Questions & Replies: Water & Environmental affairs
2012-09-30
THIS FILE CAN CONTAIN UP TO 25 REPLIES.
SEARCH ON THE TOPIC/KEYWORD YOU ARE LOOKING FOR BY SELECTING CTRL + F ON YOUR KEYBOARD
eply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2474
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2474. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether there have been any cases in North West since 1 July 2012 where the water wRithdrawals of operating mines have compromised the supply of water to other water users in the vicinity of the mines; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the (a)(i) names and (ii) locations of the mines and (b) relevant details in each case;
(2) whether her department has taken any action to rectify the situation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3077E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department is not aware of any instances since 1 July 2012 where the withdrawal of water by operating mines in the North West Province have compromised the supply of water to other water uses. This conclusion is reached on the basis that the Department's Regional Office: North West has since 1 July 2012 not received any information from any other water user relating to compromised water supply.
(1)(a) Falls away.
(1)(b) False away.
(2) Falls away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2461
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2461. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether there are any formal arrangements or protocols that govern intergovernmental relations between (a) the Government, (b) Botswana, (c) Zimbabwe and (d) Mozambique with regard to drawing water from the Limpopo River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether, with reference to the granting of a water use licence to the Vele Colliery in Limpopo, any neighboring countries were consulted with regard to the proposed (a) use and (b) discharge of water from the mine; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3063E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes. There is an agreement between the Republic of South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambiqueregarding the Limpopo water basin management which is about the establishment of the Limpopo Water Commission signed in Maputo on 23 November 2003 by the Republic of South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambique. However, this agreement does not encompass the drawing of water from the Limpopo River.
(2)(a) The neighboring countries were not consulted with regard to the granting of a water use licence to the Vele Colliery in the Limpopo Province. The proposed use of water from the Limpopo River by the Vele Colliery was not a new allocation but transfer of an existing allocation. Furthermore, there is no legislative or agreement that requires consultation of water basin member states.
(2)(b) The mine operates a close system and no discharge was authorised.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2408
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 291)
2408. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether officials in her department purchased tickets to the New Age Business Briefing; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in terms of which provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, were the tickets procured;
(2)whether she will make a statement on the matter?
REPLY:
(1) No, none of the officials from the Department of Water Affairs purchased ticket to the New Age Business Briefing.
(2) Falls Away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2407
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2407. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether she was informed of the plight of the Bushbuckridge community's lack of access to water supply from the nearby Inyaka Dam; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3000E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The Department is aware of the plight of the Bushbuckridge community's lack of access to water supply from the Inyaka Dam and the details can be summarised as follows:
· The current total population for the Bushbuckrdge Local Municipality is estimated at approximately 800 000 people.
· Phase 1 of the Inyaka Water Treatment Works with 50 Ml/day is currently serving in the order of 272 000 people. On completion of Phase 2 (early 2013), and connecting bulk pipelines, another 50 Ml/day module will serve just more than 344 000 additional people.
· Hoxani Water Treatment Works in the south of the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality is currently supplying nearly 150 000 people. The balance of the population (34 000) will also receive water from the Hoxani Water Treatment Works towards the middle of 2013 on completion of bulk supply lines to the various villages.
· In the meantime, the villages within the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality not receiving water from the Inyaka and Hoxani Water Treatment Works are supplied from smaller water treatment works (Thulamahashe, Acornhoek, Edinburgh, Thorndale, Marite and Kork) and boreholes.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2385
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. ** NW2977EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 31 August 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether South Africa has concluded its position on the lifting of the embargo on the trading of rhino horn; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2385. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
No. The last of a series of workshops to consult the citizens of South Africa on this matter took place as recently as 28 August 2012. A position will be taken once the Department of Environmental Affairs has considered all the recommendations emanating from the workshops, and subject to the outcomes of a study only then will we decide on any possible route.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2368
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2368. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1047 on 20 April 2010 and question 1389 on 20 May 2010, internal audits for assessing compliance with the water use licence have been conducted by the mine (a) in (i) 2010 and (ii) 2011 and (b) since 1 January 2012; if not, why not, in each case; if so,
(2) whether the audits had been returned to the Department of Water Affairs for scrutiny; if not, what action will be taken against the mine; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the audits have revealed compliance with all the relevant terms and conditions of the water use licence; if not, what areas of noncompliance were identified; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the audits are available for public scrutiny by the affected water users in the vicinity of the mine; if not, why not; if so, how can they be obtained? NW2950E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) During 2010 and 2011, the mine (name furnished) has conducted internal audits to assess compliance with the conditions of the water use licence. However, the mine has not yet conducted an internal audit for 2012 as such audit is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2012.
(2) Yes, the mine has submitted its audit reports in respect of 2010 and 2011 (to the Department of Water Affairs (the Department). The audit report in respect of 2012 is due for submission in November/December 2012.
(3) The 2011 audit report indicated that the mine is in compliance with the conditions of its water use licence, but identified the need for improved storm water management in line with the requirements of Government Notice No. 704 of 4 June 1999. The mine is currently re-assessing its storm water management practices and a comprehensive plan in this regard is being compiled.
(4) The audit reports are available for public scrutiny by the affected water users and may be obtained directly from the mine.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2367
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2367. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Department of Water Affairs is investigating whether the specified dam walls are causing blockages in the Brak River in the Blouberg region of Limpopo province; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details with regard to each specified dam wall;
(2) whether she is taking any action against (a) persons and/or (b) entities who have built illegal dam walls in the Brak River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has issued orders for the removal of any dam walls in the Brak River since 1 January 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2949E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, the Department's Regional Office: Limpopo has conducted investigation on 19 April 2012 at the certain farm (name furnished) regarding a weir structure which is built on the Brak River that is diverting the Brak Riverwatercourse. The investigation have revealed that indeed the weir structure is built along the Brak River.
(2) Yes, the Legal process is underway and a letter of demand (notice) has been issued to the company (name furnished), on 15 March 2012, where the Department is demanding that the owner of the farm who is also the owner of the company, to provide proof of lawfulness of the concern for the weir structure on the Brak River.
(3) No, pending the result of the Validation and Verification excise as per Section 35 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) which seek to validate and verify lawfulness of existing lawful water use, the Department has not issued any order for the removal of any dam walls or any structure in the Brak River since 1 January 2010.
On receipts of the results mention above in (3), the Department would then take an informed decision about the removal of unlawful dam walls and structure within
the Brak River and South Africa as a whole.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2366
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2366. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to (a) question 1047 on 20 April 2010 and (b) 1389 on 20 May 2010, how have the operations of the Sishen Mine affected the flow and availability of water in the Gamogara River;
(2) what is the current state of the boreholes and springs traditionally used by farms in the proximity of the mine due to the operations of the mine;
(3) whether farms in the proximity of the mine and affected by the operations of the mine are receiving the water they are entitled to according to the terms of the water use licence of the mine; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether any (a) notices and (b) directives have been issued against the mine for transgressing its water use licence since 20 May 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2948E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The mine is required to dewater constantly in order to allow for conventional open cast mining of the iron ore. The dewatering activities of the mine has resulted in the drawdown of groundwater levels around the mine and has negatively affected subsurface flow as well as groundwater availability in the Gamagara River. The Gamagara River is an ephemeral river, and surface water flow is therefore naturally sporadic.
(2) The dewatering activities of the mine have resulted either in a significant drop in water levels or drying up of boreholes located in the shallow alluvial aquifer associated with the Gamagara River.
(3) In accordance with the conditions of the mine's water use licence, farms that are affected by the mine's dewatering activities are compensated for the loss of water supply. The compensation measures are as a rule, negotiated with the specific land owner and include the drilling and equipping of alternative boreholes, the supply and installation of water storage tanks, the provision of potable water through the Vaal Gamagara Bulk Water Supply Scheme and monetary compensation or provision of alternative grazing for livestock where there are proven loss of natural grazing.
In addition, affected land owners also have the option to negotiate the sale of their land with the mine should they decide to sell their farms.
(4) No notices or directives were issued to the mine since 20 May 2010. The reason for the non-issuance of notices or directives is because the mine has been in compliance with the conditions of its water use licence.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2291
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 27 NW2873E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 24 August 2012
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What steps has she taken to give effect to the performance agreement that she signed with the President in 2010, (b) what outcomes have been measured and (c) what follow-up steps has she taken with regard to each specified outcome?
Mr D J Stubbe (DA)
SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
HANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2291. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) The Strategic Plans of the Departments of Water Affairs and of Environmental Affairs give effect to the performance agreement between the President of the Republic of South Africa and myself as the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs.
The Department of Perfomance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) receives monthly reports of our performance and prepares such reports for discussions that we hold with the President. Such performance is also published as the POA on Government Websites. The President also undertakes visits to areas which are accounted for in our reports, to satisfy himself on such accounting.
Government has adopted 12 outcomes with a view to measurable performance and accountable delivery. The President signed performance agreements with all Cabinet Ministers. In these performance agreements , Ministers were requested to establish and participate in Implementation Forums for each for each of the twelve outcomes.
The Implementation Forums have developed delivery agreements for the Outcomes. All departments, agencies and spheres of government that are involved in the direct delivery required to achieved an outcome, are party to the agreement.
(b) The audited Annual Reports of the aforementioned National Departments for the periods 2010/11 and 2011/12 as tabled in Parliament do provide details on the outcomes that have been measured to date.
(c) In June 2012, Government released the Mid Term Review which focuses on the Government's progress against the delivery agreements for the twelve outcomes. I would like to refer the Honourable Member to this document which is available on the Government's website. This particular document gives a comprehensive account on progress in the areas of national priorities.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2280
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 24 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 27)
2280. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Since 1 January 2010 (a) on how many dates has the Water Tribunal been convened, (b) how many cases have been concluded and (c) what are the relevant details of each case that have been concluded;
(2) (a) how many cases are pending before the Water Tribunal as at the latest specified date for which information is available and (b) what are the relevant details of each case;
(3) whether the Water Tribunal is mandated to convene a minimum number of times each year; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the Water Tribunal is experiencing any problems in carrying out its duties; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) whether she intends to investigate any legislative amendments to improve the operations of the Water Tribunal; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2860E
REPLY:
(1)(a) Since 1 Jan 2010 to April 2012, the Water Tribunal was convened for 50 (fifty) days during this period.
(1)(b) A total of 42 (forty two) appeals were finalized during this period. Refer to Annexure A.
(2) A total of 44 (forty four) appeals are pending in the Water Tribunal. Refer to Annexure B.
(3) No, there is no provision in the legislation, namely the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) herein after referred to as NWA that provides for the mandatory sittings of the Tribunal. Therefore, there are no predetermined specific numbers of days allocated to convene the Water Tribunal.
The Registrar processes the appeals until it is ripe for hearing. The Registrar sets the matters down for hearing in consultation with the chairperson and the members and the parties.
(4) The Water Tribunal (Tribunal) faced numerous problems and challenges as set out below:
· The current Chairperson Mr Lekala resigned in November 2011 to take up an appointment as a judge inBloemfontein. The NWA provides that the Chairperson must be a person with practical legal experience.
· The current Water Tribunal was operating with Deputy Chairperson and who's a psychologist not a legal practitioner.
· The other members of the Tribunal where engineers and also not legal practitioners.
· The term of office of the Deputy Chairperson and members came to an end in August 2012.
· Whilst the Tribunal was operating since the end of 2011 there were arguments that the Tribunal was not legal competent and therefore not properly and legally constituted. This point was argued in The Goede Wellington case and the court ruled that the Tribunal was not properly and legally constituted.
· In all subsequent matters before the Water Tribunal, both the appellants and the respondents continued to challenge the composition and the legal competency of the Tribunal.
· The Water Tribunal faced a challenge of confidence in that the appellants were dissatisfied with the manner in which they were adjudicating the disputes.
· The Chief Director: Legal Services (CD: LS) of the Department was of the opinion that the current Tribunal is not legally competent. This opinion is reinforced by the legal opinion of Adv Paul Kennedy SC, who has concluded as follows in his opinion "I accordingly conclude that in the absence of a replacement person being appointed validly by the Minister (on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission as required in the legislation), no other Tribunal member can lawfully be designated to preside over any specific appeal or application. If they were to do so and to purport to make a decision on such appeal or application, they would be acting without authority. In consequence any decision they make would be ultra vires and liable to be set aside on review". (Refer to Annexure C for copy of legal opinion)
From the above it was clear to the Department that Water Tribunal was in desperate need of legal reform.
(5) The Department has investigated legislative amendments to improve the operations of the Water Tribunal.
The operations of Water Tribunal have been held in abeyance pending the legislative amendments. As an interim solution to resolving the disputes the provisions of section 150 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) (NWA) which provides for mediation and negotiation as a solution to deal with all 44 disputes / appeals is being implemented.
In the Draft Amendment Bill, 2012, a new process for nomination and appointment of the members of the Tribunal has been proposed. In terms of the new proposal, I am in the process of appointing members of the Mediation Committee as per section 150 of the NWA. In terms of the new proposal, the involvement of the Judicial Service Commission and Water Research Commission is dispensed with. The draft Bill is currently being worked on for tabling to Cabinet in 2013 legislative programme.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2202
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2728EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether Sanparks is investigating the possibility of expanding tourist (a) facilities and (b) activities in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2202. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes, SANParks is expanding tourist (a) facilities and (b) activities in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park subject to the availability of funds. The relevant details are contained in the Five-year Strategic Plan for the Parks Division and it includes the following:
| PROJECT | IMPLEMENTATION STATUS |
| Re-design Nossob Rest Camp | 10 x units, re-alignment of road and upgrade of bulk services. Project is funded and EIA in process. |
| Re-design Nossob Rest Camp | 10 x luxury camp sites and associated infrastructure. EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Gharagab | 3 x luxury 4x4 camp sites. EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Mata Mata area | 10 x new luxury camping sites at Craig Lockhardt (Kameelperd kamp). EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Mata Mata | 2 x family units to be constructed. EIA completed. Project not funded. |
| Wilderness camps | Additional unit at Kieliekrankie, Urikaruus and Grootkolk Wilderness Camps. Project not funded. |
| Twee Rivieren | 5 x 2-bed chalets. Project not funded. |
| Jan se Draai wilderness camp (halfway between Twee Rivieren and Nossob) | Combination of two approved sites along theNossob River for wilderness camp to construct 10 units, access roads and bulk services. Project not funded |
| Stoffelsdraai – 4 x 4 camping site | 5 x wilderness camping sites for 4x4 groups. Project not funded. |
| Complete Nossob road network | Third and final phase to upgrade 7 km portion of road along the Nossob River where clay soils occur. Project not funded. |
Reply received: October 2012
QUESTION NO. 2196 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.25NW2721EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mrs M A ANjobe (Cope) to ask the Minister for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs:
Whether her department has developed policies to prevent the dumping of waste in the vicinity of human settlements;if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M A ANjobe (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2196. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes, the National Environmental Management Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) prohibits the disposal of waste other than at an area designated for that purpose, and that includes in the vicinity human settlements. The matter is dealt with in sections 25(3-5), 26(1-2) and 27(2) of the Act. Illegal dumping is also legislated through municipal by laws.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2169
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2692EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her makes use of private security firms; if so, in each case, (i) which firms and (ii) what is the (aa) purpose, (bb) value and (cc) duration of each specified contract?
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2169. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) Yes
| Department of Environmental Affairs | Name of Firm (i) | Purpose (ii)(aa) | Rand value (ii)(bb) | Duration (ii)(cc) |
| Environmental Programmes 14 Loop Street | ADT | Armed response | R 4 580.00/month | 10 months |
| Loskop Alarms | Armed response | R290.00/month | Month to month |
(b) Yes see attached
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2158 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2681EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to his reply to question 1326 of 2012, prospecting for minerals is permitted on (a) rehabilitated and (b) unrehabilitated former asbestos mine sites; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether there are potential risks to (a) human and (b) environmental health if prospecting occurs on (i) rehabilitated and (ii) unrehabilitated former asbestos mine sites; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) whether officials from her department have interacted with officials from the Department of Mineral Resources about the prospect of applications to prospect for minerals on former asbestos mine sites; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2158. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The department of Environmental Affairs has no jurisdiction on mining areas and is responsible for Asbestos related remediation on land that falls outside of mining areas. The question should be referred to the Minister of Mineral Resources who is the mandated authority in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act.
(2) (a) & (b) should prospecting be permitted in terms of the relevant legislative framework, the site specific investigations undertaken in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act would determine whether such impacts would occur and inform the Minister of Mineral Resources decisions in this regard,
(3) No official of the DEA has interacted with the Department of Mineral Resources regarding the prospect of applications to prospect for minerals on former asbestos mine sites as the DEA has not received any invitation in this regard.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2157
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2680E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What is the estimated amount of health care risk caused by medical waste produced annually and (b) how is this figure broken down according to provinces;
(2) (a) what is the estimated treatment capacity of medical waste for the whole of South Africa and (b) what is the breakdown of this figure according to each province;
(3) whether she has found that the available treatment capacity is capable of treating all medical waste to the required standards; if so, how was this conclusion reached; if not, why not?
Mr G R Morgan (DA)
SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
HANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2157. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1.
(a) As there has been limited reporting on waste management in the country, no information is available on the size of the Health Care Risk Waste (HCRW) stream that required management. In 2007, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) undertook a study to determine the volume of the HCRW generated in the country. The study concluded that approximately 45 000 tons of HCRW was generated annually. The figure is estimated to escalate annually due to annual population growth rateof 1.5% per annum.
(b) The DEA does not receive information pertaining to the amount of HCRW generated per health care facility and/or per province. The DEA is, however, receiving monthly reports from individual licensed treatment facilities reflecting the volumes of HCRW treated per month per licensed treatment facility. These figures cannot be used to reflect a provincial figure since HCRW is currently being transported between provinces for treatment.
2. (a) and (b)
| Province | Design capacitytons/month |
| Eastern Cape | 595 |
| Free State | 140 |
| Gauteng | 2317 |
| KwaZulu-Natal | 1116 |
| North West | 720 |
| Western Cape | 1045 |
| TOTAL | 5933 |
3. Each licensed treatment facilityin the country is required to operate within its design capacity as per the conditions of the waste license. Facilities are required to inform the DEA of incidences (e.g. break-downs) that will cause an interruption of the normal operation of the facility.Furthermore, licensed treatment facilities submit external audit reports to the DEA indicating the exact waste treated and the effectiveness of the facility.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2115
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 17 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25)
2115. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with respect to Exxaro's Leeuwpan mine, any part of the (a) pan and (b) wetlands on the mine site had been mined since 1 January 2012; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the mining in the specified area has been authorised by her department; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2634E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) During a site investigation conducted by the Department of Water Affairs (the Department) on 16 May 2012, it was observed that mining through the pan/wetland was taking place, however, the mine failed to provide proof of authorisation for the activity. Based on the findings of the investigation, a notice of intention to issue a directive in terms of section 53(1) of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) for engaging in water use activities without authorisation was issued to the mine dated 17 May 2012.
On 22 May 2012, the mine made representation in response to the notice. However, the Department rejected the mine's representation through a letter dated 4 June 2012 due to the mine's failure to provide proof of authorisation. Subsequently, the Department issued, a directive dated 11 June 2012 to the mine, directing the mine to provide proof of authorisation and failure to do so would lead to the mine being instructed to stop mining through the pan/wetland.
The mine lodged an appeal against the directive in terms of section 148 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) with the Water Tribunal on 13 July 2012. The Department conducted a follow up investigation on 20 June 2012 and noted that the machinery used for mining through the wetland/pan was removed and mining was only taking place towards the North to the tarred road within the boundary of the mining area.
As indicated in (1) above, the mining in the pan/ wetland has not been authorised by the Department and steps to address the non compliance are being implemented.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2114
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 17 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25)
2114. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What are the (i) names and (ii) locations of mines that are still operating without a valid water licence since her reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012 and (b) what has been the progress of each specified mine's application for such a licence;
(2) whether any further (a) directives or (b) pre-directives have been issued against mines operating without water use licences in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2633E
REPLY:
(1)(a) Refer to attached Annexure A, for the names and locations of mines that have been operating without valid water licences since the Department reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012. The list shows 46 operating without valid water licences compared to the 53 mines as at March 2012. It should be noted that the Department's licencing team has also dealt with many other sectors' water licence and not mining alone. Between March 2012 and 23 August 2012, seven licences have been issued to the following mines:
· Sudor Coal Elandsfontein: Mpumalanga
· Klipspruit Colliery: Mpumalanga
· Stuart Coal: Mpumalanga
· Shanduka Coal: Middleburg Townlands: Mpumalanga
· Phokathaba Platinum Mine: Limpopo/ Mpumalanga
· Panbuilt Siding: KwaZulu-Natal
· Gold View: Gauteng
(1)(b) Refer to attached Annexure A, showing a list of mines who have submitted applications and the status of the applications for water use licence.
The Department has embarked on a process of regulating mining operations with respect to the Department's legislative requirements. Following this process, the Department has received a number of licence applications from the mines that have been operating illegally. It should be noted that the mining licence applications form part of the category of licences that are receiving the highest priority.
(2) A total of (a) Nine (9) directives and (b) Fourteen (14) pre-directives were issued to date.
| NAME OF MINING COMPANY | LOCATION OF MINE | WATER LICENSE APPLIED FOR (YES/NO | STATUS | ||
| DIRECTIVES ISSUED | |||||
| Exxaro Glisa | Mpumalanga | Yes | Criminal case has been opened | ||
| Arnot | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Shanduka Graspan | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Umcebo Mooifontein | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Shanduka Bankfontein colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Nkomati mine | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Leliefontein | Gauteng | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Vunene | Gauteng | No | Operating without water use license | ||
| Leeuwpan Exxaro | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license on portion 7 Weltevreden | ||
| PRE-DIRECTIVES ISSUED | |||||
| Spring lake colliery | KZN | Yes | Facility operating without water use licence | ||
| Maquasa west | KZN | Yes | Facility operating water use licence | ||
| Kendal (Zaid) colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Facility operating water use licence | ||
| Sudor cola Eilandfontein | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Umcebo colliery Doornrug coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Stuart coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Delmas coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Umcebo Nowesco | Mpumalanga | Yes | Facility operating without water use licence | ||
| Xstrata plc Arthur Taylor colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Sheba | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| PMG mine | Northern Cape | Yes | Operating without water use licence. Administratively stopped | ||
| Total Coal Dorstfontein East | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Leeuwpan Exxaro | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence on portion 7 Weltevreden | ||
| Loxton Dal | Northern Cape | Yes | Operating without water use licence. Administratively stopped | ||
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2113 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25NW2632EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17August 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she used the expected number of new jobs that will be created from the implementation of a waste tyre plan as a criterion for approving a proposed waste tyre plan; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) of the waste tyre plans that have thus far been (a) approved by her and (b) submitted, but for which no decision has yet been made, what are the expected number of jobs that will be created according to the drafters of the plans;
(3) whether the expected new jobs proposed by a waste tyre plan are subject to any kind of scrutiny in order to determine the reliability of the proposal; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether any lessons were learnt from job creation under the Buyisa-e-Bag initiative that can be brought to examining job creation prospects in the waste tyre sector; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2113. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the expected number of jobs to be created was used as one of the many criteria to evaluate the plans, as per the Waste Tyre Regulations. In particular, the number of jobs coupled with whether the jobs are realistic or possible, as well as their impact – especially on previously disadvantaged individuals – was scrutinised.
(2) The Recycling and Economic Development Initiative of South Africa(REDISA) has estimated to create 10 000 jobs (b) the process of evaluating and deciding on these other plans (than REDISA) is not yet finalized and I am accordingly not in a position to comment on the number of jobs envisaged.
(3) Yes, the job estimates are scrutinised in terms of, inter alia, whether they are possible and meaningful in cases where previously disadvantaged individuals will be empowered, and whether the jobs will be sustainable.
(4) Yes, lessons were learned. One of the key lessons was that with the right support, waste had the potential to indeed create meaningful, sustainable jobs.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2056
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 10 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 23)
2056. Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) she, (b) her Deputy Minister and (c) any official from an entity reporting to her will be attending or attended, the 2012 Olympic Games; if so, what is the (i)(aa) name, (bb) rank and (cc) position/designation of each specified person accompanying (aaa) her, (bbb) her Deputy Minister and (ccc) each specified person and (ii)(aa) nature and (bb) official reason for the visit;
(2) what (a) total amount will be spent or has been spent on the trip, (b) is the (i) description and (ii) detailed breakdown of the amounts that will be spent or have been spent on (aa) accommodation, (bb) travel and (cc) subsistence costs and (c) from which budget will these funds be incurred in each case? NW2536E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Neither I; the Deputy Minister nor officials, as well as entities reporting to me will be attending or have attended the 2012 Olympic Games.
Falls away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2031 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 23 NW2510EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 8 AUGUST 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has been engaging with the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries with regard to amendments to the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has approached her department with regard to proposed amendments to the management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2031. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. Officials from the Department of Environmental Affairs were invited to a general external stakeholder workshop held on 29 June 2012 in Cape Town. During this workshop general proposed amendments to the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998 were discussed and the issue of Marine Protected Areas was not dealt with.
(2) The matter related to the management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) forms part of the relevant Presidential Proclamation which is still being discussed between the two departments in a process led by the President.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2015
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2491EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 August 2012
Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends to put a strategic plan in place to mitigate the effect of climate change on various productive sectors of the economy, if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what is the progress on the implementation of the plan and (b) how will the plan be (i) monitored and (ii) evaluated?
Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2015. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
South Africa's strategic plan to mitigate the effect of climate change on various productive sectors of the economy is set out in the White Paper on the National Climate Change Response (Government Gazette Notice 757 of 2011; Gazette No. 34695 of 19 October 2011) which is regarded as the country's National Policy on Climate ChangeResponse. The Policy seeks to effectively manage inevitable climate change impacts through interventions that build and sustain South Africa's social, economic and environmental resilience, and to mitigate South Africa's greenhouse gas emissions.
a) In respect of mitigation, Government has initiated a process of analysing mitigation potential in key economic sectors. This analysis will provide the basis for defining desired emission reduction outcomes.
b) (i) and (ii) In respect of managing the effects of climate change, Government has initiated a process of developing long-term adaptation scenarios. This process will provide the basis for defining adaptation responses and strategy.
Reply received: October 2012
QUESTION NO. 1963 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2352EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04August 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her has budgeted for (i) financial donations or (ii) sponsored services in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12, (dd) 2012-13 financial years; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what amount was (aaa) budgeted and (bbb) spent?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESSREPLY: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY QUESTION 1963 :
a) Amatola Water
Over the said financial years no provision for financial donations has been made.
b) Bloem Water
Over the said financial years no provision for financial donations has been made.
c) Botshelo Water
Botshelo Water does not provide funds as donations.
d) Bushbuckridge Water
On an annual basis, Bushbuckridge Water budgets 1% of generated surplus for donations or sponsorships according to its CSI policy, and where it indicated NIL means that the projects planned could not be implemented due to cash flow constraints or deficit incurred for the year.
e) Lepelle Northern Water
Lepelle Northern Water stated that they only do the sponsorships not the donations. See below is a table with lists of sponsorships listed :-
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Cholera awareness campaigns, water summits, charities, knowledge management, innovation and communication and National Water Week. | R2 990 000 (budget) R1 746 000 (actual) |
| Charities, National Water Week, cholera awareness campaigns. | R312 000 (budget) R153 000 (actual) |
| Water summits, charities, knowledge management, innovation and communication, National Water Week and cholera awareness campaigns. | R800 000 (budget) R651 092 (actual) |
| TOTAL | R 7 092 000, 00 |
f) Magalies Water
Magalies Water has financial constraints, therefore, they do not provide either financial donations or sponsorships.
g) Mhlathuze Water
Mhlathuze Water does both sponsorship and donations. See a table below.
(i) Donations – 2009 to 2010
| Donations | Amount |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R2 164 454, 03 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R2 164 454, 03 |
(ii) Sponsorships – 2010 to 2011
The total budget of sponsorship for the financial year 2010/11 was R1 046 008, 00 and none of spending was done except for the actual amount on the bursaries amounting to R56 145, 33 was spent.
| Sponsorships | Amount |
| Bursaries | R0 (Budget) R56 145, 44(Actual) |
| TOTAL | R56 145, 44 |
ii) Donations – 2010 to 2011
The total budget of donations for the financial year 2010/11 amounted to R71 988, 00 and nothing was spent, except the actual amount of R2 164 454, 03 on assets donated to schools.
| Donations | Amount |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R2 164 454, 03 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R2 164 454, 03 |
(ii) Sponsorships – 2011 to 2012
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Bursaries | R0 (budget) R128 785, 50 (actual) |
| Cop17 Ministers Road Show | R0 (budget) R 18 900, 00 (actual) |
| Aids Day | R0 (budget) R42 221, 00 (actual) |
| Sitholinhlanhla Primary School – shoes | R0 (budget) R 6 943, 85 (actual) |
| Jojo tanks | R0 (budget) R158 245, 56(actual) |
| TOTAL | R355 095, 91 |
ii) Donations – 2011 to 2012
| Donations | Amount |
| Ministers directive – boreholes | R92 000, 00 (Budget) R0 (Actual) |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R64 711, 09 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R156 711, 09 |
h) Overberg Water
(i) Sponsorship
See the sponsorship information in the table below for the financial year 2009/10. No donations were budgeted for the financial year 2009/10.
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Cape Epic | R 401 500, 00 |
| Agri Mega | R 50 000, 00 |
| School programme | R 65 000, 00 |
| WISA | R37 993, 00 |
| TOTAL | R554 493, 00 |
(i) Sponsorship for the financial year 2010/11
| Donations | Amount |
| WISA | R 10 000, 00 |
| Swimming pool for schools | R 4 772, 72 |
| National Water Week | R 43 575, 20 |
| TOTAL | R58 347, 92 |
(ii) Donations for the financial year 2010/11
| Sponsorships | Amount |
| S Amsterdam | R 11 990, 49 |
| "Big Walk" – Red Gross | R 33 600, 00 |
| TOTAL | R45 590, 49 |
(iii) Donations for 2011/12
| Donations | Amount |
| Field flowers Community | R 2 000, 00 |
| Cancer Association | R 1 000, 00 |
| DWA function | R12 000, 00 |
| TOTAL | R15 000, 00 |
(iv) Sponsorship for 2011/12
| Donations | Amount |
| WISA | R 210 526, 32 |
| TOTAL | R 210 526, 32 |
Donations for the financial year 2012/13 amounted to R63 000, 00 and the total budget for sponsorship amounted to R1 400 004, 00. None have been spent as yet.
i) Pelladrift Water
Pelladrift Water does not budget for financial donations or sponsorships as this stage stating that the two do not fall within their mandate.
j) Rand Water
Rand Water provided the break-down information for both sponsorship and donations including their beneficiaries. See the tables below :-
(v) Only donations were budgeted for financial year 2009/2010
| Donations | Amount | Beneficiary |
| Water Indaba Gala Dinner(donation) | R101 500 | Organisers of the Water Indaba and attendees of the Dinner |
| AfWA Kampala Congress(donation) | R250 000 | Organisers and attendees of the Congress |
| Lifestyle Design Show(donation) | R21 000 | Organisers and attendees of the Show |
| Garden World Sponsorship(donation) | R49 950 | Organisers and attendees of the Show |
| TOTAL | R 422 450 |
(vi) Donations and sponsorship were budgeted during financial year 2010/2011
| Donations and sponsorships | Amount | Beneficiary |
| Africa Investor Summit (donation) | R250 000 | Africa Investor Summit Organizers and the attendees of the Summit |
| 150 T-shirts and 150 bags for Youth Summit – Emfuleni LocalMunicipality. (Sponsorship). | R7 930 | Emfuleni local Municipality |
| The opening of Gauteng Provincial Legislature Gala Dinner. (donation). | R128 000 | Gauteng Provincial Legislature members |
| World Water Week Gala Dinner. (donation) | R164 160 | The Organisers of WWW and the attendees of the Conference |
| Bought DWA Gifts for National Water Week launch attendees | R19 440 | Attendees of National Water Week launch |
| WISA for the 3rd Municipality Water Quality Conference.(donation). | R450 000 | WISA. Water sector attendees |
| Launch of the Boreholes Project at Jozini.(sponsorship) | R200 000 | Kwanyawo Community |
| 60 Wheelchairs (sponsorship) | R108 561 | People with disability around Midvaal |
| TOTAL | R1 328 091 |
Rand Water evaluates both the sponsorship and donation initiatives and does the supporting each financial year. The decision in spending on the two is considered based on the positive financial performance of Rand Water. The expenditure would only be approved if the overall budget would not be exceeded. (Savings would have to be achieved in other areas of the business to fund the two.).
During the budgeting phase of the financial year 2012/13, it was decided that the annual spending pattern on both sponsorships and donations would be evaluated and the decision was taken to adjust the budget in line with past actual expenditure results and planned initiatives for 2012/13.
k) Sedibeng Water
Sedibeng Water budgets only for sponsorships on an annual basis to support and assist previously disadvantaged institutions with special needs, that is, the disabled; women; non-governmental organizations and community based organizations. The sponsorships also include events, campaigns such as HIV/AIDS awareness, Water Week, Arbor Week, Youth summits and Baswa le Metsi.
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 | R527, 796.00 (budget) R549, 284.80 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | R552, 504.00 (budget) R700, 982.69 (actual) |
| 2011/12 | R612, 501.00 (budget) R746, 530.01 (actual) |
| 2012/13 | R853, 751.00 (budget) N/A (actual) |
| Total | R2 546 552, 00 |
l) Umgeni Water
Umgeni Water budgets only for sponsorship, not for donations. See the table below showing the financial years and the budget allocated for sponsorships:
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 | R249 999.96 (budget) R183 331.41 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | R234 500.04 (budget) R61 857.90 (actual |
| 2011/12 | R247 866.48 (budget) R366 352.58 (actual) |
| 2012/13 | R259 899.96(budget) R28678.98 (actual) |
| Total | R992 266, 40 |
m) Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA)
TCTA budgets only for sponsorship, not for donations. See the table below showing the financial years and the budget allocated for sponsorships:
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 Sponsor for SANCOLD Conference. | R 60 000, 00 (budget) R 51 200, 00 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | N/A |
| 2011/12 | N/a |
| 2012/13 sponsor for National Water week with DWA. | R200 000, 00(budget) N/A (actual) |
| Total | R260 000, 00 |
n) Water Research Commission (WRC)
WRC does not engage in donating and sponsoring.
o) Inkomati Catchment Management Agency
Inkomati CMA does not budget for financial donations or sponsorships as this does not fall within their mandate and because they are still new in the business and concentrating on their financial viability.
p) Breede-Overberg Catchment Management Agency
Breede Overberg CMA is not in a good financial position to budget and spent on financial donations or sponsorship as they themselves depend on seed funding from the Department.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1963
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2352EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 August 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her has budgeted for (i) financial donations or (ii) sponsored services in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12, (dd) 2012-13 financial years; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what amount was (aaa) budgeted and (bbb) spent?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1963. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a)(i)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)(dd)(aaa) No, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) did not budget for financial donations or sponsored services during the 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/2012 and 2012/13 financial years. Requests for gifts, donations and sponsorships are dealt with upon receipt. The accounting officer considers and approves the expenditure according to Treasury Regulation 21.1.1. – and funds are reprioritised within the appropriate Programme for this purpose.
(bbb) The DEA's expenditure for approved gifts, donations and sponsorships for the indicated financial years were published in the annual report as per the relevant prescripts.
(b))(i)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)(dd)(aaa) and (bbb) No, the DEA public entities reporting to the Minister did not budget for financial donations or sponsored services during the 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/2012 and 2012/13 financial years.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1953
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 3 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21)
1953. Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether an application or applications for a water use license have been received from the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan municipality for storm water protection on critical sections of the Oriel stream and Jukskei River in Bedford View; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) Whether the application or applications are receiving the necessary attention in order to ensure that they are processed as quickly as possible; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) When is it expected that the process leading to a decision on the application or applications for a water use license will be approved? NW2342E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, an application for a water use license from the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality for storm water protection on critical sections of the Oriel stream and Jukskei River in Bedford View was received by the Department on 23 April 2012.
(2) All municipalities' water use applications are regarded as strategic water use and thus receive the highest priority. Thus far, aspects such as reserve requirements have already been determined and technical inputs have been provided by relevant technical divisions.
(3) The Department is currently considering all technical inputs in relation to civil design; impeding and diverting, altering the banks of the river; and possible impacts on the wetland. Subsequent to this process, a Record of Recommendation and draft license will be compiled and presented to the Department's Water Use Authorisation, Assessment and Advisory Committee which provides the Department's delegated authority on recommendations to inform the decision of the water use license application. It is envisaged that the decision on the water use license application will be concluded within 90 days provided all the information submitted meets the requirements.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1952 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2341EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 August 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1266 on 20 June 2011, the determination of the emission limit of hydrogen sulfide has been completed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether emission limits for hydrogen sulfide are stipulated when any Atmospheric Emissions Licence is awarded; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1952. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the emission limit for Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S), which is 5 mg/m3 has been determined.
(2) Yes, The Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) limit of 5 mg/m3 is currently being used in Atmospheric Emission Licenses.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1938
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 3 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21)
1938. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1686 on 11 July 2012, the SA Weather Service is involved in using fog harvesting technology; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) why has her department, despite the ongoing pilot work done by the Water Research Commission, not sought to procure fog harvesting technologies for the augmentation of water supplies in areas where the technology is known to work? NW2327E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The water harvesting project which the South African Weather Service (SAWS) is engaged in forms part of our social responsibility. Second year meteorology students from the University of Pretoria are expected to do a community project. Each group in the last three years chose to do a water harvesting project in the far northern parts of Limpopowhere there is a lot of fog. Two schools, Tshiavha and Tshanowa were identified; both schools do not have access to drinking water but are situated in areas where there is lots of fog. Fog nets were built in those schools to harvest fog water. The SAWS has in the previous years, sponsored the students to implement the project.
(2) The fact that the SAWS is involved as stated in (1) above means the Department of Environmental Affairs is doing something about this technology.
With reference to a response provided in National Assembly question 1686 in (3) which states "The private sector does have some technology but municipalities and communities must be advised on how to use and purchase technologies. From the WRC studies, guidelines are developed for this purpose. The current WRC project which began in April 2011 has been designed to further optimise the fog harvesting processes and examine the extent of the environmental impact of fog water collection systems which the private sector will not do. An important product of this study will be a South African Atlas of Fog Harvesting Potential which will map out the areas of the country with the best potential for Fog Water capture. This will be an invaluable contribution to the planning for both government and private sector agencies to roll out this water supply augmentation option."
The Department as a regulatory body cannot seek to procure fog specific technologies.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1936 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2325EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 August 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any live rhinos were exported to Vietnam since 1 April 2012; if not, why not; if so, (a) how many, (b) what is the name of the exporter and (c) what statutory role did the Department of Environmental Affairs play in the case of each export;
(2) how can the export of live rhinos to Vietnam be justified, considering that Vietnamese nationals are not permitted to hunt rhinos in South Africa;
(3) whether the Department of Environmental Affairs intends implementing any (a) norms and (b) standards on the export of live rhinos; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1936. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, (a) seven (7) white rhinoceros, (b) the information relating to the exporter cannot be made available, (c) in terms of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Regulations promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004), the provincial conservation authorities are the management authorities responsible for the issuance of CITES permits to private individuals or companies. The Department of Environmental Affairs is responsible to communicate with, among others, the management and enforcement authorities of other CITES parties on matters relating to the implementation of the Convention. In this specific case, the Department of Environmental Affairs verified the letters received from the CITES management and scientific authorities of Vietnam, confirming that the animals would only be used for the purposes as stated on the export permit (zoological purposes) and that the recipient was suitably equipped to house and care for the animals.
(2) The Department of Environmental Affairs agreed with provincial conservation authorities in February 2012 torefuse all applications for white rhinoceros hunting by foreign hunters whose state of usual residence is Vietnam until the Socialist Republic of Vietnam has confirmed in writing that white rhinoceros hunting trophies, exported from South Africa, are still in the possession of the hunters. The refusal of permits to hunt white rhinoceros is not related to the export of live animals. Vietnam complied with the requirements relating to the export of live rhinoceros to appropriate and acceptable destinations.
(3) (a) and (b) In general the regulatory provisions currently in place are sufficient to regulate the export of animals to foreign zoos. The Department of Environmental Affairs is, however, in the process of amending the additional requirement for the export of live rhinoceros to captive facilities; and it is proposed that the captive facility should be an institutional member of either the World Associates of Zoos and Aquarium (WAZA); or institutional members of association members of the WAZA; or accredited members of regional zoological associations, recognised by the CITES management authority of the state of import as a reputable association. These associations must require zoos or captive facilities to comply with specific criteria, including the high standard of husbandry and veterinary care, maintenance of record systems and contribution to conservation activities.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1857
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1857. Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether any money has been budgeted for the construction of an abstraction point of the balancing dam at the Hozani Water Purification Works in the Sabie River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2249E
---00O00---
REPLY:
No money has been budgeted for the construction of an abstraction point of the balancing dam at the Hoxani Water Purification Works for the current financial year.
It should be noted that, an abstraction works was constructed in 2006/07 financial year on the left (North) bank of theSabie River at the existing weir approximately half a kilometre from the Hoxani Water Purification Works. This abstraction works is adequate to supply raw water to the Hoxani Water Purification Works.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1854
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1854. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the arbitration award by the SA Local Government Bargaining Council in favour of a certain person (name furnished) that he should be reinstated on the same or similar conditions that existed before termination of his employment; if not,
(2) whether she intends to study the findings; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the said person has been reinstated in accordance with the award; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether Bloem Water has communicated with the said person about the arbitration award; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) whether Bloem Water owes the said person any money as at the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2246E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes I am aware of the arbitration award by the Local Government Bargaining Council (LGBC).
(2) Bloem Water as an employer and at the operational level is taking the matter to the Labour Court for review. I will only comment after the ruling of the Labour Court.
(3) Bloem Water is therefore waiting for the appeal process to be exhausted. I am informed that Bloem Water has in the meantime initiated a possible settlement discussion.
(4) Bloem Water has not communicated with the former employee. That is the responsibility of the LGBC.
(5) For as long as the appeal process is still ongoing, Bloem Water does not owe the former employee any money.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1835
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1835. Mr T D Harris (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her make payment to (i) suppliers and (ii) service providers within the 30 day payment period as specified by the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), Act 1 of 1999; if not, in each case, (aa) how many service providers are awaiting payment, (bb) what is the monetary value of outstanding payments and (cc) how long is payment overdue;
(2) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are liable for any interest charged on overdue payments in any of the cases mentioned; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what is the (i) percentage and (ii) monetary value of interest charged;
(3) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have negotiated revised payment schedules with each of the service providers mentioned; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details;
(4) what are the reasons for (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her not making payment within 30 days as specified by the PFMA;
(5) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have implemented any measures to (i) ensure full compliance with the PFMA and (ii) facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details? NW2227E
REPLY:
(1) Yes.
(1)(a)(ii) Yes, however not all service providers are paid within 30 days. This happens in cases where invoices verification and validation of service delivery has not been finalized, meaning that the department has querries.
(1)(a)(aa) Currently there are 25 service providers awaiting payment.
(1)(a)(bb) The value of outstanding payments is R 9 055 447.00.
(1)(a)(cc) Payments that are due within 30 days is R 8 523 883.00. Invoices over 30 days are to the value of R 531 564.00
(2) No.
(2)(a)(i) Falls away.
(2)(a)(ii) Falls away.
(3) No.
(4)(a) Payments are not made in 30 days where there are disputes between the Department and the service providers on invoices.
(5)(a) Yes, there are measures to ensure full compliance with the PFMA.
(5)(a)(i) Yes, there are measures to facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1835
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2227EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr T D Harris (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her make payment to (i) suppliers and (ii) service providers within the 30 day payment period as specified by the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), Act 1 of 1999; if not, in each case, (aa) how many service providers are awaiting payment, (bb) what is the monetary value of outstanding payments and (cc) how long is payment overdue;
(2) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are liable for any interest charged on overdue payments in any of the cases mentioned; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what is the (i) percentage and (ii) monetary value of interest charged;
(3) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have negotiated revised payment schedules with each of the service providers mentioned; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details;
(4) what are the reasons for (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her not making payment within 30 days as specified by the PFMA;
(5) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have implemented any measures to (i) ensure full compliance with the PFMA and (ii) facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details?
Mr T D Harris (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1835. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
| Question 1 | Question 2 | Question 3 | Question 4 | Question 5 | ||||||
| DEA/ Public Entity | (i)(ii) Are payments to service providers made within 30 days? | (aa) Number of service providers awaiting payment | (bb) Monetary value of outstanding payments | (cc) How long is payment overdue | (i)Percentage | (ii) Monetary value of interest charged | Details of negotiated payment schedule | Reasons for not making payments within 30 days | (i) Measures implemented to ensure full compliance | (i) Measures implemented to facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts |
| DEA | Yes, with exception as per (aa) | 1 | R64 911.94 | 34 days | None | None | None, payments are made as per the service level agreement (SLA) terms. | Delay in certification of invoice. | Policies, procedure manuals and internal controls (check list) have been implemented to ensure that payments are made within 30 days. | Monthly reconciliation informs management about bottlenecks. |
| iSimangaliso | Yes | None | None | Not applicable | None | None | None | None | Financial policies and procedures; internal audit | None |
| SANParks | Yes | 15 | R11 903 059 | 180 days | Creditor/ supplier not paid within the set period (of the PFMA) will be as a result of a dispute regarding the services delivered etc. and therefore no interest will be applicable. | Not applicable | Payments to suppliers are all within the 30 day period unless there is a dispute. No revised payment schedules have been negotiated. | Disputes about service delivery | SANParks has policies and procedures in place which have been drawn up with the PFMA as the guideline. | Payments to suppliers older than 30 days will be paid once the disputes are resolved. |
| SANBI | Yes | None | None | Not applicable | None | None | None | None | None | None |
| SAWS | Yes | ACSA, Upington | R150 548 | 91-120 days | SAWS is not liable for any interest on overdue accounts. SAWS engages its suppliers and service providers continuously as part of relationship building and is thus able to negotiate that interest are not charged. | None | SAWS has requested that ACSA, Upington be paid in accordance with the signed contract. This matter is still being discussed with the service provider. | Rent increase is being disputed as it is not in accordance with the signed contract between SAWS and the supplier. | Internal controls have been implemented to ensure that payments are made within 30 days. A monthly age analysis that monitors payments is included in the monthly management accounts. | Invoices are stamped and registered on the board on receipt and submitted to the cost centre managers for approval. SAWS have also introduced a supply chain management tracking software, which informs management of where the bottlenecks are in the payment and approval of invoices process. |
| Skycare Maintenance | R473 923.96 | 91-120 days | None | Invoices relate to 2006 and are being discussed with supplier on why they were submitted late. These invoices were also being checked on whether they have not been paid before to avoid duplicate payment if they were submitted. | ||||||
| Dihlabeng LocalMunicipality | R14 874.67 | 91-120 days | SAWS has requested that theDihlabengMunicipalitybe paid in accordance with the signed contract. | Amount charged by the municipality is different from the signed rental agreement, and this is being resolved with the municipality. | ||||||
| NOAA GMD | R17 895.35 | 91-120 days | None | Invoices received from the supplier could not be matched to any orders issued by SAWS. Follow up emails have been sent to the supplier with no response to date. |
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1822
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1822. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to initiate any steps against the Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality for failing to provide Carolina residents with a reliable supply of potable water; if not, why not; if so, what steps will she take;
(2) whether she intends laying criminal charges against municipal officials in respect of water services; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2214E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) At this stage, the Department does not intend to take any steps against the
Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality, however, the Department has made the following interventions since day one when we, as a Department, determined that the water in Carolina was unsafe for drinking; in order to provide the Carolina residents with reliable supply of potable water:
· Utilised the Rapid Response Unit to assist with the upgrading of the Carolina Water Treatment Plant.
· Supported the Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality by supplying potable water through water tankers to cart water into the affected areas.
· Placed the Jo-Jo water tanks at strategic points for effective water supply/distribution and the Rapid Response Unit intervention is continuing.
· Replaced the JoJo water tanks that were damaged during the Carolina unrests.
· Installed sand filter package plant to assist with enhancing water quality.
· Five contract workers were appointed as Process Controllers to maintain sustainability with processing at the Carolina Water Treatment Plant.
· The Inkomati Catchment Management Agency undertook intensive involvement in the catchment of the Carolina/Boesmanspruit Dam to stabilise the situation.
According to the latest analytical results provided by the Mpumamanzi Laboratory Services, some of the following observations and interpretations have been made:
· The results show drastic improvement in the raw water quality of the Boesmanspruit Dam;
· All treatment processes are functioning satisfactorily with removal efficiencies. The Module A (Old plant) is currently performing much better than the Module B (package plant) and particularly in terms of Aluminium removal and the reverse is true for manganese removal;
· The Mpumamanzi took the liberty to analyse the microbial status of the final water and both E.coli and Total Coliform results are zero; and
· All the results are within the Class I water quality standards as prescribed by the Department (through the SANS 241: 2006 water quality standards).
(2) The Department is not in a position to lay any criminal charge against the municipal officials because such is not provided in terms of the existing Water Service Legislation. The Department is however, working with the Chief AlbertLuthuli Local Municipality to ensure that the water quality is within the limits of the South African National Standards (SANS 241) drinking water standards.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1806
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1806. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What are the (a) last three dates on which officials of the Department of Water Affairs have conducted inspection visits with regard to each mine that is being investigated for pollution of the Bosmanspruit Dam in Carolina and (b)(i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the inspection in each case;
(2) whether any investigation was made with regard to the discharge from mines entering the Bosmanspruit Dam; if not, why not; if so, (a) why was it only noticed by her department once it affected the quality of the water and (b) what are the further relevant details;
(3) whether an early warning system has been put in place to detect seepage of discharge from the specified mines into the receiving environment; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether her department had been informed of discharges from the mines before the water became contaminated; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details of her department's response;
(5) whether her department has taken action to compel compliance with discharge standards and pollution prevention measures in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what (a) action and (b) has been the response by the responsible parties? NW2198E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Table 1 below indicates the dates, name and designations of officials who conducted inspection visits to mines being investigated for pollution of the Bosmanspruit Dam in Carolina. This is over and above the testing of water in the Carolina area and our fill-time (24/7) presence there as DWA and ICMA, since January this year when the water quality problem was experienced.
Table (1) No protocols exist that governs the terms by which an export of animals to a foreign zoo is permitted. The export of animals to foreign zoos is regulated through various pieces of legislation, including provincial conservation legislation and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) if the animal to be exported is a listed threatened or protected species or a species listed in terms of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The Threatened or Protected Species Regulations and the CITES Regulations promulgated in terms of the NEMBA further regulates activities involving these species and permits are required for the export of these species.
With regard to the CITES listed species, an export permit is required to authorise the export. An export permit can only be issued if the following conditions are met:
a) the management authority (provincial conservation authorities if applicant is private person or business) must be satisfied that the specimen concerned has been legally acquired;
b) the management authority is satisfied that any living specimen will be prepared and shipped in accordance with the most recent edition of the Live Animals Regulations of the International Air Transport Association, regardless of the mode of transport, so as to minimise the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel treatment;
c) in the case of a specimen of a species listed in Appendix I or II, the Scientific Authority has made a non-detriment finding and advised the management authority accordingly; and
d) in the case of specimens of species listed in Appendix I, an import permit has been granted by the competent authority of the country of destination.
It should be noted that in terms of the export of the CITES Appendix I species; there is an obligation on the importing country to confirm, through the respective CITES scientific authorities, that the proposed recipient of the specimen is suitably equipped to house and care for it.
With regard to rhinoceros, an additional requirement relating to the export of live rhinoceros to captive facilities was approved by the MINMEC in 2011, i.e. the captive facility should be a member of the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) or a member of an association member of the WAZA.
(2) No. The Department of Environmental Affairs has not issued any permits for the export of animals to the Dhaka Zoo inBangladesh. The Department is, however, only responsible for the issuance of permit if the activity is carried out by an official of an organ of state; if the species involved is a marine species; or if the specimen originate from a national protected area. The provincial conservation authorities are responsible for the issuance of permits to private individuals / businesses and information relating to exports should be obtained from the relevant provincial conservation authorities. The Department requested information from the provincial conservation authorities, but did not receive information within the timeframe provided.
(3) No. The Department relies on the information received from the competent government authority in the importing country.
(4) a) The Department of Environmental Affairs is the issuing authority for organ of states who apply to export the CITES listed species or threatened or protected species; export of marine species; and the export of species originating from national protected areas. All other exports are done by the provincial conservation authorities.
b) The provincial department is the issuing authority for all private individuals who apply to export the CITES listed species or threatened or protected species.
(5) No, in general the regulatory provisions currently in place are sufficient to regulate the export of animals to foreign zoos. The Department of Environmental Affairs is, however, considering amending the additional requirement for the export of live rhino to captive facilities; and it is proposed that the captive facility should be an institutional members of either the WAZA; or institutional members of association members of the WAZA; or accredited members of regional zoological associations, recognized by the CITES management authority of the state of import, as a reputable association, and these associations must require zoos or captive facilities to comply with specific criteria, including a high standard of husbandry and veterinary care, the maintenance of record systems, and a contribution to conservation activities.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1785 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2176EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has sent officials to collect DNA samples of the pieces of rhino horn that were intercepted by Hong Kong customs on 14 November 2011 for comparison with the Rhino DNA Index System (RhoDIS) data base; if not, why not; if so, what (a) are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the visit and (b) was the date of the visit;
(2) whether the analysis of the DNA samples against the information in the data base has been completed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr L L Bosman (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1785. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. The process of invoking the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Agreement signed between the Government of South Africa and the Government of Hong Kong's Special Administration through the South African Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has not yet been finalised. The agreement will facilitate the prosecution of perpetrators. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is currently finalising the paperwork that will be sent to the Hong Kong High Court in order for the DNA samples to be collected. Only after the Hong Kong High Court has finalised its part, the South African experts will travel to Hong Kong to collect the samples.
(2) No. The analysis has not yet been completed as the DNA samples have not been collected.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1782
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2173EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any representatives from (a) her department and (b) any entity reporting to her participated in the recent Forum on China-Africa Co-operation (FOCAC); if not, why not; if so, what are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the representatives that attended the Forum;
(2) whether any measures to protect Africa's rhino population were discussed at the Forum; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether China made any specific commitments to help protect South Africa's rhino population; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr L L Bosman (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1782. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No representatives from the Department of Environmental Affairs or Public Entities reporting to me participated in the recent Forum on China-Africa Co-operation (FOCAC) which took place in Beijing, China from 18 to 20 July 2012. South Africa's participation in this Forum is coordinated by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), which is the national department responsible for coordinating South Africa's international engagements. The focus of this meeting was mainly on trade, investment, economic development and political relations between African countries andChina. However, the Department of Environmental Affairs did participate in the Inter-departmental Preparatory meetings which were conducted by the DIRCO.
(2) No. The protection of Africa's rhino population was not discussed at the Forum, as this specific issue was not on the agenda of the FOCAC meeting. However, the Beijing Action Plan (2013 – 2015) adopted by the 5th Ministerial Conference of the FOCAC on 20 July 2012, does mention cooperation in protecting the environment as one of the focal areas, and both Africa and China underscored their willingness to continue exchanges and cooperation in this field.
(3) No. China did not make any specific commitments to help protect South Africa's rhino population during this FOCAC meeting because this matter was not discussed. However, as South Africa is the African Co-chair of the FOCAC for 2012 – 2018, there is scope for South Africa, with the support of the African rhino range states, to engage with the People's Republic of China on this issue within the FOCAC in future. The Department of Environmental Affairs is engaging with the relevant authorities in China on a bilateral basis on measures to address and cooperate on wildlife management and law enforcement as well as the illicit trade of rhino horn. We have also finalised the draft MOU which we will sign with the Environment Minister of China. This MOU deals, interalia, with a holistic program of cooperation on anti-rhino poaching. This is an MOU to be signed at a bilateral level and not at continental level.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1751
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1751. Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends appointing an administrator to implement a turnaround strategy as a result of the Botshelo Water Board receiving three disclaimers from the Auditor-General in the (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10 and (c) 2010-11 financial years? NW2142E
---00O00---
REPLY:
No, the Department has no intention to appoint an administrator to implement a turnaround strategy as a result of Botshelo Water receiving three disclaimers from the Auditor-General for the 2008-9, 2009-10 and 2010-11 financial years.
Instead, Rand Water has already been brought in to support Botshelo Water through providing a Caretaker Chief Executive, Chief Financial Officer and Operations Manager and is currently assisting Botshelo Water to stabilise the working environment, to prepare all relevant documentation for the financial statements and to deal with the supply chain issues.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1740 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2131EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any permits have been approved for hunting rhino in the private nature reserves adjoining the Kruger National Park since 1 January 2012; if so, (a) how many hunting permits have been approved and (b) in respect of which areas;
(2) whether there were any special conditions attached to these permits; if not, why not; if so, what conditions;
(3) whether she intends to stop the issuing of permits for hunting rhino in view of the large number of rhinos lost to poaching; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1740. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. The national department does not deal with permits approval at provincial level. The question should be referred to the Mpumalanga and Limpopo Provincial Governments.
2. Refer to the above response.
3. No. The permit process and poaching are not linked as permitting is done through a due diligence process and is legal. The issue was discussed at length with the MECs responsible for Environment in all the provinces and it was agreed not to stop the issuing of permits based on the above.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1726
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2109EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has taken note of the "Inclusive Wealth Report 2012: Measuring Progress toward Sustainability" released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on 18 June 2012; if so, what is her response; if not, will she take note of its contents;
(2) whether the Department of Environmental Affairs is making any effort to (a) quantify and (b) determine trends of exhaustible natural capital in the country; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has found that natural capital accounting should become a factor in major planning decisions in the country; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether she will discuss with her Cabinet the need for inclusive wealth accounting in South Africa; if not, why not; if so, what is the position in this regard? NW2109E
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1726. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) I have taken note of the ''Inclusive Wealth Report 2012: Measuring progress toward sustainability'' released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on 18 June 2012 and have noted, among others –
· That the report introduces a new index, the Inclusive Wealth Index (IWI) that attempts to provide a comprehensive measure of the major contributors to a nation's stock of wealth by capturing three forms of capital, namely: produced-, human- and natural-capital.
· That this is an important contribution to the ongoing scientific work on the question of how to value and measure the natural resource asset base. It must also be noted that South Africa is also making important contributions to this area of work. The King III ''triple bottom line'' corporate reporting system and the SA Top 100 Carbon Disclosure Reporting initiative are two practical examples of this.
· Although the report (of over 300 pages)needs to be analysed in far more detail before we can draw our own specific conclusions in this regard, we concur with the fundamental message of the report – that GDP growth is a completely inadequate measure of economic, social and environmental well being and wealth, particularly if the world is endeavouring to pursue a path of sustainable development.
· This confirms our own analysis and responses, which are already under implementation, for example, the activities under Presidential Outcome 10.
(2) In line with the report's 2nd recommendation, namely: that countries should mainstream the IWI within their planning and development ministries, the Department of Environmental Affairs will continue to work with the National Planning Commission, the Department of Economic Development, the National Treasury and, most importantly, the Department of Performance Monitoring, Evaluation and Administration in The Presidency to develop and use appropriate sustainable development indicators, including the quantification and monitoring of our ''natural capital." To this end –
· The indicators associated with Presidential Outcome 10 progress monitoring are important first steps in the development of such indicators.
· Further, the Department of Environmental Affairs has entered into aMoU with Stats SA to develop robust sustainable development indicators which will be routinely measured and reported by Stats SA as part of the country's robust sustainable development reporting, for, among other uses, as a basis for robust development planning going forward. The first data sets are currently under evaluation.
(3) As stated above, and as witnessed by our current efforts around the green economy, natural capital accounting is already starting to become a factor in major planning decisions in the country.
(4) See (2) above.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1703
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1703. Mr M Swart (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 3669 on 13 December 2011, what progress has her department made with the issuing of water licences to the George Municipality for (a) the extraction of water from the Malgas River and (b) raising the spillway at the Garden Route Dam? NW2057E
---00O00---
REPLY:
As indicated in reply to question 3669 on 13 December 2011, the issuance of Malgas River and Garden Route Dam water use licenses was dependent on the issuance of a positive Record of Decision from the Department of Environmental Affairs and the determination of the Outeniqua Reserve by the Department of Water Affairs.
A positive Record of Decision for Malgas River and Garden Route Dam was issued on 24 November 2009 and 16 March 2012 respectively and the Outeniqua Reserves was determined on 28 June 2012.
In view of the above, the Department has commenced with the process of reviewing the water use license application for the George Local Municipality's and anticipate to finalise the matter by no later than 30 September 2012.
The final processing of the water use license applications by the Department's Western Cape regional office should be concluded by end of July 2012, upon which it would be interrogated at a Regional Water Use Authorisation, Assessment and Advisory Committee for recommendation by the Regional Head.
Upon recommended by the Regional Head, it would be presented to a further Departmental Committee and on their recommendation the final licences will be prepared for signature of the delegated authority of the Department.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1691
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19 NW2041EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 June 2012
Mr P van Dalen (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends tabling the Nagoya Protocol (details furnished)to Parliament soon for ratification; if not, why not; if so, when;
(2) whether she has identified any challenges that must be overcome before ratification of the protocol; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what (a) challenges and (b) are the further relevant details;
(3) what has she identified to be the benefits to South Africa of ratifying the protocol?
Mr P van Dalen (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1691. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes. The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation (herewith referred to as ″The Nagoya Protocol on ABS″) will be submitted to both houses of Parliament once the planned stakeholder engagement, in terms of section 231 of the Constitution of South Africa read together with section 25 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) has been finalised. The Department intends to complete this process by 31 March 2013.
(2) (a) and (b) No. South Africa has made remarkable progress since it became a contracting party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1995 by taking policy and legislative steps towards promoting conservation, the sustainable use of indigenous biological resources and associated traditional knowledge while promoting the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use. This has been achieved even before the adoption of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS. The Bioprospecting, Access and Benefit Sharing Regulations, 2008 – developed in terms of Chapter 6 of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) and which came into force on 1 April 2008 – give effect to the provisions and objectives of the NEMBA, the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol on ABS.
(3) South Africa has made considerable progress in promoting the conservation and sustainable use of its biological resources. As largely a provider of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, South Africa, like many other countries, often experience challenges in promoting and enforcing the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of the country's biological/genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. It is in this context that South Africafinds the legally binding nature of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS to be the major benefit to consider with regard to its ratification. South Africa will be greatly assisted by the Nagoya Protocol on ABS because it includes measures to promote compliance with national legislation, policies and procedures and also strengthen transboundary and regional cooperation.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1689 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19 NW2039EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 June 2012
Mr P van Dalen (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What were the most important outcomes of the Rio+20 Summit for the Government and (b) what outcomes do the Government need to action;
(2) Whether the Government has achieved its strategic objectives at the summit; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr P van Dalen (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1689. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) Based on a review and lessons from global sustainable development efforts over the past 20 years, including the outcomes from the Millennium Development Goals (MDG's) and the 2002 WSSD Johannesburg Plan of Implementation,Rio+20 was aimed at reinvigorating and renewing a political commitment to global sustainable development action for the next 20 years. In this regard the objective has been met as captured in the outcome document, the most important of which can be summarised as follows:
i. A common vision – emphasizing that poverty eradication, changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development are foundations for sustainable development. In this regard the international community has renewed its commitment to coherent integration and implementation of previous political resolutions and to ensure the full participation of stakeholders, including women and youth, on the basis of the Agenda 21 principles (including the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities).
ii. The green economy concept, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication – emphasizing the multiplicity of approaches to be taken in accordance with national circumstances and development priorities. Thereby protecting national sovereignty and vulnerable groups, while, at the same time, committing to mobilise international finance, technology and capacity building support for the implementation of Green Economy policies at local, national and regional levels.
iii. A strengthened international institutional framework for sustainable development – reaffirming, on the one hand, the role and authority of the UN General Assembly and its' Economic and Social Council strengthened by the establishment, through an inter-governmental process, of a universal High Level Political Forum (which will replace the current Commission for Sustainable Development). While on the other hand, ensuring that the UN system is able to deliver enhanced support to countries through an upgraded UN Environment Programme, with a consolidated Headquarters in Africa (Nairobi, Kenya).
iv. A Framework for Action and Follow-up – comprising of 2 parts:
a) Thematic areas and cross-sectoral issues, including actions and follow-up on poverty eradication; food security; water and sanitation; energy; tourism; transport; cities and human settlements; health and population; employment; oceans and seas; small island developing states; least developed countries; Africa; regional efforts; disaster and risk reduction; climate change; forests; biodiversity; desertification; mountains; chemicals and waste; sustainable consumption and production; mining; education; gender and women's empowerment.
b) Sustainable Development Goals, recognizing and building on the MDG's, which expire in 2015, the outcome established an intergovernmental process to develop further global Sustainable Development Goals for the period beyond 2015.
v. Means of Implementation, focused on:
a) Finance for sustainable development with the establishment of an inter-governmental process to develop a Sustainable Development Financing Strategy, including commitments to ODA, multilateral finance, leverage private sector investments, South-South cooperation and innovative finance sources.
b) Technology development and transfer for sustainable development, with the UN Secretary General to develop recommendations on a Technology Facilitation Mechanism to address technology related challenges such as access, financing technology development and technology adaptation as well as strengthening international regional and national research and technological capacities.
c) Capacity building, with a call for continued implementation of the UNEP Bali Strategic Plan for technology and capacity building, increased effort from UN agencies and enhanced international cooperation in this area.
d) Trade as an engine for development with a call for the conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda by members of the WTO.
e) A registry of commitments to be developed and maintained by the UN Secretary General to compile and record all sustainable development commitments, policies, plans, programmes and actions by governments and all stakeholders.
(b) At a national level, the Government will further develop and implement its green economy strategy, climate change response policy, IPAP, IRP and other relevant developmental policies, plans and strategies in line with the national sustainable development strategy to effectively leverage and mobilise the means of implementation agreed in the Rio+20 outcome. This effort works towards promoting integration and coherence with regard to the national initiatives in the thematic and cross-sectoral areas outlined in the Rio + 20 outcome, particularly those that are aimed at promoting poverty reduction, job creation and sustainable consumption and production in the context of South Africa's New Growth Path. These will be elaborated in an implementation plan on the Rio+20 outcomes and will be presented to the Portfolio Committee, following Cabinet approval.
At an international level, the Government will actively participate in the further processes established by the Rio + 20 agreement, particularly the inter-governmental processes on the development of post 2015 Sustainable Development Goals; to define the modalities of the new High Level Political Forum under the UN; and the development of a Sustainable Development Financing Strategy; as well as contributing to the UN Secretary General's processes on a Technology Facilitation Mechanism and the international Register of Commitments. Further, the Government will submit its' commitments, policies, plans, programmes and projects to the international Register of Commitments, once it is developed.
(2) The Government has achieved its strategic objectives at Rio + 20. From South Africa's perspective, the most important outcomes include, for the first time, a comprehensive agreement to strengthen the participation of women and youth with a specific agreement on gender and women's' empowerment; a global pronouncement on green economy policies in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; the establishment of a process to formulate global Sustainable Development Goals beyond 2015 which build on the MDG's; a process to establish a global sustainable development finance strategy; a process for an international Technology Facilitation Mechanism; as well as a strengthened institutional framework for sustainable development. The strengthening of the existing UN sustainable development governance system through the establishment of a High Level Political Forum and the upgrading and consolidation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) will play a strategic role in improving environmental governance, thereby strengthening the environment pillar for sustainable development. Most importantly, the UNEP is based in Africa, thus providing an opportunity for the continent to tap into its capacity support programme for effective use of our natural resources. In addition, South Africa was the lead voice in calling for the recognition of the strategic role played by marine resources in sustainable development. In this regard, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was recognised as a legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1687
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1687. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters per month in each municipality in the Eastern Cape and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether her department has taken any measures to assist municipalities in the Eastern Cape to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand for and (b) supply of water in each municipality in the Eastern Cape? NW2036E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The average water loss (Non Revenue Water – NRW) across all municipalities in the Eastern Cape is 35% with a range from 3.89% to 58%.
(2) Yes, the Department has funded several Water Conservation Demand Management (WCDM) projects where situation assessments were conducted thus resulting in the complication of the following WCDM Implementation Strategies:
· identification and repairing of water leaks in the distribution systems;
· identification and repairing of water leaks as well as the replacement of inferior leaking toilet cisterns at households, especially for indigent households;
· installation of zonal and bulk water meters;
· awareness campaigns;
· repairing of leaking reservoirs; and
· replacement of the ageing pipelines.
Further, the Department has implemented an extensive Councilor Development Programme to educate newly appointed councilors on WCDM.
Specific interventions are taking place in the following Municipalities:
· The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality implements Water Conservation Demand Management (WCDM) on a continuous basis out of own funding as well as additional funding from the Department. They have a huge find and fix project focusing on the indigent households (assistance to the poor project). The project scope of work includes assessing and replacing old leaking infrastructure, pressure management, meter installation (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement. Awareness campaign is also a huge component of the interventions. The average daily reduced by approximately 30Ml/day.
· The Department funded several WCDM projects in Cacadu. The current project involves find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at households especially and indigent households, assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded 2 WCDM projects in Blue Crane Route. The current project involves find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at households especially and indigent households, assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement as well as reservoir repairs.
· The Department funded two WCDM projects in Ikwezi and repaired all their reservoirs and retrofitted the boreholes. The current project involves meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded a WCDM project over a three year period in Makana. The project involves a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement, reservoir repairs and fencing.
· The Department assisted Ndlambe to do a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks at all households, awareness campaigns, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded three WCDM project in Baviaans. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement. The Non Revenue Water of Baviaans came down from 37% to 19%.
· The Department funded a WCDM project in Kouga. The project involved a situation assessment on the metering, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded two WCDM projects in Amatole. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded several WCDM project in Chris Hani. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded several WCDM projects in Joe Gqabi. The projects involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded two WCDM project in OR Tambo The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded one WCDM project in Alfred Nzo. The project involved part of the implementation of their current WCDM strategy.
(3) The total demand for all municipalities in the Eastern Cape is 556 million cubic meters per annum and the total supply is 592 million cubic meters per annum.
Eastern Cape has been allocated R480 784 060 to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R14 434 000 has also been allocated to the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1686
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1686. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What is the purpose of all fog harvesting projects that are being conducted by the (a) Water Research Commission and (b) Department of Water;
(2) whether the Department of Water has procured any fog harvesting technology for use in any of its projects since 1 April 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the projects on fog harvesting in which the Water Research Commission is involved exist for the purpose of developing fog harvesting technology; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, why is the Water Research Commission involved in such projects when this technology already exists in the private sector? NW2033E
---00O00---
REPLY
(1) South Africa is a water scarce country which is further exacerbated by the seasonality and uneven distribution of rainfall across the country. Assurance of water supply in rural environments remains a particular challenge. In many cases, the possibility of extending conventional reticulation infrastructure to ensure piped water is limited and more innovative solutions need to be found. Fog water harvesting in low rainfall areas has the potential to enhance water security of these communities.
An examination of technological and system optimisation to make fog water harvesting a sustainable water supply in appropriate settings is the driver behind the Water Research Commission (WRC) fog water projects.
The first WRC funded study began in 1995 with the main aims to:
· Determine the feasibility of using fog to supplement existing water supplies in water-scarce parts of the country, and
· Assess design concepts for a fog water collection system.
The findings of the study are published in a report titled The South African Fog Water Collection Project (WRC Report No. 671/1/1999). The general findings of the study were that it was feasible to harvest appreciable quantities of good quality water from fog, and the volumes collected seemed to be dependent on the density of fog and wind movement. This had implications for the design of a collection system and thus the study recommended the erection of small prototype of the collection unit at one or two areas to determine how the design could function in practice.
This led to a second WRC funded study titled Implementation of an Operational Prototype Fog Water Collection System: Project Implementation (WRC Report No. 902/1/02) whose aims were to design, erect and operate a fog water collection system to provide water to rural communities, and to research factors like wet events, chemical and biological analyses of water samples that are associated with water collection at the site. The Tshanowa Junior Primary School at the crest of the Soutpansberg Mountains in the Limpopo Province and at the Lepelfontein village on the West Coast, were selected as suitable sites to implement the project. Fully operational fog harvesting systems were installed, and after a three-year monitoring and a number of experiments and development (including resizing the system) the project was finalised in which the structure design and specifications were published.
There has been further testing and experimentation on this Fog Water Collection System in different parts of the country. An example is the launch of the system in Cabazane Village (Alfred Nzo DM), Eastern Cape, and in many other areas. The results are that the system is not necessarily universally applicable because of the spatial and temporal variation in fog characteristics and types.
Therefore, as it is found that although the principles for the technology is well founded, the designs are area and context specific and that there is no comprehensive guide to define the suitable criteria needed for a location to be suitable for this technology and hence the 2011 research commissioned by the WRC for a more comprehensive, four-year study (K5/2059) titled Optimising Fog Water Harvesting which commenced in April 2011 to further enhance the system.
All WRC reports are available free to the public via the knowledge hub on the WRC website – www.wrc.org.za.
(2) The Department has not procured any fog harvesting technology for use in any of its projects since 1 April 2010as all pilots were done by the WRC.
(3) The private sector does have some technology but municipalities and communities must be advised on how to use and purchase technologies. From the WRC studies, guidelines are developed for this purpose. The current WRC project which began in April 2011 has been designed to further optimise the fog harvesting processes and examine the extent of the environmental impact of fog water collection systems which the private sector will not do. An important product of this study will be a South African Atlas of Fog Harvesting Potential which will map out the areas of the country with the best potential for Fog Water capture. This will be an invaluable contribution to the planning for both government and private sector agencies to roll out this water supply augmentation option.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1685
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1685. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What (a) is the total outstanding amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 May 2012 and (b) is the breakdown of this amount in terms of (i) current debt, (ii) debt in arrears and (iii) money owed by each municipality to each water board? NW2031E
---00O00---
REPLY
(a) The total outsanding amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 April 2012 is R 2, 261, 372, 566.
The data on the total amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 May 2012 is not available as the Department has not yet received them.
(b) The table below gives a summary of monies owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 April 2012, however the Department is finalising the Institutional Reform and Realignment (IRR) project which aims at improving financial viability for all institutions by merging marginal viable institutions with those with stronger economic base that are financially viable. The economies of scale will enable institutions to be stronger and be able to deliver on their mandate and also to support local government.
| No | Water Board | Number of Municipalities supplied by the Water Board | (b)(i) Current debt | (b)(ii) Debt in Arrears | (b)(iii) Total Owed by Municipalities | Relative Income As Sales Revenue |
| 1 | Amatola Water | 03 | 19 163 210 | 11 204 636 | 30 367 846 | 16 084 593.56 |
| 2. | Bloem Water | 04 | 35 495 103 | 52 294 493 | 87 789 596 | 87 789 603.73 |
| 3. | Botshelo Water | 03 | 5 867 000 | 61 096 795 | 66 964 666 | 5 867 871.00 |
| 4. | Bushbuckridge Water | 03 | 4 404 937 | 254 132 918 | 258 537 855 | 258 537 855.01 |
| 5. | Lepelle Northern Water | 11 | 31 260 374 | 280 691 482 | 311 951 857 | 31 260 374.68 |
| 6. | Magalies Water | 07 | 9 987 128 | 16 968 092 | 26 955 220 | 15 892 216.09 |
| 7. | Mhlathuze Water | 02 | 7 668 161 | 331 084 | 7 999 245 | 7 732 368.67 |
| 8. | Overberg Water | 05 | 174 615 | 184 038 | 358 653 | 1 017 526.00 |
| 9. | Pelladrift Water | 03 | 184 038 | 194 797 | 378 835 | 174 615.00 |
| 10. | Sedibeng Water | 11 | 41 536 884 | 561 226 172 | 602 763 056 | 38 619 279.00 |
| 11. | Rand Water | 19 | 553 608 721 | 124 016 578 | 677 625 299 | 553 608 731.25 |
| 12. | Umgeni Water | 07 | 151 182 295 | 9 849 811 | 161 032 106 | 151 182 295.00 |
| TOTAL | 860 579 471 | 1 400 793 095 | 2 261 372 566 | 1 010 717 162.99 |
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1674
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1674. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters in respect of each month in each municipality in Mpumalanga and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any steps have been taken to assist municipalities in Mpumalanga to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the demand for water versus the supply of water in each municipality inMpumalanga? NW2001E
REPLY:
(1) The details of average water loss in kiloliters and percentage of total water usage in each municipality inMpumalanga are presented in attached Annexure A.
(2) The Department is supporting the local municipalities in Mpumalanga by incorporating water conservation and demand management through the following programmes:
· Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme;
· Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant; and
· National Transfers Programme.
(3) The details of average water demand versus the supply of water in each municipality in Mpumalanga are presented in attached Annexure A.
Mpumalanga has been allocated R182 million to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R13.528 million has also been allocated from the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1667
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 15 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18)
1667. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters per month in each municipality in Limpopo and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any steps are being taken to assist municipalities in Limpopo to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand and (b) supply of water in each municipality in Limpopo? NW2004E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The details of average water loss in kiloliters and percentage of total water usage in municipalities in Limpopo are presented in attached Annexure A.
(2) Yes, the Department has taken the following measures to assist the Water Services Authorities in Limpopo to decrease water losses:
· development of water conservation strategies and business plans;
· water balance calculation;
· network sectorisation;
· replacement of water meters for large consumers;
· leak detection and repair programme;
· awareness campaigns; and
· installation of bulk and household meters.
In addition to the above measures, there are four major bulk resource developments in Limpopo which are in different stages of planning, design and construction. The following major projects will supply water for primary use as well as for industrial use in support of the growth and development plans of the provincial government of Limpopo:
· Olifants River Resource Development Project (ORWRDP) Phase 2A and 2C (R1448 million)
· Mokolo Crocodile West Water Augmentation Project (MCWAP) Phase 1
(R87.8 million). ESKOM and EXXARO are responsible for the off budget portion of phase 1
· Levhuvhu River Government Water Scheme (LRGWS) pipe contracts
(R716 million)
· Groot Letaba Water Augmentation Project (GLEWAP) Nwamitwa Dam
(R72 million)
The total available funds for these projects is R2.3 billion.
(3)(a) The current status of the demand of water as indicated on attached Annexure A in Water Services Authorities inLimpopo is high due to rapid population growth and lack of proper water conservation and demand management measures. The Department is providing support to certain Water Services Authorities (Lephalalale and Mogalakwena) to implement water conservation in order to improve the water use efficiency while investigating other options to address this demand.
(3)(b) The current status of supply of water as indicated on attached Annexure A is low, as all the Water Services Authorities in Limpopo are experiencing water shortages which attributed to numbers of factors i.e. poor operation and maintenance of water supply systems. As a result, some of the Water Services Authorities are already rationalising their water supply (supply water for certain times).
Limpopo has been allocated R481 million to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R4.3 million has also been allocated from the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1665
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18 NW2002EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 15 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 1395 on 11 June 2012, why were ordinary members of the public not invited to comment on the proposed peripheral development zone in the Kruger National Park;
(2) whether she intends to call for public comment on the proposal before any memorandum of understanding with the government of the Republic of Mozambique is signed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1665. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. It is not correct that the public was not consulted in the crafting of the Kruger Management Plan and its Zonation Plan. When the Kruger Management Plan was drafted in 2006-2008 public participation meetings were held around the park in accordance with section 39(3) of the Protected Areas Act which prescribes that "when preparing a management plan for a protected area, the management authority concerned must consult municipalities, other organs of state, local communities and other affected parties which have an interest in the area". Ordinary members of the public, the majority of whom reside within the communities surrounding the park (representing approximately 3 million people), were part of these consultations and their comments were included in the final plan approved by the Minister.
Management plans are dynamic documents that have to take the continuous changes occurring in the environments where they are applied into consideration. In terms of section 40(2) of the Protected Areas Act, "the management authority may amend the management plan by agreement with the Minister or MEC, as the case may be". As a result of unforeseen changes at the time of the approval of the Act by the Minister, the Kruger Management Plan has been amended many times already to effect changes on the management of elephants (removal of water-holes) and to update the fire policy, to mention but a few. There is no requirement or prescription in the law to go on a full public consultation process when amending an approved management plan, including zonation. The Peripheral Development Zone is a small component on the approved Zonation Plan within the Kruger Management Plan.
2. No. The proposed buffer zone memorandum of understanding between Mozambique and South Africa represents a continuation of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park Treaty signed between the two countries on 9 December 2002. In terms of Article 3(1) certain areas will be included in future as part of the GEOGRAPHIC DELIMITATION of the TransfrontierPark and these areas include 3(2), the area in Mozambique comprising the Banhine and Zinave National Parks, the Massingir and Corumana areas, as well as the interlinking regions. The proposed buffer zone forms part of the Massingir-Corumana and adjacent areas and is covered by the Treaty. The public in both countries was fully consulted when the transfrontier conservation area was proposed and there is no need for the public to comment on the memorandum of understanding between the two countries again.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1664 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.18 NW2000EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 15 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) are the beach driving restrictions for each zone along the KwaZulu-Natal coast and (b) effects have been reported on the (i) ecology and (ii) economy of the area (aa) in (aaa) 2009, (bbb) 2010 and (ccc) 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012;
(2) whether she is reconsidering the prohibition for any of the specified zones along the coast where beach driving is currently (a) prohibited and (b) restricted; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) which specified entities are responsible for determining beach driving regulations along the KwaZulu-Natalcoast?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1664. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) Driving on the beach for recreational purposes is generally prohibited in South Africa. The use of vehicles on our beaches isrestricted in terms of the Regulations for the control of use of vehicles in the coastal zone (Government Notice 1399 of 21 December 2001) published in terms of section 44 of the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998).However, permits to use vehicles in the coastal zone may be issued for:
·non-recreational activities in terms of a fishing right or an exemption;
·scientific research;
·tourism business;
·access to private property provided there is no reasonable alternative access to the property;
·producing an advertisement, feature film, still photograph or a television programme;
·access by a physically disabled person;and
·organised recreational sport fishing competitions.
(b) (i)Research conductedbetween 2009 to 2012 indicates an improvement in the ecology of the KwaZulu-Natal coast as a result of the general prohibition of the recreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone.As an example, a long-term monitoring project north of Cape Vidal has been implemented. One of the specific objectives of this study was to monitor if there has been any recovery in shore angling fish species since the implementation of the beach driving ban, using the no-take sanctuary area as a bench mark. The results of this project indicated that there has been a recovery of resident reef-associated shore angling fish species (both in terms of abundance and mean size) in the previously exploited areas north of Cape Vidal.This recovery was more significant in closer proximity to the no-take sanctuary area.
(ii)(aa), (aaa), (bbb), (ccc) and (bb) No research regarding the effects on the economy has been conducted in the KwaZulu-Natal Province between 2009-2012 because of the general prohibition on the recreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone.
(2) (a), (b) Neither the prohibitionnor the restrictionofthe recreational use of vehicles is currently being reconsidered due to the positive impact it is having on the ecology of the South African coastal zone.
(3) The Department of Environmental Affairs is responsible for determining beach driving regulations along the KwaZulu-Natal coast.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1621
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 15 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18)
1621. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any contracts have been awarded for the building of phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the loan capital for the building of the dam has been secured; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether all necessary agreements for the building of the project have been signed with the government ofLesotho; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) what is the estimated number of people who must be relocated for the purpose of building phase 2? NW1882E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) There are two contracts that have been awarded for the building of phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP).
Road
The first contract was for the construction of a 3.8 km access road to the measuring weir downstream of the Polihali Dam. This contract was awarded to Mops Civil a Lesotho based Company.
Status: The road was completed by the end of November 2011.
Measuring Weir
The second contract is for the construction of the measuring weir downstream of the Polihali Dam site on the Senqu River. This contract was awarded to BKS, a South African company.
Status:Still under construction, expected completion date is September 2012, that is if snow does not persist.
Project Management Unit (PMU)
The Lesotho Highlands Development Authority (LHDA) has completed negotiations with a preferred Bidder for the Project Management Unit (PMU) contract. Once the preferred bidder has responded to the client's concerns, an MOU will be signed which paves the way for the award of the contract. The commencement and mobilisation of the contract is expected to be by the end of July 2012.
Baseline Studies
The Request for Proposals for the Baseline Studies has already been advertised and the closing date of the proposals is 29 June 2012. Expected day for the award of contract is August 2012. Some of the studies will take 24 months to be completed.
-2-
LHWP Phase II Programme
Design and construction of the dam and tunnels have not been done. The following is the programme for Phase II of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project. Refer to the table below:
| WATER TRANSFER SOUTH AFRICA | ||
| ACTIVITY | TIMELINE | |
| Environment and Social Development baseline studies and plans. This means that the EIAs will also be conducted during this time. The impact assessment studies will also take place during this period. The rescue and conservation of indigenous plants will also be conducted during this time. | August 2012 to July 2020 | |
| Appoint consultants, design and issue construction tenders. | Nov 2012 to January 2015 | |
| Construction of advance infrastructure. | July 2014 to December 2015 | |
| Construction of dam and tunnel. | January 2016 to March 2020 | |
| Start impounding to 2000 Metres above sea level (mas)l. | August 2018 | |
| Water Delivery to South Africa | August 2020 | |
| PUMP STORAGE GOVERNMENT OF LESOTHO | ||
| Feasibility Study Completion | August 2012 | |
| Construction of the Pump storage (Provisional) | January 2013 to December 2017 | |
(2) The loan capital has not been secured yet. This will be informed by the outcome of the guarantee request which is currently under consideration by the National Treasury. The outcome of the decision is expected by the end of July 2012, once the Fiscus Liability Committee of the National Treasury has made recommendation to the Minister of Finance.The necessary Off Take and Implementation Agreements will be entered into once the loan capital is in place.
(3) The Agreement on the Implementation of the LHWP Phase II was signed on 11 August 2011 in Maserubetween the Government of Lesotho and the Republic of South Africa. A copy of the Agreement will be tabled in Parliament in due course.
(4) The feasibility study on the implementation of the LHWP Phase II identified 2 550 people which equals to 534 households from 17 villages that may be directly affected and would have to be relocated.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1586
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1586. Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether any traffic fines were incurred with regard to any of her official vehicles in the (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11 and (c) 2011-12 financial years; if so, what (i) amount in fines was incurred in respect of each specified vehicle in each specified financial year and (ii) are the further relevant details in each case? NW1914E
REPLY:
(a) (i) 2009/10 vehicle in Pretoria R 7 650
Cape Town R 0.00
(b) (i) 2010/11 vehicle in Pretoria R 3 325
Cape Town R 1 150
(c) (i) 2011/12 vehicle in Pretoria R 300
Cape Town R 200
(a) (b) (c) (ii) There are no further details.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1561
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1561. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the World Bank Inspection Panel's Report into the Medupi Power Station (details furnished); if so, what steps has she taken with regard to the findings of the report as they relate to actions taken by (a) the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) the Department of Water;
(2) whether any action is being taken by these departments to rectify any items referred to in the report; if not, why not; if so, what action? NW1884E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) Regarding the findings related to the extraction of sand in the Mokolo River, an inter-departmental task team (comprising the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism) has been established to specially investigate the sand mining activities in the Mokolo River. The task team initially met on 20 December 2011 and has met subsequently on 24 January, 7 March and 17 April 2012. The purpose of the task team is to ensure the sustainable extraction of sand from the Mokolo River through ensuring that all statutory provisions of the relevant South African Law are complied with. Furthermore, the task team will ensure that government addresses these activities in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the principles of co-operative governance are maintained. At this stage of the task team's investigation, the focus is on the following:
· Quantifying the nature and scope of the sand mining operations and establishing the impacts on the MokoloRiver system;
· Identifying all unlawful operators along the Mokolo River in order to inform the development of an enforcement strategy.
A site visit was scheduled to take place on the 19 and 20 June 2012.
(1)(b) Three main issues raised in the "World Bank Inspection Panel Report" are relating to water management. These issues are as follows:
· Concerns about the sustainability of water supply to existing and new users in view of new developments such as Medupi requiring large volumes of water.
The Department of Water Affairs planned the supply of water for the new developments according to the requirements laid down by the National Water Act (NWA). Reconciliation Strategies were developed and are being implemented and maintained on an ongoing basis to ensure sufficient and reliable supply of water of appropriate quality to all existing as well as future users. The reconciliation strategies, together with detailed pre-feasibility studies and feasibility studies, involved extensive stakeholder consultation processes. Water will be supplied from the Crocodile River and Mokolo Riverand will not adversely affect existing users.
· Concerns about the impact of new developments on quality of surface and groundwater resources.
The impact of the developments on the surface and groundwater in this area, including the possibility of Acid Mine Drainage was assessed in a Water Research Commission project (Project No K5/1830//3). Due to the geology of the area coupled with the low rainfall and high evaporation, it was found that the pits of the coal mines will not rise to levels at which they will be able to decant. It will be required that developments are planned as "zero effluent" operations, which mean that no effluent will be allowed to enter the surface or groundwater in the area. License conditions require extensive safety measures and monitoring to prevent contamination of surface and groundwater resources.
· Concerns about the impact of sand mining in the Mokolo River for the construction of Medupi
The Department of Water Affairs, in recognising that protection of water resources is as important as the supply of sand to construct Medupi Power Station, directed the sand miner (Chobe -Labonte 5) to conduct further impact studies. These include Environmental Impact Assessment, Environmental Management Plan, Hydrological impact study, Aquatic Habitat Report, Wetlands study, and Rehabilitation Plan. The reports are being reviewed as part of Water Use License application adjudicating process.
(2) No significant non-compliances were found at the Medupi Power Station during the Compliance Inspection conducted the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism on 7 December 2011.
The issues regarding the quality of sand to be supplied to Eskom will be raised in the next Environmental Management meeting to be held with Eskom. There is therefore no need to conduct a detailed compliance inspection at Medupi because the meetings are intended to deal with all issues of concern raised by the three spheres of government.
The issues relating to emissions will be managed through the comprehensive monitoring regime to be implemented by the relevant authorities who will take effect in the post-construction phase and commissioning of the power station.
The submitted Water Use License application and related studies as referred in (1)(b) above will be used as regulatory tools to mitigate or prevent any significant impacts on the Mokolo River and lawful water users. The Department of Water Affairs is working with Mokolo Water Users Association, the Department of Environmental Affairs and other stakeholders on an ongoing basis so as to monitor and enforce compliance against conditions of the Water Use Licence and other provisions of the National Water Act, Act No 36 of 1998.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1561
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.17 NW1884EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the World Bank Inspection Panel's Report into the Medupi Power Station (details furnished); if so, what steps has she taken with regard to the findings of the report as they relate to actions taken by (a) the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) the Department of Water;
(2) whether any action is being taken by these departments to rectify any items referred to in the report; if not, why not; if so, what action?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1561. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) and (b) Regarding the findings related to the extraction of sand in the Mokolo River:
Even prior to the World Bank Report, an inter-departmental task team (comprising the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism) had been established to specifically investigate the sand mining activities in the Mokolo River. The task team initially met on 20 December 2011 and has met subsequently on 24 January, 7 March and 17 April 2012. The purpose of the task team is to ensure the sustainable extraction of sand from theMokolo River through ensuring that all statutory provisions of the relevant South African Law are complied with. Furthermore, the task team will ensure that government addresses these activities in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the principles of co-operative governance are maintained. At this stage of the task team's investigation, the focus is on the following:
· Quantifying the nature and scope of the sand mining operations and establishing the impacts on the MokoloRiver system
· Identifying all unlawful operators along the MokoloRiver in order to inform the development of an enforcement strategy.
A site visit was scheduled to take place on 19 and 20 June 2012.
(2) No significant non-compliances were found at the Medupi Power Station during the Compliance Inspection conducted by the Department of Environmental Affairs and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism on 7 December 2010.
The issues regarding the quantity of sand to be supplied to Eskom will be raised in the next Environmental Management meeting to be held with Eskom. There is therefore no need to conduct a detailed compliance inspection at Medupi because the meetings are intended to deal with all issues of concern raised by the three spheres of government.
The issues relating to emissions will be managed through the comprehensive monitoring regime to be implemented by all relevant authorities who will take effect in the post-construction phase and commissioning of the power station.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1559
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1559. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) When will the feasibility study into long-term solutions to acid mine drainage in the Witwatersrand be concluded, (b) which entity is conducting the study, (c) what is the estimated cost of the feasibility study and (d) when does she anticipate that tenders for implementation of the long-term solution will be advertised and awarded;
(2) whether proposals for implementing long-term solutions are being accepted whilst the feasibility study is still underway; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1881E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) The feasibility study commenced in January 2012 and will be completed by
28 February 2013 resulting in recommendations on potential long-term solutions for mine water management (including acid mine drainage) in the Witwatersrand becoming available to the Department. Thereafter, the proposed solution(s) will require implementation.
(1)(b) The study is conducted by the Department's Chief Directorate: Integrated Water Resource Planning, supported by three professional service providers (names furnished) and specialist advisers (names furnished).
(1)(c) The cost of the feasibility study is R17 720 980.
(1)(d) While the procurement process of a project of this nature would normally commence on approval of the feasibility study and after all applicable statutory approvals have been obtained, we are also investigating the option of an earlier request for proposals (RFP) which will run parallel with the feasibility study.
During the feasibility study we will also issue a request for information (RFI) in order to register technology, funding and operating options which would inform the feasibility study. The feasibility study is scheduled for completion at the end of February 2013 and the request for proposals (RFP) could commence as early as September 2012.
(2) Falls away.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1558
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1558. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to askthe Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1327 on 18 May 2012, she has been informed of a certain letter of complaint (details furnished); if so, what was her response to the letter; if not,
(2) whether she will investigate the issues raised in the specified letter; if not, why not; if so,
(3) whether the person against whom the complaint is being lodged in the letter will be investigated for racial discrimination against the previous owner of the portion of land; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the process that will be undertaken;
(4) whether she will provide a written response to the firm of attorneys on this specified matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1879E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, a letter of complaint was received and acknowledged by the Director-General and a response regarding compensation was sent to the Representatives acting on behalf of the said person (names furnished). Refer to Annexure A.
(2) The official (name furnished) was asked to respond to the allegations made against her. In her response, she denied having uttered such racial remarks to Mr. Haarsbroek.
For the Department to conduct proper investigation, the incumbent (name furnished) must provide the Department with proof of his allegations. However, the Department has responded to the letter of complaint by the Representative acting for the incumbent (names furnished). Refer to Annexure B.
(3) Falls away.
(4) Falls away.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1557
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17 NW1877EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Government will meet its pledge made at COP15 in Copenhagen to cut emissions below a baseline of 34% by 2020; if not, why not; if so, how was this conclusion reached;
(2) whether there are any plans to adjust the pledge made at COP15; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what are the major mitigation actions that will be taken between now and 2020 and (b) what are the major mitigation actions that will be taken between 2020 and 2030?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1557. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. Yes, the mitigation pledge made at COP 15 is likely to be met, recognising that, in accordance with Article 4.7 of the UNFCCC, the extent to which this outcome can be achieved depends on the extent to which developed countries meet their commitment to provide financial, capacity-building, technology development and technology transfer support to developing countries.
2. No, there are no plans to adjust the pledge made at COP 15. This is an international commitment made by Cabinet and announced by the President as part of a balanced package that emerged from the international climate change negotiating process at heads of state level in Copenhagen. It includes the commitment from developed countries to provide $US 30 billion up till 2012 and $100 billion per year by 2020, as well as a Technology Development and Transfer Mechanism under the UNFCCC. Standing back from this commitment puts this balanced political agreement reached in Copenhagen, and further developed and formally adopted in Cancun and Durban, at risk.
(a) In respect of mitigation actions between now and 2020, Government has initiated a process of consolidating existing mitigation actions, under the flagship programmes, as set out in the National Climate Change Response Policy. In addition, Government has initiated an analysis of additional mitigation potential by sector. This analysis will provide the basis for defining desired emission reduction outcomes for key sectors and sub-sectors, as well as the mix of mitigation policies and measures required to achieve the desired outcomes.
(b) In respect of mitigation actions between 2020 and 2030, this will be defined on the basis of a review of progress on the above.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1528
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1528. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 467 on 19 May 2012, (a) which municipalities contain the majority of the estimated 25% of people who have access to a tap, but do not have an acceptable level of service and (b) what steps are being taken to turn around the situation to ensure reliable water services? NW1846E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) A total of 94.7% of the population of the Republic of South Africa have access to water supply leaving a backlog of 5.3%. A significant portion of the this 5.3% do not have access to any reliable water supply: 2% are still reliant on raw water sources while 3.3% do have access to water services infrastructure but are below RDP standards. This effectively means that 98% (94.7% and 3.3% as indicated above) of the population have access to water services infrastructure.
Most of the population without access to water supply, according to surveys and analysis performed by Statistics SA in partnership with the Department, are mainly from rural communities situated in the provinces of KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, and Eastern Cape and are located within the 23 priority District Municipalities.
(b) The Department is currently developing, in consultation with the Department of Co-operative Governance, a strategy and an action plan to provide all communities without access to water supply, with an interim but safe and reliable water supply by June 2013. In addition to the focus on the 23 priority District Municipalities the Department will also focus on the high priority areas where communities are protesting regarding poor service delivery.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1495
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1774EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends to (a) declare any new national parks or (b) enlarge existing parks; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1495. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
a. No. Currently there is no new national park to declare.
b. Yes, the department is in the process of consolidating eight national parks (Addo Elephant, Namaqua, Tankwa Karoo, West Coast, Karoo, Mountain Zebra, Camdeboo, Addo Elephant and Table Mountain) with an added total of 47 361 hectares.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1491
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1491. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has taken any steps to ensure that the Mhlathuze Water Board performs clear and separate duties from those of the executive, management and staff in order to allow the Board to exercise oversight; if not, why not; if so, what steps;
(2) What is the policy for the implementation of the Protected Disclosures Act?
(3) What are the Board's (a) findings regarding enquiries into the continuous loss of senior staff at regular intervals and (b) response to remedy allegations of the (i) abuse of state resources and (ii) rigging of tenders? NW1770E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department of Water Affairs is satisfied that its oversight of Mhlathuze Water Board is effective and appropriate.
With regards to roles and responsibilities, the Water Services Act as read with the PFMA provides for the responsibilities of a Board. In addition Mhlathuze Water Board is governed by its own Board Charter which is based on King III which defines the separation of roles between Board and Executive.
(2) Mhlathuze Water Board informs all staff of their rights and obligations with regard to protected disclosures through the positioning of posters in offices visible to all staff. These include the number to contact for "whistle blowers".
(3)(a) No specific investigation has been carried out either by the Department or Mhlathuze Water Board regarding staff turnover nor is it necessary. The current CEO has been in office for over two years.
(3)(b)(i) According to Mhlathuze Water Board, in September 2008 the then State President ordered the Special Investigation Unit to conduct an investigation into alleged irregularities that may have occurred between 2004 and 2008 but it did not reveal any irregularities.
Arising from a separate instance, the former CEO was charged inter alia with fruitless and wasteful expenditure with regard to the buying of World Cup 2010 tickets. He subsequently resigned but the case has not been finalised yet.
(3)(b)(ii) With regard to allegations of tender rigging, there is one matter currently under investigation involving two former senior members of staff and one service provider. I have instructed Mhlathuze Water, to provide me with the final report of this investigation and I will ensure that criminal charges be laid if any evidence of wrongdoing is uncovered.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1451
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1451. Dr D T George (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) When was the current Director-General of her department appointed?
(2) whether the Director-General was appointed in a permanent capacity; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1728E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The current Director-General was appointed with effect from the 1st January 2012.
(2) The Director-General is appointed on contract for a period of 5 years as per the Public Service Act, 1994.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1448
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER N0.15 NW1724E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: I June 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
1) How many employees of each of the parks administered by SA National Parks (SANParks) have been arrested for wildlife crimes (a) in (i) 2007, (ii) 2008, (iii) 2009, (iv) 2010 and (v) 2011 and (b) since 1 January 2012;
(2) how many employees of each of the parks administered by SA National Parks (SANParks) have been arrested for crimes related to (a) the illegal killing of rhinos or (b) being in possession of rhino horn (i) in (aa) 2007, (bb) 2008, (cc) 2009, (dd) 2010 and (ee) 2011 and (ii) since 1 January 2012;
(3) how many of the specified cases resulted in (a) internal disciplinary processes against and (b)(i) dismissal and (ii) successful criminal prosecution of the specified employees (aa) in (aaa) 2007, (bbb) 2008, (ccc) 2009, (ddd) 2010 and (eee) 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012?
1448. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a)
(i) 2007 - 0
(ii) 2008 - 1
(iii) 2009 - 4
(iv) 2010 - 2
(v) 2011 - 2
(b) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(2)
(a) The illegal killing of rhinos:
(i) (aa) 2007 - 0
(bb) 2008 - 0
(cc) 2009 - 1
(dd) 201 0 - 0
(ee) 201 1 - 1
(ii) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(b) Being in possession of rhino horn:
(i) (aa) 2007 - 0
(ii) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(ii) (aa) Successful criminal prosecution of the specified employees :
(aaa) 2007 - 0
(bbb) 2008 - 0
(CCC) 2009 - 0
(ddd) 2010 - 2 (Criminal case pending)
(eee) 2011 - 2 (Criminal case pending)
(bb) since 1 January 2012 - 4 (criminal cases pending)
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1447
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1723EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What was the (a)(i) date and (ii) time of day for each incident involving the shooting and killing of a suspected rhino poacher (aa) in 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012 and (b) for each of the above cases where the deceased has been identified, what are the (aaa) full names, (bbb) age, (ccc) nationality, (ddd) home town or village of residence and (eee) inquest number;
(2) whether an autopsy was conducted in each of the cases; if not, why not; if so, (a) which authority investigated the shooting and (b) what is the case number?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1447. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) and (2) This question will require that the Department and SANParks source information from other stakeholders, including the South African Police Service (SAPS), which can be a challenge. I therefore request that extension be granted to 2 July 2012 for a reply (instead of 12 June 2012) to allow the SAPS, as well as other stakeholders, sufficient time to respond to the Department's request.Reply received: July 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1446
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1722EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What has been the estimated (a) growth in actual numbers and (b) natural mortality of the (i) black rhino population and (ii) white rhino population for each year since 2005?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1446. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) and (b) (i) and (ii) This question will require time as some of the information has been archived. I therefore request that extension be given until 2 July 2012, instead of 12 June 2012, to allow the Department sufficient time to obtain all the information.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1445
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1721E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) On what date since 1 January 2012 (i) was each incident of rhino poaching recorded and (ii) was each rhino carcass discovered in the Kruger National Park (KNP) and (b) how many rhinos have been killed in the KNP by poachers since 1 January 2012?
1445. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a)
(i) Please see table below for the date recorded and the specific number of rhino poached on that specific date in theKruger National Park.
(ii) The date recorded is the same date the carcass was discovered. The estimated age of the carcass is determined by the investigating team attending to the crime scene and based on their knowledge and experience.
Here is the table: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/doc/2012/RNW1445-120612.pdf
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1444 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1720EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
1444. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What vacancies currently exist at senior management level in the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) in each case, (i) how long has the post been vacant and (ii) when is it envisaged that the post will be filled?
Mrs A Steyn (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1444. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
It is important to indicate that we have a new structure which was implemented only from the 1st April 2012. The adverts referred to hereunder also follow only from 1st April 2012.
(a) The following vacancies exist:
· Deputy Director-General (DDG): Corporate Management Services SL15
· DDG: Chemicals and Waste Management SL15
· Chief Director: Intergovernmental Relations SL14
· Chief Director: Special Projects SL14
· Chief Director: Supply Chain Management SL14
· Chief Director: Budget and Financial Management SL14
· Chief Director: Corporate Legal Support and Litigation SL14
· Chief Director: Enforcement SL14
· Chief Director: Hazardous Waste Management and Licencing SL14
· Chief Director: Chemical and Waste Policy, Evaluation and Monitoring SL14
· Chief Director: Chemical Management SL14
· Chief Director: Climate Change Monitoring and Evaluation SL14
· Chief Director: Air Quality Management SL14
· Chief Director: Biodiversity Planning and Management SL14
· Chief Director: Biodiversity Economy and Sustainable Use SL14
· Chief Director: Monitoring & Evaluation Biodiversity Specialist Advisory Services SL14
· Chief Director: Oceans Conservation SL14
· Chief Director: Specialist Monitoring Services SL14
· Chief Director: Information Management and Sector Coordination SL14
· Chief Director: Working for Water and Working on Fire SL14
· Director: Coordination and Administration (CA) SL13
· Director: Environmental Impact Evaluation SL13
· Director: Waste Policy and Information Management SL13
(b) (i) All DDG, Chief Director and Director positions have been vacant for an average period of six months
(ii) All vacant posts indicated above have been advertised and it is anticipated that they will be filled by August 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1443
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1443. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 381 on 15 March 2012, she has found any improvement in the quality of the drinking water of Carolina; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, why not;
(2) whether there has been any response from the specified mines since the issuing of pre-directives on 9 March 2012; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, what is the position in this regard;
(3) whether her department has taken any further action against the specified mines; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1719E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) There has been an improvement detected in the overall quality of drinking water in Carolina, however, there is periodic fluctuation in the water quality of some of the parameters that prevents the water to be declared safe at this stage. Table 1 below reflects a discussion on some of the key parameters:
| No | Parameters | Observations |
| 1 | pH | The pH levels of the water have improved to be of acceptable levels in spite of the continued acidic state of the water resources. |
| 2 | Iron | The Iron levels were initially found to be excessively high but this too now remains consistently within the acceptable limits of the South African National Standards (SANS 241). |
| 3 | Aluminium & Manganese | Aluminium and Manganese levels are found to be fluctuating and this is due to the ongoing construction and process amendment underway at the Carolina Water Treatment Works. |
| 4 | Sulphate | The Sulphate levels are within the health parameters but are still aesthetically detectable. |
(2) All four mines which were issued with pre-directives on 9 March 2012, have since responded by providing the water quality data which was requested by the Department. Upon evaluation of the information submitted, the Department held the meetings with all mines to clarify the information submitted as it became evident that the water resources had already been polluted, including the wetland and the Boesmanspruit Dam. Further investigations will be conducted by the Department which may result in the mines being held responsible for the cost of rehabilitation of water resources.
(3) The Department together with the Inkomati Catchment Management Agency are considering various options including the issuance of directives with the intention to rehabilitate and clean-up the area affected by the water pollution. The Department is also intending to approach the South African Police Services and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development for possible criminal prosecution if non-compliance still continues.
-00O00---
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1442
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1718E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What was the date of each live lion export that has been specified in her reply to question 957 on 15 May 2012?
1442. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Here is the table: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/doc/2012/RNW1442-120612.pdf
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1424
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1424. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What corrective action will be taken to ensure that municipalities who did not achieve Blue Drop Status do so, (b) what time lines are in place to give effect to this corrective action plan and (c) what plans are in place to find alternative implementing agents if municipalities cannot comply with the corrective action plans? NW1697E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) The Blue Drop Certification programme is an incentive-based regulation programme which seeks to inspire municipalities to set their targets on levels of excellence rather than minimum requirements. This implies that should a municipality not obtain a good Blue Drop status but the quality of drinking water complies excellently with the National Standards (SANS 241), then there would no need for a corrective action plan even though certification status is not achieved as yet. Records have shown that most municipalities in this category set performance targets for themselves towards the achievement of the Blue Drop Certification status. The Department is already engaging municipalities with the Blue Drop scores of less than 50% (as per 2012 report) to ensure that corrective measures are planned for.
The Department assists municipalities with corrective planning, do limited funding allocation with regards to the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme (ACIP), assist with business plan drafting to address shortcomings and provide technical expertise via the Rapid Response Unit (RRU) where so required. However, should negligence or non-commitment be the evident cause, action always gets taken in line with enforcement protocol.
(b) The Department will monitor implementation of the various corrective plans and conduct progress assessments. The time lines for rectification will differ according to the severity of the specific shortcomings identified during the Blue Drop audits, and responses by the relevant municipalities.
(c) Municipalities that cannot comply with corrective plans must contract water boards or private sector water providers, but the final decision rests with the municipalities.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1441 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1717EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a)(i) How many park rangers are currently employed in the Kruger National Park (KNP) and (ii) what is the figure anticipated to be by the end of the 2012-13 financial year and (b) what is the current average area in square kilometre that each ranger has to cover in the KNP;
(2) whether the current average square kilometre area that each ranger has to cover is within her department's guidelines; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) how does the current average square kilometre that each ranger in the KNP has to cover compare with each of the other national parks run by the SA National Parks?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1441. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a)(i) and (ii) and (b);
(a) (i) A total of 216 rangers are employed in the Kruger National Park.
(ii) There should be 366 rangers by the end of the 2012/13 financial year.
(b) The current average area coverage per ranger is 8,789ha (87,9 square kilometre). The current recruitment of an additional 150 rangers will result in an average of 5,187ha (51,9 square kilometre) per ranger.
(2) There is currently no set formula to determine appropriate area coverage per ranger, given the ever changing dynamics and complexity of the variables to be considered, e.g. the nature of the terrain, equipment available for use, intensity and complexity of the continually evolving poaching activity. Given the current tactics used by poachers, high levels of mobility and night capability have become essential. These tactics will also evolve intensely as the poacher tactics evolve. Given the recent escalation of rhino poaching activities, additional resources provided by the SANDF and the SAPS and other state agencies are being used to compliment and improve on the ranger area coverage.
(3) The average in the other national parks is 3,900 ha (39 square kilometer) per ranger.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1395
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1645EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What is the purpose of the proposed peripheral development zone (PDZ) for the Kruger National Park that is currently developed by the SA National Parks (SANParks);
(2) whether there was any consultation with the public in the development of the PDZ; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has approved the establishment of the PDZ in the Kruger National Park; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the proposed PDZ is consistent with the provisions of the Biodiversity Policy and Strategy for South Africa: Strategy on Buffer Zones for National Parks (details furnished); if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1395. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The purpose of the peripheral development zone (PDZ) is as follows:
· To create a conservation corridor which will, among others, serve as a mechanism to reduce poaching incursions into the Greater Lebombo Conservancy( GLC) and the Kruger National Park ( KNP) through establishing and operating a joint task force
· To use the conservation corridor to facilitate harmonisation of management policies and practices
· To secure the eastern boundary line of the GLC to prevent or minimise human-wildlife conflict
· To use the conservation corridor to facilitate cross border tourism, to stimulate investment into the corridor as well as into the neighbouring communities in Mozambique
· To generate socio-economic opportunities such as jobs, community facilities like schools and clinics for the benefit of local communities in Mozambique
(2) Yes, there were consultations with key stakeholders in Mozambique and South Africa including members of the GLC, the Ministry of Tourism in Mozambique, the South African National Defence Force and the South African Police Services.
(3) Yes, the Minister approved the establishment of the PDZ and this will be followed by a memorandum of understanding that will be signed between the Government of the Republic of Mozambique and the Government of theRepublic of South Africa.
(4) Yes, the proposed PDZ is consistent with the provisions of the Biodiversity Policy and Strategy for South Africa in that it promotes the management of the KNP and the GLC as a contiguous conservation area. The GLC comprises natural areas of high biodiversity value which are critical for the long-term persistence of biodiversity in the KNP. The reduction in the incidences of rhino poaching through the buffer zone development will significantly contribute towards the conservation of this globally threatened iconic species.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1394 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1644EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 889 on 7 May 2012, she could provide figures for the exportation of live rhinos to Asian countries from 1 January 2006 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) in respect of each specified case, (a) what is the name of the (i) exporter, (ii) importer and (iii) country to which the rhinos were exported, (b) how many live rhinos were exported and (c) which authority has approved the exportation;
(3) whether, in respect of each export, the necessary regulations on Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) permits were obtained for the transportation of rhinos from (a) the farm or reserve on which they reside and (b) their point of departure to the relevant Asian country; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether, in respect of each export, all the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)regulations were adhered to; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1394. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) – (4) The following information relating to the export of live rhino to Asian countries since 1 Jan 2006 was obtained from permit endorsements done at the OR Tambo Airport see attached.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1393
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1393. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 3642 on 13 December 2011, any further work has been done to establish whether the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, is sufficient for the purposes of controlling hydraulic fracturing; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether any officials of her department had interactions with the task team established by the Minister of Mineral Resources to investigate hydraulic fracturing since her reply; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the Water Research Commission has conducted any research into the impact of hydraulic fracturing on water; if not, why not; if so, what were the findings? NW1643E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department is considering classifying hydraulic fracturing as a Controlled Activity under Section 38 of the National Water Act (Act no. 36 of 1998). This will be done through the review of the National Water Act.
(2) Three hydro geologists from the Department are members of the Working Group of the Task Team established by the Minister of Mineral Resources.
(3) Yes, the Water Research Commission appointed the University of Free State's Institute for Groundwater Studies to investigate hydraulic fracturing in South Africa. A report is expected in nine months' time.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1392
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1392. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters for each month in each municipality in KwaZulu-Natal and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any measures are in place to assist municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal to decrease water loss; if not, why not; if so, what measures;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand for water and (b) supply of water in each municipality in KwaZulu-Natal? NW1642E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The total water losses, non revenue water (NRW) as well as the average monthly total water losses as a percentage of system input in each of the Water Services Authorities (WSAs) in KwaZulu-Natal are presented in the attached Annexure A. Where possible, the figures are monthly average kilolitres for the 2011/12 municipal financial year i.e. from 1 July 2011 to 30 April 2012.
(2) Table 1 below reflects the financial assistance that has been provided to the WSAs in KwaZulu-Natal. In addition, the Umgungundlovu District Municipality (DM) has been assisted with their application to the Dutch Government and such bid for grant funding of approximately R380 million was successful, of which 60% is for water demand and conservation management. The Department is also in the process of adjudicating a tender for a three year study to update and maintain the reconciliation strategies that have been developed for the supply systems in the province. This study includes an evaluation of the water use efficiencies and potential savings in each system.
Table 1: Financial support to WSAs for Water Demand and Conservation Management
| WSA | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | Total Project |
| Ethekwini MetropolitanMunicipality | R 8 214 500 | R 9 285 500 | R 0 | R 4 000 000 | R 21 500 000 |
| Msunduzi Local Municipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 3 000 000 | R 1 500 000 | R 4 500 000 |
| Ilembe District Municipality | R 500 000 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 3 295 284 | R 4 795 284 |
| Umgungundlovu DistrictMunicipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 300 000 | R 0 | R 300 000 |
| Ugu District Municipality | R 500 000 | R 0 | R 1 347 453 | R 4 300 000 | R 6 147 453 |
| Umkhanyakude DistrictMunicipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 0 | R 5 000 000 | R 5 000 000 |
| Mhlathuze Local Municipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 |
| Amajuba DM | R 0 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 |
| Uthukela DM | R 0 | R 0 | R 2 083 279 | R 2 083 279 | |
| TOTAL | R 9 214 500 | R 10 285 500 | R 6 647 453 | R 20 178 563 | R 46 326 016 |
(3) In 2009, the Department completed the KwaZulu-Natal Coastal Metropolitan Reconciliation Strategy Study. This study found that the demands in the area exceed the available supplies and strategies are being implemented to address the imbalances (details attached as Annexure B). These strategies include water demand and conservation management interventions and the Ethekwini Metropolitan Municipality, as the main user who utilises 80 percent of the water from the system, is reducing losses through the replacement of leak prone asbestos cement pipelines, leak detection, pressure reduction, rezoning and improvement in reservoir integrity. The NRW in Ethekwini in 2009/10 was 37.5 % and the target is to reduce this to 28% by 2013.
The Department also completed first order reconciliation strategies for the significant supply systems in the rest of the province in December 2011, and is in the process of awarding a tender to maintain these strategies and monitor their implementation. Each strategy determines the water demand, evaluates available water supply, and evaluated the best way balancing the two. In all cases, water demand and conservation management is considered as one of the first interventions.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1391
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1391. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any progress is being made in establishing an integrated permit system for the issuing of water use licences for the mines; if not, why not; if so, (a) when is it expected that such a system will be in place and (b) what are the further relevant details;
(2) whether there are any challenges that need to be overcome in order to achieve an integrated permitting system; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1641E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)With regard to the water use licenses issued by the Department, we are already issuing a consolidated water use license for the mining operations, encompassing all the water uses identified in one license and this is referred to as an Integrated Water Use License.
There is also an initiative to coordinate and align time frames, legislation, systems, business process, areas of common information requirements etc, for authorisations on the mining across the Departments of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Mineral Resources (DMR) and the Department of Water Affairs (DWA). Processes have been mapped and progress has been made. It is not expected that one integrated permit would be issued under this initiative between the three departments rather, the processes are anticipated to yield to improved coordination on information requirements from applicants as well as aligned time frames on the granting of a mining right/permit and a water use license.
Between the DWA and DMR, some alignment is currently being implemented while other elements such as online application will be phased in over a period of
18 months after enactment of amendments to the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No 28 of 2002), in line with the time frames in the agreement for the transfer of the Environmental Function to the DMR.
(2) There are no obstacles envisaged as the Department is already issuing an Integrated Water Use License for the mines, and there are no major challenges encountered as the system is well developed over the past few years. The alignment part with the DEA and DMR has to be achieved, however there are still processes that we need to complete in respect of the coordinated and aligned time frames for authorisations identified which include but not limited to: human capacity requirements; awareness and communication within the three departments including the external stakeholders; enforcement; appeals and amendments of legislation (also including air quality, waste and ocean and coastal issues); timeframes alignment processes; as well as joint planning for spatial areas.
The necessities were identified through a series of trilateral meetings between the three departments; however, task teams to guide the implementation process have been formed and are dealing with proposed solutions.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1384
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1634EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether she has put any environmental guidelines in place with regard to the construction of wind farms as a means of generating electricity; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr P J Rabie (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1384. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes. The guidelines give an indication of the minimum information required for the application to be considered.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1356
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1356. Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many employees in her department in the post level of deputy director to director general who have been appointed on a (a) permanent and (b) contract basis (i) have been suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action for periods exceeding three months, (ii) have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded and (iii)(aa) have been found guilty of gross financial misconduct or negligence and dismissed and (bb) were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearings in the (aaa) 2009-10 and (bbb) 2010-11 financial years;
(2) what total amount was paid in salaries and benefits to the employees while they were suspended;
(3) whether her department has laid criminal charges against any persons following investigations or disciplinary hearings where fraud or corruption was found to have taken place; if not, why not; if so,
(4) whether, subsequent to the specified findings of fraud and corruption, any amounts have been recovered in terms of the relevant provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999; if so, what amounts; if not,
(5) how does she intend to comply with national legislation which was promulgated to prevent corrupt practices and compel authorities to report corrupt practices to law enforcement agencies? NW1599E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) One (1) Director: Central Operations.
(1)(b)(i) In total Eight (8) employees were suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action as follows:
· one (1) Director-General who was subsequently dismissed after the disciplinary hearing;
· one (1) Deputy Director-General who is still on suspension pending the outcome of a Labour Court Review Application;
· one (1) CFO who was subsequently dismissed after the disciplinary hearing;
· three (3) Chief Directors whose cases were finalized and returned to work with one receiving a final written warning; and
· two (2) Directors who are still on suspension pending the outcome of their disciplinary enquiries, all were on contract.
(1)(b)(ii) Two (2) Directors have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded.
(1)(b)(iii)(aa) Two (2) employees have been dismissed for gross negligence.
(1)(b)(iii)(bb) Two (2) employees were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearing
(1)(b)(iii)(aaa) 2009-2010 One (1) Director General.
(1)(b)(iii)(bbb) 2010-2011 One (1) Chief Financial Officer.
(2) R6 778 466.30
To note:
As prescribed by Chapter 7 of the Senior Management Services Handbook 1 December 2003 item (2), the Conditions of Service enacted by the DPS for Senior Managers prescribes that with regard to "Precautionary suspension" (a) the employer may suspend a member on full pay if -
· the member is alleged to have committed a serious offence; and
· the employer believes that the presence of a member at the workplace might jeopardise any investigation into the alleged misconduct, or endanger the well being or safety of any person or state property.
(3) Yes, criminal charges were laid against the Director: Central Operations. The disciplinary allegations against the other seven officials were not related to allegations of fraud or corruption.
(4) No. As none of the SMS officials, except for Director: Central Operations mentioned above, were suspected of having committed fraud or corruption. They were disciplined for non compliance with procurement regulations.
(5) Where the Department suspects employees of engaging in fraudulent or corrupt activities it has engaged the services of the Internal Audit, the SAPS and or the Special Investigative Unit (SIU) in line with the Department's Fraud Prevention Strategy, which resides under the control of a totally independent Internal Audit Unit, which reports directly to the Director General.
On the findings of either the Internal Audit Unit, SAPS or SIU, the employee concerned will be disciplined and criminally charged and on successful conviction, the state attorney is instructed to pursue an order under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act to request the Presiding Magistrate or Judge when sentencing the accused, to make an order of Compensation to the State to recover whatever had been lost as a result of the fraud or corruption. This usually results in asset forfeiture of the guilty offender.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1356
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1356. Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many employees in her department in the post level of deputy director to director general who have been appointed on a (a) permanent and (b) contract basis (i) have been suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action for periods exceeding three months, (ii) have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded and (iii)(aa) have been found guilty of gross financial misconduct or negligence and dismissed and (bb) were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearings in the (aaa) 2009-10 and (bbb) 2010-11 financial years;
(2) what total amount was paid in salaries and benefits to the employees while they were suspended;
(3) whether her department has laid criminal charges against any persons following investigations or disciplinary hearings where fraud or corruption was found to have taken place; if not, why not; if so,
(4) whether, subsequent to the specified findings of fraud and corruption, any amounts have been recovered in terms of the relevant provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999; if so, what amounts; if not,
(5) how does she intend to comply with national legislation which was promulgated to prevent corrupt practices and compel authorities to report corrupt practices to law enforcement agencies? NW1599E
---00O00---
REPLY:
1
(a) One Director, Central Operations
(b) (i) Eight, one Director General, one Deputy Director General, one CFO, three Chief
Directors and two Directors all on contract.
(ii) Two Directors
(iii) (aa) Two dismissed for gross negligence
(bb) Two dismissed following due process
(aaa) 2009-2010 One , Director General
(bbb) 2010-2011 One, Chief Financial Officer
2 An amount of R6 778 466.30 was paid for varying periods of such suspension which were all in line with the provisions of the law.
3 Yes, criminal charges were laid against the Director, Central Operations. The disciplinary allegations against the other seven officials were not related to allegations of fraud or corruption.
4 No. As none of the SMS officials, except for Director, Central Operations mentioned above, were suspected of having committed fraud or corruption. They were disciplined for non compliance with procurement regulations.
5 Where the department suspects employees of engaging in fraudulent or corrupt activities it has engaged the services of the Internal Audit, the SAPS and or the Special Investigative Unit (SIU) in line with the Department's Fraud Prevention Strategy, which resides under the control of a totally independent Internal Audit Unit, which reports directly to the Director General.
On the findings of either the Internal Audit Unit, SAPS or SIU, the employee concerned will be disciplined and criminally charged and on successful conviction, the state attorney is instructed to pursue an order under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act to request the Presiding Magistrate or Judge when sentencing the accused, to make an order of Compensation to the State to recover whatever had been lost as a result of the fraud or corruption. This usually results in asset forfeiture of the guilty offender.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1351
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
[INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 14]
1351. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department is encouraging the treatment of waste water to enable its further use for (a) industrial, (b) agricultural and (c) domestic purposes; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details, in each case? NW1593
REPLY:
Yes, the Department encourages the treatment of waste water to enable its further use for industrial, agricultural and even domestic purposes.
(a) Industrial
All industries are required to submit Integrated Water and Waste Management Plans for their facilities when they apply for water use authorisations. Industries are also encouraged to follow the Best Practice Guidelines developed by the Department.
(b) Agriculture
In agriculture, irrigation of land with waste or water containing waste is a controlled activity in terms of Section 37 (i)(a) of the National Water Act. As such, during the authorisation process, conditions with specific water quality standards and limits are applied. Also, guidelines for reuse of waste water sludge; which is a by-product of the waste water treatment process have been developed.
(c) Domestic Purposes
The Department encourages the treatment of waste water to enable its future use for domestic purposes. In future, more re-use of waste water even for domestic use to potable standards will be necessary because of our scarce fresh water resources. Stringent safety processes will be incorporated into such treatment plants to safeguard public health as well as blending with fresh water.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1345
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1345. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 892 on 7 May 2012, (a) why is her department using the skills of so few retired engineers and (b) why are these skills only used in the national office of her department and not in the regional offices? NW1567E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) The project to recruit retired engineers back into to the Department is currently in its initial phase. As the project gain momentum, more of the retired engineers identified via the database as supplied by Department of Public Works will be recruited and employed. In this regard it must be noted that even engineers who worked in the Department before are being targeted.
(b) Although the initial four (4) retired engineers are based in national office, their skills and expertise are utilised in projects linked to the regions as well. As indicated above, regional placements will be effected as the project unfolds.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1334
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13)
1334. Mr P J Groenewald (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to put the Taung Dam in Northern Cape to better use; if not, why not; if so, how;
(2) whether she will make a statement on the matter? NW1579E
REPLY:
(1) The Department is using the Taung Dam, which is in the North West Province, to supply water to the settlements in the Naledi Local Municipality (LM) and Greater Taung LM within the Dr Ruth Sepati Mompati District Municipality (DM). It is the main water source for the Taung/Naledi Bulk Water Supply project being implemented through the Regional Bulk Infrastructure Programme. The details and the status of the project intended to put the Taung Dam to a better use are summarised below:
The refurbishment of Phase 1 (Pudimoe Water Treatment Works (WTW)) has been completed during the 2011112 financial year and handed over to the Dr Ruth Sepati Mompati DM.
A total of two contracts on Phase 2A (New module Pudimoe WTW), and 12 contracts on Phase 2B (Reservoirs, water pipelines and pump stations) are currently in progress. The construction of Phase 2A and 28 is anticipated to be completed by July 2012 and May 2013 respectively. The construction of Phase 2C and 2D is anticipated to be completed by April 2013 and March 2014 respectively.
The completion of all Phases will lend further support to the Phase 1 in terms of the available potable water being produced and put into the current bulk supply systems for the communities that fall under the Naledi LM and Greater Taung LM.
The Phase 2E which is the bulk surface water supply to the South East villages currently supplied by ground water, and Phase 2F which covers the refurbishment of the current 8 megalitre per day of the Pudimoe WTW are the future phases.
(2). Yes, I did make a statement in my Budget speech on 16 May 2012 to this effect. I quote" As far as Unlocking the economic opportunities of the North West Province is concerned, Taung, including the surrounding villages in the Greater Taung and Naledi Local Municipalities, are experiencing water supply shortages, hence we have commenced with the implementation to augment the bulk water supply mostly for domestic water usage. The Taung dam is being used to address the bulk water supply and a total of approximately 186 000 households will be served with water. The project started during the 2009/10 financial year and several phases have already been completed. The budget allocation over the MTEF period is R358 million. "
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1329
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1573EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether a study has been conducted to determine the number of (a) homes, (b) schools, (c) road surfaces and (d) other public buildings in the Northern Cape that have been contaminated with asbestos; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) what are the priority areas in the Northern Cape requiring rehabilitation from asbestos contamination;
(3) whether a costing for the rehabilitation of asbestos contamination in the Northern Cape has been done; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1329. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the study was conducted and the details are provided below.
(a) Total number of homes
Table 1: Estimated Number of Homes with Asbestos Contamination see attached.
· No estimate of households was available. Households were estimated by dividing the total population estimate by the average number of individuals within each home per the provincial average.
(b) Total number of schools:
Table 2: Number of Schools with Asbestos Contamination see attached
(c) Roads surfaces contaminated with asbestos
The 2006 CSS survey conducted in the Northern Cape with regard to contaminated road surfaces identified that approximately 400 km of road surface are contaminated with asbestos. The report did not incorporate other public buildings, apart from schools.
(2) The priority areas identified in the report are Ga-Mopedi and Heuningvlei.
(3) Yes, the costing for rehabilitation has been done for Ga-Mopedi which was identified as a highly contaminated area and posing a higher risk to the public. These estimates are scalable given the various levels of contamination that may be identified with costs tending to reduce on a per unit basis as project sizes increase. Table 3 below provides a summary of the total remediation cost associated with the removal and disposal of asbestos waste contamination for the Ga-Mopedi area. This estimate was based on the best available information available during the study to date, but may be subject to revision as additional data is obtained or new sites are identified for remediation.
Table 3: Remediation cost estimates/unit (based on a 90 square metre size house) for Ga-Mopedi
Average costs per contaminated stand (erven)
| Preferred Method: | R249 000 |
| Alternate Preferred Method: | R212 000 (replacement using on site builders) |
| No of contaminated stands: | 110 |
| Total costs for remediation of stands: | R23.3 million to R27.4 million |
| Costs of contaminated road remediation: | R1.2 million per square kilometre of area |
| Area of contaminated road in Ga-Mopedi: | 0.9 km2 |
| Cost of road remediation: | R1 080 000 |
| Total costs for remediation of Ga-Mopedi: | Range = R24.4 to R28.5 million |
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1327
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13)
1327. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) Why has the Department of Water Affairs not paid the expropriation payment of R423 500 to the previous owner by 30 April 2012 for the remainder of Portion 5 of the farm Beaufort No. 32, Registration Division: LT, Limpopo Province after the expropriation came into effect on or about 5 February 2012, (b) when can the previous owner expect payment and (c) what is the role of a certain official in her department (name and details furnished) in the delay of paying the specified amount to the previous owner;
(2) whether the said official is being investigated for racial discrimination towards the previous owner of the portion of land; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1571E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) The payment to the owner of the farm was not done by 30 April 2012 as the Department still needed to verify the amount being claimed by the owner before making any payment.
(1)(b) An amount of R466 545 was paid on 9 May 2012 into the owner of the farm's account instead of the R423 500 which was inclusive of solatium as per the valuation report conducted by JH Boshoff Rural and Urban Evaluations. They were contracted by the Department of Public Works on behalf of the Department with a difference of R43 045 for value added tax (VAT). The Department is currently looking at the objection to the offer by the farm owner through his attorneys Len Dekker & Associates.
(1)(c) The role of officials within the Department is to verify the amount being claimed before payment could be made.
(2) As there has been no official complaint, there is therefore no official who is being investigated for racial discrimination towards the farm owner.
Reply received: June 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1326 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1570EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Department of Environmental Affairs is involved in the remediation of any sites contaminated by asbestos in the Northern Cape, if not, why not, if so, which (a) sites have been rehabilitated thus far and (b) sites are due to be rehabilitated in the (i) 2012-13, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15 financial years;
(2) What is the budgetary allocation for remediation of sites with asbestos pollution for the (a) 2012-13, (b) 2013-14 and (c) 2014-15 financial year?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1326. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1) Yes. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is involved in the remediation of asbestos contaminated sites in the Northern Cape Province as follows: The DEA has finalised the study on Secondary Asbestos Remediation Plan (SARP) which details the remediation options, operational plan and costing model required for successful remediation of asbestos contaminated sites in the province.The findings of the SARP and Costing Model was presented for approval at the Cabinet meeting held on 20 April 2011. On presentation of the plan and costing model Cabinet instructed the DEA to establish an inter-departmental team, led by the DEA, with the view to finalise an operational plan detailing functions, procedures and budget implications. The inter-departmental team was established on 19 September 2011 and comprised national departments, provincial departments and municipalities affected by secondary Asbestos. The operational plan has been finalised and the report including the costing model will be presented to Cabinet in this fiscal year for approval. The study recommended that remediation of contaminated sites be done in phases; it is also dependent on the availability.
2) The SARP provides a yearly summary expenditure required for the remediation of asbestos contaminated sites identified in four provinces including the Northern Cape. In addition, detailed budget breakdown (refer to Table 1 below) required for the remediation of asbestos contamination was done for the Ga-Mopedi site in the Northern Cape Provincebecause it was identified as a high risk area. The cost estimate was based on the best available information during the study (2009) and it is subject to revision as additional data is obtained during remediation or when new sites are identified for remediation. Table 2 below provides detailed cost estimates to remediate contaminated land uses in four provinces (i.e. Limpopo, Northern Cape, North West, and Mpumalanga) affected with secondary asbestos pollution. Table 3 below provides yearly expenditure range for ensuring successful implementation of the SARP in the above four provinces.
Table 1: Remediation cost estimates / unit (based on a 90 square meter size house) for Ga-Mopedi
Average costs per contaminated stand (erven)
| Preferred Method: | R 249 000 |
| Alternate Preferred Method: | R 212 000 (replacement using on site builders) |
| No of contaminated stands: | 110 |
| Total costs for remediation of stands: | R23.3 million to R27.4 million |
| Costs of contaminated road remediation: | R1.2 million per square kilometer of area |
| Area of contaminated road in Ga-Mopedi: | 0.9 km2 |
| Cost of road remediation: | R1 080 000 |
| Total costs for remediation of Ga-Mopedi: | Range = R24.4 to R28.5 million |
Table 2: Total SARP financial summary for the four provinces (i.e. Limpopo, Northern Cape, North West, and Mpumalanga)
| Land use | cost estimate (Rand) |
| Homes | 1 543 800 000 |
| Schools | 77 675 000 |
| Roads | 330 000 000 |
| Other buildings | 144 000 000 |
| Other sites | 48 000 000 |
| Social compensation | 12 400 000 |
| Subtotal: | 2 155 875 000 |
| Management and Administration at 15% | 323 381 250 |
| Total SARP Costs (2009 Rand): | 2 479 256 250 |
Table 3: Yearly expenditures range for SARP over a 10-year period
| Year | Low Range | Hi Range |
| 2010 | R 164, 700,000 | R 274,500,000 |
| 2011 | R 174,582,000 | R 290,970,000 |
| 2012 | R 185,056,920 | R 308,428,200 |
| 2013 | R 196,160,335 | R 326,933,892 |
| 2014 | R 207,929,955 | R 346,549,926 |
| 2015 | R 220,405,753 | R 367,342,921 |
| 2016 | R 233,630,098 | R 389,383,496 |
| 2017 | R 247,647,904 | R 412,746,506 |
| 2018 | R 262,506,778 | R 437,511,296 |
| 2019 | R 278,257,185 | R 463,761,974 |
| 2020 | R 294,952,616 | R 491,587,693 |
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1325
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1569EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether Smart Position and Temperature (Spot) tagging of sharks is permitted in South African coastal waters in terms of the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998, if so, how was this conclusion reached, if not, why not;
(2) whether she has found any known physiological effects on sharks to which Spot tags had been affixed; if so, what are the relevant details, if not, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) whether any research is being conducted to determine the effect of Spot tags on sharks; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) how many sharks in South African waters have had Spot tags affixed to them since 1 January 2012?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1325. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes. This is international best practice.
(2) No. No change in behaviour has been observed in tagged sharks.
(3) No. The use of Spot tags to investigate the behaviour, movement and residency patterns of wild animals (including marine mammals, sharks and turtles) has been practised widely internationally for many years by many scientists. Thus, there is much information available in the literature regarding the effect, or the lack thereof, of fixing Spot tags to animals, including sharks. As this is a well-established technique with evidence that it has little impact on sharks, it is not necessary for the Department of Environmental Affairs to undertake research to determine the effect of Spot tags on sharks.
(4) 34 sharks.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1323 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1566EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many (a) hotels and (b) lodges does SANParks intend to build in the Kruger National Park until the end of the 2017-18 financial year;
(2) whether any (a) hotel and (b) lodge developments other than the Malelane and Skukuza developments are being planned; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the proposed Malelane development?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1321. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) The following hotels and lodges are planned, and depending on funding and feasibility, may be built in the Kruger National Park (KNP) in the next five years:
a) Hotels:
· Malelane Safari Lodge
· Skukuza Conference Lodge
b) Lodges:
· Shangoni Lodge (the site is still to be determined but will be on the periphery of the park and possibly outside the KNP boundary)
· Smaller rustic tent camps with between 5 and 8 tents per camp are planned for the following sites:
§ Shingwedzi
§ Letaba
§ Talamati
§ Satara
§ Orpen
§ Berg-en-dal
(2) The Shangoni Lodge and smaller rustic tent camps as detailed above.
(3) The Malelane Safari Lodge: The detailed planning is progressing well with the final scoping report to be submitted to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in due course. It is anticipated that the environmental impact assessment will be completed towards the end of 2012. Should a positive record of decision be obtained, construction will commence thereafter.
The proposed hotel-style accommodation facilities are part of the Commercialisation Strategy and justified by the need to diversify the product range offered. The target market is the South African business sector (for conferences), a section of the middle class (all races) that prefers a full service (without bringing the whole grocery shop to the park or cook for oneself). Families with children prefer to have some form of modern conveniences to keep their children happy. The target market will be South Africans and therefore the pricing of the hotels will accommodate both the local and overseas markets. The new developments will in total create between 600-700 jobs from the conceptualisation through the construction to the operational stages. These jobs are vital in the Lowveld region where unemployment runs up to 70% of the regional population. The proposed hotel developments enjoy the support of 181 communities living around the KNP (estimated at 3 million people), 7 district municipalities in the region, traditional authorities, the South African Tourism Business Council (representing the entire tourism industry), the Lowveld Chamber of Business and Tourism, organised labour and many sections of the silent majority living in townships, rural areas and the informal settlements of our country. In addition to this, additional revenue for the funding of conservation would be generated.
There is no empirical or scientific evidence that suggests that these developments will have any negative impacts on biodiversity or ecosystems. The private party will be required to adhere to all applicable responsible tourism standards as well as the "greening" principles and criteria derived from the existing standards set by SANParks for the concessions as reflected in the SANParks Management Plan Policy Framework, the KNP Management Plan, the Concession Operations Manual as well as the National Responsible Tourism Guidelines of the DEA. No exclusive traversing has been granted to the private operator and the Safari Resort development will be operated from the Malelane Entrance Gate Park and Ride Facility minimising the traffic on the roads. The building style and structure will be in harmony with the environment including the local culture and physiognomy.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1321 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.13 NW1564EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department is carrying out any (a) compliance and enforcement and (b) offensive odour investigations with regard to air quality in (i) St Helena Bay and (ii) Britannia Bay; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;
(2) whether she has found that progress has been made in improving air quality in these areas since the beginning of 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1321. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The MEC for Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning in the Western Cape recently requested the Minister to reinstate the investigation related to the odour complaints from residents in the St Helena-Britannia Bay area. In 2010, an investigation was initiated by the Directorate: Enforcement of the national Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), but this was suspended in order to await the outcome of the health risk assessment (discussed in the response to question 2 below).
Following the findings and recommendations of the health risk assessment, a joint task team (comprising national, provincial and local officials) decided on an approach to ensure better regulation of the industry, including the setting of a specific standard for hydrogen sulphide emissions to be included in the different facilities' new provisional atmospheric emission licences. As monitoring only takes place twice a year, the authorities decided to monitor compliance with these conditions prior to making a decision on whether further enforcement action was required.
Following the letter from the MEC, the Chief Directorate: Compliance and Enforcement of the DEA is in the process of reviewing the most current information and recent complaints in order to assess the approach to be taken (see below). A decision will then be made as to the need for additional compliance monitoring and / or enforcement activities.
(2) Since the coming into effect of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act on 1 April 2010 (including the relevant provisions related to licensing functions) the West Coast District Municipality (WCDM) has made every effort, with assistance from the Directorate: Pollution Management of the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP), to conclude the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act (APPA) review process on the fishmeal industry.
With regard to St Helena Bay, three of the four plants have been issued with provisional atmospheric emission licences (AEL) on 3 August 2011 with specific conditions that need to be complied with within specific timeframes. These licences will be reviewed by end July 2012 to determine progress with regard to further investigations. The fourth provisional AEL was issued on 29 March 2012 with similar conditions that will be reviewed by the end of October 2012. Once these investigations have been completed and agreed to by the relevant competent authorities, industry will have to submit action plans of implementation to the satisfaction of the competent authority. Further investigations include, among others, the following: control of fugitive emissions, preservation of raw product, environmental noise, emissions of hydrogen sulphide and monitoring, replacement of old and redundant equipment and implementation of best available technology, establishment of a communication forum with Interested and Affected Parties and treatment of non-condensable compounds. Progress with regard to some of these requirements has been noted by the WCDM and it can be reported that two of these facilities have had community forum meetings. The plant situated closest to the Britannia Bay area, namely Oceana, has had two public forum meetings and completed its first round of emission monitoring. A noise survey was also conducted.
The first factory as you enter the St Helena Bay area, namely West Point Processors, is busy replacing defunct equipment and refurbishing the entire fishmeal processing plant. They have had their first public meeting.
The provisional AEL of 29 March 2012 with a review date of the end of October 2012 was issued to Oranjevis, which has undertaken major upgrades during the past few years and is now in the process of commissioning a chemical scrubber to treat non-condensable compounds.
With regard to the Hannasbaai Fishing plant situated near the Oranjevis plant in the Sandy Point harbour area, it is important to note that its impact on air quality may change in future. The Sea Harvest white fish processing establishment in Saldanha that provides the raw material in the form of white fish offal to this facility has recently submitted an application for the establishment of a fishmeal processing plant at their own factory in Saldanha. They will then process the white fish offal (that is presently transported by road to the Hannasbaai facility in St Helena Bay) at their factory in Saldanha.
It is further important to note that, as a result of the health risk assessment that was done by Infotox under the supervision of the Chief: Directorate: Air Quality of the DEA, a hydrogen sulphide emission limit of 5mg/Nm3 was determined and included in the provisional AELs. This must be monitored twice per annum and reported to the competent authority. As previously mentioned, the Oceana plant, situated closest to the Britannia Bay area, has already done its first round of monitoring. The DEA&DP also placed an ambient monitoring station in close proximity to the Oceana plant to, among others, monitor H2S concentrations in ambient air. The station is up and running since April 2011.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1237
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1237. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012, what is the current status of the water licence application process for the PMG mine in the Northern Cape;
(2) whether any other enforcement steps have been taken against the mine in terms of National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, since the pre-notice was issued against the mine in July 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) in view of the fact that the mine had not even applied to the Department of Water Affairs for a water user licence by 19 March 2012, why has the department not issued a directive to the mine to desist from using and discharging any water;
(4) what (a) are the dates of the last three visits by officials of the Department of Water Affairs to the mine and (b) are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the visits in each case;
(5) whether her department has any concerns about the way in which the mine is using and discharging water; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1434E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) An incomplete water use license application was submitted to the Department's Regional Office: Northern Cape and an initial assessment was conducted. Further technical information was requested in a letter dated 3 May 2012, however, the Department is still awaiting submission of this information by the applicant.
A site inspection has been arranged for 4 June 2012 to further discuss and clarify the additional information requirements with the applicant in order to facilitate the water use license application process.
(2) No further enforcement steps were taken against the PMG Mine (the Mine) since the July 2010 pre-notice as the mine committed (in a detailed action plan dated 2 August 2010) to addressing the key issues listed in the pre-notice. In compliance with the action plan, the mine has conducted several specialist studies, including a detailed geo-hydrological report and storm water management plan, in support of the water license application process. Furthermore, during a joint site inspection conducted by the Department and the Department of Mineral Resources officials on 20 July 2011, it was confirmed that the mine had implemented the following remedial measures:
§ the construction of a vehicle wash bay;
§ discontinuation of water use from boreholes on site; and
§ sourcing alternative water from Sedibeng Water as proposed in the action plan.
(3) The mine demonstrated a willingness to cooperate and implemented several measures, as stipulated in response (2) above, to minimise its impacts on the water resource hence a directive was not issued. The success of the Department in dealing with unlawful water use should not only be gauged in terms of the extent to which directives are issued, but its ability to ensure that such unlawful water use is addressed through cooperation by the water user. Furthermore, an incomplete water use license application was submitted to the Department and this application will now be expedited through the Letsema Project.
(4) Only two site visits have been conducted by the Department thus far. The table 1 below indicates the dates, names and designations of officials who conducted the last inspection at the mine:
Table (5) The Department is concerned that the mining operations might impact negatively on the quality of groundwater resources in the immediate vicinity of the mine. The Department therefore requested a detailed groundwater investigation by the
mine in order to ensure that, the impacts of the mining operation are fully understood. This will also ensure that appropriate water use license conditions are stipulated in the event that a water use license is issued to the mine.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1236
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1433EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to investigate the (a) circumstances that led to the awarding of a permit to a certain entity (name furnished) to conduct research on and film sharks off the coast and (b) terms and conditions of the permit; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;
(2) what were the reasons for cancelling the permit;
(3) whether the said entity had attempted to get the permit reinstated after the cancellation; if so, what was her department's response?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1236. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. The matter has been examined by the Department of Environmental Affairs and thus far there is no indication of a need for an investigation regarding (a) the circumstances that led to a permit being awarded, and (b) the conditions of the permit.
(3) This action was taken based on the fact there had been a fatality recently and that all the relevant facts and circumstances had to be properly investigated before any further work could be considered.
(3) Their position, together with information gathered over the following ten days (including that on the movement of tagged sharks), resulted in the Department deciding to re-issue new permits.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1235 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1432EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has found any reason for concern about the exportation of lion bones; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) what are the primary countries to which lion bones are exported;
(3) whether she is considering placing a moratorium on the exportation of lion bones; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1235. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No, the lion bones exported are a by-product of the captive-bred lions that are legally hunted.
(2) United State of America, Spain, Laos and Vietnam.
(3) No, a prohibition (moratorium) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004) can only be put in place if the activity is of a nature that may negatively impact on the survival of the species in the wild. As stated above, the Department does not consider the trade in lion bones as posing a threat to the survival of the species in the wild.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1219
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1219. Mr E H Eloff (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What amount have her departments spent on (a) catering and (b) entertainment (i) in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2012? NW1416E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The expenditure incurred by my departments on catering and entertainment during the aforementioned financial years are reflected on relevant annual audited reports of the departments. For instance, expenditure in this regard for the Department of Water Affairs, is encapsulated on page 112 of the 2010/11 annual report.
It is important to note that the amounts reflected therein are in respect of a plethora of official functions that the department engages in on regular basis across its regional and local offices during a particular financial year.
The same principle applies in respect to the Department of Environmental Affairs.
The expenditure for the current financial year will accordingly be reflected upon completion of this financial period.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1192
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1192. Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed that a water pipe which transports water into the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality has had a significant break over the past two months resulting in water leaking at the point where the pipe crosses the Maitland River mouth; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,
(2) whether she will investigate the situation; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether any steps are being taken to rectify the situation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1388E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Although the Department had not been informed about the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality's (NMBM) water pipeline leakage, on receipt of this parliamentary question, the matter was urgently investigated.
The Department has since been advised by the NMBM that the water pipeline which was leaking due to corrosiveness was since repaired on 11 May 2012. Regrettably, the delays in the repairing of the pipeline were due to the fact that special pieces of the pipe had to be made before the repairs could be carried out.
It should be noted that the option to shut off the water pipeline (to avoid further leakage) could not be explored as such would have resulted in most communities without access to water as the pipeline is one of the main bulk water supply pipelines to the NMBM.
(2) Falls away.
(3) Falls away.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1191 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1387EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed that a loan has been awarded to the Recycling and Economic Development Initiative of SA (Redisa) to commence operations despite it not yet having been formally approved by her; if not,
(2) whether she intends to investigate the situation; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) (a) how much money was loaned and (b) what is the name of the entity that awarded the loan;
(4) whether she will make a statement on the matter?
Mr N D du Toit (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1191. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) As Minister, I am not aware of any loan being awarded in this regard.
(2) There is no need to investigate the situation.
(3) (a) I have no knowledge of any amounts that were loaned in this regard; (b) I also have no knowledge of the name of the entity that awarded the loan.
(4) Please refer to the statement below:
All organisations that develop industry waste management plans in terms of the Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) or, in particular, the Waste Tyre Regulations (2009), as the case may be, do so at their own risk. Should any company which has submitted a plan to the Minister for approval, obtain a loan to facilitate the development and/or implementation of such a plan, do so entirely at its own risk. As Minister, I am under no obligation to approve a plan purely because the developer of such a plan has obtained a loan.
Furthermore as Minister, I am not privy to the financial planning matters of organisations in anticipation of their plans being approved and, as such, cannot respond to related questions. The process only requires financial disclosure relating to any money being payable as part of the implementation of the actual plan, and such information should form part of the plan in terms of sub-regulation 9(1)(k) of the Waste Tyre Regulations (2009) which states "…provide details of the manner in which the contribution of each member of the plan will be determined and how it will be collected and distributed..."
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1164
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1357EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department has conducted or initiated a study on the critically endangered cycad Encephalartos dyerianus; if so, (a) how many are left in the wild, (b) how many mature plants have been removed illegally in (i) 2008 (ii) 2009, (iii) 2010 and (iv) 2011 and (c) what steps has she taken to protect the existing plants in Limpopo province?
Dr P J Rabie (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1164. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
No, but the Scientific Authority, established and mandated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA), made recommendations to the Minister to address cycad conservation matters.
(a) Encephalartos dyerianus left in the wild: 364 large plants, 264 suckers, and 118 seedlings;
(b) (i) 78 according to information provided by the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism, (ii), (iii), (iv) Information not available; and
(c) the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) has a strategy and action plan in place to address to protection of the existing plants. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) requested the LEDETto prioritise the marking and monitoring of wild cycad populations / individual plants. The DEA will assist in providing training to provinces in terms of cycad identification and micro-chipping. The Threatened or Protected Species list, published in terms of section 56 (1) of NEMBA, is also in the process of being reviewed and this process will address the listing ofEncephalartos dyerianus. The species is currently listed as Protected.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1120
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1308EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 4 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 614 on 11 April 2012, (a) how many of the rhinos that have been killed in the Kruger National Park (KNP) since 1 January 2012 were (i) white and (ii) black rhinos and (b) what were the total figures in this regard in (aa) 2010 and (bb) 2011;
(2) what was found to be the reason for the high level of rhino poaching in the KNP;
(3) whether, in light of the current poaching figures in the KNP, she has found that the existing strategies being deployed to curb poaching in the park have been appropriate; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether additional resources will be deployed to the park to help curb poaching; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) what is the extent of the assistance being granted to the fight against poaching in the KNP by the (a) SA National Defence Force and (b) SA Police Service; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1120. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1)
(a) (i) 121
(ii) 1
(b) (aa) 146
(bb) 252
(2)
· The high price for illegal rhino horn currently being paid, in South Africa approximately R65 000 per kilogram, and in Mozambique anything up to R80 000 per kilogram.
· The high levels of unemployment in the surrounding communities of South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.
· A shift by local and national organised crime syndicates from high risk crime activities to lower risk rhino poaching and rhino horn smuggling.
· The sheer size and remoteness of the KNP, as well as the relatively high rhino population and localised high densities of rhino in the border line areas of the KNP.
· The relatively easy access to remote areas of the KNP from border line communities, both in South Africa and Mozambique.
(3) We do believe that the current strategies are adequate and appropriate. "Operation Rhino", supported by the entire Security Cluster and the SA National Defence Force (SANDF), will make a difference in due course. We are however, continuously working hard to find new and additional measures to curb rhino poaching
(4) Government has released additional R20 million for anti- rhino poaching in our country. We have also added rangers to those deployed at KNP. Should it be necessary and the situation on the ground in the KNP dictates that additional resources are necessary and required, it will be considered.
(5)
a. The SANDF are currently deployed in the KNP as part of their mandate to firstly secure and ensure the maintenance of area integrity regarding the international boundary between South Africa and its neighbouring countries. Secondly, the SANDF has a secondary mandate to assist with rhino poaching and other security related challenges where necessary and when required.
b. The SA Police Service (SAPS) are currently deployed in the KNP to carry out their mandate of general community and visible policing, law enforcement and port of entry control. The SAPS also provides a specialised component to support the combating of rhino poaching activities.
Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster and National Joint Committee have declared rhino poaching a priority crime and this served on every agenda of JCPS in order to help find new measures.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1119
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1119. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether, with reference to her reply to question 2184 on 20 October 2010, any progress has been made in getting all water service authorities to report annually on the implementation of the relevant water services development plan; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1307E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The Department has established a dedicated programme to oversee, monitor and support Water Services Development Planning at Local Government level. During the previous financial year the programme supported 105 Water Services Authorities to improve the quality of their Water Services Development Plans. A water services development plan tracking system monitors the status of the options and supports this process. Extensive support is also provided to ensure Water Services Development Plans and Integrated Development Plans. The Department is also actively involved in the assessment of all Integrated Development Plans.
We have developed a guideline that supports the Water Services Authority to report on progress with respect to the implementation of their Development Plan. We are aware, through the tracking system that 145 Water Services Development Plans (out of the 168 required) were submitted and are in different stages of completion.
Together, with all the guideline documents and the dedicated support programme, the Department, has also successfully implemented a Council Awareness Raising campaign. But despite all these efforts, there are still very few Water Services Authorities that do not comply with Water Services Development Plan requirements. We will continue to provide support and are committed towards refocusing our efforts to support Local Government through innovative programmes and processes.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1118 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1306EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 477 on 25 March 2011, how many environmental impact assessments (EIAs) were outstanding (a) in each province and (b) nationally (i) for less than 6 months, (ii) between 6 and 12 months, (iii) between 12 and 18 months and (iv) for longer than 18 months as at 31 March 2012;
(2) what was the total number of (a) posts available and (b) vacancies in the EIA establishment in (i) each province and (ii) nationally as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1118. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
The Department has recently embarked on a re-structuring process that entailed the establishment of an Integrated Authorisations Chief Directorate. This Chief Directorate will be better capacitated to enable the quicker processing and administering of Environmental Impact Assessment and Waste Authorisation and Disposal applications. Further, the Department has commenced in engaging both the Department of Water Affairs and the Department of Mineral Resources on the alignment and integration of administrative processes related to permitting. These engagements will include law reform which will enable integration between these Departments as well as expedite the review processes related to permitting.
In response to question 1(a), (b)(i),(ii),(iii) and (iv), please see the table attached.
In response to question 2(a), (b)(i) and (ii), please see table attached.
* The province has not submitted information as requested – the information will be collected and submitted separately.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1082
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1270E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 May 2012
Ms A M Dreyer (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(I) (a) What are the (i) yearly rental and (ii) floor space of the (aa) current and (bb) previous premises occupied by her departments' head office and (b) when (i) was the current building occupied and (ii) does the current lease expire;
(2) whether her departments publicly invited tenders prior to the leasing of the current premises; if not, why not; if so, (a) when, (b) where was it published and (c) which (i) companies and (ii) properties were shortlisted;
(3) what (a) floor space was offered and (b) annual rental was tendered (i) by each shortlisted company and (ii) with regard to each shortlisted property?
1082. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) (i) The yearly rental for the Department of Environmental Affairs' head office is R23 311 794.60.
(ii) (aa) The floor space of the current premises occupied is 21 972.43 m²
(bb) Not applicable.
(b) (i) The Department of Environmental Affairs has been occupying the building since 1 April 2010.
(ii) The current lease expiry date is 31 March 2013.
(2) The building was procured 1 leased by the Department of Public Works (DPV for the Department of Environmental Affairs as tenant and the records are kept by the DPW. The details on the procurement processes followed are only available from the DPW as the custodian of accommodation on behalf of all state departments. This question (2) and question (3) should therefore be addressed directly to the DPW.
(a) DPW internal leasing processes.
(b) DPW internal leasing processes.
(c) (i) DPW internal leasing processes.
(ii) DPW internal leasing processes.
(3) (a) DPW internal leasing processes,
(b) (i) DPW internal leasing processes.
(ii) DPW internal leasing processes
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1082
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1082. Ms A M Dreyer (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What are the (i) yearly rental and (ii) floor space of the (aa) current and (bb) previous premises occupied by her departments' head office and (b) when (i) was the current building occupied and (ii) does the current lease expire;
(2) whether her departments publicly invited tenders prior to the leasing of the current premises; if not, why not; if so, (a) when, (b) where was it published and (c) which (i) companies and (ii) properties were shortlisted;
(3) what (a) floor space was offered and (b) annual rental was tendered (i) by each shortlisted company and (ii) with regard to each shortlisted property? NW1270E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Refer to Table below.
| No. | Name of Building | (1)(a)(i) Yearly Rental | (1)(a)(ii) Floor Space | (1)(b)(i) Year Occupied | (1)(b)(ii) Lease Expiry Date |
| 1. | ZWAMADAKA BUILDING | R8,090,778.36 | 10383 | Since 1988 to date | 31/07/2012 |
| 2. | SEDIBENG BUILDING | R15, 883,423.08 | 24021 | Since 1988 to date | 31/01/2012 |
| 3. | EMANZINI BUILDING | R6, 088,185.60 | 9340 | Since 1988 to date | 31/01/2012 |
| 4. | CONTINENTAL BUILDING | R 5, 526,778.68 | 4133 | Since 2007 to date | 30/11/2015 |
| 5. | WATERBRON BUILDING | R26, 863,991.72 | 17780 | Since 2002 to date | 30/09/2019 |
| 6. | NDINAYE BUILDING | R3, 024,468.00 | 2900 | Since 2007 to date | 30/06/2012 |
(2) The Department of Public Works is the custodian of office accommodation and is responsible for leasing office accommodation on behalf of the Department.
(2)(a) Falls away
(2)(b) Falls away
(3) Falls away
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1054
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1054. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her departments have funded the (a) construction or (b) maintenance of any (i) dams or (ii) canals for the revitalisation or irrigation schemes (aa) in the (aaa) 2009-10, (bbb) 2010-11 and (ccc) 2011-12 and (bb) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, (aaaa) how many projects were funded, and (bbbb) in respect of each province and municipality what was the total cost for each project and the purpose of each specified dam? NW1238E
REPLY:
Yes, the department has funded the construction of dams. Maintenance and rehabilitation of dams is funded through the Dam Safety and Rehabilitation Programme introduced in 2005.
(i) Refer to Annexure A for the list of Irrigation schemes
(ii) Refer to Annexure B for the list of Canals constructed
(iii) Refer to Annexure C for the list of dams rehabilitated. The Department constructed one dam in the Free State, Balancing Dam S1 on the Orange-Riet Canal since 2009 and will be completed in 2013.
The tables and Annexure are here: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/questions/RNW1054-120515.pdf
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1027
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1027. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water andEnvironmental Affairs:
What progress has been made in setting up catchment management agencies to ensure equitable, efficient and sustainable water resource management? NW1202E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS) gives provision for the establishment of the 19 Catchment Management Agencies (CMA) per Water Management Area (WMA). To date, eight CMAs have already been established, two of which are currently functional: the Inkomati CMA in Mpumalanga and the Breede-Overberg CMA in the Western Cape. A further six CMAs were gazzetted but their Boards have not been appointed and both CMAs have not been developed into functional entities yet.
Since the establishment of these CMAs, the process of establishing CMAs was put on hold while the issue of the appropriate number of institutions was investigated through project "Institutional Reform and Realignment" (IRR).
The IRR project proposed the establishment of nine CMAs in the nine WMAs. These revised areas are defined in the draft National Water Resources Strategy (NWRS) and will be part of the NWRS when it is promulgated. I announced the establishment of the nine CMAs on the 19 March 2012.
The Department is in the process of appointing a national project team to drive and manage the process of implementation/ establishment in a programmatic manner, working with relevant regional office staff within tightly managed timeframes (three to five years).
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1006 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.10 NW1187EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 26 April 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) How many environmental management inspectors (EMIs) are there currently and (b) what is the breakdown of this figure according to the organisation they work for;
(2) how many qualified EMIs are expected to be attached to organisations by the end of the 2012-13 financial year;
(3) whether any successes have been recorded in training EMIs for work in the local government sphere; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether, with reference to the reply to question 854 on 8 April 2011, any progress has been made in assessing how many EMIs are required at each sphere of government; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1006. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1)(a) and (b)
TOTAL NUMBER OF EMIs PER ORGANISATION AS AT 31 MARCH 2012
| Cape Nature | 8 |
| Department of Environmental Affairs | 66 |
| Eastern Cape Province | 39 |
| Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency | 62* |
| Free State Province | 22 |
| Gauteng Province | 43 |
| iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority | 4 |
| KZN Wildlife | 310** |
| KwaZulu-Natal Province | 37 |
| Mpumalanga Province | 14 |
| Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency | 11 |
| North West Province | 25 |
| Northern Cape Province | 16 |
| Western Cape Province | 64 |
| Limpopo Province | 75 |
| SANParks | 603*** |
| Grand Total | 1 399 |
*This total includes 54 field rangers (Grade 5 EMIs)
**This total includes 269 field rangers (Grade 5 EMIs)
***SANParks have not submitted their total number of EMIs for 2012; therefore, the figure for 2010/11 is included in this table.
(2) The various environmental management inspector (EMI) institutions have indicated that there are approximately 100 additional officials that will register for the Department of Environmental Affairs' EMI Basic Training Programme, plus an additional number are registered with UNISA. In total, it is estimated that there will be approximately 150 additional officials qualified to be designated as EMIs by the end of 2012. This estimate excludes the number of local authority officials that will be trained under the EMI-EHP Bridging Training Programme (see below).
(3) During the 2011/12 course, 37 local authority officials underwent EMI Basic Training. In addition, the Department has reached an agreement with six tertiary institutions (Universities of Technology) to develop and roll-out an EMI Bridging Training Programme for qualified Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs). Attendance of this short learning programme, plus a suitable peace officers' course, will qualify these local authority EHPs for EMI designation. The tertiary institutions have indicated that they would be prepared to present the training during the course of 2012.
(4) A strategic assessment of, inter alia, the number of EMIs required at each sphere of government (in order to ensure proper compliance and enforcement with the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and the Specific Environmental Management Acts (SEMAs)) will be performed as part of the Department's envisaged Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Strategy. The development of this strategy will encompass the green, brown and blue (integrated coastal management) subsectors. It will commence in the 2012/13 financial year and the project is envisaged to span two financial years.Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1005
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 26 APRIL 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 10)
1005. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and EnvironmentalAffairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her replies to question 872 on 5 May 2010, question 1442 on 25 May 2010, question 2086 on 18 August 2010 and question 45 on 15 March 2011, a charge sheet has been submitted to the National Prosecuting Authority for prosecution, if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details,
(2) whether any further directives have been issued against the mine since 28 April 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) (a) on what date was the last inspection of the mine conducted by officials of her department and (b) what are the (i) names and (ii) designations of all officials who visited the mine;
(4) (a) what is the current level of mine water below the surface of the mine and (b) at what rate is it rising;
(5) whether steps are being taken by the Department of Water to ensure that there is no decant of acid mine water at the mine or in neighboring locality, if not, why not; it so, what are the relevant details? NW1186E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, a charge sheet was submitted to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). After reviewing the charge sheet, the NPA requested that certain elements should be further investigated and the docket has since been returned to the South African Police Services (SAPS) for further investigation. The Department of Water Affairs (the Department) continues to work closely with the NPA and SAPS. The matter is currently sub judice.
(2) No further directives were issued against the Grootvlei Mine since
28 April 2010 as the mine was non-operational and under liquidation. Since the mine was issued with a directive during active operations and to which there was no response, the Department commenced with the enforcement process that is invoked when a directive is contravened. This has resulted in a criminal case being opened against the mine.
(3) Table 1 below indicates the date, names and designations of officials who conducted the last inspection at the Grootvlei Mine:
Table (1) Yes.
An observer from the City of Cape Town and a veterinary surgeon from the Department of Agriculture, Western Cape.
(2) See the table below:
| Project title of the research activities of the main permit holder |
| Movement patterns of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in South Africa |
| Assessment of angling and post-traumatic stress in large pelagic sharks |
| Localised movement patterns of white sharks in the Gansbaai region |
| Defining the role of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in the marine ecosystem of False Bay, South Africa |
| An investigation into the movements and behaviour of white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) within Algoa Bay and the Bird Island Marine Protected Area |
| Hormone monitoring of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in South Africa |
| Stable isotopes in large sharks off Southern Africa |
| Assessment of the bacteria colonies occurring in the buccal cavity and musculature of large coastal shark species in South Africa: Search for the presence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in sharks |
(3) Yes.eply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2474
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2474. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether there have been any cases in North West since 1 July 2012 where the water wRithdrawals of operating mines have compromised the supply of water to other water users in the vicinity of the mines; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the (a)(i) names and (ii) locations of the mines and (b) relevant details in each case;
(2) whether her department has taken any action to rectify the situation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3077E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department is not aware of any instances since 1 July 2012 where the withdrawal of water by operating mines in the North West Province have compromised the supply of water to other water uses. This conclusion is reached on the basis that the Department's Regional Office: North West has since 1 July 2012 not received any information from any other water user relating to compromised water supply.
(1)(a) Falls away.
(1)(b) False away.
(2) Falls away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2461
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2461. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether there are any formal arrangements or protocols that govern intergovernmental relations between (a) the Government, (b) Botswana, (c) Zimbabwe and (d) Mozambique with regard to drawing water from the Limpopo River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether, with reference to the granting of a water use licence to the Vele Colliery in Limpopo, any neighboring countries were consulted with regard to the proposed (a) use and (b) discharge of water from the mine; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3063E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes. There is an agreement between the Republic of South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambiqueregarding the Limpopo water basin management which is about the establishment of the Limpopo Water Commission signed in Maputo on 23 November 2003 by the Republic of South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambique. However, this agreement does not encompass the drawing of water from the Limpopo River.
(2)(a) The neighboring countries were not consulted with regard to the granting of a water use licence to the Vele Colliery in the Limpopo Province. The proposed use of water from the Limpopo River by the Vele Colliery was not a new allocation but transfer of an existing allocation. Furthermore, there is no legislative or agreement that requires consultation of water basin member states.
(2)(b) The mine operates a close system and no discharge was authorised.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2408
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 291)
2408. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether officials in her department purchased tickets to the New Age Business Briefing; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in terms of which provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, were the tickets procured;
(2)whether she will make a statement on the matter?
REPLY:
(1) No, none of the officials from the Department of Water Affairs purchased ticket to the New Age Business Briefing.
(2) Falls Away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2407
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 07 SEPTEMBER 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 29)
2407. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether she was informed of the plight of the Bushbuckridge community's lack of access to water supply from the nearby Inyaka Dam; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW3000E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The Department is aware of the plight of the Bushbuckridge community's lack of access to water supply from the Inyaka Dam and the details can be summarised as follows:
· The current total population for the Bushbuckrdge Local Municipality is estimated at approximately 800 000 people.
· Phase 1 of the Inyaka Water Treatment Works with 50 Ml/day is currently serving in the order of 272 000 people. On completion of Phase 2 (early 2013), and connecting bulk pipelines, another 50 Ml/day module will serve just more than 344 000 additional people.
· Hoxani Water Treatment Works in the south of the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality is currently supplying nearly 150 000 people. The balance of the population (34 000) will also receive water from the Hoxani Water Treatment Works towards the middle of 2013 on completion of bulk supply lines to the various villages.
· In the meantime, the villages within the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality not receiving water from the Inyaka and Hoxani Water Treatment Works are supplied from smaller water treatment works (Thulamahashe, Acornhoek, Edinburgh, Thorndale, Marite and Kork) and boreholes.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2385
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. ** NW2977EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 31 August 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether South Africa has concluded its position on the lifting of the embargo on the trading of rhino horn; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2385. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
No. The last of a series of workshops to consult the citizens of South Africa on this matter took place as recently as 28 August 2012. A position will be taken once the Department of Environmental Affairs has considered all the recommendations emanating from the workshops, and subject to the outcomes of a study only then will we decide on any possible route.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2368
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2368. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1047 on 20 April 2010 and question 1389 on 20 May 2010, internal audits for assessing compliance with the water use licence have been conducted by the mine (a) in (i) 2010 and (ii) 2011 and (b) since 1 January 2012; if not, why not, in each case; if so,
(2) whether the audits had been returned to the Department of Water Affairs for scrutiny; if not, what action will be taken against the mine; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the audits have revealed compliance with all the relevant terms and conditions of the water use licence; if not, what areas of noncompliance were identified; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the audits are available for public scrutiny by the affected water users in the vicinity of the mine; if not, why not; if so, how can they be obtained? NW2950E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) During 2010 and 2011, the mine (name furnished) has conducted internal audits to assess compliance with the conditions of the water use licence. However, the mine has not yet conducted an internal audit for 2012 as such audit is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2012.
(2) Yes, the mine has submitted its audit reports in respect of 2010 and 2011 (to the Department of Water Affairs (the Department). The audit report in respect of 2012 is due for submission in November/December 2012.
(3) The 2011 audit report indicated that the mine is in compliance with the conditions of its water use licence, but identified the need for improved storm water management in line with the requirements of Government Notice No. 704 of 4 June 1999. The mine is currently re-assessing its storm water management practices and a comprehensive plan in this regard is being compiled.
(4) The audit reports are available for public scrutiny by the affected water users and may be obtained directly from the mine.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2367
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2367. Mr M M Swathe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Department of Water Affairs is investigating whether the specified dam walls are causing blockages in the Brak River in the Blouberg region of Limpopo province; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details with regard to each specified dam wall;
(2) whether she is taking any action against (a) persons and/or (b) entities who have built illegal dam walls in the Brak River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has issued orders for the removal of any dam walls in the Brak River since 1 January 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2949E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, the Department's Regional Office: Limpopo has conducted investigation on 19 April 2012 at the certain farm (name furnished) regarding a weir structure which is built on the Brak River that is diverting the Brak Riverwatercourse. The investigation have revealed that indeed the weir structure is built along the Brak River.
(2) Yes, the Legal process is underway and a letter of demand (notice) has been issued to the company (name furnished), on 15 March 2012, where the Department is demanding that the owner of the farm who is also the owner of the company, to provide proof of lawfulness of the concern for the weir structure on the Brak River.
(3) No, pending the result of the Validation and Verification excise as per Section 35 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) which seek to validate and verify lawfulness of existing lawful water use, the Department has not issued any order for the removal of any dam walls or any structure in the Brak River since 1 January 2010.
On receipts of the results mention above in (3), the Department would then take an informed decision about the removal of unlawful dam walls and structure within
the Brak River and South Africa as a whole.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2366
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 31 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28)
2366. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to (a) question 1047 on 20 April 2010 and (b) 1389 on 20 May 2010, how have the operations of the Sishen Mine affected the flow and availability of water in the Gamogara River;
(2) what is the current state of the boreholes and springs traditionally used by farms in the proximity of the mine due to the operations of the mine;
(3) whether farms in the proximity of the mine and affected by the operations of the mine are receiving the water they are entitled to according to the terms of the water use licence of the mine; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether any (a) notices and (b) directives have been issued against the mine for transgressing its water use licence since 20 May 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2948E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The mine is required to dewater constantly in order to allow for conventional open cast mining of the iron ore. The dewatering activities of the mine has resulted in the drawdown of groundwater levels around the mine and has negatively affected subsurface flow as well as groundwater availability in the Gamagara River. The Gamagara River is an ephemeral river, and surface water flow is therefore naturally sporadic.
(2) The dewatering activities of the mine have resulted either in a significant drop in water levels or drying up of boreholes located in the shallow alluvial aquifer associated with the Gamagara River.
(3) In accordance with the conditions of the mine's water use licence, farms that are affected by the mine's dewatering activities are compensated for the loss of water supply. The compensation measures are as a rule, negotiated with the specific land owner and include the drilling and equipping of alternative boreholes, the supply and installation of water storage tanks, the provision of potable water through the Vaal Gamagara Bulk Water Supply Scheme and monetary compensation or provision of alternative grazing for livestock where there are proven loss of natural grazing.
In addition, affected land owners also have the option to negotiate the sale of their land with the mine should they decide to sell their farms.
(4) No notices or directives were issued to the mine since 20 May 2010. The reason for the non-issuance of notices or directives is because the mine has been in compliance with the conditions of its water use licence.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2291
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 27 NW2873E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 24 August 2012
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What steps has she taken to give effect to the performance agreement that she signed with the President in 2010, (b) what outcomes have been measured and (c) what follow-up steps has she taken with regard to each specified outcome?
Mr D J Stubbe (DA)
SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
HANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2291. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) The Strategic Plans of the Departments of Water Affairs and of Environmental Affairs give effect to the performance agreement between the President of the Republic of South Africa and myself as the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs.
The Department of Perfomance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) receives monthly reports of our performance and prepares such reports for discussions that we hold with the President. Such performance is also published as the POA on Government Websites. The President also undertakes visits to areas which are accounted for in our reports, to satisfy himself on such accounting.
Government has adopted 12 outcomes with a view to measurable performance and accountable delivery. The President signed performance agreements with all Cabinet Ministers. In these performance agreements , Ministers were requested to establish and participate in Implementation Forums for each for each of the twelve outcomes.
The Implementation Forums have developed delivery agreements for the Outcomes. All departments, agencies and spheres of government that are involved in the direct delivery required to achieved an outcome, are party to the agreement.
(b) The audited Annual Reports of the aforementioned National Departments for the periods 2010/11 and 2011/12 as tabled in Parliament do provide details on the outcomes that have been measured to date.
(c) In June 2012, Government released the Mid Term Review which focuses on the Government's progress against the delivery agreements for the twelve outcomes. I would like to refer the Honourable Member to this document which is available on the Government's website. This particular document gives a comprehensive account on progress in the areas of national priorities.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO 2280
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 24 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 27)
2280. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Since 1 January 2010 (a) on how many dates has the Water Tribunal been convened, (b) how many cases have been concluded and (c) what are the relevant details of each case that have been concluded;
(2) (a) how many cases are pending before the Water Tribunal as at the latest specified date for which information is available and (b) what are the relevant details of each case;
(3) whether the Water Tribunal is mandated to convene a minimum number of times each year; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the Water Tribunal is experiencing any problems in carrying out its duties; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) whether she intends to investigate any legislative amendments to improve the operations of the Water Tribunal; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2860E
REPLY:
(1)(a) Since 1 Jan 2010 to April 2012, the Water Tribunal was convened for 50 (fifty) days during this period.
(1)(b) A total of 42 (forty two) appeals were finalized during this period. Refer to Annexure A.
(2) A total of 44 (forty four) appeals are pending in the Water Tribunal. Refer to Annexure B.
(3) No, there is no provision in the legislation, namely the National Water Act, 1998 (Act 36 of 1998) herein after referred to as NWA that provides for the mandatory sittings of the Tribunal. Therefore, there are no predetermined specific numbers of days allocated to convene the Water Tribunal.
The Registrar processes the appeals until it is ripe for hearing. The Registrar sets the matters down for hearing in consultation with the chairperson and the members and the parties.
(4) The Water Tribunal (Tribunal) faced numerous problems and challenges as set out below:
· The current Chairperson Mr Lekala resigned in November 2011 to take up an appointment as a judge inBloemfontein. The NWA provides that the Chairperson must be a person with practical legal experience.
· The current Water Tribunal was operating with Deputy Chairperson and who's a psychologist not a legal practitioner.
· The other members of the Tribunal where engineers and also not legal practitioners.
· The term of office of the Deputy Chairperson and members came to an end in August 2012.
· Whilst the Tribunal was operating since the end of 2011 there were arguments that the Tribunal was not legal competent and therefore not properly and legally constituted. This point was argued in The Goede Wellington case and the court ruled that the Tribunal was not properly and legally constituted.
· In all subsequent matters before the Water Tribunal, both the appellants and the respondents continued to challenge the composition and the legal competency of the Tribunal.
· The Water Tribunal faced a challenge of confidence in that the appellants were dissatisfied with the manner in which they were adjudicating the disputes.
· The Chief Director: Legal Services (CD: LS) of the Department was of the opinion that the current Tribunal is not legally competent. This opinion is reinforced by the legal opinion of Adv Paul Kennedy SC, who has concluded as follows in his opinion "I accordingly conclude that in the absence of a replacement person being appointed validly by the Minister (on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission as required in the legislation), no other Tribunal member can lawfully be designated to preside over any specific appeal or application. If they were to do so and to purport to make a decision on such appeal or application, they would be acting without authority. In consequence any decision they make would be ultra vires and liable to be set aside on review". (Refer to Annexure C for copy of legal opinion)
From the above it was clear to the Department that Water Tribunal was in desperate need of legal reform.
(5) The Department has investigated legislative amendments to improve the operations of the Water Tribunal.
The operations of Water Tribunal have been held in abeyance pending the legislative amendments. As an interim solution to resolving the disputes the provisions of section 150 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) (NWA) which provides for mediation and negotiation as a solution to deal with all 44 disputes / appeals is being implemented.
In the Draft Amendment Bill, 2012, a new process for nomination and appointment of the members of the Tribunal has been proposed. In terms of the new proposal, I am in the process of appointing members of the Mediation Committee as per section 150 of the NWA. In terms of the new proposal, the involvement of the Judicial Service Commission and Water Research Commission is dispensed with. The draft Bill is currently being worked on for tabling to Cabinet in 2013 legislative programme.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2202
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2728EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether Sanparks is investigating the possibility of expanding tourist (a) facilities and (b) activities in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2202. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes, SANParks is expanding tourist (a) facilities and (b) activities in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park subject to the availability of funds. The relevant details are contained in the Five-year Strategic Plan for the Parks Division and it includes the following:
| PROJECT | IMPLEMENTATION STATUS |
| Re-design Nossob Rest Camp | 10 x units, re-alignment of road and upgrade of bulk services. Project is funded and EIA in process. |
| Re-design Nossob Rest Camp | 10 x luxury camp sites and associated infrastructure. EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Gharagab | 3 x luxury 4x4 camp sites. EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Mata Mata area | 10 x new luxury camping sites at Craig Lockhardt (Kameelperd kamp). EIA in process. Project not funded. |
| Mata Mata | 2 x family units to be constructed. EIA completed. Project not funded. |
| Wilderness camps | Additional unit at Kieliekrankie, Urikaruus and Grootkolk Wilderness Camps. Project not funded. |
| Twee Rivieren | 5 x 2-bed chalets. Project not funded. |
| Jan se Draai wilderness camp (halfway between Twee Rivieren and Nossob) | Combination of two approved sites along theNossob River for wilderness camp to construct 10 units, access roads and bulk services. Project not funded |
| Stoffelsdraai – 4 x 4 camping site | 5 x wilderness camping sites for 4x4 groups. Project not funded. |
| Complete Nossob road network | Third and final phase to upgrade 7 km portion of road along the Nossob River where clay soils occur. Project not funded. |
Reply received: October 2012
QUESTION NO. 2196 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.25NW2721EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mrs M A ANjobe (Cope) to ask the Minister for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs:
Whether her department has developed policies to prevent the dumping of waste in the vicinity of human settlements;if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M A ANjobe (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2196. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes, the National Environmental Management Waste Act, 2008 (Act No. 59 of 2008) prohibits the disposal of waste other than at an area designated for that purpose, and that includes in the vicinity human settlements. The matter is dealt with in sections 25(3-5), 26(1-2) and 27(2) of the Act. Illegal dumping is also legislated through municipal by laws.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2169
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2692EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her makes use of private security firms; if so, in each case, (i) which firms and (ii) what is the (aa) purpose, (bb) value and (cc) duration of each specified contract?
Mr D J Stubbe (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2169. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) Yes
| Department of Environmental Affairs | Name of Firm (i) | Purpose (ii)(aa) | Rand value (ii)(bb) | Duration (ii)(cc) |
| Environmental Programmes 14 Loop Street | ADT | Armed response | R 4 580.00/month | 10 months |
| Loskop Alarms | Armed response | R290.00/month | Month to month |
(b) Yes see attached
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2158 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2681EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to his reply to question 1326 of 2012, prospecting for minerals is permitted on (a) rehabilitated and (b) unrehabilitated former asbestos mine sites; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether there are potential risks to (a) human and (b) environmental health if prospecting occurs on (i) rehabilitated and (ii) unrehabilitated former asbestos mine sites; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) whether officials from her department have interacted with officials from the Department of Mineral Resources about the prospect of applications to prospect for minerals on former asbestos mine sites; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2158. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The department of Environmental Affairs has no jurisdiction on mining areas and is responsible for Asbestos related remediation on land that falls outside of mining areas. The question should be referred to the Minister of Mineral Resources who is the mandated authority in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act.
(2) (a) & (b) should prospecting be permitted in terms of the relevant legislative framework, the site specific investigations undertaken in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act would determine whether such impacts would occur and inform the Minister of Mineral Resources decisions in this regard,
(3) No official of the DEA has interacted with the Department of Mineral Resources regarding the prospect of applications to prospect for minerals on former asbestos mine sites as the DEA has not received any invitation in this regard.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2157
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25 NW2680E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 17 August 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What is the estimated amount of health care risk caused by medical waste produced annually and (b) how is this figure broken down according to provinces;
(2) (a) what is the estimated treatment capacity of medical waste for the whole of South Africa and (b) what is the breakdown of this figure according to each province;
(3) whether she has found that the available treatment capacity is capable of treating all medical waste to the required standards; if so, how was this conclusion reached; if not, why not?
Mr G R Morgan (DA)
SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
HANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS
2157. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1.
(a) As there has been limited reporting on waste management in the country, no information is available on the size of the Health Care Risk Waste (HCRW) stream that required management. In 2007, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) undertook a study to determine the volume of the HCRW generated in the country. The study concluded that approximately 45 000 tons of HCRW was generated annually. The figure is estimated to escalate annually due to annual population growth rateof 1.5% per annum.
(b) The DEA does not receive information pertaining to the amount of HCRW generated per health care facility and/or per province. The DEA is, however, receiving monthly reports from individual licensed treatment facilities reflecting the volumes of HCRW treated per month per licensed treatment facility. These figures cannot be used to reflect a provincial figure since HCRW is currently being transported between provinces for treatment.
2. (a) and (b)
| Province | Design capacitytons/month |
| Eastern Cape | 595 |
| Free State | 140 |
| Gauteng | 2317 |
| KwaZulu-Natal | 1116 |
| North West | 720 |
| Western Cape | 1045 |
| TOTAL | 5933 |
3. Each licensed treatment facilityin the country is required to operate within its design capacity as per the conditions of the waste license. Facilities are required to inform the DEA of incidences (e.g. break-downs) that will cause an interruption of the normal operation of the facility.Furthermore, licensed treatment facilities submit external audit reports to the DEA indicating the exact waste treated and the effectiveness of the facility.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2115
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 17 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25)
2115. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with respect to Exxaro's Leeuwpan mine, any part of the (a) pan and (b) wetlands on the mine site had been mined since 1 January 2012; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the mining in the specified area has been authorised by her department; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2634E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) During a site investigation conducted by the Department of Water Affairs (the Department) on 16 May 2012, it was observed that mining through the pan/wetland was taking place, however, the mine failed to provide proof of authorisation for the activity. Based on the findings of the investigation, a notice of intention to issue a directive in terms of section 53(1) of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) for engaging in water use activities without authorisation was issued to the mine dated 17 May 2012.
On 22 May 2012, the mine made representation in response to the notice. However, the Department rejected the mine's representation through a letter dated 4 June 2012 due to the mine's failure to provide proof of authorisation. Subsequently, the Department issued, a directive dated 11 June 2012 to the mine, directing the mine to provide proof of authorisation and failure to do so would lead to the mine being instructed to stop mining through the pan/wetland.
The mine lodged an appeal against the directive in terms of section 148 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No. 36 of 1998) with the Water Tribunal on 13 July 2012. The Department conducted a follow up investigation on 20 June 2012 and noted that the machinery used for mining through the wetland/pan was removed and mining was only taking place towards the North to the tarred road within the boundary of the mining area.
As indicated in (1) above, the mining in the pan/ wetland has not been authorised by the Department and steps to address the non compliance are being implemented.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2114
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 17 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25)
2114. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What are the (i) names and (ii) locations of mines that are still operating without a valid water licence since her reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012 and (b) what has been the progress of each specified mine's application for such a licence;
(2) whether any further (a) directives or (b) pre-directives have been issued against mines operating without water use licences in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2633E
REPLY:
(1)(a) Refer to attached Annexure A, for the names and locations of mines that have been operating without valid water licences since the Department reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012. The list shows 46 operating without valid water licences compared to the 53 mines as at March 2012. It should be noted that the Department's licencing team has also dealt with many other sectors' water licence and not mining alone. Between March 2012 and 23 August 2012, seven licences have been issued to the following mines:
· Sudor Coal Elandsfontein: Mpumalanga
· Klipspruit Colliery: Mpumalanga
· Stuart Coal: Mpumalanga
· Shanduka Coal: Middleburg Townlands: Mpumalanga
· Phokathaba Platinum Mine: Limpopo/ Mpumalanga
· Panbuilt Siding: KwaZulu-Natal
· Gold View: Gauteng
(1)(b) Refer to attached Annexure A, showing a list of mines who have submitted applications and the status of the applications for water use licence.
The Department has embarked on a process of regulating mining operations with respect to the Department's legislative requirements. Following this process, the Department has received a number of licence applications from the mines that have been operating illegally. It should be noted that the mining licence applications form part of the category of licences that are receiving the highest priority.
(2) A total of (a) Nine (9) directives and (b) Fourteen (14) pre-directives were issued to date.
| NAME OF MINING COMPANY | LOCATION OF MINE | WATER LICENSE APPLIED FOR (YES/NO | STATUS | ||
| DIRECTIVES ISSUED | |||||
| Exxaro Glisa | Mpumalanga | Yes | Criminal case has been opened | ||
| Arnot | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Shanduka Graspan | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Umcebo Mooifontein | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Shanduka Bankfontein colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Nkomati mine | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Leliefontein | Gauteng | Yes | Operating without water use license | ||
| Vunene | Gauteng | No | Operating without water use license | ||
| Leeuwpan Exxaro | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use license on portion 7 Weltevreden | ||
| PRE-DIRECTIVES ISSUED | |||||
| Spring lake colliery | KZN | Yes | Facility operating without water use licence | ||
| Maquasa west | KZN | Yes | Facility operating water use licence | ||
| Kendal (Zaid) colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Facility operating water use licence | ||
| Sudor cola Eilandfontein | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Umcebo colliery Doornrug coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Stuart coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Delmas coal | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Umcebo Nowesco | Mpumalanga | Yes | Facility operating without water use licence | ||
| Xstrata plc Arthur Taylor colliery | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Sheba | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| PMG mine | Northern Cape | Yes | Operating without water use licence. Administratively stopped | ||
| Total Coal Dorstfontein East | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence | ||
| Leeuwpan Exxaro | Mpumalanga | Yes | Operating without water use licence on portion 7 Weltevreden | ||
| Loxton Dal | Northern Cape | Yes | Operating without water use licence. Administratively stopped | ||
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2113 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 25NW2632EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 17August 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she used the expected number of new jobs that will be created from the implementation of a waste tyre plan as a criterion for approving a proposed waste tyre plan; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) of the waste tyre plans that have thus far been (a) approved by her and (b) submitted, but for which no decision has yet been made, what are the expected number of jobs that will be created according to the drafters of the plans;
(3) whether the expected new jobs proposed by a waste tyre plan are subject to any kind of scrutiny in order to determine the reliability of the proposal; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether any lessons were learnt from job creation under the Buyisa-e-Bag initiative that can be brought to examining job creation prospects in the waste tyre sector; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2113. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the expected number of jobs to be created was used as one of the many criteria to evaluate the plans, as per the Waste Tyre Regulations. In particular, the number of jobs coupled with whether the jobs are realistic or possible, as well as their impact – especially on previously disadvantaged individuals – was scrutinised.
(2) The Recycling and Economic Development Initiative of South Africa(REDISA) has estimated to create 10 000 jobs (b) the process of evaluating and deciding on these other plans (than REDISA) is not yet finalized and I am accordingly not in a position to comment on the number of jobs envisaged.
(3) Yes, the job estimates are scrutinised in terms of, inter alia, whether they are possible and meaningful in cases where previously disadvantaged individuals will be empowered, and whether the jobs will be sustainable.
(4) Yes, lessons were learned. One of the key lessons was that with the right support, waste had the potential to indeed create meaningful, sustainable jobs.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 2056
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 10 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 23)
2056. Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) she, (b) her Deputy Minister and (c) any official from an entity reporting to her will be attending or attended, the 2012 Olympic Games; if so, what is the (i)(aa) name, (bb) rank and (cc) position/designation of each specified person accompanying (aaa) her, (bbb) her Deputy Minister and (ccc) each specified person and (ii)(aa) nature and (bb) official reason for the visit;
(2) what (a) total amount will be spent or has been spent on the trip, (b) is the (i) description and (ii) detailed breakdown of the amounts that will be spent or have been spent on (aa) accommodation, (bb) travel and (cc) subsistence costs and (c) from which budget will these funds be incurred in each case? NW2536E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Neither I; the Deputy Minister nor officials, as well as entities reporting to me will be attending or have attended the 2012 Olympic Games.
Falls away.
Reply received: September 2012
QUESTION NO. 2031 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 23 NW2510EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 8 AUGUST 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has been engaging with the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries with regard to amendments to the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has approached her department with regard to proposed amendments to the management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2031. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. Officials from the Department of Environmental Affairs were invited to a general external stakeholder workshop held on 29 June 2012 in Cape Town. During this workshop general proposed amendments to the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998 were discussed and the issue of Marine Protected Areas was not dealt with.
(2) The matter related to the management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) forms part of the relevant Presidential Proclamation which is still being discussed between the two departments in a process led by the President.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 2015
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2491EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 August 2012
Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends to put a strategic plan in place to mitigate the effect of climate change on various productive sectors of the economy, if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what is the progress on the implementation of the plan and (b) how will the plan be (i) monitored and (ii) evaluated?
Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS2015. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
South Africa's strategic plan to mitigate the effect of climate change on various productive sectors of the economy is set out in the White Paper on the National Climate Change Response (Government Gazette Notice 757 of 2011; Gazette No. 34695 of 19 October 2011) which is regarded as the country's National Policy on Climate ChangeResponse. The Policy seeks to effectively manage inevitable climate change impacts through interventions that build and sustain South Africa's social, economic and environmental resilience, and to mitigate South Africa's greenhouse gas emissions.
a) In respect of mitigation, Government has initiated a process of analysing mitigation potential in key economic sectors. This analysis will provide the basis for defining desired emission reduction outcomes.
b) (i) and (ii) In respect of managing the effects of climate change, Government has initiated a process of developing long-term adaptation scenarios. This process will provide the basis for defining adaptation responses and strategy.
Reply received: October 2012
QUESTION NO. 1963 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2352EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04August 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her has budgeted for (i) financial donations or (ii) sponsored services in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12, (dd) 2012-13 financial years; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what amount was (aaa) budgeted and (bbb) spent?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESSREPLY: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY QUESTION 1963 :
a) Amatola Water
Over the said financial years no provision for financial donations has been made.
b) Bloem Water
Over the said financial years no provision for financial donations has been made.
c) Botshelo Water
Botshelo Water does not provide funds as donations.
d) Bushbuckridge Water
On an annual basis, Bushbuckridge Water budgets 1% of generated surplus for donations or sponsorships according to its CSI policy, and where it indicated NIL means that the projects planned could not be implemented due to cash flow constraints or deficit incurred for the year.
e) Lepelle Northern Water
Lepelle Northern Water stated that they only do the sponsorships not the donations. See below is a table with lists of sponsorships listed :-
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Cholera awareness campaigns, water summits, charities, knowledge management, innovation and communication and National Water Week. | R2 990 000 (budget) R1 746 000 (actual) |
| Charities, National Water Week, cholera awareness campaigns. | R312 000 (budget) R153 000 (actual) |
| Water summits, charities, knowledge management, innovation and communication, National Water Week and cholera awareness campaigns. | R800 000 (budget) R651 092 (actual) |
| TOTAL | R 7 092 000, 00 |
f) Magalies Water
Magalies Water has financial constraints, therefore, they do not provide either financial donations or sponsorships.
g) Mhlathuze Water
Mhlathuze Water does both sponsorship and donations. See a table below.
(i) Donations – 2009 to 2010
| Donations | Amount |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R2 164 454, 03 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R2 164 454, 03 |
(ii) Sponsorships – 2010 to 2011
The total budget of sponsorship for the financial year 2010/11 was R1 046 008, 00 and none of spending was done except for the actual amount on the bursaries amounting to R56 145, 33 was spent.
| Sponsorships | Amount |
| Bursaries | R0 (Budget) R56 145, 44(Actual) |
| TOTAL | R56 145, 44 |
ii) Donations – 2010 to 2011
The total budget of donations for the financial year 2010/11 amounted to R71 988, 00 and nothing was spent, except the actual amount of R2 164 454, 03 on assets donated to schools.
| Donations | Amount |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R2 164 454, 03 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R2 164 454, 03 |
(ii) Sponsorships – 2011 to 2012
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Bursaries | R0 (budget) R128 785, 50 (actual) |
| Cop17 Ministers Road Show | R0 (budget) R 18 900, 00 (actual) |
| Aids Day | R0 (budget) R42 221, 00 (actual) |
| Sitholinhlanhla Primary School – shoes | R0 (budget) R 6 943, 85 (actual) |
| Jojo tanks | R0 (budget) R158 245, 56(actual) |
| TOTAL | R355 095, 91 |
ii) Donations – 2011 to 2012
| Donations | Amount |
| Ministers directive – boreholes | R92 000, 00 (Budget) R0 (Actual) |
| Assets donated to schools | R0 (Budget) R64 711, 09 (Actual) |
| TOTAL | R156 711, 09 |
h) Overberg Water
(i) Sponsorship
See the sponsorship information in the table below for the financial year 2009/10. No donations were budgeted for the financial year 2009/10.
| Sponsorship | Amount |
| Cape Epic | R 401 500, 00 |
| Agri Mega | R 50 000, 00 |
| School programme | R 65 000, 00 |
| WISA | R37 993, 00 |
| TOTAL | R554 493, 00 |
(i) Sponsorship for the financial year 2010/11
| Donations | Amount |
| WISA | R 10 000, 00 |
| Swimming pool for schools | R 4 772, 72 |
| National Water Week | R 43 575, 20 |
| TOTAL | R58 347, 92 |
(ii) Donations for the financial year 2010/11
| Sponsorships | Amount |
| S Amsterdam | R 11 990, 49 |
| "Big Walk" – Red Gross | R 33 600, 00 |
| TOTAL | R45 590, 49 |
(iii) Donations for 2011/12
| Donations | Amount |
| Field flowers Community | R 2 000, 00 |
| Cancer Association | R 1 000, 00 |
| DWA function | R12 000, 00 |
| TOTAL | R15 000, 00 |
(iv) Sponsorship for 2011/12
| Donations | Amount |
| WISA | R 210 526, 32 |
| TOTAL | R 210 526, 32 |
Donations for the financial year 2012/13 amounted to R63 000, 00 and the total budget for sponsorship amounted to R1 400 004, 00. None have been spent as yet.
i) Pelladrift Water
Pelladrift Water does not budget for financial donations or sponsorships as this stage stating that the two do not fall within their mandate.
j) Rand Water
Rand Water provided the break-down information for both sponsorship and donations including their beneficiaries. See the tables below :-
(v) Only donations were budgeted for financial year 2009/2010
| Donations | Amount | Beneficiary |
| Water Indaba Gala Dinner(donation) | R101 500 | Organisers of the Water Indaba and attendees of the Dinner |
| AfWA Kampala Congress(donation) | R250 000 | Organisers and attendees of the Congress |
| Lifestyle Design Show(donation) | R21 000 | Organisers and attendees of the Show |
| Garden World Sponsorship(donation) | R49 950 | Organisers and attendees of the Show |
| TOTAL | R 422 450 |
(vi) Donations and sponsorship were budgeted during financial year 2010/2011
| Donations and sponsorships | Amount | Beneficiary |
| Africa Investor Summit (donation) | R250 000 | Africa Investor Summit Organizers and the attendees of the Summit |
| 150 T-shirts and 150 bags for Youth Summit – Emfuleni LocalMunicipality. (Sponsorship). | R7 930 | Emfuleni local Municipality |
| The opening of Gauteng Provincial Legislature Gala Dinner. (donation). | R128 000 | Gauteng Provincial Legislature members |
| World Water Week Gala Dinner. (donation) | R164 160 | The Organisers of WWW and the attendees of the Conference |
| Bought DWA Gifts for National Water Week launch attendees | R19 440 | Attendees of National Water Week launch |
| WISA for the 3rd Municipality Water Quality Conference.(donation). | R450 000 | WISA. Water sector attendees |
| Launch of the Boreholes Project at Jozini.(sponsorship) | R200 000 | Kwanyawo Community |
| 60 Wheelchairs (sponsorship) | R108 561 | People with disability around Midvaal |
| TOTAL | R1 328 091 |
Rand Water evaluates both the sponsorship and donation initiatives and does the supporting each financial year. The decision in spending on the two is considered based on the positive financial performance of Rand Water. The expenditure would only be approved if the overall budget would not be exceeded. (Savings would have to be achieved in other areas of the business to fund the two.).
During the budgeting phase of the financial year 2012/13, it was decided that the annual spending pattern on both sponsorships and donations would be evaluated and the decision was taken to adjust the budget in line with past actual expenditure results and planned initiatives for 2012/13.
k) Sedibeng Water
Sedibeng Water budgets only for sponsorships on an annual basis to support and assist previously disadvantaged institutions with special needs, that is, the disabled; women; non-governmental organizations and community based organizations. The sponsorships also include events, campaigns such as HIV/AIDS awareness, Water Week, Arbor Week, Youth summits and Baswa le Metsi.
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 | R527, 796.00 (budget) R549, 284.80 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | R552, 504.00 (budget) R700, 982.69 (actual) |
| 2011/12 | R612, 501.00 (budget) R746, 530.01 (actual) |
| 2012/13 | R853, 751.00 (budget) N/A (actual) |
| Total | R2 546 552, 00 |
l) Umgeni Water
Umgeni Water budgets only for sponsorship, not for donations. See the table below showing the financial years and the budget allocated for sponsorships:
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 | R249 999.96 (budget) R183 331.41 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | R234 500.04 (budget) R61 857.90 (actual |
| 2011/12 | R247 866.48 (budget) R366 352.58 (actual) |
| 2012/13 | R259 899.96(budget) R28678.98 (actual) |
| Total | R992 266, 40 |
m) Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA)
TCTA budgets only for sponsorship, not for donations. See the table below showing the financial years and the budget allocated for sponsorships:
| Financial year | Budget and Actual |
| 2009/10 Sponsor for SANCOLD Conference. | R 60 000, 00 (budget) R 51 200, 00 (actual) |
| 2010/11 | N/A |
| 2011/12 | N/a |
| 2012/13 sponsor for National Water week with DWA. | R200 000, 00(budget) N/A (actual) |
| Total | R260 000, 00 |
n) Water Research Commission (WRC)
WRC does not engage in donating and sponsoring.
o) Inkomati Catchment Management Agency
Inkomati CMA does not budget for financial donations or sponsorships as this does not fall within their mandate and because they are still new in the business and concentrating on their financial viability.
p) Breede-Overberg Catchment Management Agency
Breede Overberg CMA is not in a good financial position to budget and spent on financial donations or sponsorship as they themselves depend on seed funding from the Department.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1963
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2352EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 August 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether (a) her departments or (b) any entity reporting to her has budgeted for (i) financial donations or (ii) sponsored services in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12, (dd) 2012-13 financial years; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what amount was (aaa) budgeted and (bbb) spent?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1963. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a)(i)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)(dd)(aaa) No, the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) did not budget for financial donations or sponsored services during the 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/2012 and 2012/13 financial years. Requests for gifts, donations and sponsorships are dealt with upon receipt. The accounting officer considers and approves the expenditure according to Treasury Regulation 21.1.1. – and funds are reprioritised within the appropriate Programme for this purpose.
(bbb) The DEA's expenditure for approved gifts, donations and sponsorships for the indicated financial years were published in the annual report as per the relevant prescripts.
(b))(i)(ii)(aa)(bb)(cc)(dd)(aaa) and (bbb) No, the DEA public entities reporting to the Minister did not budget for financial donations or sponsored services during the 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/2012 and 2012/13 financial years.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1953
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 3 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21)
1953. Mr I O Davidson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether an application or applications for a water use license have been received from the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan municipality for storm water protection on critical sections of the Oriel stream and Jukskei River in Bedford View; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) Whether the application or applications are receiving the necessary attention in order to ensure that they are processed as quickly as possible; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) When is it expected that the process leading to a decision on the application or applications for a water use license will be approved? NW2342E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, an application for a water use license from the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality for storm water protection on critical sections of the Oriel stream and Jukskei River in Bedford View was received by the Department on 23 April 2012.
(2) All municipalities' water use applications are regarded as strategic water use and thus receive the highest priority. Thus far, aspects such as reserve requirements have already been determined and technical inputs have been provided by relevant technical divisions.
(3) The Department is currently considering all technical inputs in relation to civil design; impeding and diverting, altering the banks of the river; and possible impacts on the wetland. Subsequent to this process, a Record of Recommendation and draft license will be compiled and presented to the Department's Water Use Authorisation, Assessment and Advisory Committee which provides the Department's delegated authority on recommendations to inform the decision of the water use license application. It is envisaged that the decision on the water use license application will be concluded within 90 days provided all the information submitted meets the requirements.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1952 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2341EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 August 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1266 on 20 June 2011, the determination of the emission limit of hydrogen sulfide has been completed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether emission limits for hydrogen sulfide are stipulated when any Atmospheric Emissions Licence is awarded; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1952. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the emission limit for Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S), which is 5 mg/m3 has been determined.
(2) Yes, The Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) limit of 5 mg/m3 is currently being used in Atmospheric Emission Licenses.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1938
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 3 AUGUST 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21)
1938. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1686 on 11 July 2012, the SA Weather Service is involved in using fog harvesting technology; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) why has her department, despite the ongoing pilot work done by the Water Research Commission, not sought to procure fog harvesting technologies for the augmentation of water supplies in areas where the technology is known to work? NW2327E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The water harvesting project which the South African Weather Service (SAWS) is engaged in forms part of our social responsibility. Second year meteorology students from the University of Pretoria are expected to do a community project. Each group in the last three years chose to do a water harvesting project in the far northern parts of Limpopowhere there is a lot of fog. Two schools, Tshiavha and Tshanowa were identified; both schools do not have access to drinking water but are situated in areas where there is lots of fog. Fog nets were built in those schools to harvest fog water. The SAWS has in the previous years, sponsored the students to implement the project.
(2) The fact that the SAWS is involved as stated in (1) above means the Department of Environmental Affairs is doing something about this technology.
With reference to a response provided in National Assembly question 1686 in (3) which states "The private sector does have some technology but municipalities and communities must be advised on how to use and purchase technologies. From the WRC studies, guidelines are developed for this purpose. The current WRC project which began in April 2011 has been designed to further optimise the fog harvesting processes and examine the extent of the environmental impact of fog water collection systems which the private sector will not do. An important product of this study will be a South African Atlas of Fog Harvesting Potential which will map out the areas of the country with the best potential for Fog Water capture. This will be an invaluable contribution to the planning for both government and private sector agencies to roll out this water supply augmentation option."
The Department as a regulatory body cannot seek to procure fog specific technologies.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1936 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 21 NW2325EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 August 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any live rhinos were exported to Vietnam since 1 April 2012; if not, why not; if so, (a) how many, (b) what is the name of the exporter and (c) what statutory role did the Department of Environmental Affairs play in the case of each export;
(2) how can the export of live rhinos to Vietnam be justified, considering that Vietnamese nationals are not permitted to hunt rhinos in South Africa;
(3) whether the Department of Environmental Affairs intends implementing any (a) norms and (b) standards on the export of live rhinos; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1936. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, (a) seven (7) white rhinoceros, (b) the information relating to the exporter cannot be made available, (c) in terms of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Regulations promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004), the provincial conservation authorities are the management authorities responsible for the issuance of CITES permits to private individuals or companies. The Department of Environmental Affairs is responsible to communicate with, among others, the management and enforcement authorities of other CITES parties on matters relating to the implementation of the Convention. In this specific case, the Department of Environmental Affairs verified the letters received from the CITES management and scientific authorities of Vietnam, confirming that the animals would only be used for the purposes as stated on the export permit (zoological purposes) and that the recipient was suitably equipped to house and care for the animals.
(2) The Department of Environmental Affairs agreed with provincial conservation authorities in February 2012 torefuse all applications for white rhinoceros hunting by foreign hunters whose state of usual residence is Vietnam until the Socialist Republic of Vietnam has confirmed in writing that white rhinoceros hunting trophies, exported from South Africa, are still in the possession of the hunters. The refusal of permits to hunt white rhinoceros is not related to the export of live animals. Vietnam complied with the requirements relating to the export of live rhinoceros to appropriate and acceptable destinations.
(3) (a) and (b) In general the regulatory provisions currently in place are sufficient to regulate the export of animals to foreign zoos. The Department of Environmental Affairs is, however, in the process of amending the additional requirement for the export of live rhinoceros to captive facilities; and it is proposed that the captive facility should be an institutional member of either the World Associates of Zoos and Aquarium (WAZA); or institutional members of association members of the WAZA; or accredited members of regional zoological associations, recognised by the CITES management authority of the state of import as a reputable association. These associations must require zoos or captive facilities to comply with specific criteria, including the high standard of husbandry and veterinary care, maintenance of record systems and contribution to conservation activities.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1857
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1857. Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether any money has been budgeted for the construction of an abstraction point of the balancing dam at the Hozani Water Purification Works in the Sabie River; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2249E
---00O00---
REPLY:
No money has been budgeted for the construction of an abstraction point of the balancing dam at the Hoxani Water Purification Works for the current financial year.
It should be noted that, an abstraction works was constructed in 2006/07 financial year on the left (North) bank of theSabie River at the existing weir approximately half a kilometre from the Hoxani Water Purification Works. This abstraction works is adequate to supply raw water to the Hoxani Water Purification Works.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1854
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1854. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the arbitration award by the SA Local Government Bargaining Council in favour of a certain person (name furnished) that he should be reinstated on the same or similar conditions that existed before termination of his employment; if not,
(2) whether she intends to study the findings; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the said person has been reinstated in accordance with the award; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether Bloem Water has communicated with the said person about the arbitration award; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) whether Bloem Water owes the said person any money as at the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2246E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes I am aware of the arbitration award by the Local Government Bargaining Council (LGBC).
(2) Bloem Water as an employer and at the operational level is taking the matter to the Labour Court for review. I will only comment after the ruling of the Labour Court.
(3) Bloem Water is therefore waiting for the appeal process to be exhausted. I am informed that Bloem Water has in the meantime initiated a possible settlement discussion.
(4) Bloem Water has not communicated with the former employee. That is the responsibility of the LGBC.
(5) For as long as the appeal process is still ongoing, Bloem Water does not owe the former employee any money.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1835
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1835. Mr T D Harris (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her make payment to (i) suppliers and (ii) service providers within the 30 day payment period as specified by the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), Act 1 of 1999; if not, in each case, (aa) how many service providers are awaiting payment, (bb) what is the monetary value of outstanding payments and (cc) how long is payment overdue;
(2) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are liable for any interest charged on overdue payments in any of the cases mentioned; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what is the (i) percentage and (ii) monetary value of interest charged;
(3) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have negotiated revised payment schedules with each of the service providers mentioned; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details;
(4) what are the reasons for (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her not making payment within 30 days as specified by the PFMA;
(5) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have implemented any measures to (i) ensure full compliance with the PFMA and (ii) facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details? NW2227E
REPLY:
(1) Yes.
(1)(a)(ii) Yes, however not all service providers are paid within 30 days. This happens in cases where invoices verification and validation of service delivery has not been finalized, meaning that the department has querries.
(1)(a)(aa) Currently there are 25 service providers awaiting payment.
(1)(a)(bb) The value of outstanding payments is R 9 055 447.00.
(1)(a)(cc) Payments that are due within 30 days is R 8 523 883.00. Invoices over 30 days are to the value of R 531 564.00
(2) No.
(2)(a)(i) Falls away.
(2)(a)(ii) Falls away.
(3) No.
(4)(a) Payments are not made in 30 days where there are disputes between the Department and the service providers on invoices.
(5)(a) Yes, there are measures to ensure full compliance with the PFMA.
(5)(a)(i) Yes, there are measures to facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1835
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2227EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr T D Harris (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her make payment to (i) suppliers and (ii) service providers within the 30 day payment period as specified by the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), Act 1 of 1999; if not, in each case, (aa) how many service providers are awaiting payment, (bb) what is the monetary value of outstanding payments and (cc) how long is payment overdue;
(2) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are liable for any interest charged on overdue payments in any of the cases mentioned; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what is the (i) percentage and (ii) monetary value of interest charged;
(3) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have negotiated revised payment schedules with each of the service providers mentioned; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details;
(4) what are the reasons for (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her not making payment within 30 days as specified by the PFMA;
(5) whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her have implemented any measures to (i) ensure full compliance with the PFMA and (ii) facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts; if not, why not; if so, in each case, what are the relevant details?
Mr T D Harris (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1835. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
| Question 1 | Question 2 | Question 3 | Question 4 | Question 5 | ||||||
| DEA/ Public Entity | (i)(ii) Are payments to service providers made within 30 days? | (aa) Number of service providers awaiting payment | (bb) Monetary value of outstanding payments | (cc) How long is payment overdue | (i)Percentage | (ii) Monetary value of interest charged | Details of negotiated payment schedule | Reasons for not making payments within 30 days | (i) Measures implemented to ensure full compliance | (i) Measures implemented to facilitate immediate payment for overdue accounts |
| DEA | Yes, with exception as per (aa) | 1 | R64 911.94 | 34 days | None | None | None, payments are made as per the service level agreement (SLA) terms. | Delay in certification of invoice. | Policies, procedure manuals and internal controls (check list) have been implemented to ensure that payments are made within 30 days. | Monthly reconciliation informs management about bottlenecks. |
| iSimangaliso | Yes | None | None | Not applicable | None | None | None | None | Financial policies and procedures; internal audit | None |
| SANParks | Yes | 15 | R11 903 059 | 180 days | Creditor/ supplier not paid within the set period (of the PFMA) will be as a result of a dispute regarding the services delivered etc. and therefore no interest will be applicable. | Not applicable | Payments to suppliers are all within the 30 day period unless there is a dispute. No revised payment schedules have been negotiated. | Disputes about service delivery | SANParks has policies and procedures in place which have been drawn up with the PFMA as the guideline. | Payments to suppliers older than 30 days will be paid once the disputes are resolved. |
| SANBI | Yes | None | None | Not applicable | None | None | None | None | None | None |
| SAWS | Yes | ACSA, Upington | R150 548 | 91-120 days | SAWS is not liable for any interest on overdue accounts. SAWS engages its suppliers and service providers continuously as part of relationship building and is thus able to negotiate that interest are not charged. | None | SAWS has requested that ACSA, Upington be paid in accordance with the signed contract. This matter is still being discussed with the service provider. | Rent increase is being disputed as it is not in accordance with the signed contract between SAWS and the supplier. | Internal controls have been implemented to ensure that payments are made within 30 days. A monthly age analysis that monitors payments is included in the monthly management accounts. | Invoices are stamped and registered on the board on receipt and submitted to the cost centre managers for approval. SAWS have also introduced a supply chain management tracking software, which informs management of where the bottlenecks are in the payment and approval of invoices process. |
| Skycare Maintenance | R473 923.96 | 91-120 days | None | Invoices relate to 2006 and are being discussed with supplier on why they were submitted late. These invoices were also being checked on whether they have not been paid before to avoid duplicate payment if they were submitted. | ||||||
| Dihlabeng LocalMunicipality | R14 874.67 | 91-120 days | SAWS has requested that theDihlabengMunicipalitybe paid in accordance with the signed contract. | Amount charged by the municipality is different from the signed rental agreement, and this is being resolved with the municipality. | ||||||
| NOAA GMD | R17 895.35 | 91-120 days | None | Invoices received from the supplier could not be matched to any orders issued by SAWS. Follow up emails have been sent to the supplier with no response to date. |
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1822
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1822. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to initiate any steps against the Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality for failing to provide Carolina residents with a reliable supply of potable water; if not, why not; if so, what steps will she take;
(2) whether she intends laying criminal charges against municipal officials in respect of water services; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW2214E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) At this stage, the Department does not intend to take any steps against the
Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality, however, the Department has made the following interventions since day one when we, as a Department, determined that the water in Carolina was unsafe for drinking; in order to provide the Carolina residents with reliable supply of potable water:
· Utilised the Rapid Response Unit to assist with the upgrading of the Carolina Water Treatment Plant.
· Supported the Chief Albert Luthuli Municipality by supplying potable water through water tankers to cart water into the affected areas.
· Placed the Jo-Jo water tanks at strategic points for effective water supply/distribution and the Rapid Response Unit intervention is continuing.
· Replaced the JoJo water tanks that were damaged during the Carolina unrests.
· Installed sand filter package plant to assist with enhancing water quality.
· Five contract workers were appointed as Process Controllers to maintain sustainability with processing at the Carolina Water Treatment Plant.
· The Inkomati Catchment Management Agency undertook intensive involvement in the catchment of the Carolina/Boesmanspruit Dam to stabilise the situation.
According to the latest analytical results provided by the Mpumamanzi Laboratory Services, some of the following observations and interpretations have been made:
· The results show drastic improvement in the raw water quality of the Boesmanspruit Dam;
· All treatment processes are functioning satisfactorily with removal efficiencies. The Module A (Old plant) is currently performing much better than the Module B (package plant) and particularly in terms of Aluminium removal and the reverse is true for manganese removal;
· The Mpumamanzi took the liberty to analyse the microbial status of the final water and both E.coli and Total Coliform results are zero; and
· All the results are within the Class I water quality standards as prescribed by the Department (through the SANS 241: 2006 water quality standards).
(2) The Department is not in a position to lay any criminal charge against the municipal officials because such is not provided in terms of the existing Water Service Legislation. The Department is however, working with the Chief AlbertLuthuli Local Municipality to ensure that the water quality is within the limits of the South African National Standards (SANS 241) drinking water standards.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1806
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1806. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What are the (a) last three dates on which officials of the Department of Water Affairs have conducted inspection visits with regard to each mine that is being investigated for pollution of the Bosmanspruit Dam in Carolina and (b)(i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the inspection in each case;
(2) whether any investigation was made with regard to the discharge from mines entering the Bosmanspruit Dam; if not, why not; if so, (a) why was it only noticed by her department once it affected the quality of the water and (b) what are the further relevant details;
(3) whether an early warning system has been put in place to detect seepage of discharge from the specified mines into the receiving environment; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether her department had been informed of discharges from the mines before the water became contaminated; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details of her department's response;
(5) whether her department has taken action to compel compliance with discharge standards and pollution prevention measures in terms of the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998; if not, why not; if so, what (a) action and (b) has been the response by the responsible parties? NW2198E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Table 1 below indicates the dates, name and designations of officials who conducted inspection visits to mines being investigated for pollution of the Bosmanspruit Dam in Carolina. This is over and above the testing of water in the Carolina area and our fill-time (24/7) presence there as DWA and ICMA, since January this year when the water quality problem was experienced.
Table (1) No protocols exist that governs the terms by which an export of animals to a foreign zoo is permitted. The export of animals to foreign zoos is regulated through various pieces of legislation, including provincial conservation legislation and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) if the animal to be exported is a listed threatened or protected species or a species listed in terms of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The Threatened or Protected Species Regulations and the CITES Regulations promulgated in terms of the NEMBA further regulates activities involving these species and permits are required for the export of these species.
With regard to the CITES listed species, an export permit is required to authorise the export. An export permit can only be issued if the following conditions are met:
a) the management authority (provincial conservation authorities if applicant is private person or business) must be satisfied that the specimen concerned has been legally acquired;
b) the management authority is satisfied that any living specimen will be prepared and shipped in accordance with the most recent edition of the Live Animals Regulations of the International Air Transport Association, regardless of the mode of transport, so as to minimise the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel treatment;
c) in the case of a specimen of a species listed in Appendix I or II, the Scientific Authority has made a non-detriment finding and advised the management authority accordingly; and
d) in the case of specimens of species listed in Appendix I, an import permit has been granted by the competent authority of the country of destination.
It should be noted that in terms of the export of the CITES Appendix I species; there is an obligation on the importing country to confirm, through the respective CITES scientific authorities, that the proposed recipient of the specimen is suitably equipped to house and care for it.
With regard to rhinoceros, an additional requirement relating to the export of live rhinoceros to captive facilities was approved by the MINMEC in 2011, i.e. the captive facility should be a member of the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) or a member of an association member of the WAZA.
(2) No. The Department of Environmental Affairs has not issued any permits for the export of animals to the Dhaka Zoo inBangladesh. The Department is, however, only responsible for the issuance of permit if the activity is carried out by an official of an organ of state; if the species involved is a marine species; or if the specimen originate from a national protected area. The provincial conservation authorities are responsible for the issuance of permits to private individuals / businesses and information relating to exports should be obtained from the relevant provincial conservation authorities. The Department requested information from the provincial conservation authorities, but did not receive information within the timeframe provided.
(3) No. The Department relies on the information received from the competent government authority in the importing country.
(4) a) The Department of Environmental Affairs is the issuing authority for organ of states who apply to export the CITES listed species or threatened or protected species; export of marine species; and the export of species originating from national protected areas. All other exports are done by the provincial conservation authorities.
b) The provincial department is the issuing authority for all private individuals who apply to export the CITES listed species or threatened or protected species.
(5) No, in general the regulatory provisions currently in place are sufficient to regulate the export of animals to foreign zoos. The Department of Environmental Affairs is, however, considering amending the additional requirement for the export of live rhino to captive facilities; and it is proposed that the captive facility should be an institutional members of either the WAZA; or institutional members of association members of the WAZA; or accredited members of regional zoological associations, recognized by the CITES management authority of the state of import, as a reputable association, and these associations must require zoos or captive facilities to comply with specific criteria, including a high standard of husbandry and veterinary care, the maintenance of record systems, and a contribution to conservation activities.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1785 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2176EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has sent officials to collect DNA samples of the pieces of rhino horn that were intercepted by Hong Kong customs on 14 November 2011 for comparison with the Rhino DNA Index System (RhoDIS) data base; if not, why not; if so, what (a) are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the visit and (b) was the date of the visit;
(2) whether the analysis of the DNA samples against the information in the data base has been completed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr L L Bosman (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1785. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. The process of invoking the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Agreement signed between the Government of South Africa and the Government of Hong Kong's Special Administration through the South African Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has not yet been finalised. The agreement will facilitate the prosecution of perpetrators. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is currently finalising the paperwork that will be sent to the Hong Kong High Court in order for the DNA samples to be collected. Only after the Hong Kong High Court has finalised its part, the South African experts will travel to Hong Kong to collect the samples.
(2) No. The analysis has not yet been completed as the DNA samples have not been collected.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1782
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2173EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any representatives from (a) her department and (b) any entity reporting to her participated in the recent Forum on China-Africa Co-operation (FOCAC); if not, why not; if so, what are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the representatives that attended the Forum;
(2) whether any measures to protect Africa's rhino population were discussed at the Forum; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether China made any specific commitments to help protect South Africa's rhino population; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr L L Bosman (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1782. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No representatives from the Department of Environmental Affairs or Public Entities reporting to me participated in the recent Forum on China-Africa Co-operation (FOCAC) which took place in Beijing, China from 18 to 20 July 2012. South Africa's participation in this Forum is coordinated by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), which is the national department responsible for coordinating South Africa's international engagements. The focus of this meeting was mainly on trade, investment, economic development and political relations between African countries andChina. However, the Department of Environmental Affairs did participate in the Inter-departmental Preparatory meetings which were conducted by the DIRCO.
(2) No. The protection of Africa's rhino population was not discussed at the Forum, as this specific issue was not on the agenda of the FOCAC meeting. However, the Beijing Action Plan (2013 – 2015) adopted by the 5th Ministerial Conference of the FOCAC on 20 July 2012, does mention cooperation in protecting the environment as one of the focal areas, and both Africa and China underscored their willingness to continue exchanges and cooperation in this field.
(3) No. China did not make any specific commitments to help protect South Africa's rhino population during this FOCAC meeting because this matter was not discussed. However, as South Africa is the African Co-chair of the FOCAC for 2012 – 2018, there is scope for South Africa, with the support of the African rhino range states, to engage with the People's Republic of China on this issue within the FOCAC in future. The Department of Environmental Affairs is engaging with the relevant authorities in China on a bilateral basis on measures to address and cooperate on wildlife management and law enforcement as well as the illicit trade of rhino horn. We have also finalised the draft MOU which we will sign with the Environment Minister of China. This MOU deals, interalia, with a holistic program of cooperation on anti-rhino poaching. This is an MOU to be signed at a bilateral level and not at continental level.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1751
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 27 JULY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20)
1751. Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends appointing an administrator to implement a turnaround strategy as a result of the Botshelo Water Board receiving three disclaimers from the Auditor-General in the (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10 and (c) 2010-11 financial years? NW2142E
---00O00---
REPLY:
No, the Department has no intention to appoint an administrator to implement a turnaround strategy as a result of Botshelo Water receiving three disclaimers from the Auditor-General for the 2008-9, 2009-10 and 2010-11 financial years.
Instead, Rand Water has already been brought in to support Botshelo Water through providing a Caretaker Chief Executive, Chief Financial Officer and Operations Manager and is currently assisting Botshelo Water to stabilise the working environment, to prepare all relevant documentation for the financial statements and to deal with the supply chain issues.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1740 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2131EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any permits have been approved for hunting rhino in the private nature reserves adjoining the Kruger National Park since 1 January 2012; if so, (a) how many hunting permits have been approved and (b) in respect of which areas;
(2) whether there were any special conditions attached to these permits; if not, why not; if so, what conditions;
(3) whether she intends to stop the issuing of permits for hunting rhino in view of the large number of rhinos lost to poaching; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1740. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. The national department does not deal with permits approval at provincial level. The question should be referred to the Mpumalanga and Limpopo Provincial Governments.
2. Refer to the above response.
3. No. The permit process and poaching are not linked as permitting is done through a due diligence process and is legal. The issue was discussed at length with the MECs responsible for Environment in all the provinces and it was agreed not to stop the issuing of permits based on the above.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO. 1726
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 20 NW2109EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 27 July 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has taken note of the "Inclusive Wealth Report 2012: Measuring Progress toward Sustainability" released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on 18 June 2012; if so, what is her response; if not, will she take note of its contents;
(2) whether the Department of Environmental Affairs is making any effort to (a) quantify and (b) determine trends of exhaustible natural capital in the country; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has found that natural capital accounting should become a factor in major planning decisions in the country; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether she will discuss with her Cabinet the need for inclusive wealth accounting in South Africa; if not, why not; if so, what is the position in this regard? NW2109E
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1726. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) I have taken note of the ''Inclusive Wealth Report 2012: Measuring progress toward sustainability'' released by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on 18 June 2012 and have noted, among others –
· That the report introduces a new index, the Inclusive Wealth Index (IWI) that attempts to provide a comprehensive measure of the major contributors to a nation's stock of wealth by capturing three forms of capital, namely: produced-, human- and natural-capital.
· That this is an important contribution to the ongoing scientific work on the question of how to value and measure the natural resource asset base. It must also be noted that South Africa is also making important contributions to this area of work. The King III ''triple bottom line'' corporate reporting system and the SA Top 100 Carbon Disclosure Reporting initiative are two practical examples of this.
· Although the report (of over 300 pages)needs to be analysed in far more detail before we can draw our own specific conclusions in this regard, we concur with the fundamental message of the report – that GDP growth is a completely inadequate measure of economic, social and environmental well being and wealth, particularly if the world is endeavouring to pursue a path of sustainable development.
· This confirms our own analysis and responses, which are already under implementation, for example, the activities under Presidential Outcome 10.
(2) In line with the report's 2nd recommendation, namely: that countries should mainstream the IWI within their planning and development ministries, the Department of Environmental Affairs will continue to work with the National Planning Commission, the Department of Economic Development, the National Treasury and, most importantly, the Department of Performance Monitoring, Evaluation and Administration in The Presidency to develop and use appropriate sustainable development indicators, including the quantification and monitoring of our ''natural capital." To this end –
· The indicators associated with Presidential Outcome 10 progress monitoring are important first steps in the development of such indicators.
· Further, the Department of Environmental Affairs has entered into aMoU with Stats SA to develop robust sustainable development indicators which will be routinely measured and reported by Stats SA as part of the country's robust sustainable development reporting, for, among other uses, as a basis for robust development planning going forward. The first data sets are currently under evaluation.
(3) As stated above, and as witnessed by our current efforts around the green economy, natural capital accounting is already starting to become a factor in major planning decisions in the country.
(4) See (2) above.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1703
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1703. Mr M Swart (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 3669 on 13 December 2011, what progress has her department made with the issuing of water licences to the George Municipality for (a) the extraction of water from the Malgas River and (b) raising the spillway at the Garden Route Dam? NW2057E
---00O00---
REPLY:
As indicated in reply to question 3669 on 13 December 2011, the issuance of Malgas River and Garden Route Dam water use licenses was dependent on the issuance of a positive Record of Decision from the Department of Environmental Affairs and the determination of the Outeniqua Reserve by the Department of Water Affairs.
A positive Record of Decision for Malgas River and Garden Route Dam was issued on 24 November 2009 and 16 March 2012 respectively and the Outeniqua Reserves was determined on 28 June 2012.
In view of the above, the Department has commenced with the process of reviewing the water use license application for the George Local Municipality's and anticipate to finalise the matter by no later than 30 September 2012.
The final processing of the water use license applications by the Department's Western Cape regional office should be concluded by end of July 2012, upon which it would be interrogated at a Regional Water Use Authorisation, Assessment and Advisory Committee for recommendation by the Regional Head.
Upon recommended by the Regional Head, it would be presented to a further Departmental Committee and on their recommendation the final licences will be prepared for signature of the delegated authority of the Department.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1691
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19 NW2041EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 June 2012
Mr P van Dalen (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends tabling the Nagoya Protocol (details furnished)to Parliament soon for ratification; if not, why not; if so, when;
(2) whether she has identified any challenges that must be overcome before ratification of the protocol; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what (a) challenges and (b) are the further relevant details;
(3) what has she identified to be the benefits to South Africa of ratifying the protocol?
Mr P van Dalen (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1691. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes. The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation (herewith referred to as ″The Nagoya Protocol on ABS″) will be submitted to both houses of Parliament once the planned stakeholder engagement, in terms of section 231 of the Constitution of South Africa read together with section 25 of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) has been finalised. The Department intends to complete this process by 31 March 2013.
(2) (a) and (b) No. South Africa has made remarkable progress since it became a contracting party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1995 by taking policy and legislative steps towards promoting conservation, the sustainable use of indigenous biological resources and associated traditional knowledge while promoting the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use. This has been achieved even before the adoption of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS. The Bioprospecting, Access and Benefit Sharing Regulations, 2008 – developed in terms of Chapter 6 of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA) and which came into force on 1 April 2008 – give effect to the provisions and objectives of the NEMBA, the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol on ABS.
(3) South Africa has made considerable progress in promoting the conservation and sustainable use of its biological resources. As largely a provider of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, South Africa, like many other countries, often experience challenges in promoting and enforcing the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of the country's biological/genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. It is in this context that South Africafinds the legally binding nature of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS to be the major benefit to consider with regard to its ratification. South Africa will be greatly assisted by the Nagoya Protocol on ABS because it includes measures to promote compliance with national legislation, policies and procedures and also strengthen transboundary and regional cooperation.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1689 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19 NW2039EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 June 2012
Mr P van Dalen (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What were the most important outcomes of the Rio+20 Summit for the Government and (b) what outcomes do the Government need to action;
(2) Whether the Government has achieved its strategic objectives at the summit; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr P van Dalen (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1689. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) Based on a review and lessons from global sustainable development efforts over the past 20 years, including the outcomes from the Millennium Development Goals (MDG's) and the 2002 WSSD Johannesburg Plan of Implementation,Rio+20 was aimed at reinvigorating and renewing a political commitment to global sustainable development action for the next 20 years. In this regard the objective has been met as captured in the outcome document, the most important of which can be summarised as follows:
i. A common vision – emphasizing that poverty eradication, changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development are foundations for sustainable development. In this regard the international community has renewed its commitment to coherent integration and implementation of previous political resolutions and to ensure the full participation of stakeholders, including women and youth, on the basis of the Agenda 21 principles (including the principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities).
ii. The green economy concept, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication – emphasizing the multiplicity of approaches to be taken in accordance with national circumstances and development priorities. Thereby protecting national sovereignty and vulnerable groups, while, at the same time, committing to mobilise international finance, technology and capacity building support for the implementation of Green Economy policies at local, national and regional levels.
iii. A strengthened international institutional framework for sustainable development – reaffirming, on the one hand, the role and authority of the UN General Assembly and its' Economic and Social Council strengthened by the establishment, through an inter-governmental process, of a universal High Level Political Forum (which will replace the current Commission for Sustainable Development). While on the other hand, ensuring that the UN system is able to deliver enhanced support to countries through an upgraded UN Environment Programme, with a consolidated Headquarters in Africa (Nairobi, Kenya).
iv. A Framework for Action and Follow-up – comprising of 2 parts:
a) Thematic areas and cross-sectoral issues, including actions and follow-up on poverty eradication; food security; water and sanitation; energy; tourism; transport; cities and human settlements; health and population; employment; oceans and seas; small island developing states; least developed countries; Africa; regional efforts; disaster and risk reduction; climate change; forests; biodiversity; desertification; mountains; chemicals and waste; sustainable consumption and production; mining; education; gender and women's empowerment.
b) Sustainable Development Goals, recognizing and building on the MDG's, which expire in 2015, the outcome established an intergovernmental process to develop further global Sustainable Development Goals for the period beyond 2015.
v. Means of Implementation, focused on:
a) Finance for sustainable development with the establishment of an inter-governmental process to develop a Sustainable Development Financing Strategy, including commitments to ODA, multilateral finance, leverage private sector investments, South-South cooperation and innovative finance sources.
b) Technology development and transfer for sustainable development, with the UN Secretary General to develop recommendations on a Technology Facilitation Mechanism to address technology related challenges such as access, financing technology development and technology adaptation as well as strengthening international regional and national research and technological capacities.
c) Capacity building, with a call for continued implementation of the UNEP Bali Strategic Plan for technology and capacity building, increased effort from UN agencies and enhanced international cooperation in this area.
d) Trade as an engine for development with a call for the conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda by members of the WTO.
e) A registry of commitments to be developed and maintained by the UN Secretary General to compile and record all sustainable development commitments, policies, plans, programmes and actions by governments and all stakeholders.
(b) At a national level, the Government will further develop and implement its green economy strategy, climate change response policy, IPAP, IRP and other relevant developmental policies, plans and strategies in line with the national sustainable development strategy to effectively leverage and mobilise the means of implementation agreed in the Rio+20 outcome. This effort works towards promoting integration and coherence with regard to the national initiatives in the thematic and cross-sectoral areas outlined in the Rio + 20 outcome, particularly those that are aimed at promoting poverty reduction, job creation and sustainable consumption and production in the context of South Africa's New Growth Path. These will be elaborated in an implementation plan on the Rio+20 outcomes and will be presented to the Portfolio Committee, following Cabinet approval.
At an international level, the Government will actively participate in the further processes established by the Rio + 20 agreement, particularly the inter-governmental processes on the development of post 2015 Sustainable Development Goals; to define the modalities of the new High Level Political Forum under the UN; and the development of a Sustainable Development Financing Strategy; as well as contributing to the UN Secretary General's processes on a Technology Facilitation Mechanism and the international Register of Commitments. Further, the Government will submit its' commitments, policies, plans, programmes and projects to the international Register of Commitments, once it is developed.
(2) The Government has achieved its strategic objectives at Rio + 20. From South Africa's perspective, the most important outcomes include, for the first time, a comprehensive agreement to strengthen the participation of women and youth with a specific agreement on gender and women's' empowerment; a global pronouncement on green economy policies in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; the establishment of a process to formulate global Sustainable Development Goals beyond 2015 which build on the MDG's; a process to establish a global sustainable development finance strategy; a process for an international Technology Facilitation Mechanism; as well as a strengthened institutional framework for sustainable development. The strengthening of the existing UN sustainable development governance system through the establishment of a High Level Political Forum and the upgrading and consolidation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) will play a strategic role in improving environmental governance, thereby strengthening the environment pillar for sustainable development. Most importantly, the UNEP is based in Africa, thus providing an opportunity for the continent to tap into its capacity support programme for effective use of our natural resources. In addition, South Africa was the lead voice in calling for the recognition of the strategic role played by marine resources in sustainable development. In this regard, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was recognised as a legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1687
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1687. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters per month in each municipality in the Eastern Cape and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether her department has taken any measures to assist municipalities in the Eastern Cape to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand for and (b) supply of water in each municipality in the Eastern Cape? NW2036E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The average water loss (Non Revenue Water – NRW) across all municipalities in the Eastern Cape is 35% with a range from 3.89% to 58%.
(2) Yes, the Department has funded several Water Conservation Demand Management (WCDM) projects where situation assessments were conducted thus resulting in the complication of the following WCDM Implementation Strategies:
· identification and repairing of water leaks in the distribution systems;
· identification and repairing of water leaks as well as the replacement of inferior leaking toilet cisterns at households, especially for indigent households;
· installation of zonal and bulk water meters;
· awareness campaigns;
· repairing of leaking reservoirs; and
· replacement of the ageing pipelines.
Further, the Department has implemented an extensive Councilor Development Programme to educate newly appointed councilors on WCDM.
Specific interventions are taking place in the following Municipalities:
· The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality implements Water Conservation Demand Management (WCDM) on a continuous basis out of own funding as well as additional funding from the Department. They have a huge find and fix project focusing on the indigent households (assistance to the poor project). The project scope of work includes assessing and replacing old leaking infrastructure, pressure management, meter installation (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement. Awareness campaign is also a huge component of the interventions. The average daily reduced by approximately 30Ml/day.
· The Department funded several WCDM projects in Cacadu. The current project involves find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at households especially and indigent households, assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded 2 WCDM projects in Blue Crane Route. The current project involves find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at households especially and indigent households, assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement as well as reservoir repairs.
· The Department funded two WCDM projects in Ikwezi and repaired all their reservoirs and retrofitted the boreholes. The current project involves meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded a WCDM project over a three year period in Makana. The project involves a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, presure management, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement, reservoir repairs and fencing.
· The Department assisted Ndlambe to do a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks at all households, awareness campaigns, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded three WCDM project in Baviaans. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement. The Non Revenue Water of Baviaans came down from 37% to 19%.
· The Department funded a WCDM project in Kouga. The project involved a situation assessment on the metering, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded two WCDM projects in Amatole. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded several WCDM project in Chris Hani. The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded several WCDM projects in Joe Gqabi. The projects involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns, meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded two WCDM project in OR Tambo The project involved a situation assessment and compilation of a WCDM strategy, find and fixing of leaks in the distribution system and at all households especially indigent households , assessment and replacement old leaking infrastructure, awareness campaigns,meter installations (bulk, zone, industrial and domestic) and replacement.
· The Department funded one WCDM project in Alfred Nzo. The project involved part of the implementation of their current WCDM strategy.
(3) The total demand for all municipalities in the Eastern Cape is 556 million cubic meters per annum and the total supply is 592 million cubic meters per annum.
Eastern Cape has been allocated R480 784 060 to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R14 434 000 has also been allocated to the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1686
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1686. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What is the purpose of all fog harvesting projects that are being conducted by the (a) Water Research Commission and (b) Department of Water;
(2) whether the Department of Water has procured any fog harvesting technology for use in any of its projects since 1 April 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the projects on fog harvesting in which the Water Research Commission is involved exist for the purpose of developing fog harvesting technology; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, why is the Water Research Commission involved in such projects when this technology already exists in the private sector? NW2033E
---00O00---
REPLY
(1) South Africa is a water scarce country which is further exacerbated by the seasonality and uneven distribution of rainfall across the country. Assurance of water supply in rural environments remains a particular challenge. In many cases, the possibility of extending conventional reticulation infrastructure to ensure piped water is limited and more innovative solutions need to be found. Fog water harvesting in low rainfall areas has the potential to enhance water security of these communities.
An examination of technological and system optimisation to make fog water harvesting a sustainable water supply in appropriate settings is the driver behind the Water Research Commission (WRC) fog water projects.
The first WRC funded study began in 1995 with the main aims to:
· Determine the feasibility of using fog to supplement existing water supplies in water-scarce parts of the country, and
· Assess design concepts for a fog water collection system.
The findings of the study are published in a report titled The South African Fog Water Collection Project (WRC Report No. 671/1/1999). The general findings of the study were that it was feasible to harvest appreciable quantities of good quality water from fog, and the volumes collected seemed to be dependent on the density of fog and wind movement. This had implications for the design of a collection system and thus the study recommended the erection of small prototype of the collection unit at one or two areas to determine how the design could function in practice.
This led to a second WRC funded study titled Implementation of an Operational Prototype Fog Water Collection System: Project Implementation (WRC Report No. 902/1/02) whose aims were to design, erect and operate a fog water collection system to provide water to rural communities, and to research factors like wet events, chemical and biological analyses of water samples that are associated with water collection at the site. The Tshanowa Junior Primary School at the crest of the Soutpansberg Mountains in the Limpopo Province and at the Lepelfontein village on the West Coast, were selected as suitable sites to implement the project. Fully operational fog harvesting systems were installed, and after a three-year monitoring and a number of experiments and development (including resizing the system) the project was finalised in which the structure design and specifications were published.
There has been further testing and experimentation on this Fog Water Collection System in different parts of the country. An example is the launch of the system in Cabazane Village (Alfred Nzo DM), Eastern Cape, and in many other areas. The results are that the system is not necessarily universally applicable because of the spatial and temporal variation in fog characteristics and types.
Therefore, as it is found that although the principles for the technology is well founded, the designs are area and context specific and that there is no comprehensive guide to define the suitable criteria needed for a location to be suitable for this technology and hence the 2011 research commissioned by the WRC for a more comprehensive, four-year study (K5/2059) titled Optimising Fog Water Harvesting which commenced in April 2011 to further enhance the system.
All WRC reports are available free to the public via the knowledge hub on the WRC website – www.wrc.org.za.
(2) The Department has not procured any fog harvesting technology for use in any of its projects since 1 April 2010as all pilots were done by the WRC.
(3) The private sector does have some technology but municipalities and communities must be advised on how to use and purchase technologies. From the WRC studies, guidelines are developed for this purpose. The current WRC project which began in April 2011 has been designed to further optimise the fog harvesting processes and examine the extent of the environmental impact of fog water collection systems which the private sector will not do. An important product of this study will be a South African Atlas of Fog Harvesting Potential which will map out the areas of the country with the best potential for Fog Water capture. This will be an invaluable contribution to the planning for both government and private sector agencies to roll out this water supply augmentation option.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1685
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1685. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What (a) is the total outstanding amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 May 2012 and (b) is the breakdown of this amount in terms of (i) current debt, (ii) debt in arrears and (iii) money owed by each municipality to each water board? NW2031E
---00O00---
REPLY
(a) The total outsanding amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 April 2012 is R 2, 261, 372, 566.
The data on the total amount of money owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 May 2012 is not available as the Department has not yet received them.
(b) The table below gives a summary of monies owed by municipalities to water boards as at 31 April 2012, however the Department is finalising the Institutional Reform and Realignment (IRR) project which aims at improving financial viability for all institutions by merging marginal viable institutions with those with stronger economic base that are financially viable. The economies of scale will enable institutions to be stronger and be able to deliver on their mandate and also to support local government.
| No | Water Board | Number of Municipalities supplied by the Water Board | (b)(i) Current debt | (b)(ii) Debt in Arrears | (b)(iii) Total Owed by Municipalities | Relative Income As Sales Revenue |
| 1 | Amatola Water | 03 | 19 163 210 | 11 204 636 | 30 367 846 | 16 084 593.56 |
| 2. | Bloem Water | 04 | 35 495 103 | 52 294 493 | 87 789 596 | 87 789 603.73 |
| 3. | Botshelo Water | 03 | 5 867 000 | 61 096 795 | 66 964 666 | 5 867 871.00 |
| 4. | Bushbuckridge Water | 03 | 4 404 937 | 254 132 918 | 258 537 855 | 258 537 855.01 |
| 5. | Lepelle Northern Water | 11 | 31 260 374 | 280 691 482 | 311 951 857 | 31 260 374.68 |
| 6. | Magalies Water | 07 | 9 987 128 | 16 968 092 | 26 955 220 | 15 892 216.09 |
| 7. | Mhlathuze Water | 02 | 7 668 161 | 331 084 | 7 999 245 | 7 732 368.67 |
| 8. | Overberg Water | 05 | 174 615 | 184 038 | 358 653 | 1 017 526.00 |
| 9. | Pelladrift Water | 03 | 184 038 | 194 797 | 378 835 | 174 615.00 |
| 10. | Sedibeng Water | 11 | 41 536 884 | 561 226 172 | 602 763 056 | 38 619 279.00 |
| 11. | Rand Water | 19 | 553 608 721 | 124 016 578 | 677 625 299 | 553 608 731.25 |
| 12. | Umgeni Water | 07 | 151 182 295 | 9 849 811 | 161 032 106 | 151 182 295.00 |
| TOTAL | 860 579 471 | 1 400 793 095 | 2 261 372 566 | 1 010 717 162.99 |
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1674
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 22 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 19)
1674. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters in respect of each month in each municipality in Mpumalanga and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any steps have been taken to assist municipalities in Mpumalanga to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the demand for water versus the supply of water in each municipality inMpumalanga? NW2001E
REPLY:
(1) The details of average water loss in kiloliters and percentage of total water usage in each municipality inMpumalanga are presented in attached Annexure A.
(2) The Department is supporting the local municipalities in Mpumalanga by incorporating water conservation and demand management through the following programmes:
· Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme;
· Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant; and
· National Transfers Programme.
(3) The details of average water demand versus the supply of water in each municipality in Mpumalanga are presented in attached Annexure A.
Mpumalanga has been allocated R182 million to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R13.528 million has also been allocated from the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1667
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 15 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18)
1667. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters per month in each municipality in Limpopo and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent as at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any steps are being taken to assist municipalities in Limpopo to decrease water losses; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand and (b) supply of water in each municipality in Limpopo? NW2004E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The details of average water loss in kiloliters and percentage of total water usage in municipalities in Limpopo are presented in attached Annexure A.
(2) Yes, the Department has taken the following measures to assist the Water Services Authorities in Limpopo to decrease water losses:
· development of water conservation strategies and business plans;
· water balance calculation;
· network sectorisation;
· replacement of water meters for large consumers;
· leak detection and repair programme;
· awareness campaigns; and
· installation of bulk and household meters.
In addition to the above measures, there are four major bulk resource developments in Limpopo which are in different stages of planning, design and construction. The following major projects will supply water for primary use as well as for industrial use in support of the growth and development plans of the provincial government of Limpopo:
· Olifants River Resource Development Project (ORWRDP) Phase 2A and 2C (R1448 million)
· Mokolo Crocodile West Water Augmentation Project (MCWAP) Phase 1
(R87.8 million). ESKOM and EXXARO are responsible for the off budget portion of phase 1
· Levhuvhu River Government Water Scheme (LRGWS) pipe contracts
(R716 million)
· Groot Letaba Water Augmentation Project (GLEWAP) Nwamitwa Dam
(R72 million)
The total available funds for these projects is R2.3 billion.
(3)(a) The current status of the demand of water as indicated on attached Annexure A in Water Services Authorities inLimpopo is high due to rapid population growth and lack of proper water conservation and demand management measures. The Department is providing support to certain Water Services Authorities (Lephalalale and Mogalakwena) to implement water conservation in order to improve the water use efficiency while investigating other options to address this demand.
(3)(b) The current status of supply of water as indicated on attached Annexure A is low, as all the Water Services Authorities in Limpopo are experiencing water shortages which attributed to numbers of factors i.e. poor operation and maintenance of water supply systems. As a result, some of the Water Services Authorities are already rationalising their water supply (supply water for certain times).
Limpopo has been allocated R481 million to develop bulk infrastructure and an amount of R4.3 million has also been allocated from the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme to implement water conservation and water demand management.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1665
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18 NW2002EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 15 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 1395 on 11 June 2012, why were ordinary members of the public not invited to comment on the proposed peripheral development zone in the Kruger National Park;
(2) whether she intends to call for public comment on the proposal before any memorandum of understanding with the government of the Republic of Mozambique is signed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1665. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. It is not correct that the public was not consulted in the crafting of the Kruger Management Plan and its Zonation Plan. When the Kruger Management Plan was drafted in 2006-2008 public participation meetings were held around the park in accordance with section 39(3) of the Protected Areas Act which prescribes that "when preparing a management plan for a protected area, the management authority concerned must consult municipalities, other organs of state, local communities and other affected parties which have an interest in the area". Ordinary members of the public, the majority of whom reside within the communities surrounding the park (representing approximately 3 million people), were part of these consultations and their comments were included in the final plan approved by the Minister.
Management plans are dynamic documents that have to take the continuous changes occurring in the environments where they are applied into consideration. In terms of section 40(2) of the Protected Areas Act, "the management authority may amend the management plan by agreement with the Minister or MEC, as the case may be". As a result of unforeseen changes at the time of the approval of the Act by the Minister, the Kruger Management Plan has been amended many times already to effect changes on the management of elephants (removal of water-holes) and to update the fire policy, to mention but a few. There is no requirement or prescription in the law to go on a full public consultation process when amending an approved management plan, including zonation. The Peripheral Development Zone is a small component on the approved Zonation Plan within the Kruger Management Plan.
2. No. The proposed buffer zone memorandum of understanding between Mozambique and South Africa represents a continuation of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park Treaty signed between the two countries on 9 December 2002. In terms of Article 3(1) certain areas will be included in future as part of the GEOGRAPHIC DELIMITATION of the TransfrontierPark and these areas include 3(2), the area in Mozambique comprising the Banhine and Zinave National Parks, the Massingir and Corumana areas, as well as the interlinking regions. The proposed buffer zone forms part of the Massingir-Corumana and adjacent areas and is covered by the Treaty. The public in both countries was fully consulted when the transfrontier conservation area was proposed and there is no need for the public to comment on the memorandum of understanding between the two countries again.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1664 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.18 NW2000EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 15 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) are the beach driving restrictions for each zone along the KwaZulu-Natal coast and (b) effects have been reported on the (i) ecology and (ii) economy of the area (aa) in (aaa) 2009, (bbb) 2010 and (ccc) 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012;
(2) whether she is reconsidering the prohibition for any of the specified zones along the coast where beach driving is currently (a) prohibited and (b) restricted; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) which specified entities are responsible for determining beach driving regulations along the KwaZulu-Natalcoast?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1664. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) Driving on the beach for recreational purposes is generally prohibited in South Africa. The use of vehicles on our beaches isrestricted in terms of the Regulations for the control of use of vehicles in the coastal zone (Government Notice 1399 of 21 December 2001) published in terms of section 44 of the National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998).However, permits to use vehicles in the coastal zone may be issued for:
·non-recreational activities in terms of a fishing right or an exemption;
·scientific research;
·tourism business;
·access to private property provided there is no reasonable alternative access to the property;
·producing an advertisement, feature film, still photograph or a television programme;
·access by a physically disabled person;and
·organised recreational sport fishing competitions.
(b) (i)Research conductedbetween 2009 to 2012 indicates an improvement in the ecology of the KwaZulu-Natal coast as a result of the general prohibition of the recreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone.As an example, a long-term monitoring project north of Cape Vidal has been implemented. One of the specific objectives of this study was to monitor if there has been any recovery in shore angling fish species since the implementation of the beach driving ban, using the no-take sanctuary area as a bench mark. The results of this project indicated that there has been a recovery of resident reef-associated shore angling fish species (both in terms of abundance and mean size) in the previously exploited areas north of Cape Vidal.This recovery was more significant in closer proximity to the no-take sanctuary area.
(ii)(aa), (aaa), (bbb), (ccc) and (bb) No research regarding the effects on the economy has been conducted in the KwaZulu-Natal Province between 2009-2012 because of the general prohibition on the recreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone.
(2) (a), (b) Neither the prohibitionnor the restrictionofthe recreational use of vehicles is currently being reconsidered due to the positive impact it is having on the ecology of the South African coastal zone.
(3) The Department of Environmental Affairs is responsible for determining beach driving regulations along the KwaZulu-Natal coast.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1621
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 15 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 18)
1621. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any contracts have been awarded for the building of phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the loan capital for the building of the dam has been secured; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether all necessary agreements for the building of the project have been signed with the government ofLesotho; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) what is the estimated number of people who must be relocated for the purpose of building phase 2? NW1882E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) There are two contracts that have been awarded for the building of phase 2 of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP).
Road
The first contract was for the construction of a 3.8 km access road to the measuring weir downstream of the Polihali Dam. This contract was awarded to Mops Civil a Lesotho based Company.
Status: The road was completed by the end of November 2011.
Measuring Weir
The second contract is for the construction of the measuring weir downstream of the Polihali Dam site on the Senqu River. This contract was awarded to BKS, a South African company.
Status:Still under construction, expected completion date is September 2012, that is if snow does not persist.
Project Management Unit (PMU)
The Lesotho Highlands Development Authority (LHDA) has completed negotiations with a preferred Bidder for the Project Management Unit (PMU) contract. Once the preferred bidder has responded to the client's concerns, an MOU will be signed which paves the way for the award of the contract. The commencement and mobilisation of the contract is expected to be by the end of July 2012.
Baseline Studies
The Request for Proposals for the Baseline Studies has already been advertised and the closing date of the proposals is 29 June 2012. Expected day for the award of contract is August 2012. Some of the studies will take 24 months to be completed.
-2-
LHWP Phase II Programme
Design and construction of the dam and tunnels have not been done. The following is the programme for Phase II of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project. Refer to the table below:
| WATER TRANSFER SOUTH AFRICA | ||
| ACTIVITY | TIMELINE | |
| Environment and Social Development baseline studies and plans. This means that the EIAs will also be conducted during this time. The impact assessment studies will also take place during this period. The rescue and conservation of indigenous plants will also be conducted during this time. | August 2012 to July 2020 | |
| Appoint consultants, design and issue construction tenders. | Nov 2012 to January 2015 | |
| Construction of advance infrastructure. | July 2014 to December 2015 | |
| Construction of dam and tunnel. | January 2016 to March 2020 | |
| Start impounding to 2000 Metres above sea level (mas)l. | August 2018 | |
| Water Delivery to South Africa | August 2020 | |
| PUMP STORAGE GOVERNMENT OF LESOTHO | ||
| Feasibility Study Completion | August 2012 | |
| Construction of the Pump storage (Provisional) | January 2013 to December 2017 | |
(2) The loan capital has not been secured yet. This will be informed by the outcome of the guarantee request which is currently under consideration by the National Treasury. The outcome of the decision is expected by the end of July 2012, once the Fiscus Liability Committee of the National Treasury has made recommendation to the Minister of Finance.The necessary Off Take and Implementation Agreements will be entered into once the loan capital is in place.
(3) The Agreement on the Implementation of the LHWP Phase II was signed on 11 August 2011 in Maserubetween the Government of Lesotho and the Republic of South Africa. A copy of the Agreement will be tabled in Parliament in due course.
(4) The feasibility study on the implementation of the LHWP Phase II identified 2 550 people which equals to 534 households from 17 villages that may be directly affected and would have to be relocated.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1586
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1586. Mr D J Stubbe (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether any traffic fines were incurred with regard to any of her official vehicles in the (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11 and (c) 2011-12 financial years; if so, what (i) amount in fines was incurred in respect of each specified vehicle in each specified financial year and (ii) are the further relevant details in each case? NW1914E
REPLY:
(a) (i) 2009/10 vehicle in Pretoria R 7 650
Cape Town R 0.00
(b) (i) 2010/11 vehicle in Pretoria R 3 325
Cape Town R 1 150
(c) (i) 2011/12 vehicle in Pretoria R 300
Cape Town R 200
(a) (b) (c) (ii) There are no further details.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1561
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1561. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the World Bank Inspection Panel's Report into the Medupi Power Station (details furnished); if so, what steps has she taken with regard to the findings of the report as they relate to actions taken by (a) the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) the Department of Water;
(2) whether any action is being taken by these departments to rectify any items referred to in the report; if not, why not; if so, what action? NW1884E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) Regarding the findings related to the extraction of sand in the Mokolo River, an inter-departmental task team (comprising the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism) has been established to specially investigate the sand mining activities in the Mokolo River. The task team initially met on 20 December 2011 and has met subsequently on 24 January, 7 March and 17 April 2012. The purpose of the task team is to ensure the sustainable extraction of sand from the Mokolo River through ensuring that all statutory provisions of the relevant South African Law are complied with. Furthermore, the task team will ensure that government addresses these activities in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the principles of co-operative governance are maintained. At this stage of the task team's investigation, the focus is on the following:
· Quantifying the nature and scope of the sand mining operations and establishing the impacts on the MokoloRiver system;
· Identifying all unlawful operators along the Mokolo River in order to inform the development of an enforcement strategy.
A site visit was scheduled to take place on the 19 and 20 June 2012.
(1)(b) Three main issues raised in the "World Bank Inspection Panel Report" are relating to water management. These issues are as follows:
· Concerns about the sustainability of water supply to existing and new users in view of new developments such as Medupi requiring large volumes of water.
The Department of Water Affairs planned the supply of water for the new developments according to the requirements laid down by the National Water Act (NWA). Reconciliation Strategies were developed and are being implemented and maintained on an ongoing basis to ensure sufficient and reliable supply of water of appropriate quality to all existing as well as future users. The reconciliation strategies, together with detailed pre-feasibility studies and feasibility studies, involved extensive stakeholder consultation processes. Water will be supplied from the Crocodile River and Mokolo Riverand will not adversely affect existing users.
· Concerns about the impact of new developments on quality of surface and groundwater resources.
The impact of the developments on the surface and groundwater in this area, including the possibility of Acid Mine Drainage was assessed in a Water Research Commission project (Project No K5/1830//3). Due to the geology of the area coupled with the low rainfall and high evaporation, it was found that the pits of the coal mines will not rise to levels at which they will be able to decant. It will be required that developments are planned as "zero effluent" operations, which mean that no effluent will be allowed to enter the surface or groundwater in the area. License conditions require extensive safety measures and monitoring to prevent contamination of surface and groundwater resources.
· Concerns about the impact of sand mining in the Mokolo River for the construction of Medupi
The Department of Water Affairs, in recognising that protection of water resources is as important as the supply of sand to construct Medupi Power Station, directed the sand miner (Chobe -Labonte 5) to conduct further impact studies. These include Environmental Impact Assessment, Environmental Management Plan, Hydrological impact study, Aquatic Habitat Report, Wetlands study, and Rehabilitation Plan. The reports are being reviewed as part of Water Use License application adjudicating process.
(2) No significant non-compliances were found at the Medupi Power Station during the Compliance Inspection conducted the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism on 7 December 2011.
The issues regarding the quality of sand to be supplied to Eskom will be raised in the next Environmental Management meeting to be held with Eskom. There is therefore no need to conduct a detailed compliance inspection at Medupi because the meetings are intended to deal with all issues of concern raised by the three spheres of government.
The issues relating to emissions will be managed through the comprehensive monitoring regime to be implemented by the relevant authorities who will take effect in the post-construction phase and commissioning of the power station.
The submitted Water Use License application and related studies as referred in (1)(b) above will be used as regulatory tools to mitigate or prevent any significant impacts on the Mokolo River and lawful water users. The Department of Water Affairs is working with Mokolo Water Users Association, the Department of Environmental Affairs and other stakeholders on an ongoing basis so as to monitor and enforce compliance against conditions of the Water Use Licence and other provisions of the National Water Act, Act No 36 of 1998.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1561
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.17 NW1884EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed of the World Bank Inspection Panel's Report into the Medupi Power Station (details furnished); if so, what steps has she taken with regard to the findings of the report as they relate to actions taken by (a) the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) the Department of Water;
(2) whether any action is being taken by these departments to rectify any items referred to in the report; if not, why not; if so, what action?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1561. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) and (b) Regarding the findings related to the extraction of sand in the Mokolo River:
Even prior to the World Bank Report, an inter-departmental task team (comprising the Department of Environmental Affairs, the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism) had been established to specifically investigate the sand mining activities in the Mokolo River. The task team initially met on 20 December 2011 and has met subsequently on 24 January, 7 March and 17 April 2012. The purpose of the task team is to ensure the sustainable extraction of sand from theMokolo River through ensuring that all statutory provisions of the relevant South African Law are complied with. Furthermore, the task team will ensure that government addresses these activities in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the principles of co-operative governance are maintained. At this stage of the task team's investigation, the focus is on the following:
· Quantifying the nature and scope of the sand mining operations and establishing the impacts on the MokoloRiver system
· Identifying all unlawful operators along the MokoloRiver in order to inform the development of an enforcement strategy.
A site visit was scheduled to take place on 19 and 20 June 2012.
(2) No significant non-compliances were found at the Medupi Power Station during the Compliance Inspection conducted by the Department of Environmental Affairs and the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism on 7 December 2010.
The issues regarding the quantity of sand to be supplied to Eskom will be raised in the next Environmental Management meeting to be held with Eskom. There is therefore no need to conduct a detailed compliance inspection at Medupi because the meetings are intended to deal with all issues of concern raised by the three spheres of government.
The issues relating to emissions will be managed through the comprehensive monitoring regime to be implemented by all relevant authorities who will take effect in the post-construction phase and commissioning of the power station.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1559
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1559. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) When will the feasibility study into long-term solutions to acid mine drainage in the Witwatersrand be concluded, (b) which entity is conducting the study, (c) what is the estimated cost of the feasibility study and (d) when does she anticipate that tenders for implementation of the long-term solution will be advertised and awarded;
(2) whether proposals for implementing long-term solutions are being accepted whilst the feasibility study is still underway; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1881E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) The feasibility study commenced in January 2012 and will be completed by
28 February 2013 resulting in recommendations on potential long-term solutions for mine water management (including acid mine drainage) in the Witwatersrand becoming available to the Department. Thereafter, the proposed solution(s) will require implementation.
(1)(b) The study is conducted by the Department's Chief Directorate: Integrated Water Resource Planning, supported by three professional service providers (names furnished) and specialist advisers (names furnished).
(1)(c) The cost of the feasibility study is R17 720 980.
(1)(d) While the procurement process of a project of this nature would normally commence on approval of the feasibility study and after all applicable statutory approvals have been obtained, we are also investigating the option of an earlier request for proposals (RFP) which will run parallel with the feasibility study.
During the feasibility study we will also issue a request for information (RFI) in order to register technology, funding and operating options which would inform the feasibility study. The feasibility study is scheduled for completion at the end of February 2013 and the request for proposals (RFP) could commence as early as September 2012.
(2) Falls away.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1558
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1558. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to askthe Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 1327 on 18 May 2012, she has been informed of a certain letter of complaint (details furnished); if so, what was her response to the letter; if not,
(2) whether she will investigate the issues raised in the specified letter; if not, why not; if so,
(3) whether the person against whom the complaint is being lodged in the letter will be investigated for racial discrimination against the previous owner of the portion of land; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the process that will be undertaken;
(4) whether she will provide a written response to the firm of attorneys on this specified matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1879E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, a letter of complaint was received and acknowledged by the Director-General and a response regarding compensation was sent to the Representatives acting on behalf of the said person (names furnished). Refer to Annexure A.
(2) The official (name furnished) was asked to respond to the allegations made against her. In her response, she denied having uttered such racial remarks to Mr. Haarsbroek.
For the Department to conduct proper investigation, the incumbent (name furnished) must provide the Department with proof of his allegations. However, the Department has responded to the letter of complaint by the Representative acting for the incumbent (names furnished). Refer to Annexure B.
(3) Falls away.
(4) Falls away.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1557
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17 NW1877EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Government will meet its pledge made at COP15 in Copenhagen to cut emissions below a baseline of 34% by 2020; if not, why not; if so, how was this conclusion reached;
(2) whether there are any plans to adjust the pledge made at COP15; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what are the major mitigation actions that will be taken between now and 2020 and (b) what are the major mitigation actions that will be taken between 2020 and 2030?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1557. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1. Yes, the mitigation pledge made at COP 15 is likely to be met, recognising that, in accordance with Article 4.7 of the UNFCCC, the extent to which this outcome can be achieved depends on the extent to which developed countries meet their commitment to provide financial, capacity-building, technology development and technology transfer support to developing countries.
2. No, there are no plans to adjust the pledge made at COP 15. This is an international commitment made by Cabinet and announced by the President as part of a balanced package that emerged from the international climate change negotiating process at heads of state level in Copenhagen. It includes the commitment from developed countries to provide $US 30 billion up till 2012 and $100 billion per year by 2020, as well as a Technology Development and Transfer Mechanism under the UNFCCC. Standing back from this commitment puts this balanced political agreement reached in Copenhagen, and further developed and formally adopted in Cancun and Durban, at risk.
(a) In respect of mitigation actions between now and 2020, Government has initiated a process of consolidating existing mitigation actions, under the flagship programmes, as set out in the National Climate Change Response Policy. In addition, Government has initiated an analysis of additional mitigation potential by sector. This analysis will provide the basis for defining desired emission reduction outcomes for key sectors and sub-sectors, as well as the mix of mitigation policies and measures required to achieve the desired outcomes.
(b) In respect of mitigation actions between 2020 and 2030, this will be defined on the basis of a review of progress on the above.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1528
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 08 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 17)
1528. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 467 on 19 May 2012, (a) which municipalities contain the majority of the estimated 25% of people who have access to a tap, but do not have an acceptable level of service and (b) what steps are being taken to turn around the situation to ensure reliable water services? NW1846E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) A total of 94.7% of the population of the Republic of South Africa have access to water supply leaving a backlog of 5.3%. A significant portion of the this 5.3% do not have access to any reliable water supply: 2% are still reliant on raw water sources while 3.3% do have access to water services infrastructure but are below RDP standards. This effectively means that 98% (94.7% and 3.3% as indicated above) of the population have access to water services infrastructure.
Most of the population without access to water supply, according to surveys and analysis performed by Statistics SA in partnership with the Department, are mainly from rural communities situated in the provinces of KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, and Eastern Cape and are located within the 23 priority District Municipalities.
(b) The Department is currently developing, in consultation with the Department of Co-operative Governance, a strategy and an action plan to provide all communities without access to water supply, with an interim but safe and reliable water supply by June 2013. In addition to the focus on the 23 priority District Municipalities the Department will also focus on the high priority areas where communities are protesting regarding poor service delivery.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1495
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1774EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department intends to (a) declare any new national parks or (b) enlarge existing parks; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1495. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
a. No. Currently there is no new national park to declare.
b. Yes, the department is in the process of consolidating eight national parks (Addo Elephant, Namaqua, Tankwa Karoo, West Coast, Karoo, Mountain Zebra, Camdeboo, Addo Elephant and Table Mountain) with an added total of 47 361 hectares.
Reply received: August 2012
QUESTION NO 1491
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1491. Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department has taken any steps to ensure that the Mhlathuze Water Board performs clear and separate duties from those of the executive, management and staff in order to allow the Board to exercise oversight; if not, why not; if so, what steps;
(2) What is the policy for the implementation of the Protected Disclosures Act?
(3) What are the Board's (a) findings regarding enquiries into the continuous loss of senior staff at regular intervals and (b) response to remedy allegations of the (i) abuse of state resources and (ii) rigging of tenders? NW1770E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department of Water Affairs is satisfied that its oversight of Mhlathuze Water Board is effective and appropriate.
With regards to roles and responsibilities, the Water Services Act as read with the PFMA provides for the responsibilities of a Board. In addition Mhlathuze Water Board is governed by its own Board Charter which is based on King III which defines the separation of roles between Board and Executive.
(2) Mhlathuze Water Board informs all staff of their rights and obligations with regard to protected disclosures through the positioning of posters in offices visible to all staff. These include the number to contact for "whistle blowers".
(3)(a) No specific investigation has been carried out either by the Department or Mhlathuze Water Board regarding staff turnover nor is it necessary. The current CEO has been in office for over two years.
(3)(b)(i) According to Mhlathuze Water Board, in September 2008 the then State President ordered the Special Investigation Unit to conduct an investigation into alleged irregularities that may have occurred between 2004 and 2008 but it did not reveal any irregularities.
Arising from a separate instance, the former CEO was charged inter alia with fruitless and wasteful expenditure with regard to the buying of World Cup 2010 tickets. He subsequently resigned but the case has not been finalised yet.
(3)(b)(ii) With regard to allegations of tender rigging, there is one matter currently under investigation involving two former senior members of staff and one service provider. I have instructed Mhlathuze Water, to provide me with the final report of this investigation and I will ensure that criminal charges be laid if any evidence of wrongdoing is uncovered.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1451
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1451. Dr D T George (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) When was the current Director-General of her department appointed?
(2) whether the Director-General was appointed in a permanent capacity; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1728E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The current Director-General was appointed with effect from the 1st January 2012.
(2) The Director-General is appointed on contract for a period of 5 years as per the Public Service Act, 1994.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1448
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER N0.15 NW1724E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: I June 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
1) How many employees of each of the parks administered by SA National Parks (SANParks) have been arrested for wildlife crimes (a) in (i) 2007, (ii) 2008, (iii) 2009, (iv) 2010 and (v) 2011 and (b) since 1 January 2012;
(2) how many employees of each of the parks administered by SA National Parks (SANParks) have been arrested for crimes related to (a) the illegal killing of rhinos or (b) being in possession of rhino horn (i) in (aa) 2007, (bb) 2008, (cc) 2009, (dd) 2010 and (ee) 2011 and (ii) since 1 January 2012;
(3) how many of the specified cases resulted in (a) internal disciplinary processes against and (b)(i) dismissal and (ii) successful criminal prosecution of the specified employees (aa) in (aaa) 2007, (bbb) 2008, (ccc) 2009, (ddd) 2010 and (eee) 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012?
1448. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a)
(i) 2007 - 0
(ii) 2008 - 1
(iii) 2009 - 4
(iv) 2010 - 2
(v) 2011 - 2
(b) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(2)
(a) The illegal killing of rhinos:
(i) (aa) 2007 - 0
(bb) 2008 - 0
(cc) 2009 - 1
(dd) 201 0 - 0
(ee) 201 1 - 1
(ii) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(b) Being in possession of rhino horn:
(i) (aa) 2007 - 0
(ii) since 1 January 2012 - 4
(ii) (aa) Successful criminal prosecution of the specified employees :
(aaa) 2007 - 0
(bbb) 2008 - 0
(CCC) 2009 - 0
(ddd) 2010 - 2 (Criminal case pending)
(eee) 2011 - 2 (Criminal case pending)
(bb) since 1 January 2012 - 4 (criminal cases pending)
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1447
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1723EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What was the (a)(i) date and (ii) time of day for each incident involving the shooting and killing of a suspected rhino poacher (aa) in 2011 and (bb) since 1 January 2012 and (b) for each of the above cases where the deceased has been identified, what are the (aaa) full names, (bbb) age, (ccc) nationality, (ddd) home town or village of residence and (eee) inquest number;
(2) whether an autopsy was conducted in each of the cases; if not, why not; if so, (a) which authority investigated the shooting and (b) what is the case number?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1447. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) and (2) This question will require that the Department and SANParks source information from other stakeholders, including the South African Police Service (SAPS), which can be a challenge. I therefore request that extension be granted to 2 July 2012 for a reply (instead of 12 June 2012) to allow the SAPS, as well as other stakeholders, sufficient time to respond to the Department's request.Reply received: July 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1446
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1722EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 June 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What has been the estimated (a) growth in actual numbers and (b) natural mortality of the (i) black rhino population and (ii) white rhino population for each year since 2005?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1446. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a) and (b) (i) and (ii) This question will require time as some of the information has been archived. I therefore request that extension be given until 2 July 2012, instead of 12 June 2012, to allow the Department sufficient time to obtain all the information.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1445
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1721E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) On what date since 1 January 2012 (i) was each incident of rhino poaching recorded and (ii) was each rhino carcass discovered in the Kruger National Park (KNP) and (b) how many rhinos have been killed in the KNP by poachers since 1 January 2012?
1445. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(a)
(i) Please see table below for the date recorded and the specific number of rhino poached on that specific date in theKruger National Park.
(ii) The date recorded is the same date the carcass was discovered. The estimated age of the carcass is determined by the investigating team attending to the crime scene and based on their knowledge and experience.
Here is the table: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/doc/2012/RNW1445-120612.pdf
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1444 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1720EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
1444. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What vacancies currently exist at senior management level in the Department of Environmental Affairs and (b) in each case, (i) how long has the post been vacant and (ii) when is it envisaged that the post will be filled?
Mrs A Steyn (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1444. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
It is important to indicate that we have a new structure which was implemented only from the 1st April 2012. The adverts referred to hereunder also follow only from 1st April 2012.
(a) The following vacancies exist:
· Deputy Director-General (DDG): Corporate Management Services SL15
· DDG: Chemicals and Waste Management SL15
· Chief Director: Intergovernmental Relations SL14
· Chief Director: Special Projects SL14
· Chief Director: Supply Chain Management SL14
· Chief Director: Budget and Financial Management SL14
· Chief Director: Corporate Legal Support and Litigation SL14
· Chief Director: Enforcement SL14
· Chief Director: Hazardous Waste Management and Licencing SL14
· Chief Director: Chemical and Waste Policy, Evaluation and Monitoring SL14
· Chief Director: Chemical Management SL14
· Chief Director: Climate Change Monitoring and Evaluation SL14
· Chief Director: Air Quality Management SL14
· Chief Director: Biodiversity Planning and Management SL14
· Chief Director: Biodiversity Economy and Sustainable Use SL14
· Chief Director: Monitoring & Evaluation Biodiversity Specialist Advisory Services SL14
· Chief Director: Oceans Conservation SL14
· Chief Director: Specialist Monitoring Services SL14
· Chief Director: Information Management and Sector Coordination SL14
· Chief Director: Working for Water and Working on Fire SL14
· Director: Coordination and Administration (CA) SL13
· Director: Environmental Impact Evaluation SL13
· Director: Waste Policy and Information Management SL13
(b) (i) All DDG, Chief Director and Director positions have been vacant for an average period of six months
(ii) All vacant posts indicated above have been advertised and it is anticipated that they will be filled by August 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1443
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1443. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 381 on 15 March 2012, she has found any improvement in the quality of the drinking water of Carolina; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, why not;
(2) whether there has been any response from the specified mines since the issuing of pre-directives on 9 March 2012; if so, what are the relevant details; if not, what is the position in this regard;
(3) whether her department has taken any further action against the specified mines; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1719E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) There has been an improvement detected in the overall quality of drinking water in Carolina, however, there is periodic fluctuation in the water quality of some of the parameters that prevents the water to be declared safe at this stage. Table 1 below reflects a discussion on some of the key parameters:
| No | Parameters | Observations |
| 1 | pH | The pH levels of the water have improved to be of acceptable levels in spite of the continued acidic state of the water resources. |
| 2 | Iron | The Iron levels were initially found to be excessively high but this too now remains consistently within the acceptable limits of the South African National Standards (SANS 241). |
| 3 | Aluminium & Manganese | Aluminium and Manganese levels are found to be fluctuating and this is due to the ongoing construction and process amendment underway at the Carolina Water Treatment Works. |
| 4 | Sulphate | The Sulphate levels are within the health parameters but are still aesthetically detectable. |
(2) All four mines which were issued with pre-directives on 9 March 2012, have since responded by providing the water quality data which was requested by the Department. Upon evaluation of the information submitted, the Department held the meetings with all mines to clarify the information submitted as it became evident that the water resources had already been polluted, including the wetland and the Boesmanspruit Dam. Further investigations will be conducted by the Department which may result in the mines being held responsible for the cost of rehabilitation of water resources.
(3) The Department together with the Inkomati Catchment Management Agency are considering various options including the issuance of directives with the intention to rehabilitate and clean-up the area affected by the water pollution. The Department is also intending to approach the South African Police Services and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development for possible criminal prosecution if non-compliance still continues.
-00O00---
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1442
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1718E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What was the date of each live lion export that has been specified in her reply to question 957 on 15 May 2012?
1442. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Here is the table: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/doc/2012/RNW1442-120612.pdf
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1424
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 01 JUNE 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)
1424. Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(a) What corrective action will be taken to ensure that municipalities who did not achieve Blue Drop Status do so, (b) what time lines are in place to give effect to this corrective action plan and (c) what plans are in place to find alternative implementing agents if municipalities cannot comply with the corrective action plans? NW1697E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) The Blue Drop Certification programme is an incentive-based regulation programme which seeks to inspire municipalities to set their targets on levels of excellence rather than minimum requirements. This implies that should a municipality not obtain a good Blue Drop status but the quality of drinking water complies excellently with the National Standards (SANS 241), then there would no need for a corrective action plan even though certification status is not achieved as yet. Records have shown that most municipalities in this category set performance targets for themselves towards the achievement of the Blue Drop Certification status. The Department is already engaging municipalities with the Blue Drop scores of less than 50% (as per 2012 report) to ensure that corrective measures are planned for.
The Department assists municipalities with corrective planning, do limited funding allocation with regards to the Accelerated Community Infrastructure Programme (ACIP), assist with business plan drafting to address shortcomings and provide technical expertise via the Rapid Response Unit (RRU) where so required. However, should negligence or non-commitment be the evident cause, action always gets taken in line with enforcement protocol.
(b) The Department will monitor implementation of the various corrective plans and conduct progress assessments. The time lines for rectification will differ according to the severity of the specific shortcomings identified during the Blue Drop audits, and responses by the relevant municipalities.
(c) Municipalities that cannot comply with corrective plans must contract water boards or private sector water providers, but the final decision rests with the municipalities.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO. 1441 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15 NW1717EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 1 June 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a)(i) How many park rangers are currently employed in the Kruger National Park (KNP) and (ii) what is the figure anticipated to be by the end of the 2012-13 financial year and (b) what is the current average area in square kilometre that each ranger has to cover in the KNP;
(2) whether the current average square kilometre area that each ranger has to cover is within her department's guidelines; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) how does the current average square kilometre that each ranger in the KNP has to cover compare with each of the other national parks run by the SA National Parks?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1441. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a)(i) and (ii) and (b);
(a) (i) A total of 216 rangers are employed in the Kruger National Park.
(ii) There should be 366 rangers by the end of the 2012/13 financial year.
(b) The current average area coverage per ranger is 8,789ha (87,9 square kilometre). The current recruitment of an additional 150 rangers will result in an average of 5,187ha (51,9 square kilometre) per ranger.
(2) There is currently no set formula to determine appropriate area coverage per ranger, given the ever changing dynamics and complexity of the variables to be considered, e.g. the nature of the terrain, equipment available for use, intensity and complexity of the continually evolving poaching activity. Given the current tactics used by poachers, high levels of mobility and night capability have become essential. These tactics will also evolve intensely as the poacher tactics evolve. Given the recent escalation of rhino poaching activities, additional resources provided by the SANDF and the SAPS and other state agencies are being used to compliment and improve on the ranger area coverage.
(3) The average in the other national parks is 3,900 ha (39 square kilometer) per ranger.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1395
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1645EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What is the purpose of the proposed peripheral development zone (PDZ) for the Kruger National Park that is currently developed by the SA National Parks (SANParks);
(2) whether there was any consultation with the public in the development of the PDZ; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether she has approved the establishment of the PDZ in the Kruger National Park; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether the proposed PDZ is consistent with the provisions of the Biodiversity Policy and Strategy for South Africa: Strategy on Buffer Zones for National Parks (details furnished); if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1395. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The purpose of the peripheral development zone (PDZ) is as follows:
· To create a conservation corridor which will, among others, serve as a mechanism to reduce poaching incursions into the Greater Lebombo Conservancy( GLC) and the Kruger National Park ( KNP) through establishing and operating a joint task force
· To use the conservation corridor to facilitate harmonisation of management policies and practices
· To secure the eastern boundary line of the GLC to prevent or minimise human-wildlife conflict
· To use the conservation corridor to facilitate cross border tourism, to stimulate investment into the corridor as well as into the neighbouring communities in Mozambique
· To generate socio-economic opportunities such as jobs, community facilities like schools and clinics for the benefit of local communities in Mozambique
(2) Yes, there were consultations with key stakeholders in Mozambique and South Africa including members of the GLC, the Ministry of Tourism in Mozambique, the South African National Defence Force and the South African Police Services.
(3) Yes, the Minister approved the establishment of the PDZ and this will be followed by a memorandum of understanding that will be signed between the Government of the Republic of Mozambique and the Government of theRepublic of South Africa.
(4) Yes, the proposed PDZ is consistent with the provisions of the Biodiversity Policy and Strategy for South Africa in that it promotes the management of the KNP and the GLC as a contiguous conservation area. The GLC comprises natural areas of high biodiversity value which are critical for the long-term persistence of biodiversity in the KNP. The reduction in the incidences of rhino poaching through the buffer zone development will significantly contribute towards the conservation of this globally threatened iconic species.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1394 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1644EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 889 on 7 May 2012, she could provide figures for the exportation of live rhinos to Asian countries from 1 January 2006 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) in respect of each specified case, (a) what is the name of the (i) exporter, (ii) importer and (iii) country to which the rhinos were exported, (b) how many live rhinos were exported and (c) which authority has approved the exportation;
(3) whether, in respect of each export, the necessary regulations on Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) permits were obtained for the transportation of rhinos from (a) the farm or reserve on which they reside and (b) their point of departure to the relevant Asian country; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether, in respect of each export, all the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)regulations were adhered to; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1394. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) – (4) The following information relating to the export of live rhino to Asian countries since 1 Jan 2006 was obtained from permit endorsements done at the OR Tambo Airport see attached.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1393
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1393. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 3642 on 13 December 2011, any further work has been done to establish whether the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, is sufficient for the purposes of controlling hydraulic fracturing; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether any officials of her department had interactions with the task team established by the Minister of Mineral Resources to investigate hydraulic fracturing since her reply; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether the Water Research Commission has conducted any research into the impact of hydraulic fracturing on water; if not, why not; if so, what were the findings? NW1643E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The Department is considering classifying hydraulic fracturing as a Controlled Activity under Section 38 of the National Water Act (Act no. 36 of 1998). This will be done through the review of the National Water Act.
(2) Three hydro geologists from the Department are members of the Working Group of the Task Team established by the Minister of Mineral Resources.
(3) Yes, the Water Research Commission appointed the University of Free State's Institute for Groundwater Studies to investigate hydraulic fracturing in South Africa. A report is expected in nine months' time.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1392
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1392. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) What (a) is the average water loss in kiloliters for each month in each municipality in KwaZulu-Natal and (b) percentage of total water usage does this figure represent at the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether any measures are in place to assist municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal to decrease water loss; if not, why not; if so, what measures;
(3) what is the current status of the (a) demand for water and (b) supply of water in each municipality in KwaZulu-Natal? NW1642E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) The total water losses, non revenue water (NRW) as well as the average monthly total water losses as a percentage of system input in each of the Water Services Authorities (WSAs) in KwaZulu-Natal are presented in the attached Annexure A. Where possible, the figures are monthly average kilolitres for the 2011/12 municipal financial year i.e. from 1 July 2011 to 30 April 2012.
(2) Table 1 below reflects the financial assistance that has been provided to the WSAs in KwaZulu-Natal. In addition, the Umgungundlovu District Municipality (DM) has been assisted with their application to the Dutch Government and such bid for grant funding of approximately R380 million was successful, of which 60% is for water demand and conservation management. The Department is also in the process of adjudicating a tender for a three year study to update and maintain the reconciliation strategies that have been developed for the supply systems in the province. This study includes an evaluation of the water use efficiencies and potential savings in each system.
Table 1: Financial support to WSAs for Water Demand and Conservation Management
| WSA | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | Total Project |
| Ethekwini MetropolitanMunicipality | R 8 214 500 | R 9 285 500 | R 0 | R 4 000 000 | R 21 500 000 |
| Msunduzi Local Municipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 3 000 000 | R 1 500 000 | R 4 500 000 |
| Ilembe District Municipality | R 500 000 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 3 295 284 | R 4 795 284 |
| Umgungundlovu DistrictMunicipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 300 000 | R 0 | R 300 000 |
| Ugu District Municipality | R 500 000 | R 0 | R 1 347 453 | R 4 300 000 | R 6 147 453 |
| Umkhanyakude DistrictMunicipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 0 | R 5 000 000 | R 5 000 000 |
| Mhlathuze Local Municipality | R 0 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 |
| Amajuba DM | R 0 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 | R 0 | R 1 000 000 |
| Uthukela DM | R 0 | R 0 | R 2 083 279 | R 2 083 279 | |
| TOTAL | R 9 214 500 | R 10 285 500 | R 6 647 453 | R 20 178 563 | R 46 326 016 |
(3) In 2009, the Department completed the KwaZulu-Natal Coastal Metropolitan Reconciliation Strategy Study. This study found that the demands in the area exceed the available supplies and strategies are being implemented to address the imbalances (details attached as Annexure B). These strategies include water demand and conservation management interventions and the Ethekwini Metropolitan Municipality, as the main user who utilises 80 percent of the water from the system, is reducing losses through the replacement of leak prone asbestos cement pipelines, leak detection, pressure reduction, rezoning and improvement in reservoir integrity. The NRW in Ethekwini in 2009/10 was 37.5 % and the target is to reduce this to 28% by 2013.
The Department also completed first order reconciliation strategies for the significant supply systems in the rest of the province in December 2011, and is in the process of awarding a tender to maintain these strategies and monitor their implementation. Each strategy determines the water demand, evaluates available water supply, and evaluated the best way balancing the two. In all cases, water demand and conservation management is considered as one of the first interventions.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1391
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1391. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether any progress is being made in establishing an integrated permit system for the issuing of water use licences for the mines; if not, why not; if so, (a) when is it expected that such a system will be in place and (b) what are the further relevant details;
(2) whether there are any challenges that need to be overcome in order to achieve an integrated permitting system; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1641E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)With regard to the water use licenses issued by the Department, we are already issuing a consolidated water use license for the mining operations, encompassing all the water uses identified in one license and this is referred to as an Integrated Water Use License.
There is also an initiative to coordinate and align time frames, legislation, systems, business process, areas of common information requirements etc, for authorisations on the mining across the Departments of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Mineral Resources (DMR) and the Department of Water Affairs (DWA). Processes have been mapped and progress has been made. It is not expected that one integrated permit would be issued under this initiative between the three departments rather, the processes are anticipated to yield to improved coordination on information requirements from applicants as well as aligned time frames on the granting of a mining right/permit and a water use license.
Between the DWA and DMR, some alignment is currently being implemented while other elements such as online application will be phased in over a period of
18 months after enactment of amendments to the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (Act No 28 of 2002), in line with the time frames in the agreement for the transfer of the Environmental Function to the DMR.
(2) There are no obstacles envisaged as the Department is already issuing an Integrated Water Use License for the mines, and there are no major challenges encountered as the system is well developed over the past few years. The alignment part with the DEA and DMR has to be achieved, however there are still processes that we need to complete in respect of the coordinated and aligned time frames for authorisations identified which include but not limited to: human capacity requirements; awareness and communication within the three departments including the external stakeholders; enforcement; appeals and amendments of legislation (also including air quality, waste and ocean and coastal issues); timeframes alignment processes; as well as joint planning for spatial areas.
The necessities were identified through a series of trilateral meetings between the three departments; however, task teams to guide the implementation process have been formed and are dealing with proposed solutions.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1384
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14 NW1634EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 25 May 2012
Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether she has put any environmental guidelines in place with regard to the construction of wind farms as a means of generating electricity; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Dr P J Rabie (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1384. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
Yes. The guidelines give an indication of the minimum information required for the application to be considered.
Reply received: July 2012
QUESTION NO 1356
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1356. Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many employees in her department in the post level of deputy director to director general who have been appointed on a (a) permanent and (b) contract basis (i) have been suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action for periods exceeding three months, (ii) have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded and (iii)(aa) have been found guilty of gross financial misconduct or negligence and dismissed and (bb) were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearings in the (aaa) 2009-10 and (bbb) 2010-11 financial years;
(2) what total amount was paid in salaries and benefits to the employees while they were suspended;
(3) whether her department has laid criminal charges against any persons following investigations or disciplinary hearings where fraud or corruption was found to have taken place; if not, why not; if so,
(4) whether, subsequent to the specified findings of fraud and corruption, any amounts have been recovered in terms of the relevant provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999; if so, what amounts; if not,
(5) how does she intend to comply with national legislation which was promulgated to prevent corrupt practices and compel authorities to report corrupt practices to law enforcement agencies? NW1599E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) One (1) Director: Central Operations.
(1)(b)(i) In total Eight (8) employees were suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action as follows:
· one (1) Director-General who was subsequently dismissed after the disciplinary hearing;
· one (1) Deputy Director-General who is still on suspension pending the outcome of a Labour Court Review Application;
· one (1) CFO who was subsequently dismissed after the disciplinary hearing;
· three (3) Chief Directors whose cases were finalized and returned to work with one receiving a final written warning; and
· two (2) Directors who are still on suspension pending the outcome of their disciplinary enquiries, all were on contract.
(1)(b)(ii) Two (2) Directors have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded.
(1)(b)(iii)(aa) Two (2) employees have been dismissed for gross negligence.
(1)(b)(iii)(bb) Two (2) employees were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearing
(1)(b)(iii)(aaa) 2009-2010 One (1) Director General.
(1)(b)(iii)(bbb) 2010-2011 One (1) Chief Financial Officer.
(2) R6 778 466.30
To note:
As prescribed by Chapter 7 of the Senior Management Services Handbook 1 December 2003 item (2), the Conditions of Service enacted by the DPS for Senior Managers prescribes that with regard to "Precautionary suspension" (a) the employer may suspend a member on full pay if -
· the member is alleged to have committed a serious offence; and
· the employer believes that the presence of a member at the workplace might jeopardise any investigation into the alleged misconduct, or endanger the well being or safety of any person or state property.
(3) Yes, criminal charges were laid against the Director: Central Operations. The disciplinary allegations against the other seven officials were not related to allegations of fraud or corruption.
(4) No. As none of the SMS officials, except for Director: Central Operations mentioned above, were suspected of having committed fraud or corruption. They were disciplined for non compliance with procurement regulations.
(5) Where the Department suspects employees of engaging in fraudulent or corrupt activities it has engaged the services of the Internal Audit, the SAPS and or the Special Investigative Unit (SIU) in line with the Department's Fraud Prevention Strategy, which resides under the control of a totally independent Internal Audit Unit, which reports directly to the Director General.
On the findings of either the Internal Audit Unit, SAPS or SIU, the employee concerned will be disciplined and criminally charged and on successful conviction, the state attorney is instructed to pursue an order under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act to request the Presiding Magistrate or Judge when sentencing the accused, to make an order of Compensation to the State to recover whatever had been lost as a result of the fraud or corruption. This usually results in asset forfeiture of the guilty offender.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1356
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1356. Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many employees in her department in the post level of deputy director to director general who have been appointed on a (a) permanent and (b) contract basis (i) have been suspended on full salary pending investigations or disciplinary action for periods exceeding three months, (ii) have resigned before the relevant investigations or disciplinary actions were concluded and (iii)(aa) have been found guilty of gross financial misconduct or negligence and dismissed and (bb) were dismissed following due process and disciplinary hearings in the (aaa) 2009-10 and (bbb) 2010-11 financial years;
(2) what total amount was paid in salaries and benefits to the employees while they were suspended;
(3) whether her department has laid criminal charges against any persons following investigations or disciplinary hearings where fraud or corruption was found to have taken place; if not, why not; if so,
(4) whether, subsequent to the specified findings of fraud and corruption, any amounts have been recovered in terms of the relevant provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999; if so, what amounts; if not,
(5) how does she intend to comply with national legislation which was promulgated to prevent corrupt practices and compel authorities to report corrupt practices to law enforcement agencies? NW1599E
---00O00---
REPLY:
1
(a) One Director, Central Operations
(b) (i) Eight, one Director General, one Deputy Director General, one CFO, three Chief
Directors and two Directors all on contract.
(ii) Two Directors
(iii) (aa) Two dismissed for gross negligence
(bb) Two dismissed following due process
(aaa) 2009-2010 One , Director General
(bbb) 2010-2011 One, Chief Financial Officer
2 An amount of R6 778 466.30 was paid for varying periods of such suspension which were all in line with the provisions of the law.
3 Yes, criminal charges were laid against the Director, Central Operations. The disciplinary allegations against the other seven officials were not related to allegations of fraud or corruption.
4 No. As none of the SMS officials, except for Director, Central Operations mentioned above, were suspected of having committed fraud or corruption. They were disciplined for non compliance with procurement regulations.
5 Where the department suspects employees of engaging in fraudulent or corrupt activities it has engaged the services of the Internal Audit, the SAPS and or the Special Investigative Unit (SIU) in line with the Department's Fraud Prevention Strategy, which resides under the control of a totally independent Internal Audit Unit, which reports directly to the Director General.
On the findings of either the Internal Audit Unit, SAPS or SIU, the employee concerned will be disciplined and criminally charged and on successful conviction, the state attorney is instructed to pursue an order under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act to request the Presiding Magistrate or Judge when sentencing the accused, to make an order of Compensation to the State to recover whatever had been lost as a result of the fraud or corruption. This usually results in asset forfeiture of the guilty offender.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1351
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
[INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 14]
1351. Mr L S Ngonyama (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department is encouraging the treatment of waste water to enable its further use for (a) industrial, (b) agricultural and (c) domestic purposes; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details, in each case? NW1593
REPLY:
Yes, the Department encourages the treatment of waste water to enable its further use for industrial, agricultural and even domestic purposes.
(a) Industrial
All industries are required to submit Integrated Water and Waste Management Plans for their facilities when they apply for water use authorisations. Industries are also encouraged to follow the Best Practice Guidelines developed by the Department.
(b) Agriculture
In agriculture, irrigation of land with waste or water containing waste is a controlled activity in terms of Section 37 (i)(a) of the National Water Act. As such, during the authorisation process, conditions with specific water quality standards and limits are applied. Also, guidelines for reuse of waste water sludge; which is a by-product of the waste water treatment process have been developed.
(c) Domestic Purposes
The Department encourages the treatment of waste water to enable its future use for domestic purposes. In future, more re-use of waste water even for domestic use to potable standards will be necessary because of our scarce fresh water resources. Stringent safety processes will be incorporated into such treatment plants to safeguard public health as well as blending with fresh water.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1345
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 25 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 14)
1345. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
With reference to her reply to question 892 on 7 May 2012, (a) why is her department using the skills of so few retired engineers and (b) why are these skills only used in the national office of her department and not in the regional offices? NW1567E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(a) The project to recruit retired engineers back into to the Department is currently in its initial phase. As the project gain momentum, more of the retired engineers identified via the database as supplied by Department of Public Works will be recruited and employed. In this regard it must be noted that even engineers who worked in the Department before are being targeted.
(b) Although the initial four (4) retired engineers are based in national office, their skills and expertise are utilised in projects linked to the regions as well. As indicated above, regional placements will be effected as the project unfolds.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO 1334
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13)
1334. Mr P J Groenewald (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to put the Taung Dam in Northern Cape to better use; if not, why not; if so, how;
(2) whether she will make a statement on the matter? NW1579E
REPLY:
(1) The Department is using the Taung Dam, which is in the North West Province, to supply water to the settlements in the Naledi Local Municipality (LM) and Greater Taung LM within the Dr Ruth Sepati Mompati District Municipality (DM). It is the main water source for the Taung/Naledi Bulk Water Supply project being implemented through the Regional Bulk Infrastructure Programme. The details and the status of the project intended to put the Taung Dam to a better use are summarised below:
The refurbishment of Phase 1 (Pudimoe Water Treatment Works (WTW)) has been completed during the 2011112 financial year and handed over to the Dr Ruth Sepati Mompati DM.
A total of two contracts on Phase 2A (New module Pudimoe WTW), and 12 contracts on Phase 2B (Reservoirs, water pipelines and pump stations) are currently in progress. The construction of Phase 2A and 28 is anticipated to be completed by July 2012 and May 2013 respectively. The construction of Phase 2C and 2D is anticipated to be completed by April 2013 and March 2014 respectively.
The completion of all Phases will lend further support to the Phase 1 in terms of the available potable water being produced and put into the current bulk supply systems for the communities that fall under the Naledi LM and Greater Taung LM.
The Phase 2E which is the bulk surface water supply to the South East villages currently supplied by ground water, and Phase 2F which covers the refurbishment of the current 8 megalitre per day of the Pudimoe WTW are the future phases.
(2). Yes, I did make a statement in my Budget speech on 16 May 2012 to this effect. I quote" As far as Unlocking the economic opportunities of the North West Province is concerned, Taung, including the surrounding villages in the Greater Taung and Naledi Local Municipalities, are experiencing water supply shortages, hence we have commenced with the implementation to augment the bulk water supply mostly for domestic water usage. The Taung dam is being used to address the bulk water supply and a total of approximately 186 000 households will be served with water. The project started during the 2009/10 financial year and several phases have already been completed. The budget allocation over the MTEF period is R358 million. "
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1329
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1573EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether a study has been conducted to determine the number of (a) homes, (b) schools, (c) road surfaces and (d) other public buildings in the Northern Cape that have been contaminated with asbestos; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) what are the priority areas in the Northern Cape requiring rehabilitation from asbestos contamination;
(3) whether a costing for the rehabilitation of asbestos contamination in the Northern Cape has been done; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1329. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes, the study was conducted and the details are provided below.
(a) Total number of homes
Table 1: Estimated Number of Homes with Asbestos Contamination see attached.
· No estimate of households was available. Households were estimated by dividing the total population estimate by the average number of individuals within each home per the provincial average.
(b) Total number of schools:
Table 2: Number of Schools with Asbestos Contamination see attached
(c) Roads surfaces contaminated with asbestos
The 2006 CSS survey conducted in the Northern Cape with regard to contaminated road surfaces identified that approximately 400 km of road surface are contaminated with asbestos. The report did not incorporate other public buildings, apart from schools.
(2) The priority areas identified in the report are Ga-Mopedi and Heuningvlei.
(3) Yes, the costing for rehabilitation has been done for Ga-Mopedi which was identified as a highly contaminated area and posing a higher risk to the public. These estimates are scalable given the various levels of contamination that may be identified with costs tending to reduce on a per unit basis as project sizes increase. Table 3 below provides a summary of the total remediation cost associated with the removal and disposal of asbestos waste contamination for the Ga-Mopedi area. This estimate was based on the best available information available during the study to date, but may be subject to revision as additional data is obtained or new sites are identified for remediation.
Table 3: Remediation cost estimates/unit (based on a 90 square metre size house) for Ga-Mopedi
Average costs per contaminated stand (erven)
| Preferred Method: | R249 000 |
| Alternate Preferred Method: | R212 000 (replacement using on site builders) |
| No of contaminated stands: | 110 |
| Total costs for remediation of stands: | R23.3 million to R27.4 million |
| Costs of contaminated road remediation: | R1.2 million per square kilometre of area |
| Area of contaminated road in Ga-Mopedi: | 0.9 km2 |
| Cost of road remediation: | R1 080 000 |
| Total costs for remediation of Ga-Mopedi: | Range = R24.4 to R28.5 million |
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1327
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 18 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13)
1327. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) Why has the Department of Water Affairs not paid the expropriation payment of R423 500 to the previous owner by 30 April 2012 for the remainder of Portion 5 of the farm Beaufort No. 32, Registration Division: LT, Limpopo Province after the expropriation came into effect on or about 5 February 2012, (b) when can the previous owner expect payment and (c) what is the role of a certain official in her department (name and details furnished) in the delay of paying the specified amount to the previous owner;
(2) whether the said official is being investigated for racial discrimination towards the previous owner of the portion of land; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1571E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1)(a) The payment to the owner of the farm was not done by 30 April 2012 as the Department still needed to verify the amount being claimed by the owner before making any payment.
(1)(b) An amount of R466 545 was paid on 9 May 2012 into the owner of the farm's account instead of the R423 500 which was inclusive of solatium as per the valuation report conducted by JH Boshoff Rural and Urban Evaluations. They were contracted by the Department of Public Works on behalf of the Department with a difference of R43 045 for value added tax (VAT). The Department is currently looking at the objection to the offer by the farm owner through his attorneys Len Dekker & Associates.
(1)(c) The role of officials within the Department is to verify the amount being claimed before payment could be made.
(2) As there has been no official complaint, there is therefore no official who is being investigated for racial discrimination towards the farm owner.
Reply received: June 2012
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1326 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1570EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether the Department of Environmental Affairs is involved in the remediation of any sites contaminated by asbestos in the Northern Cape, if not, why not, if so, which (a) sites have been rehabilitated thus far and (b) sites are due to be rehabilitated in the (i) 2012-13, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15 financial years;
(2) What is the budgetary allocation for remediation of sites with asbestos pollution for the (a) 2012-13, (b) 2013-14 and (c) 2014-15 financial year?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1326. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
1) Yes. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) is involved in the remediation of asbestos contaminated sites in the Northern Cape Province as follows: The DEA has finalised the study on Secondary Asbestos Remediation Plan (SARP) which details the remediation options, operational plan and costing model required for successful remediation of asbestos contaminated sites in the province.The findings of the SARP and Costing Model was presented for approval at the Cabinet meeting held on 20 April 2011. On presentation of the plan and costing model Cabinet instructed the DEA to establish an inter-departmental team, led by the DEA, with the view to finalise an operational plan detailing functions, procedures and budget implications. The inter-departmental team was established on 19 September 2011 and comprised national departments, provincial departments and municipalities affected by secondary Asbestos. The operational plan has been finalised and the report including the costing model will be presented to Cabinet in this fiscal year for approval. The study recommended that remediation of contaminated sites be done in phases; it is also dependent on the availability.
2) The SARP provides a yearly summary expenditure required for the remediation of asbestos contaminated sites identified in four provinces including the Northern Cape. In addition, detailed budget breakdown (refer to Table 1 below) required for the remediation of asbestos contamination was done for the Ga-Mopedi site in the Northern Cape Provincebecause it was identified as a high risk area. The cost estimate was based on the best available information during the study (2009) and it is subject to revision as additional data is obtained during remediation or when new sites are identified for remediation. Table 2 below provides detailed cost estimates to remediate contaminated land uses in four provinces (i.e. Limpopo, Northern Cape, North West, and Mpumalanga) affected with secondary asbestos pollution. Table 3 below provides yearly expenditure range for ensuring successful implementation of the SARP in the above four provinces.
Table 1: Remediation cost estimates / unit (based on a 90 square meter size house) for Ga-Mopedi
Average costs per contaminated stand (erven)
| Preferred Method: | R 249 000 |
| Alternate Preferred Method: | R 212 000 (replacement using on site builders) |
| No of contaminated stands: | 110 |
| Total costs for remediation of stands: | R23.3 million to R27.4 million |
| Costs of contaminated road remediation: | R1.2 million per square kilometer of area |
| Area of contaminated road in Ga-Mopedi: | 0.9 km2 |
| Cost of road remediation: | R1 080 000 |
| Total costs for remediation of Ga-Mopedi: | Range = R24.4 to R28.5 million |
Table 2: Total SARP financial summary for the four provinces (i.e. Limpopo, Northern Cape, North West, and Mpumalanga)
| Land use | cost estimate (Rand) |
| Homes | 1 543 800 000 |
| Schools | 77 675 000 |
| Roads | 330 000 000 |
| Other buildings | 144 000 000 |
| Other sites | 48 000 000 |
| Social compensation | 12 400 000 |
| Subtotal: | 2 155 875 000 |
| Management and Administration at 15% | 323 381 250 |
| Total SARP Costs (2009 Rand): | 2 479 256 250 |
Table 3: Yearly expenditures range for SARP over a 10-year period
| Year | Low Range | Hi Range |
| 2010 | R 164, 700,000 | R 274,500,000 |
| 2011 | R 174,582,000 | R 290,970,000 |
| 2012 | R 185,056,920 | R 308,428,200 |
| 2013 | R 196,160,335 | R 326,933,892 |
| 2014 | R 207,929,955 | R 346,549,926 |
| 2015 | R 220,405,753 | R 367,342,921 |
| 2016 | R 233,630,098 | R 389,383,496 |
| 2017 | R 247,647,904 | R 412,746,506 |
| 2018 | R 262,506,778 | R 437,511,296 |
| 2019 | R 278,257,185 | R 463,761,974 |
| 2020 | R 294,952,616 | R 491,587,693 |
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1325
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1569EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs M Wenger (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether Smart Position and Temperature (Spot) tagging of sharks is permitted in South African coastal waters in terms of the Marine Living Resources Act, Act 18 of 1998, if so, how was this conclusion reached, if not, why not;
(2) whether she has found any known physiological effects on sharks to which Spot tags had been affixed; if so, what are the relevant details, if not, how was this conclusion reached;
(3) whether any research is being conducted to determine the effect of Spot tags on sharks; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) how many sharks in South African waters have had Spot tags affixed to them since 1 January 2012?
Mrs M Wenger (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1325. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) Yes. This is international best practice.
(2) No. No change in behaviour has been observed in tagged sharks.
(3) No. The use of Spot tags to investigate the behaviour, movement and residency patterns of wild animals (including marine mammals, sharks and turtles) has been practised widely internationally for many years by many scientists. Thus, there is much information available in the literature regarding the effect, or the lack thereof, of fixing Spot tags to animals, including sharks. As this is a well-established technique with evidence that it has little impact on sharks, it is not necessary for the Department of Environmental Affairs to undertake research to determine the effect of Spot tags on sharks.
(4) 34 sharks.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1323 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 13 NW1566EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) How many (a) hotels and (b) lodges does SANParks intend to build in the Kruger National Park until the end of the 2017-18 financial year;
(2) whether any (a) hotel and (b) lodge developments other than the Malelane and Skukuza developments are being planned; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) what is the current status of the proposed Malelane development?
Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1321. Mrs S V Kalyan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) The following hotels and lodges are planned, and depending on funding and feasibility, may be built in the Kruger National Park (KNP) in the next five years:
a) Hotels:
· Malelane Safari Lodge
· Skukuza Conference Lodge
b) Lodges:
· Shangoni Lodge (the site is still to be determined but will be on the periphery of the park and possibly outside the KNP boundary)
· Smaller rustic tent camps with between 5 and 8 tents per camp are planned for the following sites:
§ Shingwedzi
§ Letaba
§ Talamati
§ Satara
§ Orpen
§ Berg-en-dal
(2) The Shangoni Lodge and smaller rustic tent camps as detailed above.
(3) The Malelane Safari Lodge: The detailed planning is progressing well with the final scoping report to be submitted to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in due course. It is anticipated that the environmental impact assessment will be completed towards the end of 2012. Should a positive record of decision be obtained, construction will commence thereafter.
The proposed hotel-style accommodation facilities are part of the Commercialisation Strategy and justified by the need to diversify the product range offered. The target market is the South African business sector (for conferences), a section of the middle class (all races) that prefers a full service (without bringing the whole grocery shop to the park or cook for oneself). Families with children prefer to have some form of modern conveniences to keep their children happy. The target market will be South Africans and therefore the pricing of the hotels will accommodate both the local and overseas markets. The new developments will in total create between 600-700 jobs from the conceptualisation through the construction to the operational stages. These jobs are vital in the Lowveld region where unemployment runs up to 70% of the regional population. The proposed hotel developments enjoy the support of 181 communities living around the KNP (estimated at 3 million people), 7 district municipalities in the region, traditional authorities, the South African Tourism Business Council (representing the entire tourism industry), the Lowveld Chamber of Business and Tourism, organised labour and many sections of the silent majority living in townships, rural areas and the informal settlements of our country. In addition to this, additional revenue for the funding of conservation would be generated.
There is no empirical or scientific evidence that suggests that these developments will have any negative impacts on biodiversity or ecosystems. The private party will be required to adhere to all applicable responsible tourism standards as well as the "greening" principles and criteria derived from the existing standards set by SANParks for the concessions as reflected in the SANParks Management Plan Policy Framework, the KNP Management Plan, the Concession Operations Manual as well as the National Responsible Tourism Guidelines of the DEA. No exclusive traversing has been granted to the private operator and the Safari Resort development will be operated from the Malelane Entrance Gate Park and Ride Facility minimising the traffic on the roads. The building style and structure will be in harmony with the environment including the local culture and physiognomy.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1321 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.13 NW1564EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 18 May 2012
Mr A Watson (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether her department is carrying out any (a) compliance and enforcement and (b) offensive odour investigations with regard to air quality in (i) St Helena Bay and (ii) Britannia Bay; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;
(2) whether she has found that progress has been made in improving air quality in these areas since the beginning of 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr A Watson (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1321. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) The MEC for Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning in the Western Cape recently requested the Minister to reinstate the investigation related to the odour complaints from residents in the St Helena-Britannia Bay area. In 2010, an investigation was initiated by the Directorate: Enforcement of the national Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), but this was suspended in order to await the outcome of the health risk assessment (discussed in the response to question 2 below).
Following the findings and recommendations of the health risk assessment, a joint task team (comprising national, provincial and local officials) decided on an approach to ensure better regulation of the industry, including the setting of a specific standard for hydrogen sulphide emissions to be included in the different facilities' new provisional atmospheric emission licences. As monitoring only takes place twice a year, the authorities decided to monitor compliance with these conditions prior to making a decision on whether further enforcement action was required.
Following the letter from the MEC, the Chief Directorate: Compliance and Enforcement of the DEA is in the process of reviewing the most current information and recent complaints in order to assess the approach to be taken (see below). A decision will then be made as to the need for additional compliance monitoring and / or enforcement activities.
(2) Since the coming into effect of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act on 1 April 2010 (including the relevant provisions related to licensing functions) the West Coast District Municipality (WCDM) has made every effort, with assistance from the Directorate: Pollution Management of the Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP), to conclude the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act (APPA) review process on the fishmeal industry.
With regard to St Helena Bay, three of the four plants have been issued with provisional atmospheric emission licences (AEL) on 3 August 2011 with specific conditions that need to be complied with within specific timeframes. These licences will be reviewed by end July 2012 to determine progress with regard to further investigations. The fourth provisional AEL was issued on 29 March 2012 with similar conditions that will be reviewed by the end of October 2012. Once these investigations have been completed and agreed to by the relevant competent authorities, industry will have to submit action plans of implementation to the satisfaction of the competent authority. Further investigations include, among others, the following: control of fugitive emissions, preservation of raw product, environmental noise, emissions of hydrogen sulphide and monitoring, replacement of old and redundant equipment and implementation of best available technology, establishment of a communication forum with Interested and Affected Parties and treatment of non-condensable compounds. Progress with regard to some of these requirements has been noted by the WCDM and it can be reported that two of these facilities have had community forum meetings. The plant situated closest to the Britannia Bay area, namely Oceana, has had two public forum meetings and completed its first round of emission monitoring. A noise survey was also conducted.
The first factory as you enter the St Helena Bay area, namely West Point Processors, is busy replacing defunct equipment and refurbishing the entire fishmeal processing plant. They have had their first public meeting.
The provisional AEL of 29 March 2012 with a review date of the end of October 2012 was issued to Oranjevis, which has undertaken major upgrades during the past few years and is now in the process of commissioning a chemical scrubber to treat non-condensable compounds.
With regard to the Hannasbaai Fishing plant situated near the Oranjevis plant in the Sandy Point harbour area, it is important to note that its impact on air quality may change in future. The Sea Harvest white fish processing establishment in Saldanha that provides the raw material in the form of white fish offal to this facility has recently submitted an application for the establishment of a fishmeal processing plant at their own factory in Saldanha. They will then process the white fish offal (that is presently transported by road to the Hannasbaai facility in St Helena Bay) at their factory in Saldanha.
It is further important to note that, as a result of the health risk assessment that was done by Infotox under the supervision of the Chief: Directorate: Air Quality of the DEA, a hydrogen sulphide emission limit of 5mg/Nm3 was determined and included in the provisional AELs. This must be monitored twice per annum and reported to the competent authority. As previously mentioned, the Oceana plant, situated closest to the Britannia Bay area, has already done its first round of monitoring. The DEA&DP also placed an ambient monitoring station in close proximity to the Oceana plant to, among others, monitor H2S concentrations in ambient air. The station is up and running since April 2011.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1237
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1237. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 468 on 19 March 2012, what is the current status of the water licence application process for the PMG mine in the Northern Cape;
(2) whether any other enforcement steps have been taken against the mine in terms of National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, since the pre-notice was issued against the mine in July 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) in view of the fact that the mine had not even applied to the Department of Water Affairs for a water user licence by 19 March 2012, why has the department not issued a directive to the mine to desist from using and discharging any water;
(4) what (a) are the dates of the last three visits by officials of the Department of Water Affairs to the mine and (b) are the (i) names and (ii) designations of the officials who conducted the visits in each case;
(5) whether her department has any concerns about the way in which the mine is using and discharging water; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1434E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) An incomplete water use license application was submitted to the Department's Regional Office: Northern Cape and an initial assessment was conducted. Further technical information was requested in a letter dated 3 May 2012, however, the Department is still awaiting submission of this information by the applicant.
A site inspection has been arranged for 4 June 2012 to further discuss and clarify the additional information requirements with the applicant in order to facilitate the water use license application process.
(2) No further enforcement steps were taken against the PMG Mine (the Mine) since the July 2010 pre-notice as the mine committed (in a detailed action plan dated 2 August 2010) to addressing the key issues listed in the pre-notice. In compliance with the action plan, the mine has conducted several specialist studies, including a detailed geo-hydrological report and storm water management plan, in support of the water license application process. Furthermore, during a joint site inspection conducted by the Department and the Department of Mineral Resources officials on 20 July 2011, it was confirmed that the mine had implemented the following remedial measures:
§ the construction of a vehicle wash bay;
§ discontinuation of water use from boreholes on site; and
§ sourcing alternative water from Sedibeng Water as proposed in the action plan.
(3) The mine demonstrated a willingness to cooperate and implemented several measures, as stipulated in response (2) above, to minimise its impacts on the water resource hence a directive was not issued. The success of the Department in dealing with unlawful water use should not only be gauged in terms of the extent to which directives are issued, but its ability to ensure that such unlawful water use is addressed through cooperation by the water user. Furthermore, an incomplete water use license application was submitted to the Department and this application will now be expedited through the Letsema Project.
(4) Only two site visits have been conducted by the Department thus far. The table 1 below indicates the dates, names and designations of officials who conducted the last inspection at the mine:
Table (5) The Department is concerned that the mining operations might impact negatively on the quality of groundwater resources in the immediate vicinity of the mine. The Department therefore requested a detailed groundwater investigation by the
mine in order to ensure that, the impacts of the mining operation are fully understood. This will also ensure that appropriate water use license conditions are stipulated in the event that a water use license is issued to the mine.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1236
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1433EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she intends to investigate the (a) circumstances that led to the awarding of a permit to a certain entity (name furnished) to conduct research on and film sharks off the coast and (b) terms and conditions of the permit; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;
(2) what were the reasons for cancelling the permit;
(3) whether the said entity had attempted to get the permit reinstated after the cancellation; if so, what was her department's response?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1236. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No. The matter has been examined by the Department of Environmental Affairs and thus far there is no indication of a need for an investigation regarding (a) the circumstances that led to a permit being awarded, and (b) the conditions of the permit.
(3) This action was taken based on the fact there had been a fatality recently and that all the relevant facts and circumstances had to be properly investigated before any further work could be considered.
(3) Their position, together with information gathered over the following ten days (including that on the movement of tagged sharks), resulted in the Department deciding to re-issue new permits.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1235 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1432EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has found any reason for concern about the exportation of lion bones; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) what are the primary countries to which lion bones are exported;
(3) whether she is considering placing a moratorium on the exportation of lion bones; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1235. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) No, the lion bones exported are a by-product of the captive-bred lions that are legally hunted.
(2) United State of America, Spain, Laos and Vietnam.
(3) No, a prohibition (moratorium) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004) can only be put in place if the activity is of a nature that may negatively impact on the survival of the species in the wild. As stated above, the Department does not consider the trade in lion bones as posing a threat to the survival of the species in the wild.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1219
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1219. Mr E H Eloff (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
What amount have her departments spent on (a) catering and (b) entertainment (i) in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11 and (cc) 2011-12 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2012? NW1416E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The expenditure incurred by my departments on catering and entertainment during the aforementioned financial years are reflected on relevant annual audited reports of the departments. For instance, expenditure in this regard for the Department of Water Affairs, is encapsulated on page 112 of the 2010/11 annual report.
It is important to note that the amounts reflected therein are in respect of a plethora of official functions that the department engages in on regular basis across its regional and local offices during a particular financial year.
The same principle applies in respect to the Department of Environmental Affairs.
The expenditure for the current financial year will accordingly be reflected upon completion of this financial period.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1192
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 11 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12)
1192. Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed that a water pipe which transports water into the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality has had a significant break over the past two months resulting in water leaking at the point where the pipe crosses the Maitland River mouth; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,
(2) whether she will investigate the situation; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether any steps are being taken to rectify the situation; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1388E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Although the Department had not been informed about the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality's (NMBM) water pipeline leakage, on receipt of this parliamentary question, the matter was urgently investigated.
The Department has since been advised by the NMBM that the water pipeline which was leaking due to corrosiveness was since repaired on 11 May 2012. Regrettably, the delays in the repairing of the pipeline were due to the fact that special pieces of the pipe had to be made before the repairs could be carried out.
It should be noted that the option to shut off the water pipeline (to avoid further leakage) could not be explored as such would have resulted in most communities without access to water as the pipeline is one of the main bulk water supply pipelines to the NMBM.
(2) Falls away.
(3) Falls away.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1191 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1387EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Mr N D du Toit (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) Whether she has been informed that a loan has been awarded to the Recycling and Economic Development Initiative of SA (Redisa) to commence operations despite it not yet having been formally approved by her; if not,
(2) whether she intends to investigate the situation; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) (a) how much money was loaned and (b) what is the name of the entity that awarded the loan;
(4) whether she will make a statement on the matter?
Mr N D du Toit (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1191. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) As Minister, I am not aware of any loan being awarded in this regard.
(2) There is no need to investigate the situation.
(3) (a) I have no knowledge of any amounts that were loaned in this regard; (b) I also have no knowledge of the name of the entity that awarded the loan.
(4) Please refer to the statement below:
All organisations that develop industry waste management plans in terms of the Waste Act, 2008 (Act 59 of 2008) or, in particular, the Waste Tyre Regulations (2009), as the case may be, do so at their own risk. Should any company which has submitted a plan to the Minister for approval, obtain a loan to facilitate the development and/or implementation of such a plan, do so entirely at its own risk. As Minister, I am under no obligation to approve a plan purely because the developer of such a plan has obtained a loan.
Furthermore as Minister, I am not privy to the financial planning matters of organisations in anticipation of their plans being approved and, as such, cannot respond to related questions. The process only requires financial disclosure relating to any money being payable as part of the implementation of the actual plan, and such information should form part of the plan in terms of sub-regulation 9(1)(k) of the Waste Tyre Regulations (2009) which states "…provide details of the manner in which the contribution of each member of the plan will be determined and how it will be collected and distributed..."
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1164
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 12 NW1357EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 11 May 2012
Dr P J Rabie (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her department has conducted or initiated a study on the critically endangered cycad Encephalartos dyerianus; if so, (a) how many are left in the wild, (b) how many mature plants have been removed illegally in (i) 2008 (ii) 2009, (iii) 2010 and (iv) 2011 and (c) what steps has she taken to protect the existing plants in Limpopo province?
Dr P J Rabie (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1164. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
No, but the Scientific Authority, established and mandated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA), made recommendations to the Minister to address cycad conservation matters.
(a) Encephalartos dyerianus left in the wild: 364 large plants, 264 suckers, and 118 seedlings;
(b) (i) 78 according to information provided by the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism, (ii), (iii), (iv) Information not available; and
(c) the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) has a strategy and action plan in place to address to protection of the existing plants. The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) requested the LEDETto prioritise the marking and monitoring of wild cycad populations / individual plants. The DEA will assist in providing training to provinces in terms of cycad identification and micro-chipping. The Threatened or Protected Species list, published in terms of section 56 (1) of NEMBA, is also in the process of being reviewed and this process will address the listing ofEncephalartos dyerianus. The species is currently listed as Protected.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1120
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1308EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 4 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 614 on 11 April 2012, (a) how many of the rhinos that have been killed in the Kruger National Park (KNP) since 1 January 2012 were (i) white and (ii) black rhinos and (b) what were the total figures in this regard in (aa) 2010 and (bb) 2011;
(2) what was found to be the reason for the high level of rhino poaching in the KNP;
(3) whether, in light of the current poaching figures in the KNP, she has found that the existing strategies being deployed to curb poaching in the park have been appropriate; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether additional resources will be deployed to the park to help curb poaching; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(5) what is the extent of the assistance being granted to the fight against poaching in the KNP by the (a) SA National Defence Force and (b) SA Police Service; if not, what will be done to rectify the situation; if so, how was this conclusion reached?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1120. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1)
(a) (i) 121
(ii) 1
(b) (aa) 146
(bb) 252
(2)
· The high price for illegal rhino horn currently being paid, in South Africa approximately R65 000 per kilogram, and in Mozambique anything up to R80 000 per kilogram.
· The high levels of unemployment in the surrounding communities of South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.
· A shift by local and national organised crime syndicates from high risk crime activities to lower risk rhino poaching and rhino horn smuggling.
· The sheer size and remoteness of the KNP, as well as the relatively high rhino population and localised high densities of rhino in the border line areas of the KNP.
· The relatively easy access to remote areas of the KNP from border line communities, both in South Africa and Mozambique.
(3) We do believe that the current strategies are adequate and appropriate. "Operation Rhino", supported by the entire Security Cluster and the SA National Defence Force (SANDF), will make a difference in due course. We are however, continuously working hard to find new and additional measures to curb rhino poaching
(4) Government has released additional R20 million for anti- rhino poaching in our country. We have also added rangers to those deployed at KNP. Should it be necessary and the situation on the ground in the KNP dictates that additional resources are necessary and required, it will be considered.
(5)
a. The SANDF are currently deployed in the KNP as part of their mandate to firstly secure and ensure the maintenance of area integrity regarding the international boundary between South Africa and its neighbouring countries. Secondly, the SANDF has a secondary mandate to assist with rhino poaching and other security related challenges where necessary and when required.
b. The SA Police Service (SAPS) are currently deployed in the KNP to carry out their mandate of general community and visible policing, law enforcement and port of entry control. The SAPS also provides a specialised component to support the combating of rhino poaching activities.
Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster and National Joint Committee have declared rhino poaching a priority crime and this served on every agenda of JCPS in order to help find new measures.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1119
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1119. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether, with reference to her reply to question 2184 on 20 October 2010, any progress has been made in getting all water service authorities to report annually on the implementation of the relevant water services development plan; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1307E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The Department has established a dedicated programme to oversee, monitor and support Water Services Development Planning at Local Government level. During the previous financial year the programme supported 105 Water Services Authorities to improve the quality of their Water Services Development Plans. A water services development plan tracking system monitors the status of the options and supports this process. Extensive support is also provided to ensure Water Services Development Plans and Integrated Development Plans. The Department is also actively involved in the assessment of all Integrated Development Plans.
We have developed a guideline that supports the Water Services Authority to report on progress with respect to the implementation of their Development Plan. We are aware, through the tracking system that 145 Water Services Development Plans (out of the 168 required) were submitted and are in different stages of completion.
Together, with all the guideline documents and the dedicated support programme, the Department, has also successfully implemented a Council Awareness Raising campaign. But despite all these efforts, there are still very few Water Services Authorities that do not comply with Water Services Development Plan requirements. We will continue to provide support and are committed towards refocusing our efforts to support Local Government through innovative programmes and processes.
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1118 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1306EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 May 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) With reference to her reply to question 477 on 25 March 2011, how many environmental impact assessments (EIAs) were outstanding (a) in each province and (b) nationally (i) for less than 6 months, (ii) between 6 and 12 months, (iii) between 12 and 18 months and (iv) for longer than 18 months as at 31 March 2012;
(2) what was the total number of (a) posts available and (b) vacancies in the EIA establishment in (i) each province and (ii) nationally as at the latest specified date for which information is available?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1118. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
The Department has recently embarked on a re-structuring process that entailed the establishment of an Integrated Authorisations Chief Directorate. This Chief Directorate will be better capacitated to enable the quicker processing and administering of Environmental Impact Assessment and Waste Authorisation and Disposal applications. Further, the Department has commenced in engaging both the Department of Water Affairs and the Department of Mineral Resources on the alignment and integration of administrative processes related to permitting. These engagements will include law reform which will enable integration between these Departments as well as expedite the review processes related to permitting.
In response to question 1(a), (b)(i),(ii),(iii) and (iv), please see the table attached.
In response to question 2(a), (b)(i) and (ii), please see table attached.
* The province has not submitted information as requested – the information will be collected and submitted separately.
Reply received: June 2012
QUESTION NO. 1082
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11 NW1270E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 04 May 2012
Ms A M Dreyer (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(I) (a) What are the (i) yearly rental and (ii) floor space of the (aa) current and (bb) previous premises occupied by her departments' head office and (b) when (i) was the current building occupied and (ii) does the current lease expire;
(2) whether her departments publicly invited tenders prior to the leasing of the current premises; if not, why not; if so, (a) when, (b) where was it published and (c) which (i) companies and (ii) properties were shortlisted;
(3) what (a) floor space was offered and (b) annual rental was tendered (i) by each shortlisted company and (ii) with regard to each shortlisted property?
1082. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1) (a) (i) The yearly rental for the Department of Environmental Affairs' head office is R23 311 794.60.
(ii) (aa) The floor space of the current premises occupied is 21 972.43 m²
(bb) Not applicable.
(b) (i) The Department of Environmental Affairs has been occupying the building since 1 April 2010.
(ii) The current lease expiry date is 31 March 2013.
(2) The building was procured 1 leased by the Department of Public Works (DPV for the Department of Environmental Affairs as tenant and the records are kept by the DPW. The details on the procurement processes followed are only available from the DPW as the custodian of accommodation on behalf of all state departments. This question (2) and question (3) should therefore be addressed directly to the DPW.
(a) DPW internal leasing processes.
(b) DPW internal leasing processes.
(c) (i) DPW internal leasing processes.
(ii) DPW internal leasing processes.
(3) (a) DPW internal leasing processes,
(b) (i) DPW internal leasing processes.
(ii) DPW internal leasing processes
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1082
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1082. Ms A M Dreyer (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) What are the (i) yearly rental and (ii) floor space of the (aa) current and (bb) previous premises occupied by her departments' head office and (b) when (i) was the current building occupied and (ii) does the current lease expire;
(2) whether her departments publicly invited tenders prior to the leasing of the current premises; if not, why not; if so, (a) when, (b) where was it published and (c) which (i) companies and (ii) properties were shortlisted;
(3) what (a) floor space was offered and (b) annual rental was tendered (i) by each shortlisted company and (ii) with regard to each shortlisted property? NW1270E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Refer to Table below.
| No. | Name of Building | (1)(a)(i) Yearly Rental | (1)(a)(ii) Floor Space | (1)(b)(i) Year Occupied | (1)(b)(ii) Lease Expiry Date |
| 1. | ZWAMADAKA BUILDING | R8,090,778.36 | 10383 | Since 1988 to date | 31/07/2012 |
| 2. | SEDIBENG BUILDING | R15, 883,423.08 | 24021 | Since 1988 to date | 31/01/2012 |
| 3. | EMANZINI BUILDING | R6, 088,185.60 | 9340 | Since 1988 to date | 31/01/2012 |
| 4. | CONTINENTAL BUILDING | R 5, 526,778.68 | 4133 | Since 2007 to date | 30/11/2015 |
| 5. | WATERBRON BUILDING | R26, 863,991.72 | 17780 | Since 2002 to date | 30/09/2019 |
| 6. | NDINAYE BUILDING | R3, 024,468.00 | 2900 | Since 2007 to date | 30/06/2012 |
(2) The Department of Public Works is the custodian of office accommodation and is responsible for leasing office accommodation on behalf of the Department.
(2)(a) Falls away
(2)(b) Falls away
(3) Falls away
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1054
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1054. Mrs A Steyn (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
Whether her departments have funded the (a) construction or (b) maintenance of any (i) dams or (ii) canals for the revitalisation or irrigation schemes (aa) in the (aaa) 2009-10, (bbb) 2010-11 and (ccc) 2011-12 and (bb) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, why not; if so, (aaaa) how many projects were funded, and (bbbb) in respect of each province and municipality what was the total cost for each project and the purpose of each specified dam? NW1238E
REPLY:
Yes, the department has funded the construction of dams. Maintenance and rehabilitation of dams is funded through the Dam Safety and Rehabilitation Programme introduced in 2005.
(i) Refer to Annexure A for the list of Irrigation schemes
(ii) Refer to Annexure B for the list of Canals constructed
(iii) Refer to Annexure C for the list of dams rehabilitated. The Department constructed one dam in the Free State, Balancing Dam S1 on the Orange-Riet Canal since 2009 and will be completed in 2013.
The tables and Annexure are here: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/questions/RNW1054-120515.pdf
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1027
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 04 MAY 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 11)
1027. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Water andEnvironmental Affairs:
What progress has been made in setting up catchment management agencies to ensure equitable, efficient and sustainable water resource management? NW1202E
---00O00---
REPLY:
The National Water Resource Strategy (NWRS) gives provision for the establishment of the 19 Catchment Management Agencies (CMA) per Water Management Area (WMA). To date, eight CMAs have already been established, two of which are currently functional: the Inkomati CMA in Mpumalanga and the Breede-Overberg CMA in the Western Cape. A further six CMAs were gazzetted but their Boards have not been appointed and both CMAs have not been developed into functional entities yet.
Since the establishment of these CMAs, the process of establishing CMAs was put on hold while the issue of the appropriate number of institutions was investigated through project "Institutional Reform and Realignment" (IRR).
The IRR project proposed the establishment of nine CMAs in the nine WMAs. These revised areas are defined in the draft National Water Resources Strategy (NWRS) and will be part of the NWRS when it is promulgated. I announced the establishment of the nine CMAs on the 19 March 2012.
The Department is in the process of appointing a national project team to drive and manage the process of implementation/ establishment in a programmatic manner, working with relevant regional office staff within tightly managed timeframes (three to five years).
Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO. 1006 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO.10 NW1187EDATE OF PUBLICATION: 26 April 2012
Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:
(1) (a) How many environmental management inspectors (EMIs) are there currently and (b) what is the breakdown of this figure according to the organisation they work for;
(2) how many qualified EMIs are expected to be attached to organisations by the end of the 2012-13 financial year;
(3) whether any successes have been recorded in training EMIs for work in the local government sphere; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether, with reference to the reply to question 854 on 8 April 2011, any progress has been made in assessing how many EMIs are required at each sphere of government; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Mr G R Morgan (DA) SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENTHANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS1006. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:
(1)(a) and (b)
TOTAL NUMBER OF EMIs PER ORGANISATION AS AT 31 MARCH 2012
| Cape Nature | 8 |
| Department of Environmental Affairs | 66 |
| Eastern Cape Province | 39 |
| Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency | 62* |
| Free State Province | 22 |
| Gauteng Province | 43 |
| iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority | 4 |
| KZN Wildlife | 310** |
| KwaZulu-Natal Province | 37 |
| Mpumalanga Province | 14 |
| Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency | 11 |
| North West Province | 25 |
| Northern Cape Province | 16 |
| Western Cape Province | 64 |
| Limpopo Province | 75 |
| SANParks | 603*** |
| Grand Total | 1 399 |
*This total includes 54 field rangers (Grade 5 EMIs)
**This total includes 269 field rangers (Grade 5 EMIs)
***SANParks have not submitted their total number of EMIs for 2012; therefore, the figure for 2010/11 is included in this table.
(2) The various environmental management inspector (EMI) institutions have indicated that there are approximately 100 additional officials that will register for the Department of Environmental Affairs' EMI Basic Training Programme, plus an additional number are registered with UNISA. In total, it is estimated that there will be approximately 150 additional officials qualified to be designated as EMIs by the end of 2012. This estimate excludes the number of local authority officials that will be trained under the EMI-EHP Bridging Training Programme (see below).
(3) During the 2011/12 course, 37 local authority officials underwent EMI Basic Training. In addition, the Department has reached an agreement with six tertiary institutions (Universities of Technology) to develop and roll-out an EMI Bridging Training Programme for qualified Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs). Attendance of this short learning programme, plus a suitable peace officers' course, will qualify these local authority EHPs for EMI designation. The tertiary institutions have indicated that they would be prepared to present the training during the course of 2012.
(4) A strategic assessment of, inter alia, the number of EMIs required at each sphere of government (in order to ensure proper compliance and enforcement with the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and the Specific Environmental Management Acts (SEMAs)) will be performed as part of the Department's envisaged Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Strategy. The development of this strategy will encompass the green, brown and blue (integrated coastal management) subsectors. It will commence in the 2012/13 financial year and the project is envisaged to span two financial years.Reply received: May 2012
QUESTION NO 1005
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 26 APRIL 2012
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 10)
1005. Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and EnvironmentalAffairs:
(1) Whether, with reference to her replies to question 872 on 5 May 2010, question 1442 on 25 May 2010, question 2086 on 18 August 2010 and question 45 on 15 March 2011, a charge sheet has been submitted to the National Prosecuting Authority for prosecution, if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details,
(2) whether any further directives have been issued against the mine since 28 April 2010; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) (a) on what date was the last inspection of the mine conducted by officials of her department and (b) what are the (i) names and (ii) designations of all officials who visited the mine;
(4) (a) what is the current level of mine water below the surface of the mine and (b) at what rate is it rising;
(5) whether steps are being taken by the Department of Water to ensure that there is no decant of acid mine water at the mine or in neighboring locality, if not, why not; it so, what are the relevant details? NW1186E
---00O00---
REPLY:
(1) Yes, a charge sheet was submitted to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). After reviewing the charge sheet, the NPA requested that certain elements should be further investigated and the docket has since been returned to the South African Police Services (SAPS) for further investigation. The Department of Water Affairs (the Department) continues to work closely with the NPA and SAPS. The matter is currently sub judice.
(2) No further directives were issued against the Grootvlei Mine since
28 April 2010 as the mine was non-operational and under liquidation. Since the mine was issued with a directive during active operations and to which there was no response, the Department commenced with the enforcement process that is invoked when a directive is contravened. This has resulted in a criminal case being opened against the mine.
(3) Table 1 below indicates the date, names and designations of officials who conducted the last inspection at the Grootvlei Mine:
Table (1) Yes.
An observer from the City of Cape Town and a veterinary surgeon from the Department of Agriculture, Western Cape.
(2) See the table below:
| Project title of the research activities of the main permit holder |
| Movement patterns of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in South Africa |
| Assessment of angling and post-traumatic stress in large pelagic sharks |
| Localised movement patterns of white sharks in the Gansbaai region |
| Defining the role of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in the marine ecosystem of False Bay, South Africa |
| An investigation into the movements and behaviour of white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) within Algoa Bay and the Bird Island Marine Protected Area |
| Hormone monitoring of the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in South Africa |
| Stable isotopes in large sharks off Southern Africa |
| Assessment of the bacteria colonies occurring in the buccal cavity and musculature of large coastal shark species in South Africa: Search for the presence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in sharks |
(3) Yes.
The research will improve our understanding of the basic life histories of white sharks, including migration, residency patterns, reproduction, population status as well as other aspects of their biology. This information will enable the department to improve its conservation efforts and improve public safety.
(4) Yes.
As stipulated in the permit conditions: "A written report on the cruise shall be submitted to the department within 30 days of its completion of a cruise, stating areas worked and providing basic information on all sharks caught and released and the sampling done on each animal".
The research will improve our understanding of the basic life histories of white sharks, including migration, residency patterns, reproduction, population status as well as other aspects of their biology. This information will enable the department to improve its conservation efforts and improve public safety.
(4) Yes.
As stipulated in the permit conditions: "A written report on the cruise shall be submitted to the department within 30 days of its completion of a cruise, stating areas worked and providing basic information on all sharks caught and released and the sampling done on each animal".