Questions & Replies: Public Enterprises
2013-03-07
THIS FILE CAN CONTAIN UP TO 25 REPLIES.
SEARCH ON THE TOPIC/KEYWORD YOU ARE LOOKING FOR BY SELECTING CTRL + F ON YOUR KEYBOARD
Reply received: December 2013
QUESTION NO.: 1131
DATE OF PUBLICATION:
1131. Mrs N W A Michael (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(a) What total amount has (i) his department and (ii) each specified entity reporting to him spent on conferences in the (aa) 2009-10, (bb) 2010-11, (cc) 2011-12 and (dd) 2012-13 financial years and (b) what (i) amount was spent on, and (ii) is the breakdown of the expenditure for, each specified conference? NW1364E
Reply:
(b)(i-ii) The Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) did not spend any amount on conferences during the financial years indicated above. However, information on amounts spent by State Owned Enterprises (SOCs) which are reporting to DPE is provided below. The SOCs do not have separate budget lines for conferences and they found it onerous to provide detailed responses to the question as it is phrased. It should be noted that SOCs interpreted conferences as referring to industry-related projects or workshops and/or training sessions.
Alexkor:
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) Alexkor only paid for delegates to attend the annual Mining Indaba which was held at the Cape Town International Conference Centre. The amounts below refer to 2 tickets and only refer to the Mining Indaba.
| 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13 |
| R19 550 | R21 137 | R24 382 | R27 782 |
Broadband Infraco
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) The table below indicates the amount spent by Broadband Infraco on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
| 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13 |
| R252 474.35 | R307 002.01 | R238 250.99 | R303 083.10 |
Denel
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) The table below indicates the amount spent by Denel on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
| 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13 |
| R49 864.82 | R15 806.00 | R87 743.06 | R448 767.06 |
ESKOM
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) Eskom spent a total amount of R26.1 million over the period from 2009/10 to 2012/13 and the breakdown per financial year is reflected in the table below. The costs included travel, accommodation and delegate conference fees where applicable.
The table below indicates the amount used by Eskom on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
| 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13 |
| R2 599 959 | R3 092 170 | R6 291 403 | R14 153 097 |
SAFCOL
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) The table below indicates the amount spent used by SAFCOL on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
| 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13 |
| R26 007.56 | R2 000 | - | R24 463.90 |
SAA
(a)(ii)(aa-dd) South African Airways hosted two conferences in 2011/12 and hosted Global sales conference and 2012/13 hosted AFRAA conference – see details below.
SAX (a)(ii)(aa-dd) The table below indicates the amount spent by SAX on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
Transnet (a)(ii)(aa-dd) The table below indicates the amount used by Transnet on workshops and/or (training sessions) conferences of the aforementioned financial years.
|
Reply received: July 2013
QUESTION NO: 977
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 10 May 2013
977. Mr J R B Lorimer (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) Since 1 January 2011, how many applications under the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000, were received by (a) his department and (b) entities reporting to him, and in each case, how many were (i) granted, (ii) refused and (iii) deemed refused under section 27;
(2) since 1 January 2011, how many internal appeals under the Act were received by (a) his department and (b) entities reporting to him, and in each case, how many were (i) granted, (ii) refused and (iii) deemed refused under section 77(7);
(3) who is the information officer for (a) his department and (b) each entity reporting to him, and in each case, what are the contact details of the officer? NW1200E:
Reply:
Information on the application under the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000, received by the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) and its State Owned Enterprises (SOCs) is provided below.
(1)(a) Since 1 January 2011, the Department received two (2) applications in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).
(1)(a)(i) The Department granted two applications.
(1)(a)(ii)(iii) None.
(2)(a)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011, DPE received and granted one (1) and refused none of these or of those deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(a) The Information Officer for DPE is the Director General.
Contact Details:
Name: Mr Tshediso Matona
Tel: 012 431 1084
E-mail: [email protected]
According to Alexkor:
(1)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 201, it has not received any applications in terms of PAIA and as such it has not granted nor refused any application.
(2)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011, it has not received, granted or refused any internal appeals which are deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(b)The Information Officer for Alexkor is the Company Secretary.
Contact details:
Name: Mrs Jane Mbatia
Tel: 011 788 8809
E-mail: [email protected]
According to Broadband Infraco:
(1-3) It has not receive any request/s for access to information in terms of PAIA during the relevant period.
(1)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011 Infraco has not received any applications in terms of PAIA and as such Infraco has not granted nor refused any application.
(2)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011 Infraco did not receive, grant or refuse any internal appeals which are deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(b) The Information Officer for Infraco is the Legal Executive
Contact Details:
Name: Klaas Motlhabane
Tel: 011 235 1720
Email: [email protected]
According to Denel:
(1-2) No requests were made to them in terms of the Act.
(3)(b) The Group Communications Manager is the Information Manager for Denel.
Contact Details:
Name: Vuyelwa Qinga
Group Communications Manager
Tel: 012 671 2662
Fax: 012 671 2751
E-mail: [email protected]
According to Eskom:
(1)(b) Tables 1 and 2 below set out the decisions taken on the total PAIA requests received during the period requested. Eskom indicated that the information since 1 April 2013 to date has not been audited yet and can only be released once audited.
Table 1: Annual breakdown of decisions taken on the 112 PAIA requests received during the period 1 Jan 2011 to 31 March 2013.
| Action | 1 Jan 11 – 31 Mar 11 | 1 Apr 11 - 31 Mar 12 | 1 Apr 12 - 31 Mar 13 | Total 1 Jan 11 - 31 Mar 13 |
| Granted | 7 | 20 | 19 | 46 |
| Refused | 5 | 7 | 7 | 19 |
| Deemed refused under Section 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other (*) | 6 | 18 | 23 | 47 |
| Total Received | 18 | 45 | 49 | 112 |
Table 2: Annual breakdown of decisions taken on the 47 PAIA requests received during the period 1 Jan 2011 to 31 March 2013.
| *Other decisions | 1 Jan 2011 – 31 Mar 2011 | 1 Apr 2011 – 31 Mar 2012 | 1 Apr 2012 – 31 Mar 2013 | Total 1 Jan 2011 – 31 Mar 2013 |
| Transferred in terms of Section 20 (to DOE in this case) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Deferred in terms of Section 27 (would be in public domain in due course) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Party granted (access granted to a portion of the request) | 2 | 11 | 13 | 26 |
| Rejected (request outside the parameters of the Act) | 4 | 7 | 5 | 16 |
| Current (under consideration) | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Total Other | 6 | 18 | 23 | 47 |
(2) Table 3 below sets out the internal appeals under PAIA during the period requested. Eskom has indicated that the information since 1 April 2013 to date has not been audited yet and can only be released once audited. It should be noted that State Owned Companies (SOC) are excluded from the internal appeal process (see definition of a Public Body in paragraph (b)(ii)). Eskom have however instituted an informal appeals process which requesters can utilise should they wish to do so.
Table 3: Annual breakdown of the internal appeals under the PAIA during the period 1 Jan 2011 to 31 March 2013.
| 1 Jan 2011 – 31 Mar 2011 | 1 Apr 2011 – 31 Mar 2012 | 1 Apr 2012 – 31 Mar 2013 | Total 1 Jan 2011 – 31 Mar 2013 | |
| Granted | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| Refused | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Deemed refused under Section 77(7) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other* | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total Received | 2 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
(3)(b) In terms of the Act, Eskom's Chief Executive is the Information Officer for Eskom. However, he is allowed to appoint another official to assist him in this regard. Eskom's Chief Executive Officer, Brian Dames, has appointed a Deputy Information Officer, Mohamed Adam, to assist him in terms of the Act. In addition, he has appointed a National Deputy Information Officer with Deputy Information Officers from within each operating division within Eskom to handle specific requests for information within the divisions.
Contact details of the Information Officers:
| Name | Division/Company | Telephone No. | |
| Deputy Information Officer | |||
| Mohamed Adam | Regulatory and Legal | (011) 800-6076 | |
| National Deputy Information Officer | |||
| Eddie Laubscher | Regulatory and Legal | (011) 655-2130 | |
| Deputy Information Officers | |||
| Jacob Buys | Corporate Finance Division | (011) 800-4703 | |
| Gavin Bruce | Transmission Division | (011) 871-3496 | |
| Luke Walker | Corporate Capital | (012) 421-6656 | |
| Eddie Laubscher | Regulation & Legal Division | (011) 655-2130 | |
| Nico Nett | Eskom Enterprises (Pty) Ltd | (011) 800- 2095 | |
| Ohna Smit | Transmission Division (Key Sales and Customer) | (021)915-2608 | |
| Andrew Anderson | Escap & Gallium | (011) 800-2669 | |
| Christo Olivier | Nuclear | (021) 550 4980 | |
According to SAFCOL:
(1)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011, it has not received any applications in terms of PAIA and as such it has not granted nor refused any application.
(2)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011 SAFCOL did not receive, grant or refuse any internal appeals which are deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(b) The Information Officer for SAFCOL is the CEO.
Contact details:
Name: Ms Nomkhita Mona
Tel: 012 481 3500
Fax: 013 754 2733
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
South African Airways (SAA):
(1)(b)(i-iii) Since 01 January 2011 SAA received only one (1) application in terms of PAIA and granted none, but also refused one application and none of those deemed to be refused under section 27.
(2)(b)(i-iii) Since 1 January 2011 SAA did not receive, grant or refuse any internal appeals which are deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(b) The Company Secretary is the Information Officer.
Contact details:
Name: Mr. Sandile Dlamini
E-mail: [email protected]
Contact no: 011 978 6553
According to South African Express (SAX):
(1)(b)(i) Since 1 January 201, SAX received two (2) applications in terms of PAIA.
(1)(b) (ii-iii) SAX refused two (2) of these applications or those deemed refused in terms of section 27 (subject to approval of third parties).
(2)(b) (i-iii) Since 1 January 2011 SAX did not receive, grant or refuse any internal appeals which are deemed refused under section 77(7).
(3)(b) The Chief Financial Officer is the Information Officer.
Contact details:
Name: Mr Zanele Ngwenya
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 011 978 2466
Transnet:
(1)(b) Seventeen (17) applications under the Act were received by Transnet SOC and these were addressed to as per the table below:
| Requests granted (i) | Requests refused (ii) | Deemed refusal in terms of section 27 (iii) | |
| Transnet SOC (Ltd) | 9 | 8 | 0 |
(2)(b) Two (2) internal appeals under the Act were received by Transnet and these were addressed to as per the table below:
| Appeals granted (i) | Appeals refused (ii) | Deemed refused in terms of section 77(7) (iii) | |
| Transnet SOC (Ltd) | 2 | 0 | 0 |
(3)(b) The Information Officer for Transnet SOC Limited is the Group Chief Executive.
Contact details:
Name: Mr Brian Molefe
Tel: 011 308 2312
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 911
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 May 2013
911. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether he has found that the awareness campaigns regarding electricity theft and the dangers of stealing electricity are effective; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1137E
Reply:
According to Eskom:
The campaign is already yielding results, among which are the following achievements:
· Since the launch of Operation Khanyisa, more than 6 000 tip-offs have been received. Eskom together with the relevant municipalities are hard at work acting on this information.
· More than R200 million has been recovered in the past three years, thanks to customers who responded to the call to report perpetrators.
· Operation Khanyisa involves working with law enforcement agencies to devise a strategy through which the loophole in legislation can be mitigated, such as the absence of a definition of electricity theft as a criminal act. This approach is showing rewards in that the number of arrests and prosecutions of theft related to electricity has increased.
Since the inception of this campaign, about 112 suspects were arrested, including 58, over the past year. In 2012 five convictions were registered nationally in various courts. The sentences are commensurate with the crime. A watershed case was the one in the South Gauteng High court where two suspects received 15 and 18 year jail sentences respectively and their assets were seized. This case is changing the way people view theft of electricity and we are detecting a groundswell of support among communities for the campaign.
In addition, structured audits are regularly conducted on electricity installations and meters which are not functioning correctly. A specialised team has been established to deal with conventional revenue losses where identification and loss determination occur and recovery is initiated.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 834
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 03 MAY 2013
834. Mr N N J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) Whether he has been informed that Transnet does not have the capacity to transport all Phalaborwa Mining Company (PMC) magnetite by rail; if so,
(2) whether he has been informed that PMC is transporting the majority of their stock by truck on the R40 between Phalaborwa and Mpumalanga, therefore harming the road infrastructure; if so, when will the situation be rectified? NW1040E
Reply:
According to Transnet:
(1) Transnet does have the capacity to transport the entire Phalaborwa Mining Company's (PMC) magnetite by rail that it is contracted for.
(2) It is incorrect that PMC is transporting the majority of their stock by truck on the R40.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 823
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 26 April 2013
823. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether Transnet intends to divert more freight rail away from the network running through the Balule Nature Reserve between Phalaborwa and Hoedspruit to the line running between Phalaborwa and Hoedspruit, via Mica; if not, why not? NW1039E
Reply:
According to Transnet:
Transnet does not intend to divert traffic away from the network running through the Balule Nature Reserve due to the fact that the Mica line and the Phalaborwa line which converge at Hoedspruit, are coming from different directions. Transnet continues to transit through the nature reserve in rendering rail services to the ports of Maputo and Richards Bay at a restricted speed of 40 km/h in order to accommodate concerns raised by the nature reserve about the train speed and noise.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 764
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19 April 2013
764. Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) With reference to the electricity supply agreement between Eskom and BHT Billiton, what are the names and designations of signatories to the renewal agreement in 2001 which extended the initial agreement until 2028;
(2) whether the details and implications of the agreement were (a) provided to and (b) deliberated on by the Cabinet; if so, (i) when and (ii) what resolutions were taken;
(3) whether (a) a process of due diligence, including short- and long-term implications and actuarial viability projections was conducted and (b) the results were considered before entering into the extended agreement; if not, on what basis was a long-term agreement entered into without such consideration; if so, what are the details of the (i) motivation, (ii) projections and (iii) deliberations;
(4) whether he will conduct any investigations to determine whether acts or omissions of a negligent or corrupt nature occurred with regard to this agreement; if not, why not; if so, when? NW974E
Reply:
According to Eskom:
(1) The original (Main) Hillside contract, for Potlines 1 and 2 was signed on 11 November 1992. The contractual end date of this contract is 30 July 2020 and neither Eskom nor NERSA agreed to any extension to this contract. The original agreement remains valid until 2020.
An agreement (The Supplementary Agreement) between Eskom and BHP Billiton for Potline 3 signed on 10 December 2001 was to run until 2028. The purpose of the Supplementary Agreement signed in 2001 was to provide for the supply of additional electricity for the operation of Hillside Potline 3.
The signatories of the Supplementary Agreement to provide for an Increased Supply of Electricity to Hillside Potline 3 are:
| Name of Signatory | Company | Designation |
| MI Seedat | BHP | Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Southern Africa |
| PJ Maroga | Eskom | Executive Director (Distribution) |
(2) The details and implications of the agreement were not considered by Cabinet; however, the National Electricity Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), as the legal approving authority, approved the Supplementary Agreement.
(3) Eskom considered the short and long term implication of these contracts which led to the re-negotiations of the contracts with BHP Billiton in 2010.
(4) No investigation is required because Eskom has referred this matter to Nersa for an enquiry under the Electricity Regulation Act, 2006.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 738
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19 April 2013
738. Mr J F Smalle (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) When will the loan between China Development Bank and Transnet be concluded;
(2) what will the loan be used for; (3) what security was given for the loan; (4) what are the terms of repayment; (5) why was China Development Bank chosen for the loan?
NW946E
Reply:
According to Transnet:
(1) There is no loan agreement between Transnet and China Development Bank. The parties concluded a Cooperation Agreement which records the intention of the two parties to work together and identify areas of mutual benefit.
(2-5) Not applicable.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 727
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19 April 2013
727. Mrs N W A Michael (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) With reference to his reply to question 392 on 4 April 2013, what plans are in place to ensure that the Medupi Power Plant supply power into the grid by the December 2013 deadline;
(2) (a) who in his department will serve in the monitoring and supervision team at Medupi, (b) what will their functions be, (c) how regularly will reports be compiled and (d) to whom will they report;
(3) how regularly will site visits to Medupi be conducted by him;
(4) what is being done to ensure labour stability at the Medupi site;
(5) (a) who is in charge of the one-stop forum for industrial relations at Medupi, (b) what is their mediation and negotiation mandate and (c) whom do they report to? NW935E
Reply:
According to Eskom:
(1) The Eskom Finance Director has been assigned directly to Medupi to manage the process of delivering the first power by December 2013. He is engaging with the Chief Executives of all the major contractors on site on a regular basis, to ensure all deadlines are met. The Finance Director also has fortnightly meetings with contractors' CEOs to remove strategic obstacles that may still arise.
(2)(a-d) No one from the Department has been specifically nominated to serve on a monitoring and supervision team at Medupi. However, senior officials from the Department regularly attend Monthly Build Programme Status Review meetings at Eskom as part of the oversight process. The Department has established the Strategic Partnerships Branch, headed by a DDG, with a Chief Director appointed to head the Projects Management Unit.
(3) The visits will be conducted as often as it is necessary, until such time that the unit is on-line or there is comfort that the Medupi project is meeting the timelines.
(4) An Industrial Relations (IR) forum, called the Medupi IR forum, has been established on-site to deal with site-based issues and is chaired by Bhabalazi Bulunga, the Eskom Group Executive: Human Resources (Group Executive: HR). The forum meets regularly and has visibility of all Project IR issues (new and emerging risks) and gives speedy direction to their resolution. A new partnership agreement will be facilitated by an independent facilitator. The Medupi Project Labour Agreement is to be revised and will be renamed the Medupi Partnership Agreement. It is facilitated independently and will be signed by Eskom, the Contractors and Labour.
(5)(a) The Medupi IR forum is the one-stop IR forum chaired by the Eskom Group Executive: HR. The forum reports to the Medupi Leadership Forum which is constituted by the trade unions' regional officials, the Executive Management of the Contractors and Eskom's Finance Director (who also chairs the forum). The Medupi Leadership Forum is ultimately responsible for addressing and determining all issues on site, including labour issues.
(5)(b) The IR forum's mandate is to bring the labour instability at Medupi under control by introducing appropriate dispute mechanisms, renegotiate the Medupi Partnership Agreement (PLA) and rebuild and foster relationships among all parties.
(5)(c) The IR Forum reports to the Medupi Leadership Forum.
Reply received: May 2013
QUESTION NO.: 685
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19 April 2013
685. Mr J F Smalle (DA) to ask the Minister for Public Enterprises:
(1) With reference to his reply to question 645 on 9 March 2013, how many legal claims were instituted against his department (a) in the (i) 2007-08, (ii) 2008-09, (iii) 2009-10, (iv) 2010-11 and (v) 2011-12 financial years and (b) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) in respect of each specified financial year, (a) what amount was claimed, (b) how many claims were (i) finalised in court, (iii) settled out of court and (iii) are still outstanding and (b) what amount has been paid to each plaintiff in each case that was finalised (i) in court and (ii) settled out of court? NW851E
Reply:
(1)(a)(i-v)(b) The table below indicates a number of legal matters that were dealt with by the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) from 2007 to 2013.
| Year | Legal Matter |
| 2007/08 | 1 |
| 2008/09 | 1 |
| 2009/10 | 2 |
| 2010/11 | 4 |
| 2011/12 | 0 |
| 2012/13 | 0 |
(2)(a) In each specified financial amount,details are as follows:
· 2007/08: It was for reinstatement based on alleged unfair dismissal.
· 2008/09: The claim was for 3.2 billion.
· 2009/10: Two claims, one for R572m and the other for R286m.
· 2010/11: Claims were for transfer of assets, reinstatement (contesting the termination of contract), reinstatement (alleging unfair dismissal), and a claim for R100 000, 00 on alleged breach of contract.
· 2011/12: None
· 2012/13: None
(2)(b)(i) Matters finalised in court in each specified financial year are as follows:
· 2007/08: None
· 2008/09: None. Matter not pursued.
· 2009/10: None
· 2010/11: Only one matter settled by court. Others still outstanding.
· 2011/12: None
· 2012/13: None
(2)(b)(ii) No legal matter was settled in court in each specified financial year - the matter was not pursued.
(2)(b)(iii) Details of matters settled out of court in each financial year:
· 2007/08: None
· 2008/09: One
· 2009/10: Two
· 2010/11: Three
· 2011/12: None
· 2012/13: One
(2)(b)(i) No amount was paid to plaintiffs in matters finalised in court in each of these specified financial years.
(2)(b)(ii) No amount was paid to plaintiffs in matters settled out of court in each of these specified financial years.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 675
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 19 April 2013
675. Adv A de W Alberts (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether he is aware that the shareholders agreement between Eskom and the Government does not meet the requirements as stipulated in section 6(5)(b) of the Eskom Conversion Act, Act 13 of 2001, because the shareholders agreement does not make provision for the provision of affordable electricity, as required by section 6(5)(b); if not, what is he planning to do to correct this error; if so, why were the requirements not met? NW817E
Reply:
The Eskom Shareholder Compact meets the requirements of the the Eskom Conversion Act, Act 13 of 2001(ECA).
The ECA provides that in determining the Shareholder Compact, the Minister of the Department of Public Enterprises (Minister) must take into account Eskom's developmental role; the promotion of universal access, and the provision of affordable electricity, taking into account the cost of electricity, financial sustainability and the competitiveness of Eskom.
In the development of the Shareholder Compact the Minister takes into account the requirements of the ECA. The Shareholder Compact acknowledges that electricity prices need to increase, but require a balance between the need to meet the economic objectives, climate change imperatives, protection of the poor and sustainability of the industry. It also acknowledges that a clear, stable and predictable price path is required to ensure confidence in the economy and to attract investment.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 645
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28 March 2013
645. Mr J F Smalle (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) How many claims were instituted against his department (a) in the (i) 2007-08, (ii) 2008-09, (iii) 2009-10, (iv) 2010-11 and (v) 2011-12 financial years and (b) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) in respect of each specified financial year, (a) what amount was claimed, (b) how many claims were (i) finalised in court, (ii) settled out of court and (iii) are still outstanding and (c) what amount has been paid to each plaintiff in each case that was (i) finalised in court and (ii) settled out of court? NW804E
Reply:
(1)(a-b) (2)(a-c) The question is unclear therefore the Department of Public Enterprises is unable to respond at this stage.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 578
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28 March 2013
578. Adv A de W Alberts (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Why the performance bond of Alstom was called up because of the company's non-performance with regard to its contract with the Government for work on the Medupi Nuclear Power Plant project, but the performance bond of Hitachi was not called up following its non-performance with regard to its contract with the Government for work on the Medupi Nuclear Power Plant project? NW733E
Reply:
It is inaccurate to allege that the Hitachi bond was not called up whereas Alstom's was.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 400
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 March 2013
400. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether the SA Express are in arrears with regard to any payments due in respect of the maintenance of their aircraft; if so, what are the relevant details? NW553E
Reply:
According to SA Express (SAX):
No, SAX' policy regarding payment of suppliers is 30-days from the date of statement/invoice for maintenance suppliers. Major suppliers for maintenance of aircrafts are foreign suppliers. All suppliers are paid regularly within the stipulated timeframe per policy.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 399
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 March 2013
399. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) Which domestic sector that is served by the SA Express has on average the most expensive return ticket price in 2012;
(2) Is the sector profitable? NW552E
Reply:
According to SA Express:
(1-2) The information required cannot be made public as it will compromise SA Express's financial position in a highly competitive environment.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 392
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 March 2013
392. Ms B D Ferguson (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether, with reference to the ongoing labour disruptions at the Medupi power plant, he has implemented any measures to bring the generation of power back on track; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW543E
Reply:
On 20 February 2013, I met with Eskom's main contractors (Hitachi and Alstom) and NUMSA as a measure to resolve the labor dispute at the Medupi power plant currently under construction. The meeting successfully facilitated a conclusion of a framework for resolution of issues between the parties. This was to ensure an immediate return to work and resumption of duties by the following Monday (25 February 2013), as well as a process to resolve all outstanding issues in dispute.
The parties were to go back and consult with their principals, members and constituencies on the agreement. Subsequently the parties could not agree on the implementation of the agreement which meant that the strike continued.
I then facilitated meetings over two days firstly with all major contractors and subcontractors on 7 March 2013; all unions represented on the Medupi site on 8 March 2013 and all unions and contractors again on 8 March 2013. These meetings led to an agreement and commitment from all stakeholders involved to return to work immediately and ensure lasting peace on site. The parties also agreed as part of this process to review the agreement that governs the employer and employee relations on site to ensure it addresses concerns that have been raised.
The construction site has since then returned to normality, although there have been infrequent disruptions. These, however, have not been widespread or protracted as the previous one.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 382
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 08 March 2013
382. Mrs N W A Michael (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(a) What was the original process regarding the conversion of temporary employees to full-time employment, as set out in South African Airways (SAA) letter to South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU) dated 29 February 2012 and (b) how many temporary employees had been converted to full-time employees by SAA in terms of this process by (i) 30 April 2012, (ii) 30 November 2012 and (iii) since 1 December 2012? NW529E
Reply:
According to South African Airways (SAA):
(a) Over the years SAA Cargo (SAAC), which is a division of SAA, has been operating with a headcount of about 805 employees. The numbers have been fairly consistent since 1999, following a series of restructuring processes across SAA. There was then a corporate strategic directive to structure the human capital ratio in terms of permanent and non-permanent employees within the approved structure at 80/20 in 1999. Initially the non-permanent portion was resourced through Labour brokers.
However, the labour brokers were phased out as a consequence of a collective bargaining process. In this regard, in 2009 SAA and organised labour signed agreements regarding the phasing out of labour brokers in the company. Subsequently the phasing out process was implemented and employment contracts (albeit for a fixed-term) were signed with contractor employees directly. As from the 1st of August 2010 the contracted employees are employed by SAA.
One of the trade unions placed the issue of the conversion on the agenda. This necessitated the company to re-look at their workforce planning for its operations. Various divisions assessed their respective operations to ascertain whether there was a need for additional human resources. One such division was SAAC. As at February 2012, SAAC's number of employees was around 805 of which 274 had been on fixed-term bases.
During the continuous engagements between SAAC and organised labour, there was an agreement to:
· convert 200 employees to permanent employment; and
· extend the fixed-term contracts of the remaining 74.
(b) (i) April 2012 = 20
(ii) 01 May - 30 November 2012 = 490
(iii) 01 December 2012 – 28 February 2013 = 3
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 310
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 March 2013
310. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether the SA Airways has made a profit on all its existing international routes; if not, which routes are not profitable? NW388E
Reply:
According to South African Airways (SAA):
SAA currently operates to 11 international destinations out of its Johannesburg hub, O.R Tambo International Airport. The information on profitability and non-profitability of routes SAA flies cannot be made public as that will compromise its financial position in highly competitive environment. However, the international routes contribute in the region of 30% in terms of revenue to both domestic and regional routes.
Reply received: April 2013
QUESTION NO.: 309
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 01 March 2013
309. Mr N J J van R Koornhof (Cope) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether the SA Express has made a profit on all its existing domestic routes; if not, which routes are not profitable? NW387E
Reply:
According to SA Express (SAX):
22 of its 24 routes are profitable. The information regarding which routes are non-profitable cannot be disclosed as it is commercially sensitive and may compromise SAX' financial position in a highly competitive environment.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 224
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 February 2013
224. Mr J F Smalle (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) What is the (a) original and (b) actual (i) cost and (ii) generating capacity of the Ingula Peaker Plant project;
(2) what will be the cost of electricity generation per unit once the plant is fully operational;
(3) whether the project experienced any delays; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether any penalties were levied against the contractor for delays on this project; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW240E
Reply:
According to Eskom:
(1)(a) R17, 1 billion is the budgeted amount excluding interest during construction and transmission costs. This was provided for in the Multi-Year Price Determination 2 submission in September 2009.
(b)(i) The actual current estimated cost, excluding interest during construction and transmission costs is R25, 9 billion.
(b)(ii) Ingula is contracted to generate a total of 1 332MW once the plant is fully operational and it will consist of four units of 333MW each.
(2) The cost of electricity generation per unit, once the plant is fully operational is estimated at R1, 246/MWh.
(3) The business case used for the MYPD 2 submission in September 2009 assumed that all four units would be commissioned in the second six months of 2014. Currently the units are expected to be commissioned for operation towards the end of 2014 but running into the first six months of 2015. As this is an underground water pumping scheme, all units must be fully commissioned before any power generation can take place from the scheme (first six months of 2015).
The delays and subsequent cost impact have arisen mainly as a result of:
• Unforeseen geological conditions that occurred and required re-design and
testing of cable bolts and anchors;
• Unforeseen geological faults in the main turbine hall that delayed mining
operations;
• Dealing with unforeseen excessive water in the outlet tunnels;
• Repairs required due to cracks in the buttress in the machine hall;
• Lower than anticipated levels of productivity due to labour dispute issues; and
• General schedule integration issues.
(4) Currently no penalties have been levied as the delays were, in the main, due to unforeseen conditions. All contracts on Ingula are the New Engineering Contract (NEC3) suite of contracts and all delays are handled as prescribed by the contract.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 179
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 February 2013
179. Dr G W Koornhof (ANC) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether, with regard to the recent increase in financial loss at the SA Airways (SAA), he intends to (a) define a clear vision and mandate for SAA, (b) stimulate a demand for SAA and (c) encourage more South Africans to exchange road travel for air travel; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? NW184E
Reply:
(a) As part of its Long-Term Strategy development, the South African Airways (SAA) Board will review all aspects of the SAA Group's Business Model. This includes articulating a bold new vision for the sustainable future of the airline which will be consistent with their mandate and Strategic Objectives as a strategic state asset.
(b) The expectation is that the new business model will stimulate an even greater demand for SAA, Mango and SA Express (SAX) passenger and cargo services.
(c) it must be a key objective of this model to strongly encourage South Africans to
exchange road travel.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 178
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 February 2013
178. Dr G W Koornhof (ANC) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
What is the comparable available information for South African Airways (SAA) for the period 2001-02 and 2011-12 with regard to (a) the rand price per litre for jet-fuel, (b) labour costs in cents per available seat kilometre, (c) fleet age in respect of average age in years of SAA aircraft, (d) SAA net earnings in rand figures per annum and (e) passenger kilometres as a percentage of available seat kilometres? NW183E
Reply:
According to SAA:
(a-e) The comparative information for South African Airways on rand price per liter for jet-fuel, labour costs in cents per available seat kilometer (km), SAA earning per annum, fleet age in respect of average age in years of SAA aircraft and passenger km percentage of available seat, is attached in Annexure A.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 177
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 February 2013
177. Dr G W Koornhof (ANC) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
Whether the financial statements of Mango for the 2011-12 financial year will be made public; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NW182E
Reply:
According to South African Airways (SAA):
Mango, as a subsidiary of SAA, reports its annual financial results in the consolidated Annual Financial Statements of the SAA Group. This manner of consolidated reporting is aligned with the remainder of the SAA Group, as well as to the consolidated reporting of other Schedule 2 SOCs; and is also on par with the disclosure level of JSE listed entities such as Comair. A level of disclosure beyond that of direct competitors places the entity at a commercial disadvantage within a highly competitive market.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 176
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 22 February 2013
176. Adv A de W Alberts (FF Plus) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) How much funding has been spent by (a) Transnet and (b) Eskom respectively on advertising in (i) national, (ii) regional and (iii) local newspapers since 2009 until the latest date for which information is available;
(2) How much funding has been spent by (a) Transnet and (b) Eskom respectively on advertising on (i) the various state television channels and (ii) e.tv since 1 January 2009? NW177E
Reply:
According to Transnet:
1(a)(i-iii) In 2009, Transnet did not spend on advertising in national, regional and local newspapers. Since 2010 until the latest date for which information is available, Transnet spent R109 023 306.06 on advertising in national, regional and local newspapers.
2(a)(i-ii) Since 1 January 2009 Transnet spent R32 936 669.01 on advertising in broadcast media.
According to Eskom:
(1)(b)(i-iii)(2)(i-ii) The table below indicates Eskom's advertising costs in newspapers and television For Year Ending (FYE) 2009 to Year to Date (YTD) 2013.
| FYE 2008/09 | FYE 2009/10 | FYE2010/11 | FYE 2011/12 | YTD 2013 (1 April 2012 to Jan 2013) | |
| (1)(b) Newspapers Total | R23 830 308 | R9 510 604 | R24 831 966 | R31 324 321 | R49 594805 |
| (i) National | R12 147 469 | R5 706 197 | R12938115 | R15 988 346 | R32 912 728 |
| (ii) Regional | R6 481 063 | R2 853 098 | R8 169 057 | R8 756 392 | R8 611 598 |
| (iii) Local | R5 201 776 | R951 309 | R3 724 794 | R6 579 583 | R8 070 479 |
| (2)(b)Television Total | R37 079 226 | R33 276 027 | R39 474 068 | R58 704 666 | R77 703 576 |
| (i) State Television Channels (SABC) | R36708 226 | R28 906 447 | R28 623 914 | R39 592 953 | R56 154 789 |
| (ii) eTV | R371 000 | R4 369 580 | R10 850 154 | R19 111 713 | R21 548 787 |
| Grand Total | R60 909 534 | R42 786 631 | R64 306 034 | R90 028 987 | R127 298 381 |
The above television costs are inclusive of "Power Alert" which is an unbranded public announcement of the constraints on the power system at different times. The noticeable increase since FYE 2011/12 is because of the extending of Power Alert announcements to ETV and DSTV to reach audiences that do not watch SABC. In the newspapers, the increase reflects amongst others advertising costs in new publications.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 151
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 February 2013
151.Dr L L Bosman (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) How many legal matters were dealt with by his department (a) in the (i) 2009-10, (ii) 2010-11 and (iii) 2011-12 financial years and (b) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) (a) how many of the specified legal matters were dealt with by (i) the State Attorney and (ii) private attorneys during the specified periods and (b) what are the reasons why his department was not represented by the State Attorney in each specified case;
(3) what total amounts were paid by his department to (a) the State Attorney and (b) private attorneys during the specified periods? NW157E
Reply:
(1)(a)(i-iii)(b) The table below indicates a number of legal matters that were dealt with by the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) from 2009 to 2013.
| Year | Labour Matters | Other Matters |
| 2009/10 | 2 | 4 |
| 2010/11 | 1 | 6 |
| 2011/12 | 2 | 2 |
| 2012/13 | 2 | 1 |
In 2009/10
(2)(a)(i-ii) One labour matter was dealt with by the State Attorney and the other by a private attorney who was on the Department's panel of attorneys.
(b) It was in the interests of expediency that the other matter be dealt with by a private attorney given the capacity constraints at the time in the office of the State Attorney, which would have required the office of the State Attorney to procure the services of a Counsel (Advocate) to handle the matter on behalf of the Department.
Three of the other matters were dealt with by the State Attorney. The fourth matter was handled by a private attorney due to the fact that the State Attorney's office could not assist.
In 2010/11
(a)(i-ii)(b) The labour matter was dealt with internally by the Department and it was not necessary for the Department to seek external legal assistance.
Three (3) of the matters were dealt with by the State Attorney. The fourth matter was jointly held by the State Attorney and the private attorney. This matter was initially handled by the State Attorney but because of its complexities as it continued, it became necessary to use a private law firm specialising in intellectual property law.
The two other matters were corporate commercial transactions requiring commercial law expertise. The office of the State Attorney could not assist in this regard.
In 2011/12
(a)(i-ii) One matter was dealt with internally by the Department and the other matter was dealt with by a private law firm which is on the Department's panel of attorneys.
(b) Initially, the matter was referred to the office of the State Attorney for advice. However upon realising that the State Attorney wanted to procure a Counsel (Advocate) to handle the matter, the Department decided to withdraw the instructions given to the office of the State Attorney and employed the services of an attorney from its panel in consideration of costs (as it is cost effective to use an attorney vs an Advocate). In addition this decision was taken in consideration of the Department's empowerment initiatives.
01 April 2012 to 31 January 2013
(a)(i-ii) There were no labour matters during this period and the other matter was dealt with by the Department's in-house lawyers.
(3)(a-b) The table below indicates the amounts paid by DPE to the State Attorney and private attorneys during the specified periods.
| Year | State Attorney | Private Attorneys |
| 2009/10 | R2 073 721.95 | R235 936.33 |
| 2010/11 | R5 233 357.09 | R692 036.02 |
| 2011/12 | R1 875 126.19 | R2 075 228.55 |
| April 2012- Jan 2013 | R275 355.72 | - |
| Total | R9 457 560.95 | R3 003 200.09 |
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 118
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 February 2013
118. Mr I M Ollis (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) Whether (a) his department and (b) any entities reporting to him paid any bonuses to senior officials in December 2012; if so, in each specified case, (i) to whom and (ii) what amount was paid;
(2) Whether the specified bonuses were performance-based; if not, what is the justification for each bonus; if so, in each case, from which budget were the performance bonuses paid;
(3) Whether, in each case, (a) a performance agreement was signed with the official and (b) regular performance assessments were conducted; if not, why not, in each case; if so, what are the relevant details in each case? NW124E
Reply:
(1)(a-b)(i-ii) No, neither the Department of Public Enterprises nor any entities reporting to it paid bonuses to senior officials in December 2012.
(2-3) Not applicable.
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 85
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 February 2013
85. Dr H C Schalkwyk (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(a) How many tickets did (i) his department and (ii) any of its entities purchase to attend business breakfasts hosted by a certain newspaper (name furnished) (aa) in the (aaa) 2010-11 and (bbb) 2011-12 financial years and (bb) during the period 1 April 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available and (b) what was the total cost in each case? NW91E
Reply:
With the exception of Alexkor, Broadband Infraco and SAFCOL all other State Owned Companies (SOC) reporting to the Department purchased tickets to attend business breakfasts hosted by the newspaper referred to.
Information in relation to DPE and other State Owned Companies (SOC) is provided below:
DPE
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by the Department of Public Enterprises from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did the Department of Public Enterprises purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 |
| 20 tickets | None | None | R14 261.40 (20 tickets) |
Denel
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by Denel from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did Denel purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 |
| 30 tickets | R7 130.00 (10 tickets) | None | R14 261.00 (20 tickets) |
Eskom
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by Eskom from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did Eskom purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 |
| 100 tickets | None | None | R71 307.00 |
SAA
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by SAA from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did SAA purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 |
| 10 tickets | none | none | R7 130.00 (10 tickets) |
SAX
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by SA Express (SAX) from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did SAX purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 |
| 10 tickets | None | None | R 7130.00 (10 tickets) |
Transnet
The table below indicates amounts and tickets purchased by Transnet from 2010 to 2013.
| (a)(i) How many tickets did Transnet purchase to attend breakfasts hosted by the referred to newspaper? | (aa)(aaa)(b) In 2010/11 | (aa)(bbb)(b) In 2011/12 | (bb)(b) In 1 April 2012 to February 2013 | |
| 160 tickets | None | R7 130 (10 tickets) 11/11/2011 | R21 390.00 (30 tickets) 12/04/2012 | |
| R 21 390.00 (30 tickets) 17/05/2012 | ||||
| R21 390.00 (30 tickets) 10 /02/2012 | ||||
| R7 130.00 (10 tickets) 20/08/2012 | ||||
| R28 522.80 (40 tickets) 13/11/2012 | ||||
| R7 130.00 (30 tickets) 16/02/2012 |
Reply received: March 2013
QUESTION NO.: 35
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14 February 2013
35. Mr J F Smalle (DA) to ask the Minister of Public Enterprises:
(1) What is (a) Eskom's current coal consumption and (b) the year-on-year projected coal consumption up to and including 2016;
(2) how much coal has Eskom secured for delivery year on year in relation to its projected coal needs? NW37E
Reply:
(1)(a-b) Eskom's current coal consumption and the year-on-year projected coal consumption up to and including 2017 is provided in the table below.
| Volume | YTD | Projected figures | ||||
| (until January 2013) 2012/13 | FY 2013/14 | FY 2013/14 | FY 2014/15 | FY 2015/16 | FY 2017/18 | |
| Coal Consumption (Mt)* | 103.0 | 123.39 | 127.28 | 129.56 | 133.19 | 133.81 |
*Figures reflected are per annum Mt= Million tons
(2) Eskom's strategy is to secure at least 80% of the coal consumption over a 5-year period. For financial years 2013/14 and 2014/15, Eskom has exceeded its minimum 80% coal consumption target in that the State Owned Company has secured 100% and 95% respectively of its coal requirements.
In its strategy, Eskom caters for fluctuations for its burn requirements which arise from changes in the electricity demand and current power station availability in respect of maintenance schedules. It is prudent therefore, for a large utility such as Eskom, not to fully contract its coal requirements.