Questions & Replies: Transport

Share this page:
2012-11-30

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: August 2012

QUESTION NO 989

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 26 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 10 – 2012)

Mrs A T Lovemore (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether a date has been set for the draft National Scholar Transport Policy of February 2009 to be (a) finalised and (b) gazetted; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;

(2) whether any safeguards have been put in place to coordinate scholar transport with the transport departments in each province; if not, why not; if so, (a) which provinces have this arrangement in place and (b) when are the remaining provinces expected to implement this arrangement;

(3) whether his department monitors the implementation of the draft policy in each province; if not, why not; if so, (a) who exercises such monitoring and (b) what are the further relevant details;

(4) whether his department maintains a record of scholars (a) requiring and (b) supplied with transport in each province; if so, what are the relevant figures for each province; if not,

(5) whether his department intends to compile such a record; if so, what are the relevant figures for each province? NW1168E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) No. The Draft National Scholar Transport policy is at the final consulation stage. The Department of Basic Education made material inputs to the draft which required going back to consult other key stakeholders

(b) No. See (a) above.

(2) (a) No. Policy is not finalized

(b) No applicable; see (a)

(3) The draft policy is not yet and therefore not enforceable.

(4) No. This a responsibility of provincial departments of Education and Transport, depending on which department has been allocated the scholar transport function in those province

(5) The Department requested and received data up to 2010/2011 for purpose of finalizing the national scholar transport policy.

Reply received: May 2012

QUESTION NO 945

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Thursday, 17 May 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 26 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 10 – 2012)

Mr G B D Mc Intosh (COPE) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether, in view of the large number of pedestrians killed in traffic accidents, he intends introducing legislation which will make it a legal requirement that all clothing include a reflective material; if not, why not; if so,

(2) whether he has had any meetings with clothing and textile manufacturers in this regard; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1120E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) Although, the wearing of reflective clothing would reduce the number of accidents involving pedestrians, it would be impractical and unreasonable for the Department of Transport to advocate to every pedestrian to wear such clothing. The manufacturing and the material used in the production of clothing are outside the domain of the Department. Furthermore, it would be difficult to establish which type of clothing must be manufactured and what kind of material must be used. It is also difficult to determine whether at any given time a pedestrian would be wearing the appropriate material and under which circumstances, as one never knows when he/ she would be travelling at night.

The Department would like to introduce a programme for pedestrian safety, which will be implemented through education and engineering.

As a proactive approach during road safety campaigns, the Department has continuously been handing out reflective armbands that pedestrians should wear when walking at night. They are also reminded to wear light-coloured clothing at all times to enhance visibility.

In addition, we are engaging with some of the industries whose employees travel/ work at times when there is less visibility, to encourage them to wear reflective clothing. For example, the construction, mining and agricultural industries are required to ensure that their employees wear visible clothing when travelling/ working at night.

The Department will further engage with other sectors that require their employees to wear uniforms, to ensure that those clothes are designed with reflective materials.

(2) No.

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 926

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Adv A de W Alberts (FF-Plus) asked the Minister of Transport

(1) (a) What is the motivation for the price increase of 25% for train tickets for the Tshwane Business Express between Johannesburg and Pretoria from 1 April 2012, (b) what criteria were taken into account in determining the increase and (c) why were users of this train service notified only four days prior to the price increase coming into force;

(2) whether Metrorail received any representations from commuters against the price increase; if so, (a) what was the nature of the representations, (b) what feedback did Metrorail provide to commuters who submitted representations and (c) why were these representations not taken into account in determining the tariffs;

(3) whether, in light of the coming into force of the payment of toll fees for the Gauteng freeway improvement project (e-tolling system), Metrorail considered not to increase the tariffs of the Tshwane Business Express as the new e-tolling system could result in a larger number of commuters, because private transport is being rendered potentially unaffordable for an increasing number of workers; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1108E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) Commuters using the Tshwane Business Express service between Johannesburg and Pretoria receive, in addition to the train service, additional services such as secure parking, on-board beverages and newspapers served by hosts/hostesses, dedicated security inside the train and shuttle bus services to their destinations. Since inception of the service in May 2008, the fares of the Tshwane Business Express have been based on the heavily discounted launch fare price, and do not cover the total running costs of this service. Despite the recent annual-based inflation increases in the electricity, personnel, material and maintenance costs, the price of the Tshwane Business Express has not increased since inception, leading to extremely high operational costs and revenue, which does not cover these costs.

(b) The general increase of fares is designed to ensure that Metrorail meets its operational costs.

(c) The commuters were not informed four days prior to the price increase came into force. Engagements with theGauteng commuter forums started long before the announcements, and bulk short message services were distrubuted at all stations and sent to commuters on Metrorail's database over a 2-week period. Meetings were held separately with Tshwane Business Express, Soweto Business Express and Metroplus Express regarding the fare increase, and the reasons behind the increase were explained to them.

(2) Yes, Metrorail received representations from commuters and commuter structures who expressed concerns around the fare increase.

(a) These mainly revolved around affordability issues and came via the commuter forums and individual expressions sent via e-mails.

(b) Metrorail provided feedback through formal engagements with the forums, notices, flyers and press releases, by stating the fact that the costs of running the service had increased, but that the fares had remained constant since inception of the service.

(c) It would be uneconomical to continue to run the Tshwane Business Express without increases of the fare price, which still remains lower than the other public transport modes.

(3) The excessive costs of running the service would have rendered the Tshwane Business Express unviable if Metrorail did not increase the fare structure. The service remains a viable and more affordable option than private vehicle usage as well as alternative public transport services.

Reply received: July 2012

QUESTION NO 905

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 20 JULY 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether the Civil Aviation Authority approved the export of any products (a) in the (i) 2009-10, (ii) 2010-11 and (iii) 2011-12 financial years and (b) from 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, in respect of each year (aa) what was the name of the exporting company, (bb) what products were to be exported and (cc) on what date was the export approved? NW1085E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(a) (i), (ii) and (iii) and (b) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

The South Africa Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) has been established as the civil aviation safety and security regulator in terms of Section 71 of the Civil Aviation Act, 2009, (Act No. 13 of 2009), and does not approve the export of any products.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 904

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 04 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether the Civil Aviation Authority (a) processed and (b) approved the export of any products to Zimbabwe (i) in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12 financial years and (ii) from 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, in respect of each year (aaa) what was the name of the exporting company, (bbb) what products have been exported and (ccc) on what date was the export approved? NW1084E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(a), (b) (i) (aa), (bb) and (cc), (ii) (aaa), (bbb) and (ccc)

The South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) has not processed any exemptions or approvals to or from Zimbabwe for the specified financial years mentioned.

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 903

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Mr M R Sayedali Shah (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether the Civil Aviation Authority (a) processed and (b) approved the export of any products to Iran (i) in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12 financial years and (ii) from 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, in respect of each year (aaa) what was the name of the exporting company, (bbb) what products have been exported and (ccc) on what date was the export approved? NW1083E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(a), (b) (i) (aa), (bb) and (cc) and (ii)

The South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) has not processed any exemptions or approvals to or from Iran for the specified financial years mentioned.

(aaa), (bbb) and (ccc)

Fall away

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 875

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Mrs H Lamoela (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

How much money was received at each toll gate on the N1 between Pretoria and Polokwane on each day from 5 April 2012 to 10 April 2012? NW1053E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

The nett revenue received on mainline plazas by the South African National Roads Agency (SANRAL) and its Concessionaire, Bakwena, on the N1 from Pretoria to Polokwane for the period specified is as follows:

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 826

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 20 APRIL 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 9 – 2012)

Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether his department has received an application to upgrade the Hoedspruit Eastgate Airport to international status; if so, (a) when will this upgrade take place and (b) what are the further relevant details? NW999E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

No, the Department of Transport did not receive a formal application to upgrade the Hoedspruit Eastgate Airport to international status.

(a) and (b) Fall away.

Reply received: May 2012

QUESTION NO 803

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: TUESDAY, 08 MAY 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 8 – 2012)

Mr N J van den Berg (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether any officials from (a) his department and (b) any entities reporting to him were on an official visit to Bloemfontein in (i) December 2011 and (ii) January 2012; if so, in each case, what (aa) is the (aaa) name and (bbb) position of the specified official, (bb) was the (aaa) purpose and (bbb) date of such visit and (cc) was the cost of (aaa) transport, (bbb) accommodation and (ccc) other expenses? NW974E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(a) and (b) (i) and (ii) (aa) (aaa) and (bbb), (bb) (aaa) and (bbb) and (cc) (aaa), (bbb) and (ccc)

A large contingency, consisting of Heads of State and dignitaries from foreign governments, attended the centenary celebrations of the African National Congress in Manguang, Bloemfontein, in January this year. In anticipation of their arrival, a number of state agencies and departments were mandated to make preparations as part of the courtesies extended to any visiting President/ Head of State or foreign dignitary.

These departments included the Presidency, the Departments of International Relations and Cooperation, Arts and Culture, Health, Disaster Management, Public Works, State Security Agencies, and other government departments who played a cross-cutting role in the successful execution of the event. These departments were mandated to ensure, firstly, the safety and security of the event in terms of the Public Gathering Act, 1991 (Act No. 30 of 1991), and secondly, to provide protocol services and facilities suitable for the stature of the event. Officials from different departments were deployed to ensure the smooth running of the event.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 773

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 04 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 8 – 2012)

Mr S J F Marais (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether he has considered the impact of the closure of Shell Ultra City on the N1 outside Worcester on (a) the employment of the local communities and (b) motorists; if not, why not; if so, how was this justified;

(2) how did SANRAL justify continued access on the (a) Ceres (R46) and (b) Rawsonville (R10l) turn-offs from the N1 and the (c) Caltex service station north of Worcester under the same conditions? NW942E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) and (b)

The impact of the closure has not only being considered from an economic aspect but also from a road safety aspect. The entrance was not being closed, but the proposed measures are to prevent the dangerous right hand turn-movements into and out of the service station, in front of on-coming traffic. As the Honourable Member would agree, it is incumbent on all to make our roads safer by design, where it can be done, for example, by reducing the potential cause of crashes by slow moving heavy vehicles making a right hand turn into and out of the service station. Still fresh on our minds is the horror crash (15 November 2011) that claimed the lives of twenty people on the N1 near Leeu Gamka, after exiting a service station. We trust the Honourable Member will agree with us that a situation cannot be knowingly allowed to exist where there is a risk of loss human life.

Furthermore, the owner of the Shell Ultra City was provided with a 12 month written notice in March 2011, in terms of the Agreement between SANRAL and Shell. It is also noted that the owner was granted four extensions, whilst a hazardous situation existed.

Notwithstanding the above, SANRAL has reached agreement with the owner of the Shell Ultra City that the current access on the N1 will only be closed once the owner has built a new Shell Ultra City on either side of the N1 (further south), with safer accesses. The owner had indicated that the new service station is scheduled to be completed by March 2013.

(2) (a), (b) and (c)

Under a future project, the Ceres (R46) and Rawsonville (R101) N1 intersections will be relocated to feed into a new planned interchange, and the Caltex Service Station access is to be relocated to a location further north along the N1 due to another new planned interchange.

We trust the Honourable Member will agree that all these measures are taken in the interest of all road users, and this action is contributing to making our roads safer in light of the United Nations Decade of Safe Roads campaign.

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 655

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 8 – 2012)

Mr P D Mbhele (Cope) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether his department has commissioned a cost analysis to determine the loss that was incurred as the result of train torching incidents in the past three financial years; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW814E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

The costs with regard to the torching of trains in the past three years are reflected below, and it pertains to pure insurance losses, eg. repairs and replacement of assets.

Financial Year

Cost of Incidents

2009/2010

R 81,510,625.64

2010/2011

R 82,322,574.99

2011/2012

R 126,200,000.00

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 654

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 8 – 2012)

Mr P D Mbhele (Cope) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether his department intends handing over control of passenger train services from the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa) to cities; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW813E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

No, the Department of Transport (DoT) does not intend handing over the rail services to the Cities.

It is a constitutional aspiration and a stated policy that public transport should eventually devolve to the level of government closest to its delivery. For the Metros/ Cities it is clear that they are accountable to the users of public transport and the general population of the Cities for a well-working integrated public transport network. The current structure of the commuter rail industry provides for limited accountability to customers. It is imperative to restructure service delivery in such a way as to introduce accountability and obtain better governance over the deployment of public funds.

In terms of the National Land Transport Act, 2009 (Act No. 5 of 2009), the municipal sphere of government, inter alia, has the responsibility of "service level planning for passenger rail on a corridor network basis" in consultation with the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA). In order to start giving effect to this policy and legislative requirement, the DoT had a consultative meeting on 5 October 2010 and met with the Mayors of all the Metropolitan Municipalities (Metros) in whose area of jurisdiction commuter rail services are being provided by PRASA. Representatives of the affected provinces of the South African Local Government Association (SALGA), National Treasury and PRASA were at the meeting to discuss this matter. At that meeting the Deputy Minister of Transport made it clear that, at this stage, the intention was that only rail operational subsidies would be devolved to the Metros and the Metros would therefore only act as conduits between the DoT and PRASA for the payment of such subsidies. That is still the intention.

For the 2012/13 financial year, PRASA will still receive operational subsidies directly from the DoT. This will give the Metros that are willing to participate in the process the opportunity to conduct, in conjunction with the DoT, due diligence studies into the impact on the Metro of the acceptance of this responsibility. After completion of the due diligence studies and acceptance of the responsibility by the Metros, they will put capacity in place to start managing the process. Information flows and reporting on the commuter rail operations from PRASA/ Metrorail to the Metros will be required so that the latter can build up a knowledge base and internal capacity to enable the Metros to develop an effective oversight role. It will also allow PRASA to analyse its cost structure to enable it to allocate costs and revenues to the various metropolitan areas.

This arrangement will be in place for the subsequent three to five years to allow the Metros to do the necessary rail planning and build up capacity to start taking greater responsibility for the monitoring and influencing of the rail services delivered by PRASA. For some Metros the three to five year period may be reduced if they are ready at an earlier stage. The function will therefore not be devolved to the Metros if they do not have the necessary capacity.

It must be emphasised that PRASA/Metrorail will continue to operate the rail services and maintain the infrastructure and rolling stock and that the responsibility of these functions will not become the responsibility of the Metros/Cities. Furthermore, the funds for capital works, as well as the funds for the acquisition of the new rolling stock for PRASA, will remain on the budget of the DoT and will not be devolved to the Metros.

Reply received: July 2012

QUESTION NO 653

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 20 JULY 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 8 – 2012)

Mr P D Mbhele (Cope) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) How many incidents of train torching have been reported in (a) 2008, (b) 2009, (c) 2010, (d) 2011 and (e) 2012;

(2) whether any perpetrators have been arrested in each specified year; if not, why not; if so, what are the (a) reasons that have been furnished for torching the trains and (b) further relevant details? NW812E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1)

No

Year

Number of train torching incidents

(a)

2008

11

(b)

2009

7

(c)

2010

7

(d)

2011

14

(e)

2012

13

TOTAL

52

(2) (a) The following table depicts the number of arrests for the respective stipulated years. It should be noted that some of these individuals have since been released on bail, and that some of the sentences are still outstanding pending further investigation by the South African Police Service (SAPS).

No

Year

Arrests

(a)

2008

None

(b)

2009

None

(c)

2010

None

(d)

2011

13

(e)

2012

26

TOTAL

39

The main reasons furnished for the train coach torchings include:

Ø Commuter frustration as a result of train delays, and

Ø Strike related incidents in the Western Cape Region and Gauteng Province during 2011 and 2012, respectively.

For the 2008, 2009 and 2010, no arrests have been made as yet as the South African Police Services (SAPS) is still investigating.

(b) Furthermore, and related to the above, in some of the incidents that occurred during 2008, 2009 and 2010, the persons arrested were released due to a lack of definitive evidence.

Reply received: April 2012

QUESTION NO 626

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: MONDAY, 02 APRIL 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 16 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 8 – 2012)

Adv A de W Alberts (FF-Plus) asked the Minister of Transport

How many e-tags for use in the Gauteng freeway improvement project have been sold from the date of e-tags being made available until the latest specified date for which information is available? NW699E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

Tags are distributed through retailers such as Shoprite, Checkers and Pick 'n Pay, directly to corporates, customer care centres, and through fleet managers. Approximately 320 000 tags have been distributed through the various channels as at 16 March 2012. The exact number sold is yet to be finalised.

Reply received: April 2012

QUESTION NO 588

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: MONDAY, 02 APRIL 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 09 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 7 – 2012)

Mr G G Hill-Lewis (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether his department has an internal audit unit; if not, why not; if so, (a) how many staff members are employed in the unit and (b) what (i) is the structure and (ii) are the functions of the unit;

(2) whether the audit committee considers the internal audit reports; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether he holds meetings to discuss (a) the internal reports and (b) their findings with the audit unit; if not, why not, in each case; if so, (i) on what dates since 1 April 2010 has each specified meeting taken place and (ii) what are the further relevant details? NW753E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii)

The Department of Transport has an Internal Audit Unit, which has staff members on the following levels:

§ One Chief Audit Executive

§ One Director: Internal Audit (Assurance and Consulting, Performance and Information Technology Auditing)

§ One Director: Fraud Investigations

§ One Deputy Director: Assurance and Consulting Auditing

§ One Deputy Director: Performance Auditing

§ Two Assistant Directors (Assurance and Consulting Auditing)

§ Two Internal Auditors (Assurance and Consulting Auditing)

§ Two Office Administrators

The main objective of the internal auditing function is to add value and improve the Department's operations by helping it accomplish its objectives. Internal Auditors do this by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of governance, risk management and control processes.

(2) Yes, it considers the internal audit reports. The Internal Audit Unit reports quarterly to the Audit Committee on its performance against the approved audit plan. Results of audit projects are tabled at Audit Committee meetings for the Committee's consideration.

(3) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii)

Internal Auditors have not requested a meeting with the Minister as Treasury Regulation 3.2.9 prescribes that "an internal audit function must report directly to the accounting officer and shall report at all audit committee meetings." The Audit Committee is in turn required by Treasury Regulation 3.1.15 to "communicate any concerns it deems necessary to the executive authority."

The Minister, however, meets with the Auditor-General quarterly and has already met with the team from the Auditor-General's office on 31 January 2012.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 542

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 09 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 7 – 2012)

542. Adv A de W Alberts (FF Plus) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether, during the test period in which the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act (AARTO/APBO), Act 46 of 1998, was put into action in Johannesburg and Pretoria, traffic offence notices were served on alleged offenders (a) by registered mail and/or (b) in person; if not, in which city are the instructions, as contained in section 30 of the Act, not adhered to; if so, what (i) systems or (ii) authorities are used to serve traffic offence notices on alleged offenders by registered mail and/or in person;

(2) whether he sought legal opinion on the implications of serving traffic offence notices in a format other than the one prescribed by the Act; if so, what was the opinion; if not,

(3) whether he intends to seek legal opinion on the matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW697E

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii)

Infringement notices in terms of the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act (AARTO), 1998 (Act No. 46 of 1998), were served in person by means of an AARTO 01 form in both Tshwane and Johannesburg. Infringement notices for camera infringements were served by registered mail by means of an AARTO 03 form in Tshwane. In order to limit postage costs, Johannesburg authorities issued the first notice by ordinary mail by means of an AARTO 03 form. This was to be followed up by a notice by registered mail. However, regulation 3(1) determines that the infringement notice must be served by registered mail within 40 days from the date of infringement and the required funds to serve the notices by registered mail could not be secured. In both cases, the South African Post Office (SAPO) is used as the service provider to serve or deliver the infringement notices.

Tshwane uses the National Traffic Information System (eNaTIS) for the processing of all its infringement notices, whilst Johannesburg uses the eNaTIS system since July 2011 for the processing of its personally served AARTO 01 infringement notices. Johannesburg uses systems as provided by its sub-contractors for the delivery of camera infringement notices by ordinary mail. However, Johannesburg has recently secured funds for the posting of infringement notices by registered mail and it is believed that Johannesburg will use the eNaTIS and serve infringement notices by registered mail as from April 2012.

(2) A legal opinion on the implications of serving traffic offence notices in a format other than the one prescribed by the Act was not obtained, as Section 30(1) and Regulation 3(1) of the AARTO Act are clear that an infringement notice must be served either in person or by registered mail.

(3) The Registrar of the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) and I are of the opinion that the legislation is clear and that a legal opinion is not required to clarify exact legislation.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 502

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 04 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 02 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 6 – 2012)

Mr D J Stubbe (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether he met with the internal audit committee in the (a) 2010-11 and (b) 2011-12 financial years; if not, why not; if so, (i) on which dates did they meet and (ii) what are the further relevant details? NW651E

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(a) and (b) (i)

No, the Minister did not meet with the Audit Committee during the said financial years. A system is however being put in place to ensure that the Minister meets with the Chairperson of the Audit Committee at least once annually. In terms of Treasury Regulation 3.1.12, "an audit committee may communicate any concerns it deems necessary to the executive authority. The DoT Audit Committee did not communicate any concerns to the Minister during the said financial years.

(ii) There are no further relevant details.

Reply received: April 2012

QUESTION NO 405

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: MONDAY, 02 APRIL 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 02 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 6 – 2012)

Adv A de W Alberts (FF-Plus) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Why have taxis and buses been exempted from paying toll fees for the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project;

(2) whether the vehicles of welfare organisation have also be exempted from paying toll fees; if so, (a) where and (b) when was this decision made in public; if not, why not;

(3) whether he intends exempting such vehicles from paying toll fees; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW535E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) The reason for a zero tariff for qualifying public transport vehicles was based on the presentations delivered during the public participation process in favour of a zero tariff for taxis and buses, and in order to promote the general use of public transport instead of private vehicle use. Also, Government is sensitive towards the transportation costs of the poor, who in most instances are making use of public transport. The proposed toll tariffs on the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) toll roads are of general application and apply equally, having regard to the categories of road users, and are not discriminatory. Section 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 108 of 1996), clearly provides that legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons, or categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination, may be taken.

(2) (a) and (b)

In terms of legislation, only vehicles of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) and the South African Police Service (SAPS) are exempted from toll payment. It is not administratively feasible to determine which vehicles are used for what purposes. Such a system will be open to fraud and will not be manageable.

(3) See the response to part (2) above.

Reply received: April 2012

QUESTION NO 404

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: MONDAY, 02 APRIL 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 02 MARCH 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 6 – 2012)

Adv A de W Alberts (FF-Plus) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) When will the claim that a certain person (name and details furnished) instituted against the Road Accident Fund (RAF) in connection with a motor vehicle accident on 8 June 2008 be finalised, (b) why did the industrial psychologist assigned by the RAF to evaluate him take eight months before visiting him and (c) why has the report by this industrial psychologist still not been completed and submitted to the RAF more than a year after his visit;

(2) whether he or his department have put any measures in place that enable them to take action against persons who are retarding the processing of claims against the RAF; if not, what measure are in place to facilitate the prompt finalisation of claims; if so, what are the relevant details? NW534E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a)

From the perspective of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), it would be very difficult to determine the actual time of settlement of the said claim, as the claimant's entire claim is based on mere speculation regarding what exactly would have transpired in the future regarding his entrepreneurial enterprises and the success thereof. The following should be noted:

§ The evidence provided by the claimant/claimant's legal representative regarding his earnings was based on mere projections of what was to be earned in the future;

§ No evidence in the form of any contract or agreement with existing or future buyers was furnished to the RAF at any stage, up to this date, to enable the RAF to actually quantify losses the claimant might suffer in future;

§ The basis (whether as Pty Ltd, Closed Corporation, etc) on which the claimant was doing business as farmer has to date not been clarified. The case of Rudman v the Road Accident Fund 2003(2) SA 234(SCA) comes to mind and p241H – 2423B thereof : "the fallacy in Mr. Eksteen's criticism is that it assumes that Rudman suffers loss once he proves that his physical disabilities bring about a reduction in his earning capacity; thereafter all that remains is to quantify the loss. This assumption cannot be made. A physical disability which impact upon capacity to earn does not necessarily reduce the estate or patrimony of the person injured. It may in some cases follow quite readily that it does, but not on the facts of this case. There must be proof that the reduction in earning capacity indeed gives rise to pecuniary loss"; and

§ All the medical evidence provided by the claimant and his legal representatives appeared to be outdated, given the fact that the reports all stem from the year 2008 to early 2009. No recent medical evidence supporting continuous permanent disability has been provided or any medical evidence by specific experts which specifically links the allegedChronic Regional Pain Syndrome to the accident. One cannot but note that he now has developed problems with his right leg as well according to the "scarce" medical evidence on file. (Regarding the latter, it has been established that he had been treated for hip problems prior to this accident)

Should the RAF therefore be forced to speedily settle the claim for compensation by the claimant on the bare minimum provided, it could very well lead to the overcompensation or enrichment. The Road Accident Fund Act, 1996 (Act No. 56 of 1996), however, has the purpose of "reasonable compensation" for injuries sustained in the accident involved and given the huge deficit the RAF has, it clearly would not be in the RAF's best interest at this stage. One has to keep in mind that in certain instances it is impossible and unreasonable to expect the RAF to settle claims merely for the purpose of settling as one has to keep in mind that the RAF is the proverbial "protector" of public funds. It is expected of the RAF to be cautious where settling of claims comes into play.

(b) This is the claimant's own assumption that the industrial psychologist took more than eight months to visit him. The claimant's legal representative was advised that once all the requested evidence regarding the claimant's claim have been received, the industrial psychologist would then be able to complete the necessary investigations and draft a formal report regarding possible future losses the claimant might suffer, as well as possible methods of mitigation of damages. Given the latter it has to be remembered that the industrial psychologist is expected to verify and substantiate all collateral evidence in an effort to minimize the risk of overcompensation or enrichment based on half-truths or unsubstantiated information . Given the answer to the question above, it is evident that the industrial psychologist should not even have begun working yet, given the amount and kind of outstanding information. Yet, he did preliminary work because of the fact that the claimant and his wife started pressurizing the RAF and their legal representative. It transpired from the preliminary investigations that the claimant's income comes mainly from entrepreneurial enterprises and not specifically from being a fully fledged dairy farmer as initially alleged.

Although the RAF has now been furnished by a report of the industrial psychologist, with whom the claimant is highly impressed, in an effort to substantiate a loss of earnings via the mitigation route, it is evident that:

· All income derived by the claimant seems to be derived via entrepreneurial enterprises;

· No evidence exists regarding the actual income earned prior and after the accident;

· No collateral evidence exists regarding any income earned or the duration of any of the alleged entrepreneurial enterprises; and

· No attempt has been made to actually determine, based on actual medical evidence, other than the fact that the claimant cannot do physical activities anymore, whether the claimant can actually earn an income by activities such as property development (being the owner of a garage, etc).

The latter report, with all the attachments have been provided to the industrial psychologist, who will obtain collateral evidence to the above effect, as well as advise the RAF regarding a residual earning the claimant might have. The gist of the original claim was always that the claimant cannot pursue his career as a dairy farmer anymore. Although the claimant has physical problems, it is obvious that there has to be a residual earning capacity.

(c) The reason for this is because the gist of the claimant's claim has changed once again as a result of the industrial psychologist's report. The claimant has now provided new information which must first be considered and analysed. Furthermore, no collateral evidence regarding the entrepreneurial enterprises and the income derived from these enterprises, although it has been alleged, has been furnished to the RAF, which would enable the finalisation of the said report.

(2) The RAF has a disciplinary code in place to address staff who are intentionally retarding the settlement of claims. If experts are found guilty of such practices, the instructions can be withdrawn or cancelled should such behavior become apparent. In the present matter we are not of the opinion that there are any intentional delaying tactics employed by the industrial psychologist, as he has vast experience in this field and has been doing a lot of preparatory work before and after he has consulted with the claimant. The expert is noted for taking a holistic approach to the conditions of claimants and has always presented the RAF with thorough reports which could be relied upon where matters went to trial.

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO 335

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 14 SEPTEMBER 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 4 – 2012)

Mr A Watson (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether his department has identified measures to deal with the traffic congestion at the border post between Lebombo and Resano Garcia; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) What were the reasons for shelving the initial plan of a 24-hour one stop border post? NW416E

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

  1. The DoT has recently developed Freight Movement Optimisation Plans (FMOP) for 6 key commercial border posts, including Lebombo. The FMOP have helped the DoT to identify pressure points and potential solutions to the challenge of congestion at the border posts. Therefore, in the current financial year (2012-2013) the DoT will be working on the implementation of some of the proposed solutions. These include:
    1. Fast-tracking negotiations with the Department of Public Works (DPW) to secure the transfer of the roads mandate to the DoT to enable SANRAL to build all roads at the border posts, as per the Cabinet decision of March 2001. The provision of adequate road infrastructure or capacity will help in the decongestion of the border posts.
    2. Regulation of truck stop to ensure healthy distance between truck stops and the control zones. This will also help to decongest the ports' mouth, which is currently suffocated by many and sometimes illegal operations of truck stops.
    3. The DoT will also conduct a pilot project on the feasibility of routing passenger and freight traffic to different/alternative border posts along a borderline. However, Maseru Bridge border post will be site of the pilot project. Nevertheless, the lessons learnt from this exercise will be transferred to other border posts, including Lebombo.
  1. The DoT is not responsible for the commissioning of operating hours at the border posts.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 334

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: THURSDAY, 15 MARCH 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 4 – 2012)

Mr A Watson (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether any progress has been made with the upgrading of national roads in Mpumalanga; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW415E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

Progress is continuously made in keeping with the budget allocations received from National Treasury and the priorities as per the road condition and traffic volumes using the road. The projects related to design, construction and routine road maintenance in the Mpumalanga province are listed below:

NON-TOLL -ROUTINE ROAD MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS

ROAD NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS

KMS

R23

Routine Road Maintenance

181

R40

174

R37

118

INKOMAZI FEEDER ROADS

163

Bethal - R35

156

N11

241

Mkondo-N2

167

R33

212

N4Y (R555)

20

N12

83

R38

192

Total kilometres

1707

TOLL - ROUTINE ROAD MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS

ROAD NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS

KMS

N17

Routine Road Maintenance

264

NON-TOLL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

ROAD NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS

KMS

N11 Middleberg to Loskopdam

Design

54

N12 Daveyton to Delmas

Design

26

R23 Balfour to MP/GP provincial border

Design

6

R33 Carolina to Belfast

Construction

46

R35 Km 34 to Middleberg

Construction

41

R40 White River to Hazyview

Construction

47

R40 Hoedspruit to Mica

Construction

32

R33 KZN/MP provincial border to N17

Construction

52

R 38 Bethal to Carolina

Construction

43

R38 Carolina to Barberton

Construction

112

N2 KZN/MP provincial border to Piet Retief (Mkondo)

Construction

63

N2 Piet Retief to Camden

Construction

90

N11 Amersfoort to Ermelo

Construction

56

N 11 Estancia to Hendrina

Awaiting water use license

34

N11 Ermelo to Estancia

Awaiting water use license

24

N12 Oogies to eMalahleni

Design

27

R23 Platrand to Standerton

Design

30

R23 Volksrust to km 30

Design

33

R23 Greylingstad to Balfour

Construction

19

Standerton to Greylingstad

Design

56

R33 N17 to Carolina

Construction

38

R35 Amersfoort to Morgenzon

Construction

42

R35 Morgenzon to Bethal

Design

35

R35 Bethal to km 34

Construction

34

R40 R533 to Hoedspruit

Construction

65

R40 Hazyview to R 533

Construction

26

R104 Bronkhorstspruit to N4

Design

21

R555 Witbank to Middleberg

Design

20

R571 N4 to Sibanyeni

Design

20

R37 Modikwa Mine to Burgersfort

Design

26

R570 N4 to Jeppes Reef

Design

41

R23 safety project

Design

4

N2 Camden to Ermelo

Construction

12

N2 New Panbult intersection

Design

1

N4 Nelspruit link road

Construction

4

Ermelo Ring road

Planning

35

Nelspruit to Hazyview road

Planning

45

Bushbuckridge Ring road

Planning

4

Total kilometres

1364

TOLL – UNDER CONSTRUCTION

ROAD NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS

KMS

N17 Springs to Kinross

Completed

50

N17 Leandra to Leven

Completed

29

N17 Leven to Wildebeestfontein

Completed

4

N17 Ermelo to Chrissiesmeer

Design

37

N17 Chrissiesmeer to km 85

Design

51

N17 Km 85 to Oshoek

Design

38

N17 Davel to Ermelo

Construction

35

N17 Trichardt to Bethal

Construction

24

N17 Wildebeestfontein to Trichardt

Construction

10

N4 Trichardt Bypass

Construction

4

N17 Bethal to Davel

Completed

29

Total kilometres

311

Overload Control Facilities

N4 Weighbridges operations & maintenance

Construction/ operation

N4 Weighbridges

Construction

The above projects are for the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period from 2011 to 2013. These projects are on the network of roads that form part of the total network managed by the South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) nationally.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 326

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 4 – 2012)

Mr P van Dalen (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) What was annual cost of copper cable theft from (a) the Passenger Rail Agency of SA (PRASA) and (b) Metrorail (i) in the (aa) 2006-07, (bb) 2007-08, (cc) 2008-09 (dd) 2009-10 and (ee) 2010-11 financial years and (ii) during the period 1 April 2011 up to the latest specified date for which information is available with respect to (aaa) loss, (bbb) replacement cost and (ccc) increased security measures;

(2) Whether the protection of copper cables and action to combat theft thereof has been outsourced; if not, why not; if not; if so, (a) why and (b) what are the names of the companies that have been contracted;

(3) Whether the outsourcing of these services has had a reducing impact on the impact on the number of reported thefts; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) Whether contracted companies have been held responsible for non-performance; if not, why not; if so, what steps have been taken against companies for non-performance?

NW406E

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) and (b) (aa), (bb), (cc), (dd) and (ee)

Period (Year)

Copper Theft Value

2006-07

R 2 757 233.93

2007-08

R 2 993 872.58

2008-09

R 2 669 690.38

2009-10

R 4 324 875.16

2010-11

R 6 843 619.68

(ii) (aaa)

R 2 404 941.48 (as at January 2012)

(bbb)

R 4 845 957.08

(ccc)

Cost/ figures are required here please (as per the question), and not details as listed below

§ Vehicle and daily foot patrols

§ Observations

§ Scrap yards visits

§ Asset Protection Units

§ Tactical Response Team

§ Deployment of contracted guards in high risk areas

§ Continuous inspection of infrastructure components, cabinets and cable routes

§ Response to all reported disruptions related to the tracks and operational tunnel

§ Tasked the Signal department to vandal proof certain high risk cable areas, by cementing the cables to prevent theft and damage.

§ Monitoring and analysing cable faults and theft trends

§ Accompanying repair technicians

§ Security advisory service to technical and infrastructure disciplines

§ Attendance at all relevant business and industry related theft prevention forums

§ Establishment of Community liaison forums and awareness programs

§ Establishment of a Tactical Asset Protection Task Team whose members have specialised National Key Point protection skills

(2) (a)

Yes, but not in all operational areas. The reason is because of inadequate internal security capacity.

(b)

§ Bhejane Security

§ Isdingo Security Services

§ Security International

§ iBhubesi Security

§ Comwezi Security Services

§ Sechaba Security

§ Chuma Security Systems

§ Manuel Security

§ Chippa Security

§ Afri-Guard Security

§ Futuris Guarding Systems

§ Hlanganani Protection Services

§ Sinqobile Security Services

(3) Yes, there has been a reducing impact on the number of reported thefts. The security companies are being used as an extension of the internal security contingent with their main focus being on infrastructure asset protection. It must however be noted that the rail network of the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) covers a vast area, and is therefore more exposed to acts of criminality. Nevertheless, theft in general is sporadic and diverse. In addition, specialised task teams consisting of internal security resources have been introduced to respond to this requirement.

(4) Security contractors are held accountable for incidents that occur within their deployment areas. Special contractual penalty clauses have been incorporated in private security service providers' contracts in this regard.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 269

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 4 – 2012)

Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether with regard to the proposals for the construction of high-speed train systems, he has found that there is a need for establishing (a) factories and (b) manufacturing plants; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what is the relevant details in each case;

(2) whether any costing has been done in this regard; if not, why not; and if so, what are the budget implication? NW300E

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) and (b)

There has been no decision to develop high-speed train systems, factories and manufacturing plants.

The high-speed rail programme, as it is known, is a proposal of the National Transport Master Plan (NATMAP 2050), that has not yet been approved by Cabinet. As such, the high-speed rail programme is a programme that is in the plans of the Department of Transport, as part of the National Transport Master Plan.

In the event that the high-speed rail programme is realised, it is imperative that a local high-speed rail industry is developed. This would include, but not limited, to the manufacturing of combined components / parts and manufacturing plants of railway line construction.

The decision to proceed with the high-speed rail programme will be undertaken, subject to the condition that there be a detailed feasibility study that would take into consideration the entire programme, i.e. inclusive of the manufacturing factories, plants and/or industry. The feasibility study will form an integral part of the decision-making process that would consider cost-benefit analysis or multi-criteria analysis and/or any other relevant project-viability evaluation criteria.

(2) Due to the fact that no decision has yet been taken in this regard, no costing has been conducted. The costing of the high-speed rail programme will form part of the detailed outcomes of the feasibility study, should a decision be taken to actually proceed with the programme.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 214

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: THURSDAY, 15 MARCH 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 2 – 2012)

Dr S M van Dyk (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

Whether, with regard to the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project, road users without bank accounts will be accommodated on the system; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW232E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:


Road users without bank accounts will be accommodated. Users are not required to link their e-toll account with a bank account. A pre-paid system will be available to users for which payments can be made by EFT, in cash at customer service centres or at selected retailers.

Reply received: May 2012

QUESTION NO 211

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Thursday, 17 May 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr T W Coetzee (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether all provinces have transferred the function of the transporting of scholar patrols from the Department of Basic Education to his department; if not, why not; if so, on what date was the transfer concluded in each province;

(2) whether the budget allocation with regard to this function will be transferred to his department; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW229E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) The function of scholar patrols still remains the responsibility of the Department of Basic Education. The Department of Basic Education is working jointly with the respective communities in this regard. The schools are the direct undertaker of this task and there is no cost associated with it.

(2) Where the scholar transport function is transferred, the budget will accompany such function.

The scholar transport function is currently managed as follows:

Deparment of Basic Education

Department of Transport

Gauteng, Western Cape, Limpopo and Free State

Eastern Cape, North West, KwaZulu Natal, Mpumpalanga and Northern Cape

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 210

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Tuesday, 05 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr T W Coetzee (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether (a) his department and (b) the entities reporting to him have adopted a policy with regard to the payment of suppliers of goods and services; if not, why not; if so, (i) what exceptions are there to the policy and (ii) under what circumstances will an exception be made;

(2) whether (a) his department and (b) the entities reporting to him are currently adhering to the specified policy; if not, (i) why not and (ii) what mechanisms has he put in place to rectify noncompliance;

(3) (a) what is the value of outstanding payments to suppliers of goods and services in (i) his department and (ii) entities reporting to him and (b) how is it (i) ascertained and (ii) monitored? NW228E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

There are twelve (12) transport entities that report to the Minister via the Department of Transport, and for this reason the replies to this question have been provided individually.

Department of Transport (DoT)

(1) (a)

The Department of Transport's Supply Chain Management Policy addresses the issue relating to the payment of suppliers of goods and services.

(i) and (ii)

There are no exceptions to the policy with regard to the payment of suppliers.

(2) (a) (i) and (ii)

Yes, the Department is currently adhering to the Supply Chain Management Policy with regard to the payment of suppliers.

(3) (a) (i) R4,317,136.62

(b) (i) and (ii)

A file is kept in the payment office wherein all query related invoices are kept and regularly followed up until the query has been resolved and then payment is made.

Airports Company South Africa Limited (ACSA)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

ACSA has standard procurement policies and procedures which deal with the procurement of goods/services and ultimate settlement. The policies seek to make sure that payments to suppliers adhere to the terms agreed upon.

(2) (b) and (i) and (ii)

ACSA adheres to the policy. Payment terms are uploaded as standing data when a supplier is registered on the system.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b (i) and (ii)

As at the end of January 2012, the value of accounts payable was R152,5 million. The amount outstanding will be paid in terms of the terms agreed to with the clients. The office responsible for accounts payable draws weekly reports to monitor the outstanding balance.

Air Traffic and Navigation Services Company Limited (ATNS)

(1) (b)

ATNS has adopted a procurement policy that addresses the procurement of goods and services.

(i) and (ii)

There are no exceptions with regard to the payment of suppliers.

(2) (b) (i) and (ii)

ATNS complies with the procurement policy with regard to the payment of suppliers.

(3) (a) (ii) As at the end of February 2012, a total of R29 million was outstanding. This amount will be settled in line with credit terms agreed with service providers.

(b) (i) and (ii)

The creditors department reviews and reconciles all suppliers' accounts on a monthly basis.

Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (C-BRTA)

(1) (b)

The C-BRTA has a Supply Chain Management Policy, which guides the payment of suppliers. Over and above the Supply Chain Management Policy, the C-BRTA complies with the National Treasury Regulations, which prescribes that payment be made within 30 days of receipt of an invoice.

(i) and (ii)

In terms of best practice, the exception on the 30 days only arises when the invoices are in dispute and such dispute is declared in writing with the service provider. In such cases, the payment will be effected within 30 days of resolving the dispute.

(2) (b) (i)

The C-BRTA endeavors to comply with the 30 days policy of effecting payments, however, in some instances challenges are experienced due to delays in the certification of invoices.

(ii) The Supply Chain Management Policy and related delegations of authority were put in place and staff trained on the processes to be followed on the procurement of goods and services. Furthermore, controls are also being strengthened to ensure that goods delivery notes are signed on time, as well as to ensure that invoices for services rendered are certified on time.

(3) (a) (ii)

The total value of outstanding payments as at 30 January 2012, amounted to R4 407 181 in the processing system. Of the total amount outstanding as at the end of January 2012, R1 072 938 relates to invoices over 30 days, which are currently being resolved.

(b) (i)

The total value is derived from the supply invoices received, as well as the monthly creditor reconciliations performed.

(ii)

Monthly creditors' reconciliations are performed and all long outstanding items followed up. A creditor's age analysis is also utilised to monitor the outstanding payments with a view of taking corrective action.

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

PRASA undertakes to pay its suppliers within the framework as required by the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999) (PFMA), except in circumstances where separately agreed terms are enforced. Payment terms are negotiated per supplier contract, and most suppliers' terms are 30 days. However, for certain suppliers such as municipalities, 60 day terms have been negotiated. All these policies and procedures are followed within normal business environment and cash management policy.

(2) (b) (i) and (ii)

PRASA adheres to the policy, except under the following circumstances:

§ When documentation received from a supplier is incomplete, e.g. omission of VAT number on invoice or completion certificates on project contracts are not properly signed off by both the service provider and PRASA project managers; and

§ when services / products rendered differ from the amount or specification ordered or negotiated, e.g. where quality or product delivered does with comply to normal standards or specification negotiated.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b) (i)

The outstanding payments will vary from time to time. PRASA and its subsidiaries and divisions embarked on a process of paying all suppliers that are long outstanding by the end of March 2012.

(ii)

PRASA's corporate office monitors the creditors' book on a bi-monthly basis to ensure timely settlement of all outstanding creditor invoices after compliance with the contract agreement and specified delivery.

Ports Regulator of South Africa

(1) (b) The Ports Regulator has a Financial Management Policy and Procedure in place, issued in terms of the PFMA and Treasury Regulations, dealing with expenditure management and the payment of supplies of goods and services.

(i) There are no exceptions.

(ii) When suppliers contravene signed agreements and service level agreements.

(2) (b) The Ports Regulator effects payments in terms of the Financial Management Policy and Procedure.

(i) None.

(iii) Not applicable.

(3) (a)(ii) None.

(b) (i) and (ii)

Timely payments are ascertained and monitored through the Port Regulator's accounting package's age analysis.

Road Accident Fund (RAF)

(1) (b) The RAF has adopted and adheres to the RAF Payment Policy and Supply Chain

Frameworks, Policies and Practice Notes, issued by National Treasury.

(i) The Policy is applied without exception.

(ii) Not applicable.

(2) The RAF complies with the policies as approved, and the Internal Audit Unit is conducting evaluation on performance and compliance in terms of the approved policies.

(b) The RAF complies with the relevant policies.

(i) Not applicable.

(ii) Internal Audit is being utilized as a monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Areas of non-

compliance as identified by the internal audit are corrected by improving such controls

as recommended by the Internal Audit unit.

(3) (a) (ii)

The RAF's outstanding amount for trade creditors, as at 31 January 2012, is

R36, 941,696.86

.

(b) (i) and (ii)

The value of outstanding payments to the suppliers of goods and services is ascertained

by preparing a monthly reconciliation between the RAF's records and the supplier's

statements.

Railway Safety Regulator (RSR)

(1) (b) The RSR endeavours to pay suppliers of goods and services within the required timeframes to avoid interest and penalties for late payments. Management exercises an oversight responsibility and takes effective and appropriate steps to prevent irregular expenditure/fruitless and wasteful expenditure, as per the requirements of section 51(1) (b) of the PFMA. This has culminated in the RSR having to adopt a 30 days payment term rule with regard to the payments of suppliers of goods and services.

(i) Under normal circumstances, payment for supplies and services is made with contract conditions only after delivery of the requisite goods and/or services. Although the 30 days payment term rule reigns supreme, the RSR endeavours to make payments within a reasonable period, particularly to exempted micro enterprises in terms of the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, 2003 (Act No. 53 of 2003).

(ii) Progress payments are made for supplies and services only in accordance with contract conditions. The RSR avoids advance payment at all costs, however, under extreme circumstances, with relevant guarantees made available by the supplier, can this be considered. There are stringent internal controls in place, specifically concerning irregular/fruitless and wasteful expenditure to allow the Chief Financial Officer to make a recommendation to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), on requests for advance payment. An express written approval from the CEO is used to effect a pre-payment.

(2) (b) (i)

The RSR adheres to the payment rule at all times.

(ii) There is 100% compliance to the rule and no need for intervention and/or mechanism to rectify non-compliance.

(3) (a) (ii)

R1, 221,887.52

(b) (i) and (ii)

Individual supplier account reconciliations are performed monthly to monitor total amounts due for supplies and services.

Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA)

(1) (b) The Agency has adopted a policy of paying suppliers within the period stipulated in the PFMA and Treasury Regulations.

(i) and (ii)

Exceptions to the policy are where the verification process has not been completed prior to effecting the payment, or where a dispute has been declared with the service provider on the authenticity of the claim presented, nature or quality of work claimed. Other exceptions may be due to the liquidity status of the Agency and the need to ensure sufficient cash flow to the Agency.

(2) (b), (i) and (ii)

The Agency is doing its best to adhere to the policy and the only non-compliance relates to the Agency's funding capacity, which the Department of Transport is assisting with.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b) (i) and (ii)

To date, the South African Post Office is owed +-R7 million. Monthly invoices are reconciled with the reports generated by the National Contraventions Register to determine and verify the number and type of notices issued, and this is monitored on a weekly basis.

Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)

(1) (b) The RTMC has adopted a policy of paying suppliers as stipulated in the PFMA and Treasury Regulations.

(i) and (ii)

Exceptions to the policy are where the invoices have been declared as disputed based on the terms of reference and deliverable time frames as agreed with the service provider.

(2) (b), (i) and (ii)

The RTMC adheres to the policy and the only non-compliance relates to limited financial resources that may result in delayed payments in certain instances.

The RTMC has requested additional funding from the Department of Transport as its allocation is not enough to meet its strategic objectives or mandate.

(3) (a) (ii)

The value of of outstanding payments to suppliers currently is R6,661,258.00.

(b) (i) and (ii)

The amount is ascertained through orders placed with suppliers and invoices received and recorded through the accounting system.

Creditors' reconciliations are performed on a monthly basis to ensure that supplier statements received reconcile to invoices and the accounting system and that invoices are paid within the required period.

South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

The SACAA has standard procurement policies and procedures which deal with the procurement of goods/services and ultimate settlement. The policies seek to make sure that payments to suppliers adhere to the terms agreed upon.

(2) (b) (i) and (ii)

The SACAA adheres to the policy. Payment terms are uploaded as standing data when a supplier is registered on the system.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b (i) and (ii)

As at the end of March 2012, the value of accounts payable was R3,2 million. The amount outstanding will be paid according to the terms agreed to with the clients. The office responsible for accounts payable draws weekly reports to monitor the outstanding balance and payments are cleared accordingly.

South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

SAMSA has a policy regarding the payment of suppliers for goods and services in its finance policy. Exceptions are provided for in relation to urgent payments, e.g. matters relating to casualties in South African waters.

(2) (b), (i) and (ii)

SAMSA complies with this policy and non-compliance is rectified by disciplinary action, where necessary.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b) (i) and (ii)

The value of outstanding payments currently stands at R3 245 098.79. It is ascertained by the maintenance of accurate and up to date accounting records on SAMSA's "Great Plains" financial system, which is consistently monitored through reconciliation, checks and approvals.

South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

SANRAL has a supply chain management policy in place and adhere to Practice Notes issued by National Treasury that, amongst other, contain procedures and mechanisms regulating payment. The only exception to the policy is where agreements signed between SANRAL and service providers provide for a mechanism to settle disputes in a specific manner, such as the use of an alternative dispute resolution procedure.

(2) (b), (i) and (ii)

SANRAL currently adheres to the Policy and Practice Notes.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b) (i) and (ii)

As payment or the withholding thereof are dealt with in terms of the agreed provisions and mechanisms contained in the agreements, no payments are withheld outside of the agreements. The values of such payments are ascertained in terms o the provisions of the agreements and are monitored and audited.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 175

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: THURSDAY, 15 MARCH 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) How many traffic fines have been issued in each province in (a) 2009, (b) 2010 and (c) 2011, broken down in terms of the (i) categories of the fines issued and (ii) value of the total amount of fines in each category;

(2) (a) how many fines in each category were affected by some form of corruption, (b) how were fines affected handled and (c) how many (i) arrests and (ii) prosecutions took place with regard to the specified corruption;

(3) what measures have been put in place to curb corruption affecting traffic fines at present? NW191E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport

(1) (a), (b) and (c) (i) and (ii), (2) (a), (b) and (c) (i) and (ii) and (3)

The Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the fact that this question warrants and impractically extensive reply, which will be very time consuming. Staff members will have to be redeployed to perform the task of collating and analysing the information. The redeployment of personnel to perform this task would not only place an extra burden on limited human and financial resources, but would rather be to the detriment of other essential duties for which these staff members are responsible. However, please be assured that a zero-tolerance approach has been adopted concerning corrupt practices related to traffic fines and anyone found guilty of such practices will be punished in accordance with the law.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 174

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

What (a) is the current status in each province of the migration of scholar patrol functions from the Department of Education to the Department of Transport, (b) (i) processes (ii) procedures and (iii) mechanisms are in place in this regard, (c)(i) milestones and (ii) deadlines have been set for each province in this regard and (d) is the (i) full cost to the department and (ii) break down thereof? NW190E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(a)

Eastern Cape

§ The scholar transport has been transferred to the Provincial Department of Transport.

§ The Department has appointed a service provider to manage the services on their behalf.

Mpumalanga

§ The scholar transport function rests with the Provincial Department of Transport.

§ A service provider has been appointed to manage the service for the province.

§ In addition, a monitoring firm has been appointed to monitor all the services related to scholar transport.

Western Cape

§ The Provincial Department of Education manages scholar transport and patrol functions.

Free State

§ The Provincial Department of Education manages scholar transport and patrol functions.

North West

§ The Provincial Department of Transport manages the scholar transport function.

Gauteng

§ The Provincial Department of Education manages scholar transport and patrol functions.

§ The department has procured the services of a service provider to assist in managing these functions.

KZN

§ The Provincial Department of Transport manages the scholar transport function.

Limpopo

§ The Provincial Department of Education manages scholar transport and patrol functions.

Northern Cape

§ The Provincial Executive Council has taken a decision that this function must be transferred to the Department of Transport, Liaison and Safety. However, a transitional mechanism has been put in place in relation to contracts entered into with the Provincial Department of Education.

(b) (i), (ii) and (iii)

Processes, procedures and mechanisms are agreed upon by the respective provincial structures, including the Provincial Executive Committee, whose decisions are acted upon by the set structures.

A national steering committee, made up of provincial transport departments has been established to ensure the smooth running of scholar transport and patrol functions. This structure is backed up by provincial task teams.

(c) (i)

The Northern Cape has agreed on a transitional mechanism of renewing contracts on a month to month basis. In addition, the process of route assessment and the auditing of current operations have been finalised. A memorandum of agreement has been signed with the Provincial Department of Education. By 1 April 2012, functions related to scholar transport will rest with the Provincial Department of Transport.

No milestones have been set for the other provinces.

(ii) No timelines have been set. The decision rest solely with the Provincial Executive Councils in each province.

(d) (i) The cost remains the responsibility of the implementation department in each province.

(ii) There is currently no funding model.

In the Northern Cape however, a technical team comprising of national representatives and officials of the Northern Cape Department of Transport, Safety and Liaison has been established to develop a costing framework for the Northern Cape. This framework should serve as a guideline on budgetary provision, with associated costs to the department.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 172

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: THURSDAY, 15 MARCH 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr T W Coetzee (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) What are the (a)(i) names of the (aa) local and (bb) international technology suppliers contracted to the Gauteng Freeway Project and (b)(i) names and (ii) ID numbers of the directors of each of these companies;

(2) for each of these (a) local and (b) international companies, (i) what are the conditions of payment by SANRAL, (ii) over what period will these payments take place, (iii) what is the value of the amounts paid on specified dates and (iv) what penalties will be imposed by SANRAL if delivery is not met? NW188E

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) (i) (aa) and (bb) and (b) (i) and (ii)

Tenders for this Project were procured by means of a two-phased approach - a pre-qualification process was used to pre-qualify potential operators and suppliers for an Open Road Tolling (ORT) system and a National Transaction Clearing House. The public tenders were open to local and international service providers. The objective of this process was to determine service providers' technical and operational experience/ ability, as well as their financial strength.

Below is a list of the applicants that pre-qualified for the next stage of the tender process:

Packages

Package 1 – Road Side System

1. Efkon Tecsidel Consortium

2. Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture

3. Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation

4. Q-free ASA

5. Thales Transportation Systems

Package 2 – ORT Back Office

1. Efkon, T-Systems ZA and T-Systems ES

2. Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture

3. Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation

4. Q-Free ASA

5. Sice

Package 3 – Transaction Clearing House

1. Autostrade, Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation Joint Venture

2. Bankserv

3. Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture

4. Marpless Consortium

5. T-Systems ES, T-System ZA

Package 4 – Violation Processing Centre

1. Autostrade, Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation Joint Venture

2. Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture

3. Sice Accenture JV

4. Transcore

5. T-systems ZA, T-Systems ES and Magna FS

Package 5 – Main Contractor

1. Autostrade Per Italia, Intertoll and Q-Free Consortium

2. Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture

3. Sanef and Sice Joint Venture

Local and international service providers pre-qualified for different packages (shown above). Following the pre-qualification process for the supply of the equipment, systems including the operations, three main contractors were pre-qualified who had to make up the rest of their team from those service providers that successfully pre-qualified to supply the required equipment and services.

The pre-qualified main contractors were invited to submit tenders in accordance with the project requirements set for the project. The contract model implemented comprised a Design, Build and Operate (DBO) contract (an international contract model that is used in South Africa) in terms of the FIDIC (International Federation of Consulting Engineers) conditions of contract.

The make-up, inclusive of the total team to provide a tender for the ORT project, is shown below.

The South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) awarded, subsequent to a competitive tender process, the contract to the Electronic Toll Collection Joint Venture. The tender was awarded to ETC who offered a competitive tender, which was more than R2 billion lower than the next offer. This Joint Venture has been incorporated as Electronic Toll Collection Proprietary Limited (ETC), a company incorporated in South Africa. The shareholders of ETC are Kapsch Trafficom AB (a company incorporated in Sweden), Kapsch Trafficom AG (a company incorporated in Austria) and TMT Services and Suppliers Proprietary Limited (a company incorporated in South Africa). ETC, being the South African company, is the party contracted to design, build and operate the system. ETC is the entity with whom SANRAL has contracted to provide the services.

In terms of the tendered rates and in accordance with the specifications provided for in this contract, ETC is compensated accordingly.

The electronic tags were procured through a separate tender process. Following this process, two suppliers are providing tags, namely Q-free (which has incorporated a South African subsidiary) and Kapsch.

The names and identity numbers of the directors of the South African companies are available from the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission.

(2) (a) and (b) (i)

As stated in (1) above, SANRAL has contracted with a company incorporated in South Africa. ETC is compensated in terms of the tendered rates. For various components of the contract, the conditions of payment differ. For the implementation component, the contract document describes the procedure for payment of software development and implementation in accordance with performance requirements. SANRAL uses the international FIDIC conditions of contract DBO contracts that detail the payment conditions. For operations, the contractor is once again compensated for services delivered in accordance with the tendered prices. There is a schedule of rates that is applied for different scenarios. For example, if the contractor had to handle 85 000 calls in the call centre, compensation will take place in accordance with the tendered rate per 1000 calls in the band between 80 000 and 90 000 calls per month - these are not stand alone items. The contractor has to supply the service in a particular manner and is measured in terms of these key performance indicators (KPI's) that have to be taken into account in the monthly payments. These are additional requirements to ensure quality of service. However, there are additional key performance requirements (KPI's) that will impact on the monthly payment. The contract makes provision for this regime, in order to ensure proper performance by the contractor. To take the example further, the system will measure the time it took to answer each telephone call, as well the number of outstanding queries. In terms of the KPI regime, the payment will be adjusted in accordance with performance. More than a 100 KPI's are considered when the payment certificate is compiled, and an adjustment on payment is made according to the KPI formulas in the tender document. The score is used in the payment methodology to derive the adjustment to the payment certificate (which has an in-built penalty regime) to reflect the Contractor's performance. The adjustments are determined separately for each of the individual components and operating environments related to the ORT, TCH and VPC entities in accordance with the performance criteria stipulated in the contract. The components of the tender were:

· Design & Build: The tenderer had to design and implement all equipment, hardware and software requirements for the ORT system in Gauteng.

· Operations (toll collection): The operational phase comprised three components namely:

o ORT roadside, back office, points of presence, systems maintenance and facilities – 8 years operations

o Transaction clearing house (TCH) – 5 years of operations

o Violation processing centre (VPC) – 5 years of operations

· Asset Replacement: At the end of the ORT operations (8 years), the contractor must replace components of the toll system that have reached the end of their design life.

For each of the performance indicators, the reporting requirements, calculation of scores are provided for in the contract. The performance indicators are prioritised into 'critical' and 'standard' and are allocated to the ORT, THC and VPC operations respectively, to calculate the level of performance being achieved.

(ii)

Payment is only made for actual services delivered and takes place over the duration of the contract, as stated above in the reply to part (i). The contractor may submit an invoice on a monthly basis.

(iii)

The contractor is compensated in terms of actual services provided in accordance with the tendered rate for those services. If no services for a specific pay item are provided, then the contractor will get no payment for the specific pay item. The quantities for each pay item in the schedule of payments are calculated on a monthly basis and are agreed upon between the parties. Adjustments related to performance as described above are made to the payment certificate in terms of the conditions of contract. The payment for each month will be different as a result of the actual services delivered or progress made.

(iv)

Penalties are imposed in terms of the performance criteria as described in part (2) above.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 173

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 04 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 2 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) With regard to monies owed to suppliers of services and goods by his (a) department and (b) entities reporting to him, what (i) policies, (ii) procedures and (iii) mechanisms are in place to effect payment for (aa) services rendered and (bb) supplies;

(2) (a) under which conditions and circumstances will payment be withheld, and (b) what are the details of all instances in which (i) his department and (ii) entities reporting to him withheld payment in the (aa) 2008-09 (bb) 2009-10 and (cc) 2010-11 financial years;

(3) what steps have his (a) department and (b) entities reporting to him taken to remedy the situation? NW189E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

There are twelve (12) transport entities that report to the Minister via the Department of Transport, and for this reason the replies to this question have been provided individually.

Department of Transport (DoT)

(1) (a) (i) The Department of Transport's (DoT) supply chain management policy, Treasury Regulations and the Public Finance Management Act, 1999, Act No. 1 of 1999, are in place.

(ii) Payment for services and supplies are only made if the project managers and end users have signed the relevant invoices, certifying that the services and supplies have been received in good order.

(iii) (aa) and (bb)

Payments are captured on LOGIS (Logistical Information System - a provisioning, procurement and stock-control system which is highly adaptable to the requirements of any department) by the DoT's Supply Chain Management office and authorised by its Finance office on BAS (Basic Accounting System).

(2) (a) Payments are only withheld for the following reasons:

§ If no contractual obligation exists for the payment of a claim;

§ if the services and supplies rendered are not according to the contractual specifications;

§ the supplier does not have a valid tax clearance certificate;

§ if the invoice amount exceeds the quoted or bid amount; and

§ if banking details are not available.

(b) (i) The DoT held back the following claims during:

(aa) 2008-09:

Ø R3,754,237 due to a legal dispute with a supplier; and

Ø R11,274,080 because no contract existed between the DoT and the supplier and the supplier was informed to stop work

(bb) 2009-10:

No payments were held back.

(cc) 2010-2011:

Ø R1,535,352 was not paid because there was no contractual obligation to pay a claim; and

Ø R29,772,000 claimed for a guarantee, which is disputed.

(3) (a) The DoT stamps invoices to reflect the date that invoices were received. For all payments that are not processed within 30 days from receipt of an invoice, the reasons are recorded on the payment advice for audit purposes, and these payment advices are signed off by the Chief Financial Officer.

Airports Company South Africa Limited (ACSA)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

ACSA have standard procurement policies and procedures in place which deal with the procurement of goods and services and ultimate settlement. The payments to suppliers for goods and services are done monthly as a routine. The majority of ACSA's payment terms are 30 days from statement date. Where the payment terms are outside the 30 day norm, payments are done to match the terms agreed to with a supplier.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

Payments that are due and payable and which have gone through the necessary internal validation processes are not withheld. They are paid in terms of the agreement between ACSA and the supplier. ACSA have not withheld any payments for the 2008-09 and 2009-10 financial years. In the 2010-11 financial year, ACSA withheld a payment of about R22 million subject to remediation of snag-defects. While ACSA do not ordinarily withhold payments, there are instances that payments are delayed. This could be for various reasons, e.g. supplier's bank account closed or banking details have changed and need to be re-verified, the amount invoiced does not match the goods/services received, etc.

(3) (b)

For the payment that has been withheld, a process has been set up with the supplier, which looks specifically at addressing the defects. Meetings are also held to assess the progress made in this regard. The last of these meetings was on 30 January 2012.

Air Traffic and Navigation Services Company Limited (ATNS)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

ATNS has adopted a procurement policy that addresses the procurement of goods and services. Small businesses are paid after 15 days while other businesses are on 30 days terms.

(2) (a)

Payment is withheld under the following circumstances:

§ If the procurement policy is not followed in securing the goods and services;

§ if the invoice has not been approved for payment (as confirmation of goods received or service rendered) by the relevant managers; and

§ if there are disputes.

(b)

(aa), (bb) and (cc)

No payments were held back.

(3) (b)

ATNS regularly reviews the procurement policy and related procedures to ensure seamless procurement of goods and services as well as timeous payment of service providers

Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (C-BRTA)

(1) (b) (i)

The C-BRTA has a supply chain management policy which outlines policy on payments of monies owed to suppliers of services and goods. Over and above this policy, the Agency complies with Treasury Regulations, which prescribes that all payments to suppliers be effected within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice.

(ii)

The procedure for the payment of monies owed to suppliers of goods and services are as follows:

§ Invoices are received from suppliers and are stamped on the date of receipt;

§ invoices are checked for mathematical accuracy and matched with the purchase orders and other relevant documentation;

§ where invoices are for goods delivered, the invoice will be matched with the goods delivery note, and where the invoice is for the service rendered, the relevant manager will sign the invoice as certification that the service was rendered satisfactorily;

§ the payment batch is then prepared and submitted to the delegated finance manager for approval;

§ the Finance Manager will confirm the validity and accuracy of the invoice (including banking details) and approve the payment; and

§ once approved, the payment is captured on the Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) and released for payment by the designated signatories.

(iii) (aa) and (bb)

The following procedures and mechanisms are in place to effect payment for services rendered:

§ The creditor reconciliation (supplier statement to the ledger accounts) is performed to ensure validity of the invoice;

§ the reconciliation is included as part of the payment batch; and

§ cash-flow projections are compiled to ensure that funds are available to effect payments.

(2) (a) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

Payments are withheld by the C-BRTA in circumstances where the invoices are in dispute, and such dispute is declared in writing with the service provider. In such cases, the payment will be effected within 30 days of resolving the dispute.

Payments withheld by the C-BRTA in the 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 financial years are detailed in the table below:

2008/2009

2009/2010

2010/2011

Payments withheld

None

R13 450.42

R15 256.56

Reasons for withholding

Dispute on the services rendered.

(3) (b) The C-BRTA's supply chain management policy and related delegations of authority were put in place and staff were trained on the processes to be followed regarding the procurement of goods and services within the C-BRTA. Furthermore, controls are also being strengthened to ensure that goods delivery notes are signed on time and invoices for service rendered are certified on time.

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

PRASA undertakes to pay its suppliers within the PFMA required timeframes, except in circumstances where separately agreed terms are enforced. Payment terms are negotiated per supplier contract - most suppliers' terms are 30 days, however, for certain suppliers such as municipalities, 60 day terms have been negotiated. All these policies and procedures are followed within the normal business environment and cash management.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

Payment is withheld under the following circumstances:

§ When documentation received from a supplier is incomplete, e.g. omission of VAT number on invoice or completion certificates on project contracts are not properly signed off by both the service provider and PRASA project managers; and

§ when services / product rendered differs from amount or specification ordered or negotiated, e.g. where quality or product delivered do not comply to normal standards or specification negotiated.

(3) (b)

PRASA follows business processes and policies within the normal business requirements and cash management. PRASA endeavours to pay suppliers within the negotiated terms as far as business processes and cash management permits us.

Ports Regulator of South Africa

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

The Ports Regulator has a Financial Management Policy and Procedure in place, issued in terms of the PFMA and Treasury Regulations, dealing with expenditure management and the payment of supplies of goods and services.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii)

Payments are effected in terms of the PFMA and National Treasury instructions, and payments will only be withheld if the suppliers are in contravention of clauses of contracts or service level agreements.

(aa), (bb) and (cc)

None

(3) (b)

All payments effected are in terms of the PFMA and Treasury Regulations.

Road Accident Fund (RAF)

(1) (b) The RAF is an entity reporting to the Minister of Transport.

(i) The RAF has the Accounts Payable Policy and the Procurement Policy in place - both policies are in line with the PFMA.

(ii) The RAF follows procedures as outlined in the policies.

(iii) (aa) The RAF pays for the following services rendered and signed off by the beneficiary and/or the service provider will submit invoice to the RAF for payment for services rendered.

(bb) The supplier will invoice the RAF for goods supplied and the proof of delivery will be attached to the invoice for payment.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

The RAF will withhold payment for goods and services rendered when the documents requesting for payment are incomplete – in a situation where procurement process was not followed or the invoice was submitted without proof of service being rendered.

(3) (b)

The following steps are taken by the RAF to remedy the situation:

§ Always strengthening the systems of internal controls where gaps are identified;

§ conducting in-house training to all staff on the processes regarding procurement; and

§ reporting the areas of resistance to the Procurement Control Committee, Audit Committee and the Chief Executive Officer for future action.

Railway Safety Regulator (RSR)

(1) (b) (i)

The RSR's supply chain management policy provides direction for payment of suppliers' accounts for prompt delivery of requisite goods and services.

(ii) The payment procedure is clearly outlined in the system description that supports the agreed payment terms for supplies and services.

(iii) (aa) and (bb)

The RSR association with the official banker provided a number of investments in a sound, effective, seamless and quick electronic funds transfer. This was implemented to provide a payment system with a single connection within internet solutions, thereby ensuring secure connectivity to a wide range of our service providers, employee, rail operators as our debtors and any other user within the supply chain system.

(2) (a) Under normal circumstances, payment for supplies and services is made in accordance with contract conditions, only after they have delivered and installed in good working order. Should this not be the case, the invoice from the supplier shall not be validated by the person who requested the supplies or service. In this manner, payment shall be withheld until the service has been rendered or goods delivered in a satisfactorily manner.

(b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

None

(3) (b) None

Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

The RTIA has adopted a policy of ensuring that payments to suppliers are effected within 30 days from the date the invoice is received by the Agency.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii)

Payment will be withheld where the verification process has not been completed prior to effecting the payment, or where a dispute has been declared with the service provider on the authenticity of the claim presented, nature or quality of work claimed. Other exceptions may be due to the liquidity status of the Agency and the need to ensure sufficient cash flow to the Agency.

(aa), (bb) and (cc)

No payments were withheld in the 2008-09, 2009-10 or 2010-11 financial years.

Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)

(1) (b) (i) The RTMC has a supply chain management policy in place, and moreover, it also adheres to Treasury Regulations and the PFMA. The latter prescribes that all payments to suppliers be effected within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice.

(ii) Payment for services and supplies are only made if the project managers and end users have signed the relevant invoices, certifying that the services and supplies have been received in good order.

(iii) (aa) and (bb)

Mechanisms in place include:

· A creditor's reconciliation (reconciling supplier statement to the general ledger) is performed to ensure validity of the invoice and the amount;

· invoices are captured into the RTMC's accounting system, and

· a payment batch with all invoices to be paid is authorised for payment, and released for such payment.

(2) (a) Payments are only withheld where an invoice received is in dispute (either invoice amount is different from the order, goods were not delivered on time etc). A written declaration of dispute is forwarded to the service provider concerned. Once the dispute is resolved, payment will be effected immediately thereafter.

(b) (ii) The RTMC held back the following claims:

2008/2009

2009/2010

2010/2011

Payments withheld

None

R214,000.00

None

Reasons for withholding

Dispute on the services rendered.

(3) (b) Suppliers are properly inducted and supplied adequate information relating to goods and services required to avoid instances of misunderstanding.

South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)

(1) (b) (i) and (ii)

SACAA has standard procurement policies and procedures which deal with the procurement of goods/services and ultimate settlement.

(2) (b)

Payments will be withheld if the relevant supporting documentation has not been attached, for example, invoices are not authorised, there is no order attached and the goods have not been rendered yet, there is no budget or the invoices' details are in contrast to SACAA's policies and procedures (non-compliance).

(i) and (ii)

There are numerous cases where payments have been withheld in the short-term. These payments were subsequently released after the queries relating to them had been fixed.

(3) (a) (ii) and (b (i) and (ii)

SACAA is constantly improving its processes, procedures and its policies to elevate the importance of paying suppliers within 30 days, and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) within 7 days. Payments are therefore done weekly (every Friday) to ensure and allow for compliance in this regard.

South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

SAMSA has policies, procedures and mechanisms in place to deal with payments for suppliers and services rendered. These are reflected in the organisation's financial policies.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

SAMSA withhold payments in circumstances where services rendered and supplies received do not meet the required standards or have not been done in the manner agreed between the parties. SAMSA has not withheld any payment to any service provider for the 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 financial years.

(3) (b)

SAMSA is continuously reviewing and improving its policies and procedures to ensure that it continues to receive value for money.

South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

(1) (b) (i), (ii) and (iii) (aa) and (bb)

SANRAL has a supply chain management policy in place and adhere to practice notes issued by National Treasury that, amongst other, contain procedures and mechanisms regulating payment.

(2) (a) and (b) (ii) (aa), (bb) and (cc)

SANRAL only withhold payment where claims are submitted for services or supplies outside of the agreements signed between SANRAL and the service provider. Such claims for payment are then dealt with in terms of the mechanisms set out in the agreements or contracts.

(3) (b)

All non-payments of claims are dealt with in terms of the mechanisms contained in the agreement and/or contract.

Reply received: June 2012

QUESTION NO 134

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: Wednesday, 06 June 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 17 FEBRUARY 2012 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 2 – 2012)

Ms D Carter (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether he had been informed that the KwaZulu-Natal provincial department of transport has instructed relevant contractors to immediately halt all road construction until 1 April 2012; if so, (a) what is the position in this regard and (b) what are the implications for his department regarding (i) unilateral revision of contracts and (ii) unforeseen costs accruing to contractors as a result;

(2) whether work has been stopped summarily; if so, what steps does he intend to take in this regard? NW145E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a)

Damage to the road infrastructure caused by flooding dating back to 2008, has had a serious negative effect on the infrastructure development programme of the department. These floods, including the recent one that hit the uMzinyathi district, caused major disruption to roads infrastructure in the Province and taking with it several lives.

The floods that hit KwaZulu-Natal in June 2008 caused extensive damage to the provincial road network, destroying roads and bridges and causing damages to the amount of R1.1 billion. Furthermore, the road network suffered further damage when it was hit by the November 2009/ January 2010 floods which caused damages to the amount of R232 million and the December 2010/ January 2011 floods which caused damages to the value of a further R312 million.

In terms of government policy, the funding for disaster management and assistance resides at a national level with the National Treasury and it is accessed through the National Disaster Management Unit residing within the Department of Co-operative Governance. The situation faced by the department, however, is that the infrastructure damage suffered by the provincial road network is estimated at R1.6 billion, whilst only R860 million has been received by the department to repair these damages. The department is thus faced with a situation where roads and other infrastructure damages, as far back as 2008, has not yet been repaired as the funding for these repairs has not been received.

The department has come under increasing pressure over the past 4 years to repair the infrastructure damaged in these floods, and as a result the department has had to start repairing this infrastructure from its own fiscal allocation.

As a result of these additional flood repairs that had to be added to the department's programme during the year, the departmental budget projection started projecting an over-expenditure of the departmental budget. On 6 December 2011, the projected over-expenditure at the current rate of expenditure was R932 million. This had however improved to R559 million on 5 January 2012 as a result of control measures implemented during December 2011, but in order to further reduce this anticipated over-expenditure, the department had to take more drastic measures to ensure that the expenditure for the year was in line with the budget.

In order to reduce the rate of expenditure and to prioritise the projects for the remainder of the financial year, it was decided to temporarily suspend specific construction projects in order to reallocate funds to the repair of the flood-damaged roads and to ensure that the maintenance programme of the department is permitted to continue without interruption. The temporary suspension of these projects was undertaken for a 6 week period in order to prevent the department over-committing itself to projects for which it did not have funds available. The suspension of these projects was implemented in line with the provisions on the CIDB (Construction Industry Development Board) General Conditions of Construction.

The suspension of these construction projects is expected to result in the department spending its entire budget allocation without any over-expenditure. It should also be noted that the department has achieved its service delivery targets relating to the construction programme for the 2011/12 financial year.

(b) (i) There was no revision to any contracts as the general conditions of contract for construction contracts provide for the temporary suspension of construction works.

(ii) The department will meet all contractual obligations toward the contractors.

(2) Work was only temporarily stopped in accordance with the provisions of the general conditions of contract.

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 104

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: TUESDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 09 FEBRUARY 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 1 – 2012)

Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether he has extended the appointment contract of the Acting Director of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for a further three months; if not, why not; if so,

(2) whether he took section 90(4) of the Civil Aviation Authority Act, Act 13 of 2009, into account when he extended the appointment; if so, (a) how does he or his officials account for this extension and (b) what action will he take in this regard;

(3) how long has the said director been in an acting capacity prior to the extension of the contract;

(4) whether any documentation relevant to the CAA has been signed by the said director after his contract of appointment was extended; if so, what action does he intend taking in this regard? NW113E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) On 3 January 2012, the Minister of Transport appointed Mr Zakhele Thwala as Acting Director of Civil Aviation ("DCA") for a period of three (3) months.

(2) (a) and (b)

The Minister of Transport took section 90 (4) of the Civil Aviation Act, 2009 (Act No. 13 of 2009) ("the Act") into account when he appointed Mr Thwala as Acting DCA. Section 90 (4) is the only subsection in the Act that enables and empowers the Minister of Transport to make acting appointments. This subsection limits the acting appointment to twelve (12) months. To avoid falling foul of the Act, the Minister did not extend Mr Thwala's prior acting appointment of January 2011.

(3) Mr Thwala acted for 12 months between January and December 2011. His second appointment is for three (3) months. The Act does not preclude the Minister from appointing the same person for another period at the expiration of the first twelve (12) months. This is not an extension of prior appointment.

(4) In the execution of his duties, the Acting DCA signs a number of documents. As Head of the South African Civil Aviation Authority, it is incumbent upon the Acting DCA to ensure that the organisation carries out its statutory mandate. This therefore involves signing a number of contracts and documentation.

______________________________________________________________________

Reply received: September 2012

QUESTION NO 84

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 11 SEPTEMBER 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 09 FEBRUARY 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 1 – 2012)

Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) What were the reasons for the strike that took place at the Road Traffic Management Corporation on 24 January 2012;

(2) whether a memorandum listing staff's grievances was submitted to the acting chief executive officer; if so, what were these grievances;

(3) whether any of the staff members involved in the strike have been (a) suspended or (b) discharged as a result; if so, (i) how many were (aa) suspended and (bb) discharged in each case and (ii) what were the reasons in each case?

NW92E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) The strike that took place at the offices of the Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC) was an illegal and unprotected one, which all the recognized unions have distance themselves from.

(2) No memorandum was submitted to the Acting Chief Executive Officer. Grievance procedures on labour matters in the RTMC are dealt with in terms of the recognized agreement with unions and the terms of reference of the various fora where labour and management have representation.

(3) (a), (b) (i) (aa) and (bb) and (ii)

Initially 106 employees were dismissed, however, through negotiations with Nehawu (National Education Health and Allied Workers' Union), as a recognized union, an agreement was reached in which the affected dismissed employees admitted guilt and accepted final written warnings for six months.

It should also be noted that the Minister met with the RTMC employees/ Nehawu on the same day, and a process was set in place to address the management issues they raised.

Reply received: August 2012

QUESTION NO 78

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 06 AUGUST 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 09 FEBRUARY 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 1 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) How many (a) international and (b) domestic trips were undertaken by (i) him and (ii) his Deputy Minister since assuming office up to the latest specified date for which information is available;

(2) for each trip, what was the relevant (a) date of (i) departure and (ii) return, (b) destination and (c) names of accompanying delegates;

(3) what was the (a) cost in each case for (i) flights, (ii) accommodation and (iii) miscellaneous expenditure, (b) objectives and (c) outcomes of each trip? NW85E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

The response to questions 1 (a) and (b) (i) and (ii); 2 (a) (i) and (ii), (b) and (c); 3 (a) (i) (ii) and (iii) are provided in the tables below for financial year 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.

Flight details of For Minister of Transport 2010 / 2011

(a) (i) How many international flights?

(ii) And domestic flights were undertaken?

(aa) (aaa) By Minister using military aircraft?

(bbb) Chartered aircraft?

(ccc) Or commercial aircraft during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

(b) What class did Minister travel in each case?

(c) And what amount did the department spend with regard to each specified flight?

10

90

No

n/a

Business or First Class

International

R746,781-81

Domestic

R399,566-39

Flight details of Former Minister of Transport 2011 / 2012

(a) (i) How many international flights?

(ii) And domestic flights were undertaken?

(aa) (aaa) By Minister using military aircraft?

(bbb) Chartered aircraft?

(ccc) Or commercial aircraft during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

(b) What class did Minister travel in each case?

(c) And what amount did the department spend with regard to each specified flight?

8

59

No

n/a

Business or First Class

International

R337,614-22

Domestic

R427,459-74



Flight details of Former Deputy Minister of Transport 2010/2011

(a) (i) How many international flights?

(ii) And domestic flights were undertaken?

(bb) (aaa) By the Deputy Minister using military aircraft?

(bbb) Chartered aircraft?

(ccc) Or commercial aircraft during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

(b) What class did the Deputy Minister travel in each case?

(c) And what amount did the department spend with regard to each specified flight?

1

70

No

No

N/A

Business or First class

International

R91,496-00

Domestic

R551,095-56

Flight details of Former Deputy Minister of Transport 2011/2012

(a) (i) How many international flights?

(ii) And domestic flights were undertaken?

(bb) (aaa) By the Deputy Minister using military aircraft?

(bbb) Chartered aircraft?

(ccc) Or commercial aircraft during the period 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

(b) What class did the Deputy Minister travel in each case?

(c) And what amount did the department spend with regard to each specified flight?

1

50

No

No

N/A

Business or First class

International

R9,130-00

Domestic

R340,865-00

3 (b) and (c) falls away.

Reply received: October 2012

QUESTION NO. 76

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 01 OCTOBER 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 09 FEBRUARY 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 1 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) When will the Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011-12 strategy be finalised;

(2) (a) what was the (i) purpose and (ii) objectives of the launch of the strategy in May 2011 and (b) how were the objectives measured;

(3) whether the objectives have been met; if not, (a) why not and (b) what action has been taken in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) what (a) are the names of the persons who were invited to the launch and (b) is the breakdown of the cost of the launch? NW83E

____________________________________________________________________________

3. THE WRITTEN REPLY

The Minister of Transport:

(1) The Decade of Action for Road Safety Strategy has been finalized.

(2) (a) (i)

The purpose of the launch was to host an event to create national awareness (radio, television and print media), to inform relevant stakeholders of the objectives of the United Nations campaign, and to participate in the global launch of the Decade of Action for Road Safety. It was furthermore also aimed to call on stakeholders to use this platform to assertively address the challenges of road safety towards reducing the scourge on the roads.

(ii)

The launch was aimed at advocating for greater international attention, commitment and support for road injury prevention by:

· Encouraging all South Africans to support road safety initiatives and to contribute towards reductions in fatalities and injuries; and

· To engage all three spheres of government in road safety awareness programs.

(b) The objectives were measured as follow:

§ To determine whether the stakeholders that were invited would attend the event. All stakeholders were ultimately present.

§ To ensure media coverage of the event on radio, in print media and on television.

Coverage was very extensive. All national and commercial radio stations had a news item concerning the event. National television (SABC 1, 2 and 3) had a news item on the launch and E.tv also had a news insert. National print media covered the event on the days following the launch in their respective newspapers.

§ Community radio stations also had news inserts, as well as interviews. The stations included, Eldos FM, Alex FM, Radio Islam, Theta FM, Josi FM and Soshanguve CR.

(3) (a) and (b)

The objectives of the event have been met. The two primary objectives were to host an event where all relevant stakeholders could participate and be informed, and secondly, to inform the media fraternity of the campaign and how South Africa will be participating in this event.

(4) (a)

Stakeholders invited to the launch

§ Officials from the Department of Transport

§ Officials from the various provincial departments of Transport

§ Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)

§ Road Accident Fund (RAF)

§ South African National Road Agency Limited (SANRAL)

§ Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (C-BRTA)

§ Provincial officials from relevant departments

§ MEC's responsible for safety matters in all provinces

§ Relevant planning groups

§ Department of Health

§ Department of Social Development

§ Business Unity South Africa (BUSA)

§ World Health Organization (WHO)

§ Structural engineering fraternity

§ Engineering Faculties at all universities in South Africa

§ Road building fraternity

§ Metro police and traffic officers

§ World Bank

§ Vehicle manufacturers

§ Bus companies

§ Courier agencies

§ Long-haul fraternity

§ Automobile Association (AA)

§ Taxi associations

§ Vehicle rental companies

§ Media

§ NOSA Employment Agency

§ Institute of Risk Management

§ Institute of Structural Engineers

§ Community based organizations

List of media invited to the launch see attached

(b)

Budget: Decade of Action Campaign 2011/12 see attached

Reply received: March 2012

QUESTION NO 75

DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: TUESDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2012

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: THURSDAY, 09 FEBRUARY 2012 - INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 1 – 2012)

Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

(1) Whether (a) emergency and (b) official local government service delivery vehicles will be exempt from paying the toll fees of the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project; if not, why not; if so, how will this arrangement be administrated;

(2) whether this decision has been communicated to these entities; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the manner in which it was communicated? NW82E

____________________________________________________________________________

REPLY:

The Minister of Transport:

(1) (a) The South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) historically allowed emergency vehicles to obtain toll authority cards if they are delivering a service on freeways. Due to previous misuse by some of these card holders, SANRAL is finalising a different approach for the Gauteng project. This approach is far advanced and will be communicated when finalised with some of the more predominant role players. In short, the route followed will depend on whether the vehicle is privately owned or owned directly by local government. If privately owned, the user can through a specific process (which requires approval by the specific government entity) be credited for those transactions that were made for official purposes. The vehicle must be fitted with an e-tag in order to manage this process and to prevent fraud from taking place. If it is registered in the name of the local authority, they can apply as per the same process for toll authority cards to be exempted.

(b) Official local government service delivery vehicles are not exempted from the payment of tolls.

(2) Yes, this decision has been communicated to these entities. SANRAL is communicating with all government garages through a forum, via the Department of Transport.