incorrect legal position during the establishment of the GHA;

(ii) were grossly negligent in authorising three payments to the value of R5.1 million to the GHA, which was unlawful or contrary to the provisions of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No. 32 of 2000) ("Systems Act").

(b) The matters referred to in (a), above, need to be referred to:

(i) The SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority for criminal investigation and the potential institution of criminal proceedings; and

(ii) the Municipality for the potential institution of civil proceedings,

against the persons implicated in the irregularities or otherwise responsible for the losses suffered by the Municipality.

(c) The investigation into the other matters set out in the proclamation revealed no indication of irregularities and no further action is required.

4. Oudtshoorn Local Municipality (Western Cape)

4.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2004 and 4 February 2011:

(a) The procurement of goods, works or services by or on behalf of the Municipality and related expenditure incurred by the Municipality in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Municipality.

(b) Losses or prejudice suffered by the Municipality as a result of unlawful conduct or irregular practices of the Municipality's personnel, the Municipality's suppliers and service providers or third parties.

(c) Losses or prejudice suffered by the Municipality as a result of the mismanagement of the Municipality's assets, finances or other resources.

4.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 4 February 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 6 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

4.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The investigation has been finalised and a report is being drafted.

4.4 Current status of investigation

The following findings have been made, inter alia:

(a) R1.7 million in duplicate payments to a service provider has been identified in a housing project.

Evidence of fraud and corruption in this regard, implicating a former Municipal Manager, has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(b) A service provider instituted a civil claim to the value of a R2.7 million against the Municipality. The SIU, however, found the payment on which this claim is based to be irregular.

(c) Evidence obtained revealed possible theft of Municipal trust funds and a number of other possible irregularities by a law firm contracted to collect municipal debt. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority for criminal investigation or the potential institution of criminal proceedings.

(d) The irregular procurement of services at inflated cost of between R6.5 million and R8.4 million from a service provider has been identified. The investigation has revealed contraventions of the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 2003 (Act No. 56 of 2003 ("MFMA") and possible fraud. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the relevant prosecuting authority.

(e) The irregular procurement of services in order to do an unnecessary survey at a cost of R559 648.40 has been identified. The investigation has revealed contraventions of the MFMA and possible fraud. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(f) Irregular and unlawful procurement of consultants, to the value of R1.9 million, had been identified. The investigation has revealed evidence of contraventions of the MFMA and possible fraud. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(g) It was found that the services of a specific service provider were procured in an irregular and unlawful manner. The losses are still to be quantified and the matter is about to be referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(h) The SIU recommended the suspension of the Municipal Manager and recommended to the Municipality to institute proceedings in an attempt to recover losses and prevent further losses. Instead, the Municipal Council opted to enter into severance agreements with the Municipal Manager and former Municipal Manager, which indemnified these managers from liability for the losses they caused the Municipality.

5. Stellenbosch Local Municipality (Western Cape)

5.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 September 2005 and 14 January 2011:

(b) Losses or prejudice suffered by the Municipality as a result of the mismanagement of the Municipality's assets, finances or other resources.

5.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 14 January 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 3 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

5.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 May 2012.

5.4 Current status of investigation

The following findings were made to date, inter alia:

(a) In respect of the Kayamandi Cultural Day, evidence of fraud and contraventions of the MFMA were uncovered. The former Municipal Mayor, his brother, the Chief Financial Officer ("CFO"), the former Mayor, the former deputy Mayor, a councillor and a supplier or service provider have been implicated in these irregularities. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority, but it appears unlikely that any losses will be recovered.

(b) Evidence of fraud and other statutory contraventions involving the former Municipal Manager, other municipal officials, a councillor and a supplier or service provider have been identified in respect of the demolition of a building. This matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(c) In respect of the Stellenbosch 2010 Soccer World Cup Project, evidence of fraud and other statutory contraventions involving the former Municipal Manager, his brother, the CFO, the former Mayor, other councillors and suppliers or service providers were uncovered. The matter has been referred to the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority. The recovery of any losses is unlikely due to the fact that severance packages and/or settlement agreements have been entered into with those implicated.

(d) In respect of the investigation of seven tenders, evidence of irregularities such as conflicts of interest in the tender process was identified. The Municipality has already intervened by taking civil action and reported the matter to the SAPS early on in the investigation.

(e) In respect of the Kayamandi Stadium, no evidence uncovered to date has been able to substantiate the allegations under investigation.

6. Swellendam Local Municipality (Western Cape)

6.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2006 and 29 February 2012:

Maladministration of the affairs of the Municipality by its councillors, officials, employees or agents in relation to-

(a) the supply chain management system of the Municipality;

(b) the management of the Municipality's finances and assets; and

(c) applications by developers for the development of the Swellengate and Swellenmark shopping centre developments and the Municipality's approval of such applications,

including the causes of such maladministration.

6.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 29 February 2012, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 12 of 2012 was published in the Gazette.

6.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 28 February 2013.

6.4 Current status of investigation

The investigation has recently commenced and the collection and analysis of evidence is being done.

7. National Treasury Limpopo Intervention

7.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU is to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 April 2010 and 23 March 2012:

Maladministration of the affairs of the Limpopo Provincial Treasury, the Limpopo Department of Health and Social Development, the Limpopo Department of Roads and Transport, the Limpopo Department of Education and the Limpopo Department of Public Works ("the Departments") in relation to their -

(a) cash management;

(b) supply chain management;

(d) budget preparation and implementation,

including the causes of such maladministration.

7.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 23 March 2012, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 21 of 2012 was published in the Gazette.

7.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 July 2012.

7.4 Current status of investigation

Investigations are being conducted at the Departments at the request of the National Treasury and in cooperation with the National Treasury, the South African Receiver of Revenue ("SARS"), the Accountant General, the Hawks and the National Prosecuting Authority ("NPA").

8. National Department of Human Settlements - Housing Subsidies and Housing Contracts

8.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities in the affairs of the National Department of Housing, the Provincial Departments of Housing, the former Housing Development Boards and Corporations and Local Authorities and their appointed agents (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Institutions"), which allegedly took place between 1994 and 5 March 2012:

(a) Loss of State funds that were allocated to low cost housing schemes;

(b) mismanagement and misuse of the State's low cost housing scheme; and

(c) the conduct of officials, employees and municipal councillors of the Institutions and their appointed agents responsible for or involved in the administration of the State's low cost housing schemes and in the payment of subsidies under such schemes, which has resulted in losses of or lack of control over property or money allocated for such schemes.

8.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 25 April 2007, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 7 of 2007 was published in the Gazette.

Proclamation No. R. 7 of 2007 was subsequently amended by:

(a) Proclamation No. R. 35 of 2010, which extended the cut-off date of the period of investigation to 30 July 2010; and

(b) Proclamation No. R. 15 of 2012, which further extended the cut-off date of the period of investigation to 5 March 2012.

8.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The investigation into housing subsidies was completed on 31 March 2012. The estimated date for the conclusion of the remaining investigation is 30 April 2013.

8.4 Current status of investigation

8.4.1 The investigation into housing subsidies has been completed and a final report is being prepared.

8.4.2 In respect of the investigation into housing contracts the following:

(a) The investigation relates to housing projects approved up to 29 Feb 2012, with some investigations relating to projects approved as early as the 1996/1997 financial year. The focus of the investigation relates to low cost housing construction contracts, where 59 contracts were identified for investigation. The total value of the 59 contracts that are being investigated is R4 billion. From the aforementioned 59 contracts, the investigations into 42 contracts have been completed and the investigations into 17 contracts are still on-going across 7 provinces

(b) High level systemic findings made by the SIU include:

(i) Non-compliance with the Housing Act, 1997 (Act No. 107 of 1997) and National Housing Code;

(ii) non-compliance with the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999) ("PFMA"); and

(iii) non-adherence to Section 217 of the Constitution and other procurement related legislation in respect of the procurement of goods and services.

(i) Fruitless and wasteful expenditure amounting to R27.9 million for certain investigations;

(ii) potential losses estimated at over R71 million suffered by provincial departments;

(iii) potential recoveries amounting to over R100 million have been identified in respect of certain investigations;

(iv) various instances of misconduct by officials, employees or agents of the Institutions; and

(v) possible criminal charges against some of the previous and/or current heads of departments.

(d) An investigation is currently being conducted in respect of the People's Housing Process in the Western Cape Province.

9. Gauteng Department of Health

9.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2006 and 14 May 2010:

(a) The procurement of goods, works or services by or on behalf of the Department and related expenditure incurred by the Department in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Department; and

(b) the incurrence of unauthorised expenditure, irregular expenditure, fruitless and wasteful expenditure and the payment of expenditure not due or payable.

9.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 14 May 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 21 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

9.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 30 November 2012.

9.4 Current status of investigation

Ten specific matters were identified for investigation. All these matters relate to contracts that were entered into by the Department with various suppliers or service providers. The total value of these matters is over R1 billion. Preliminary findings that were made to date include:

(a) Three cases of fraud to the value of R17 million have been identified and is being dealt with;

(b) recommendations were made to recover approximately R15.3 million from a number of former senior officials or employees of the Department; and

(c) duplicate payments to the value of over R13 million have been identified. Cash recoveries for duplicate payments to the value of over R1 million were made.

10. Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (Gauteng)

10.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2007 and 8 November 2010:

(a) Fruitless and wasteful expenditure and resultant losses suffered by the Municipality due to payments made for goods and services not supplied or not rendered or not delivered and the duplication of payments due to fraudulent or corrupt involvement by Municipal employees, officials, contractors, service providers and suppliers.

10.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 8 November 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 63 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

10.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 30 November 2012.

10.4 Current status of investigation

(a) 11 waste management contracts to the value of R530 million have been reviewed.

(b) Five officials or employees of the Municipality have been suspended. One official subsequently resigned and one official has been dismissed. The disciplinary hearings of the other three officials are pending.

(c) The investigation identified R1.8 million of ostensibly fraudulent invoices that were submitted to and paid for by the Municipality in respect of the refuse bins contract.

(d) The investigation identified R10 million that was claimed for escalations, despite the fact that no escalations have been approved.

(e) Irregular payments to the amount of R8.9 million on invoices for the waste removal contract were uncovered during the investigation.

(f) The unlawful transfer of R20 million without council approval was identified.

(g) In respect of the investigation of the ICT contracts, the following:

(aa) The investigations in respect of one contract have been completed.

(bb) A number of suspects were arrested and have appeared in court.

(cc) An asset forfeiture order was obtained and assets to the value of R32 million have been seized.

(dd) One senior official was suspended for fraudulently signing invoices to the value of R12.5 million. Criminal conduct is being investigated by the SAPS.

(h) In respect of the investigation of a security contract, the following:

(aa) It was found that the municipality exceeded its budget by R15 million and the service provider admitted that the contract was awarded based on a bid document not completed by him. Stock to the value of R4 million was invoiced and paid for, but cannot be accounted for. Total losses are still being quantified but the owner of the service provider has since died. The SIU is negotiating possible recoveries with the trustee of the estate of the service provider.

(i) In respect of various contracts that relate to the upgrading of sports facilities, the investigation uncovered that although R35 million was paid for the upgrading of 30 sports fields, no work has been done or the work has not been completed.

(j) In respect of employee management by the municipality, the following:

(aa) Eight officials were identified with fraudulent matric certificates. They have since been dismissed and criminal cases have been registered.

(bb) Various officials have been identified with criminal convictions.

(cc) Various fictitious claims made by employees were identified.

(dd) Various entities, which belong to employees of the municipality or their spouses are doing business with the Municipality.

(ee) Various "ghost" employees have been identified.

(k) In respect of a contract that relates to the purchasing of water meters and tokens, the investigation uncovered that according to invoices for September and November 2010, which were paid in May and July 2011, R38 million was paid for 17,421 meters and tokens but only 5,804 meters and 5,796 tokens were procured.

(l) The preliminary findings after an investigation of the Valuation Roll are as follow:

(aa) Various service providers were not recommended by the Bid Evaluation Committee and there were possible conflicts of interest.

(bb) In various instances payments for services were made in full although the services were not rendered.

(cc) Various instances of non-compliance with statutory provisions have been identified.

(m) As a result of the investigation an array of criminal charges were laid. R400 million has been recommended for recovery as a result of irregularities that were uncovered during the investigation.

11. Midvaal Local Municipality (Gauteng)

11.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2002 and 20 May 2011:

(a) Maladministration of the affairs of the Municipality by its councillors, officials, employees or agents in respect of:

(i) The improper, negligent or erroneous disposal of the Municipality's operating assets as being redundant assets.

(ii) The failure to properly implement the Municipality's Indigent Policy.

(iii) The erroneous issuing of town planning certificates.

(iv) The failure to obtain money belonging to the Municipality from the trust account of the Municipality's attorneys and the failure to utilise such money for municipal purposes.

(v) The failure to properly control the debt owing by the Municipality's debtors.

(vi) The failure to record the Municipality's assets in its asset registers.

(vii) The appointment of staff of the Municipality at incorrect post levels.

(b) The procurement of legal services by or on behalf of the Municipality and related expenditure incurred by the Municipality in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Municipality.

11.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 20 May 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 33 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

11.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of investigation is 31 August 2012.

11.4 Current status of investigation

The investigation is nearing completion. To date the investigation had the following results, inter alia,:

(a) Irregularities in the debt collecting processes had been identified, in that 129 officials were identified with three months' arrear rates and taxes to the value of R354 805. These are being deducted from the officials' salaries to repay the amounts owed.

(b) One hundred debtor accounts were identified to the value of R56 870 456. To date R31 261 348 has been recovered.

(c) Through the investigation of the indigent database and grants, 2020 applications were identified where people failed to comply with the indigent policy and who benefitted from indigent grants. 53 applications are currently being reviewed and assessed.

(d) Various irregularities in personnel related matters have been identified.

12. Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (Gauteng)

12.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2007 and 8 November 2010:

(a) Irregularities in the recruitment, selection and appointment of staff to the Municipality.

(b) Payment or remuneration, allowances or other benefits to Municipal staff that were not due, owing or payable or that was in excess of stipulated limits.

(c) Fruitless and wasteful expenditure by outsourcing work and services that could be rendered by the officials or employees of the Municipality.

(d) The mismanagement of finances, assets or other resources of the Municipality.

12.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 8 November 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 62 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

12.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 October 2012.

12.4 Current status of investigation

The investigation is in the process of being finalised. The investigation, inter alia, identified the following irregularities and maladministration:

(a) 65 officials had been identified who had or have conflicts of interest in contracts to the value of R185 million. Disciplinary action against these employees is pending.

(b) Various investigations relating to procurement have been finalised, which unveiled gross negligence, irregular expenditure, unauthorised expenditure, tender irregularities and fraud.

(i) 212 employees were identified with fraudulent drivers' licenses and action is being taken against these employees.

(ii) Non-declaration of interest matters have been referred to the Anti-corruption Task Team ("ACTT") and joint investigations are underway. An official was identified with links to 6 companies that have possibly defrauded the municipality of R100 million. The SIU is assisting with possible further disciplinary action.

(iii) 5 senior officials were identified who submitted fraudulent qualifications which resulted in their appointments. 2 of these officials have already been found guilty and dismissed.

(iv) 1 official was arrested and convicted of fraud due to using a stolen ID number.

(v) Criminal investigations have been finalised against 164 Metro police officials.

13. National Department of Social Development ("DSD") and the South African Social Security Agency ("SASSA")

13.1 Intention and scope of investigation

(a) The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 April 1996 and 30 March 2007 in respect of the Department of Social Development ("DSD"): The payment and/or receipt of social grants or benefits in respect of deceased and/or fictitious persons and/or persons who do not or did not qualify for the receipt of such grants/benefits or any portion thereof and any conduct directed at, promoting, or facilitating payment or receipt of same.

(b) Conduct of government officials and/or agents responsible for the administration and/or payment of social grants or benefits which has resulted in losses of, lack of control over, or delays in the payment of monies allocated for the payment of such grants or benefits and any conduct directed at, promoting or facilitating same.

Proclamation No. R. 27 of 2010 authorised the SIU to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 15 November 2004 and 8 June 2010 in respect of the South African Social Security Agency ("SASSA"):

(a) The unlawful payment and receipt of social grants in respect of deceased or fictitious persons or by persons who do not qualify for any or all such social grants.

(b) Allegations that staff of SASSA have undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with suppliers or service providers of SASSA.

(c) Failure by staff of SASSA to disclose that they have engaged in business activities for reward outside their employment with SASSA

13.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation into the affairs of DSD commenced on 06 April 2005, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 18 of 2005 was published in the Gazette.

Proclamation No. R. 18 of 2005 was subsequently amended by Proclamation No. R. 5 of 2007, which extended the cut-off date of the period of investigation to 30 March 2007.

The investigation into the affairs of SASSA commenced on 8 June 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 27 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

13.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 March 2013.

13.4 Current status of investigation

The results of the investigation thus far are as follows, inter alia:

(a) 20,544 criminal convictions were recommended, which resulted in 17,880 convictions.

(b) 26,013 disciplinary hearings were recommended.

(c) 46,237 civil litigations were recommended and R304.9 million was recovered through civil litigation or admissions of debt.

(d) Actual savings that resulted from the investigation is calculated at R1 billion.

(e) Prevention of future losses resulted from the investigation is calculated at R11.9 billion.

14. Eskom

14.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2006 and 7 February 2012:

(a) Procurement of coal supplies and coal transport by or on behalf of Eskom and related irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure incurred in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing Eskom.

(b) Procurement of helicopter services for the Eastern Cape region by or on behalf of Eskom and related irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure incurred in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing Eskom, or which was conducted or facilitated by board members, officials or employees of Eskom with undeclared or unauthorised conflicts of interest.

(c) Any undisclosed or unauthorised interests which by board members, officials or employees of Eskom may have had in contractors, suppliers or service providers of Eskom and the extent of benefits so derived by such persons.

(d) Maladministration in the affairs of Eskom in relation to:

(i) The incorrect blending of different grades of coal to fuel its coal burning power stations;

(ii) the payment for or acceptance by Eskom of coal of inferior quality to that contracted for;

(iii) the procurement of and contracting for work, goods or services for fencing in excess of the need thereof;

(iv) the failure to safeguard fencing materials belonging to Eskom or in respect of which Eskom carried the risk for loss or damage; or

(v) payments made for the blending of coal, for coal or for fencing that were not due or payable, and

any related losses that Eskom suffered.

14.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 7 February 2012, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 2 of 2012 was published in the Gazette.

14.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation and status

After initial constraints that affected the funding of resources for this project, the investigation has now begun and the collection and analysis of evidence is underway.

The allocation of additional resources to this project is on hold until the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill, 2012, is finalised by Parliament, which will allow the SIU to recover funding from State institutions involved in SIU investigations, which funding will in turn be used to acquire or deploy additional resources to the SIU's investigations.

13.4 Current status of investigation

After initial constraints that affected the funding of resources for this project, the investigation has now begun and the collection and analysis of evidence is underway.

15. KwaZulu-Natal: Department of Public Works

15.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2005 and 27 August 2010:

(a) Allegations that staff of the Department enjoy remuneration, income, allowances or rewards in conflict with the conditions of their employment with the Department and contrary to the Public Service Act, 1994.

(b) Allegations that staff of the Department have undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with suppliers or service providers of the Department.

(d) The unlawful or irregular conduct by staff of the Department, service providers to the Department and third parties relating to any of the aforementioned allegations.

15.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 27 August 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 43 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

15.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 January 2013.

15.4 Current status of investigation

Considerable progress has thus far been made in the investigation. Some of the highlights are:

(a) A supplier or service provider is criminally charged with 150 counts of fraud and corruption relating to the award of contracts with a combined value in excess of R87 million. The AFU has frozen over R68 million of the supplier or service provider's assets pending trial.

(b) Two former and two current officials of the Department have been arrested on charges of corruption and theft.

16. National Department of Public Works

16.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 October 2003 and 30 July 2010:

(a) The incurrence of irregular expenditure and/or fruitless and wasteful expenditure and the payment of expenditure not due, owing or payable.

16.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 30 July 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 30 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

16.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 March 2014.

16.4 Current status of investigation

(a) The investigation focuses on a wide range of vulnerabilities in the supply chain management ("SCM") environment of the Department of Public Works ("DPW") and includes leases, prestige portfolio and capital works projects.

(b) To date five DPW officials were suspended, including one Deputy Director-General and disciplinary action instituted.

(d) Criminal proceedings were also instituted against current and ex DPW officials and suppliers or service providers for fraud and corruption involving approximately 32 contracts with a combined value exceeding R400 million.

(e) Civil recoveries in excess of R70 million were recommended as a result of overpayments and/or non-performance by suppliers or service providers.

(f) Recommendations were also made for the overturning of lease agreements with a total value in excess of R700 million due to non-compliance with SCM processes and prescripts.

(g) Disciplinary action was also recommended against four DPW officials found to have direct interests in companies contracting with the DPW.

(h) A consistent abuse of SCM delegations and non-compliance with SCM prescripts have been identified throughout the SCM value chain, as well as poor controls and lack of proper governance.

17. 24 North West Municipalities

17.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2005 and 10 November 2009:

(a) Appointment of staff that is not suitably qualified or otherwise unsuitable.

(b) The promotion and excessive remuneration of staff, contrary to applicable laws and municipal policies.

(d) Allegations of procurement irregularities.

(e) Losses of municipal funds due to theft, fraud and misallocation and the irregular expenditure and mismanagement of municipal funds.

(f) The external influence over and manipulation of procurement and alienation processes.

(g) Undue preference to and favouring of certain parties in the awarding of contracts.

(h) The impairment of the independence and integrity of bid structures and processes.

17.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 10 November 2009, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 72 of 2009 was published in the Gazette.

17.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 March 2013.

17.4 Current status of investigation

The investigation relating to all the identified municipalities is in an advanced stage and the following irregularities have been identified, inter alia:

(a) Payments were made in several instances despite the fact that goods or services that were contracted for were not delivered or not delivered in full.

(b) Various instances of non-compliance with SCM were identified.

(c) Various instances where the staff of the various municipalities have undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with suppliers or service providers of the municipalities were identified.

(d) Contracts are awarded to family members of senior officials.

(e) Various instances of –

(i) irregular appointment of personnel;

(ii) irregular promotions of personnel; and

(iii) irregular salary increases of officials,

of various municipalities have been uncovered.

(f) Various instances of irregular appointment and remuneration of suppliers or service providers have been uncovered.

18. Mpumalanga Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

18.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 April 2007 and 5 March 2012:

(a) The procurement of and contracting for consulting or related services by or on behalf of the Department in relation to its Water for All Flagship Project and payments made in respect thereof.

(b) The procurement of and contracting for sewerage suctioning or related services by or on behalf of the Department and payments made in respect thereof.

(c) Maladministration of the affairs of the Department and any losses or prejudice suffered by the Department as a result of such maladministration in relation to its Water for All Flagship Project, the provision of sewerage suctioning or related services or the engagement of service providers or contractors to repair or refurbish water pipelines.

(d) Practices in terms of which officials or employees of the Department were promised, solicited or received benefits or other forms of unlawful gratification from anyone in connection with the execution of their duties or the failure to execute their duties.

18.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 5 March 2012, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 16 of 2012 was published in the Gazette.

18.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 March 2013.

18.4 Current status of investigation

The investigation has recently commenced and the collection and analysis of evidence is being done.

19. South African Broadcasting Corporation ("SABC")

19.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2005 and 29 October 2010:

(a) Allegations that SABC board members or personnel have undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with suppliers or service providers of the SABC.

(b) Payment or remuneration, commission or allowances or the provisioning of benefits to the SABC's personnel that were not due, owing or payable or that was in excess of stipulated limits.

(c) The continued payment of remuneration or allowances or provisioning of benefits to the SABC's personnel suspended from duty for excessively long periods.

19.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 29 October 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 58 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

19.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 May 2012.

19.4 Current status of investigation

The Investigation is nearly completed. Some notable results of the investigation are the following, inter alia:

(a) 42 potential conflicts of interest matters were investigated with a combined contract value of R2.6 billion in respect of which 23 disciplinary files were prepared for the SABC.

(b) Potential VAT fraud was identified and reported to SARS, the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(c) 4,000 business interests were investigated and 400 disciplinary files where prepared and are ready to be handed to the SABC.

(d) 15 possible criminal prosecutions were identified for non-compliance with the Companies Act.

(e) Serious deficiencies in the controls environment were identified and reported to the SABC.

(f) R35 million in potentially un-taxed fringe benefits were uncovered and reported to SARS.

(g) 20 revenue contracts were investigated to the value of R798 million. It was found that these contracts were non-compliant with policies. Severe corporate governance deficiencies were identified and reported. In this regard, disciplinary files were prepared and will be handed to the SABC. Criminal prosecutions may also follow.

(h) 131 procurement matters, valued at R932 million were investigated and irregular expenditure to the value of R152 million and fruitless and wasteful expenditure to the value of R35 million were to date identified. This number will definitely increase because an ongoing investigation is envisaged. Serious corporate governance deficiencies in this regard were identified and reported to the SABC.

(i) The SIU introduced data analytical techniques across various SABC business areas to assist the SABC Board to identify possible "red flag" areas in their operations.

(j) The SIU also assisted the Brixton Commercial Crime Unit of the SAPS in eight criminal matters that relate to the investigation. Seven case dockets have already been completed, whilst other case dockets are near completion. Four persons have been arrested on criminal charges and a warrant of arrest has been issued for another person.

20. Department of Arts and Culture – National Heritage Council

20.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2006 and 14 January 2011:

(a) The procurement of goods, works or services by or on behalf of the Council and related expenditure incurred by the Council in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the Council;

(b) the incurrence of irregular expenditure; and

20.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 14 January 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 2 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

20.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 30 April 2012 and a report is being prepared.

20.4 Current status of investigation

(a) The investigation focuses primarily on irregular expenditure and contracts, conflicts of interest and the compliance of the utilisation of expenditure in relation to the National Lottery fund.

(b) Irregular expenditure totalling R53.4 million, including lottery funding of R35 million, was identified.

21. Eastern Cape Department of Health

21.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2003 and 04 September 2008:

(a) Payments made to fictitious employees.

(b) Payment of salaries, benefits, commission, allowances and overtime to employees that were not due or owing to them.

(d) Procurement of goods or services by or for the Department by its employees at the Kgotsong Santa Hospital from entities in which relatives, friends or associates of the Department's employees held an interest.

(e) Payments made to suppliers or service providers for goods or services not completed or in excess of what was due.

(f) Losses suffered by the Department due to the forfeiture of indemnification for accident damages as a result of the failure by staff of the Department to timeously report accidents and submit insurance claims.

21.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 4 September 2008, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 36 of 2008 was published in the Gazette.

21.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

It is difficult to say, as a number of challenges were only recently overcome. Further, the SIU is in the process of applying for an extension to this proclamation that will also provide for a number of new allegations or matters to be investigated.

21.4 Current status of investigation

(a) Although this investigation has suffered from numerous challenges, including a perceived lack of cooperation by the Department, there is now a renewed focus on this investigation and a dedicated team has been assigned.

(b) The SIU has noticed a marked improvement in the levels of cooperation with the Department.

(c) Further, the SIU is in the process of applying for an extension to this proclamation that will also provide for a number of new allegations or matters to be investigated.

22. Eastern Cape Department of Education

22.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 April 2005 and 30 July 2010:

(a) Losses suffered by the Department as a result of the mismanagement of its expenditure or through theft, fraud or other unlawful conduct and irregular practices of the staff of the Department and third parties.

(b) The mismanagement of the remuneration or benefits of the staff of the Department.

(c) Remuneration or benefits granted to staff of the Department, whilst these employees were not entitled to such remuneration or benefits or any part thereof.

(d) Failure by the Department to take appropriate steps to recover remuneration and benefits paid out or granted incorrectly or erroneously.

(e) Irregularities in the recruitment, selection and appointment of staff to the Department.

22.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 30 July 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 37 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

22.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 30 September 2012.

22.4 Current status of investigation

(a) Various instances were uncovered during the investigation where the Department suffered losses.

(b) To date R4.4 million was recovered.

(c) Thus far the investigation ensured actual savings of approximately R30.3 million and prevented substantial future losses.

(d) 69 cases were identified for disciplinary proceedings.

(e) The SIU is also assisting the SAPS with 14 possible criminal prosecutions.

(f) Evidence is also being prepared for civil litigation in 16 matters that have been identified to date.

23. The former Eastern Cape Department of Roads and Transport

23.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 10 May 2001 and 28 March 2010:

(a) The procurement of goods, works or services by or on behalf of the former Department and related expenditure incurred by the former Department in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the former Department.

(b) Undeclared or unauthorised conflicts of interest by officials or employees of the Department.

23.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 20 May 2011, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 34 of 2011 was published in the Gazette.

23.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 1 June 2013.

23.4 Current status of investigation

The following areas, within the scope of the SIU's terms of reference, have so far been identified for investigation:

(a) The Kei Rail project.

(b) The awarding of irregular tenders to three entities that provided IT related supplies or services. It seems that the contracts with these entities were continuously extended with no competitive bidding process being followed.

(c) Irregular payments, totalling R60 million, that were made to suppliers or service providers of Port St Johns Municipality.

(d) The alleged irregular awards of three tenders for ICT supplies or services.

(e) The irregular awarding of a tender to a training entity with questionable accreditation to train traffic officials.

(f) Allegations of corruption, fraud and maladministration against a senior official employed at the Alfred Nzo District Office of the Department in relation to community-based transport.

(g) The alleged irregular award of tenders to three entities to construct/repair seven emergency and eight non-emergency roads for approximately R30 million between 2005 and 2009. It is alleged that some of these roads were never constructed or repaired.

24. South African Police Service ("SAPS")

24.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 January 2005 and 22 December 2011:

(a) The procurement of goods, works or services (including leased accommodation) by or on behalf of the SAPS and related expenditure incurred by the SAPS in a manner that was not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective and which was contrary to applicable legislation or internal policies and procedures governing the SAPS.

(b) The incurrence of unauthorised expenditure, irregular expenditure, fruitless and wasteful expenditure and/or the payment of expenditure not due, owing or payable.

(c) Allegations that SAPS staff have undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with suppliers or service providers of the SAPS.

(d) Non-compliance with the provisions of the Government Immovable Asset Management Act, 2007.

(e) The unlawful or irregular conduct by staff of the SAPS, suppliers or service providers to the SAPS and third parties relating to any of the above allegations.

24.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 10 August 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 42 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

Proclamation No. R. 42 of 2010 was subsequently amended by Proclamation No. R. 73 of 2011, which extended the cut-off date of the period of investigation to 22 December 2011.

24.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The estimated date for the conclusion of the investigation is 31 July 2013.

24.4 Current status of investigation

(a) One matter relating to the forensic Science Laboratory Division of the SAPS (the FSL) is being worked on by the ACTT with SIU assistance. Other matters pertaining to the FSL also being investigated by the SIU and the SIU are awaiting documentation in this regard. The value of this investigation is approximately R12 million.

(b) Investigations in respect of SAPS facilities are the following:

(i) Intenda: No criminal conduct or unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure was uncovered during the investigation. However, findings relating to disciplinary action have been made in that members of the SAPS failed to report for training, which had already been paid for.

(ii) Kingsgate: No criminal conduct or unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure were uncovered during the investigation. However, systematic recommendations will be made to cover risk areas that were identified during the investigation. The value of the contract is R287 million.

(c)Investigations in respect of the TetraNet installation and deployment are nearly complete. Discussions are underway with the ACTT for further investigation. Recommendations for disciplinary action against 2 SAPS members will also be made. Others implicated members of the SAPS in this matter have since left the SAPS.

(d) In respect of the construction of 33 police stations, it was found that the SAPS had no legal mandate to build its own stations and should have referred this to the DPW. This makes the entire expenditure for the building of the police stations irregular.

(e) Investigations in respect of possible conflicts of interestshould be complete by the end of May 2012. 193 files will be handed to the SAPS with a recommendation for possible disciplinary action.

(f) Documentation relating to the National Police day celebrations was recently received and is currently being analysed. The amount involved is approximately R48 million.

(g) The investigations into the contracts between the SAPS and Midway Two Holdings, which are valued at R1 billion, are ongoing.

(h) In respect of the investigation relating to the installation of solar panels at the Boschkop police stations, it was found that the purchasing and installation was done without following the proper SCM procedure.

(i) The SIU also assisted the Public Protector with investigations into leases for SAPS offices in Pretoria and Durban.

25. National Department of Arts and Culture – investing in culture

25.1 Intention and scope of investigation

The SIU was requested to investigate the following alleged irregularities, which allegedly took place between 1 April 2006 and 30 July 2010:

(a) The under-spending or misspending of the Department's budgets for the 2010 FIFA World Cup Projects for the 2007, 2008 and 2009 financial years.

(b) Failure by staff of the Department to ensure that transfers and subsidies to beneficiaries in terms of the Department's Arts and Culture in Society Programme, the 2010 FIFA World Cup, the Investing in Culture Programme and the Cultural Development Programme were applied for their intended purposes.

(c) The incurrence of irregular expenditure or fruitless and wasteful expenditure in respect of the aforementioned Programmes.

25.2 Starting date of investigation

The investigation commenced on 30 July 2010, which is the date upon which Proclamation No. R. 36 of 2010 was published in the Gazette.

25.3 Estimated date for conclusion of investigation

The investigation has been finalised and a final report is being prepared.

25.4 Current status of investigation

This investigation has been finalised. Some of the irregularities that were uncovered by the investigation are the following:

(a) Misuse of R26 million that was earmarked for the Soccer World Cup.

(b) Irregular expenditure uncovered relating to 17 contracts totalling R94 million.

(d) A supplier or service provider not registered with SARS claimed VAT to the value of R390 439. This matter has been referred to SARS, the SAPS or the applicable prosecuting authority.

(e) Civil recovery in excess of R22.5 million was recommended.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO. 839

DATE PUBLISHED: 20 APRIL 2012

DATE DUE: 8 MAY 2012

839. Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the Special Investigation Unit has finalised their investigations regarding alleged negligence in managing the National Skills Fund in the 2005-06 financial year; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1016E

REPLY:

The Special Investigation Unit only investigates in instances where it has a formal Presidential Proclamation. No Proclamation was ever requested or issued for an investigation at the National Skills Fund, and thus there is no investigation.

Reply received: December 2012

QUESTION NO. 762

DATE PUBLISHED: 16 March 2012

762. Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether a (a) National Security Council and (b) National Security Council Director-General's Committee has been established; if not, why not; if so, in each case (i)(aa) when and (bb) why was it established, (ii) what are (aa) the names and (bb) the positions of the persons who serve on the (aaa) council and (bbb) committee and (iii) how often does the (aa) council and (bb) committee meet;

(2) whether a National Security Council Secretariat has been established; if not, why not; if so, (a)(i) when and (ii) why was it established, (b) what is the name of the person who is the head of this council and (c) what proportion of officials, serving in the secretariat, are seconded from (i) the SA National Defence Force, (ii) the SA Police Service, (iii) State Security and (iv) any other department? NW930E

REPLY:

No, a National Security Council as well as a National Security Council Director-General's Committee has not been established because the matters that previously occupied a National Security Council are being ably handled by the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster and the International Cooperation, Peace and Security Cluster, as well as the respective Cabinet Committees. The two Cabinet Committees are chaired by the President.

With the above-mentioned in mind, it then follows that a National Security Council Secretariat has not been established, due to the reasons stated above.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 642

DATE PUBLISHED: 16 March 2012

DATE DUE: 2 April 2012

642. Mrs Maluleke (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

Why has tourism been given lower precedence as one of the five priorities in creating jobs in 2012 than it was given in 2011? NW801E

REPLY:

Tourism has not been given a lower precedence. The New Growth Path identifies tourism as one of the top six job drivers. This is in recognition of the fact that the tourism sector has the potential and a fundamental role to play in job creation, addressing environmental sustainability, and local economic development. Already, we are seeing the positive impact of our focus on this sector. Despite a slump in the global tourism as a result of the global financial crisis, South Africa's performance in the tourism sector has been relatively impressive.

In recognition of the major role that tourism plays in, among others, job creation and local economic development we established tourism as a standalone portfolio to ensure proper coordination and best practice in the tourism sector so as to enable ourselves to maximize on the potential spin-offs from the sector.

Building on the momentum of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, South Africa witnessed an increase in foreign tourist arrivals, which grew by 3.3 percent in 2011. Domestic tourism is now receiving the necessary attention to support its stature as a backbone for a sustainable tourism sector in South Africa.

Under the National Tourism Sector Strategy, the thrust is for the development of key objectives relating to product development, namely the development of the Heritage and Cultural Tourism Strategy as well as the Rural Tourism Strategy in a holistic and integrated manner. This will ensure that socio-economic benefits of this sector percolate down to the rural communities.

The Rural Tourism Strategy will in turn focus on ensuring a more even geographic spread of tourism, with more emphasis on supporting tourism growth in rural areas in particular, with more rural community involvement. The marketing of our country as a preferred tourism destination remains a top priority of Government. We will therefore endeavour to increase South Africa's share of the global tourism market.

Therefore, tourism remains extremely important as a job driver and also in promoting people to people contact domestically and with other nations. We will continue to promote South Africa as a tourist destination to both our people locally and to the international market.

Reply received: May 2012

QUESTION NO. 606

DATE PUBLISHED: 9 MARCH 2012

DATE DUE: 23 MARCH 2012

The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he has taken any steps to ensure that the Youth Wage Subsidy which he announced in his 2010 state of the nation address will be implemented by the 1 April 2012 deadline; if so, what steps have been taken; if not, why not;

(2) whether Cabinet intends to abandon the policy entirely; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,

(3) whether he has found that the policy will be implemented by the 1 April 2012 deadline; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, (a) why not and (b) what further steps will be taken to ensure that the policy is implemented timeously,

(4) whether he intends to commission a study into the impact that the delay in the implementation of the programme has on the level of unemployment amongst young persons; if not, why not; if so, when does he envisage the study to be completed;

(5) whether the results of the study will be made public; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW772E

REPLY

(1) As outlined in the 2011 discussion paper, implementation would follow a process of consultation that include:

· Discussions within the Economic Sectors and Employment Cluster of the youth employment incentive as part of the multi-pronged strategy to tackle youth unemployment

· Initiation of discussions through the NEDLAC process to gather further inputs from social partners

· Final proposals made to Cabinet

Discussions have taken place within the Economic Sectors and Employment Cluster and consultation with social partners began at NEDLAC on 10 May 2011. Social partners continue to discuss the youth employment incentive at NEDLAC. As such, final proposals have yet to be made to Cabinet.

Rising unemployment, particularly among young people has become a focal challenge for many countries across the world, including South Africa. Youth unemployment rates in some countries, particularly some developing countries, are as high as 50 per cent and have risen rapidly in advanced economies such as Spain and Ireland. For the young, the impact of starting their working life unemployed can last a lifetime, while for society it can result in lower growth and possible social dislocation or even unrest.

In South Africa, the proposed youth employment incentive constitutes just one of many government interventions intended to alleviate youth unemployment over the short-term and long-term. This include measures to boost labour demand and create a conducive environment for stronger investment and growth through our infrastructure build programme and economic support package, and addressing skills constraints in the economy through measures to improve access to and the quality of basic, further and higher education.

Tailored labour market policies including the Community Works Programme, natural resource management public work programmes and the National Rural Youth Service Corps received additional allocations in February's budget and will help boost youth and overall employment in the short-term.

(2.) Cabinet does not intend to abandon the policy; however discussions with social partners, alongside the public comments received on the discussion paper, will inform a revised document and design of the proposed youth employment incentive. Cabinet will respond to the final proposals made.

(3.) Government has undertaken to resolve the concerns raised by social partners, in particular organised labour, in NEDLAC.

This includes outlining the role of the youth employment incentive as an important pillar of the Department of Economic Development's multi-pronged strategy to confront youth unemployment, and adjusting design features of the proposed incentive to address the specific concerns of social partners.

There have been a number of valid concerns raised with the youth employment incentive, including the potential substitution and displacement of older workers by younger workers, the age of those potentially qualifying for the incentive, and the duration of probation.

Discussions with social partners are aimed at mitigating these concerns. The rules, design and monitoring of a youth employment incentive will be critical to actively reduce the risk of negative unintended consequences, including potential displacement, and help maximise net job creation.

For example, firms will only be able to access and benefit from the incentive if they create additional jobs for young and inexperienced South Africans above current employment levels. The incentive targets a net rise in youth and overall employment.

Mechanisms that manage the risk of displacement would include:

· Existing labour relations laws prevent the retrenchment of older workers just to create new positions for youth

· Bargaining Council structures, which will be important for monitoring and ensuring appropriate implementation of any incentive

· Requiring union/bargaining council agreement for participation in the scheme

· Using the tax system to monitor the number of jobs created using the incentive and to ensure that incentivised employees are young people and add-ons, rather than substitutes for existing workers. This will also help minimise the risks of potential fraud

· Limiting the number of incentivised workers relative to the total number of workers at a firm (i.e. one incentivised worker for every five "normal" workers)

· Effective enforcement to discourage behaviour that undermines the objective of net job creation. This includes partnering SARS monitoring functions with the Department of Labour's inspection services at an operational level and establishing the appropriate and suitably strict legal measures to discourage and punish abuse of the incentive

(4.) There is no intention to commission a study into the impact on the level of unemployment among young people of not implementing the youth employment incentive on 1 April 2012.

It would be very difficult to determine the effect of the youth employment incentive on levels of unemployment among young people without actually implementing the proposed incentive. However, given the estimates of youth job creation outlined in the discussion paper, and the fact that the economy has created 365 000 jobs over the past twelve months, the impact is likely to be negative.

The precise effect would, however, depend on a number of interdependent factors including how firms would respond to the incentive in an uncertain business climate, and the impact on young people's participation in the labour market. Prior to implementation, we do not know how these types of behaviour would change.

Government will rather focus on accelerating the process of social dialogue and finding satisfactory solutions to the valid concerns that social partners have raised.

(5.) There is no intention to commission a study.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 642

DATE PUBLISHED: 16 March 2012

DATE DUE: 2 April 2012

642. Mrs Maluleke (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

Why has tourism been given lower precedence as one of the five priorities in creating jobs in 2012 than it was given in 2011? NW801E

REPLY:

The New Growth Path identifies tourism as one of the top six job drivers. This is in recognition of the fact that the tourism sector has the potential and a fundamental role to play in job creation, addressing environmental sustainability, and local economic development. Already, we are seeing the positive impact of our focus on this sector. Despite a slump in the global tourism as a result of the global financial crisis, South Africa's performance in the tourism sector has been relatively impressive.

Reply received: May 2012

QUESTION NO. 507

DATE PUBLISHED: 2 MARCH 2012

DATE DUE: 16 MARCH 2012

The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, in light of his commitment to upholding the principle of Teachers and Textbooks in class on Time (three Ts) for at least seven hours per day, as announced in his state of the nation address, Cabinet intends approving a Bill which restricts the right of teachers to strike; if not, (a) why not and (b) what other legislative steps are being taken to prevent strikes from disrupting the quality of education at schools; if so, (i) when and (ii) what are the further relevant details? NW656E

REPLY:

(a) No. Cabinet does not intend to introduce and approve a Bill which restricts the right of teachers to strike. Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa states that:

1. Everyone has the right to fair labour practices.

2. Every worker has the right-

(a) to form and join a trade union

(b) to participate in the activities and programmes of a trade union; and

The right to strike has been enshrined in our Constitution and this right has been extended to teachers. It is however important to emphasise that the right to strike is balanced by the right of employers to implement the principle of No Work, No Pay.

No other legislative steps are required. However, the Department of Basic Education has entered into a social compact with all our teacher unions to commit to the non-negotiables in education as part of our Quality Learning and Teaching Campaign. The unions have committed all their members to be in class, on time and teaching on every school day.

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION 390 FOR WRITTEN REPLY

390. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Deputy President:

Whether the Government intends to strike a balance between job creation through infrastructure and mining development and the tourism and conservation industries; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW354E

REPLY

In order for the Honourable Member to fully appreciate the approach of Government on job creation, I would like to provide a full spectrum of our envisaged job targets as outlined in the New Growth Path that aims to create five million jobs over a period of ten years.

The following is a list of industry and job creation targets identified by Government:

Infrastructure (by 2015)	1 250 000
Agriculture smallholder schemes (2020)	300 000
Agro-processing (2020)	145 000
Mining (2020)	140 000
General industry (2020)	350 000
Tourism, business services (2020)	250 000
Green economy (2020)	300 000
Knowledge intensive sectors (2020)	100 000
Not-for-profit institutions (2020)	260 000
Public service (2020)	100 000
Exports to SADC (2020)	150 000
Total number of jobs	3 345 000

Overall, the infrastructure sector contributes the most jobs in the immediate future. The contribution of the mining sector is modest while that of tourism can be described as significant. The differences in the figures arise from what we consider to be the potential of the specific sector.

And so, rather than aiming to strike a balance between the different sectors, our utmost consideration is the potential that the sector has to create the maximum number of jobs.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO. 322

DATE PUBLISHED: 24 FEBRUARY 2012

DATE DUE: 8 MARCH 2012

Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

1. With regards to the meeting attended by the President on the 3rd of September 2011, held between the Minister of Basic Education and the Eastern Cape Education Department, (a) why was this meeting held at the African National Congress (ANC) Headquarters in King Williams Town, rather than at a government venue, and (b) why was this meeting attended by ANC officials? NW402E

REPLY:

The meeting, which the Honourable Member refers to, was an African National Congress meeting which was not attended by any Eastern Cape Education Department officials. The President attended the meeting in his capacity as the leader of the African National Congress.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO. 223

DATE PUBLISHED: 17 FEBRUARY 2012

DATE DUE: 1 MARCH 2012

Mrs P C Duncan (DA) to ask the Presidency of the Republic:

(1) Whether the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) is currently investigating the information and communications technology division within the SA Social Security Agency (SASSA); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) when did the investigation begin, (b) when is it expected to be completed and (c) what is the scope of the investigation? NW244E

REPLY:

(a) Yes. The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) has been involved in a number of investigations relating to the affairs of the Department of Social Development ("DSD") and SASSA.

The President initially authorised the SIU to investigate allegations of social grant fraud and irregularities in respect of the affairs of the DSD, with the publication of Proclamation No. R.18 of 6 April 2005. The President then extended the period of the SIU's terms of reference for the DSD investigation with the publication of Proclamation No. R. 5 of 30 March 2007. When DSD transferred the administration of social grants to SASSA, the President authorised the SIU to continue with its fraud investigation relating to social grants conducted in respect of the affairs of DSD and mandated the SIU to also investigate allegations of procurement irregularities and potential conflicts of interest in respect of the affairs of SASSA, with the publication of Proclamation No. R. 27 of 8 June 2010.

One aspect of the investigation authorised under Proclamation No. R. 27 of 8 June 2010 (the "Proclamation"), relates to the information and communications technology division ("ICT division") of SASSA.

The investigation commenced on 8 June 2010, which is the date of publication of the Proclamation.

(b) The SIU anticipates that all matters under investigation with regard to the SASSA ICT division should be finalised by the end of July 2012.

· Evaluate whether the awarding and management of contracts were done in accordance with the following criteria: Value for money; open and effective competition; ethics and fair dealing; and accountability and reporting

· Determine whether there was any link between SASSA officials and ICT suppliers and/or service providers contracted with

· Determine whether there was any unlawful benefit from the suppliers and/or service providers by any SASSA official and/or members of the BEC/BAC

· Determine whether any non-compliance with prescripts identified during the internal audit review was deliberate and intentional

· Determine whether any criminal and/or disciplinary transgressions were committed by any SASSA official or other person involved in the process and whether any such person/s could be prosecuted accordingly

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO. 162

DATE PUBLISHED: 17 FEBRUARY 2012

DATE DUE: 10 MARCH 2012

Dr H C van Schalkwyk (DA) to ask the Presidency of the Republic:

(1) Why has the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) National Programme of Action (NPoA) not been included in the agenda of the National Planning Commission? NW178E

REPLY:

The agenda of the National Planning Commission is guided by the Revised Green Paper: National Planning Commission and the address of the President of the Republic at the inaugural meeting of the National Planning Commission. Both documents are publicly available.

The mandate is to develop a long-term development plan and vision for South Africa. In this context, the Terms of Reference does not exclude the possibility of the APRM National Programme of Action reports being considered in the work of the Commission.

2012-12-31

What's wrong with this page?