Universal Service and Access Agency 2012/13 Annual Report, Independent Communication Authority Annual Report briefing postponed

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks
The Chairperson noted an apology from the Minister and Deputy Minister for their absence.

He noted that the meeting planned on Thursday 17 October, for short listing for the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) had been postponed until reports were received. The Committee would need to meet with the Department of Communications (DoC) regarding the comments of the Auditor-General (AG). He reminded Members that the Committee still needed to deliberate on the Electronic Communications Act (ECA) and Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) Act amendments.

Mr A Steyn (DA) requested that the Chairperson clarify to all Members what was being done about the bills.

The Universal Service and Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA) 2012/13 Annual Report briefing
Ms Pumla Radebe, Chairperson of USAASA, introduced her delegation and made some opening remarks. She said that circumstances that prevailed over the previous financial year should be considered when looking at the report. USAASA had done well do deliver on its mandate and had actually met most of the targets.

Ms Makhotso Moiloa, Executive Manager: Performance Management, USAASA, presented the Annual Reports for USAASA and the Universal Service and Access Fund (USAF) report.. There were four USAF projects, namely:
- Digital Terrestrial Television Project (DTT), which was not achieved,
-the access centres project, which was partially achieved when 104 centres out of a target of 120 centres were established
-handover/connectivity upgrade, which was not achieved
-Broadcasting Digital Migration (BDM) project which was achieved.

The DTT target was not achieved because of the USAASA dependency on the Department of Communications (DoC or the Department)

The majority of the USAASA targets – implementation of the Universal Service and Access Strategy, stakeholder facilitation and management in support of mandate, information technology, legal advisory, implementation of corporate governance model, the internal audit review, financial management – were achieved. Only two targets – Fund operating guidelines and human resource support – were partially achieved. The basis of the Fund manual was achieved but the rest were not achieved.

On the human resources side, a  project was deferred due to the requirement for USAASA to align with the National Strategy on Universal Service and Access. USAASA conducted a skills audit to get a better overview of what gaps it needed to close. There had been achievement in legal advisory services and the corporate governance model  and attention had been paid to the Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) and lease agreement. Disciplinary hearings were held in appropriate matters, which had helped the organisation to move forward. The Internal Audit Review was achieved as planned and compliance matters dealt with.

In summary, USAASA achieved 85% of targets spent 98.11% (excluding depreciation) of its budget.

USAF had not done so well on the achievements: 50% of the targets were achieved and 66.17% was spent on the budget (this excluded DTT budget). She noted, however, that DTT comprised more than 80% of the total USAF budget. In order to mitigate these results, USAASA had completed the work that it needed to do to address underperformance. It had developed standard operating procedures. It would, for the first time, have a Fund manual that would be published for  public consultation.

She noted again that the DTT progress depended significantly upon the Department for manufacturers. USAASA had mapped the access gaps and postal offices against the income groups that earned below R 3 200 per month. USAASA had indicated to the Department what resources it needed for the DTT project. It was imperative that the systems were integrated between Post Office, Pastel Evolution and SABC.

In relation to the broadband infrastructure, USAF was given orders not to implement it this year. Two Broadband projects had been funded for the 2013/2014 financial year. The project would help close a lot of gaps for growth in the country. She said new access centres were being deployed as she spoke as  140 sites had been established in total. Some projects were rolled over into the new financial year.

The cyber-labs which were established were a combination of community and educational centres. The pie chart in the presentation (see attached document) showed what would be found in the community centres – computers, furniture, cabling and networking, airtime and printing, Internet and Wi-Fi hotspots, telephones and community services. The Personal Computers and Internet alone were not sustainable in these communities, and USAASA had to include electricity and other facilities to meet the needs of the community. The educational institutions established aimed to keep things educational, and also have extra equipment such as projector screens and multi-functional printers. For big centres and in special cases, more than 21 PCs were provided for these technology schools. 80 centres were revived around the country, at the request of the E-institute.  This enabled preservation of jobs that were at risk of being lost. Many of these centres provided full time employment, mostly for women.

The National Strategy on Universal Service and Access provided information analyses and international benchmarking, and access gap mapping, to develop a strategy for USAF and ICASA responses to the mandate of the National Development Fund. For the first time in history, National Treasury could use the report. Looking at phase 1 of the analysis, the demand for connectivity services was high, but affordability was a challenge. This prohibited progress and growth. She mentioned that co-ordination in the Universal Access Strategy was not clear, which posed a problem. Proper monitoring and evaluation had been lacking. Wireless connection could be a solution to this. Under phase 2 of access gap mapping, 2G (voice), access and coverage was high from a population point of view but not a geographical point of view. Not all government institutions were connected either, which was a big surprise. She said significant work must be done. The biggest gap was in the 3G (mobile) connectivity case. Approximately R7 billion must be invested to close the gap, just to provide accessibility; whether it was used or not was a different issue.

Ms M Shinn (ANC) interrupted to check whether the figures were costed in rands or dollars.

Ms Moiloa replied that even though USAASA noted most costs in dollars, this particular figure was in rands.

She continued that the biggest deficit in connectivity was in the Eastern Cape, the Free State and Limpopo provinces. She said these areas must be prioritized. On broadcasting penetration, she noted that not all areas in the country got reception of all the SABC channels. With postal services outlay against population, the picture would get worse in the space of broadband, according to the Postal Services Review. Approximately 250 towns required points of presence to meet rural areas and this amounted to 150 municipalities requiring infrastructure. In year 1 of implementation the aim was to look at 30 towns and increase over the following years, in increments of ten per year.

USAASA would pay attention to 982 schools for disabled persons. USAASA was in talks with Sentech for broadcasting master-planning to inform annual performance plans for the next five years. The Fund Manual intended to provide procedures and guidelines for USAF, aligned with good governance and auditing. The guidelines would speak to effecting project management skills required to disperse these skills.

USAF would continue to comply with Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) regulations. She said USAASA needed to be realigned so that USAF completed what it needed to achieve.

Moving on to the audit report findings, Ms Moiloa said that in regard to the USAF, the Auditor-General (AG) had made material findings around leadership instability, resulting in poor oversight and monitoring of performance; strategic planning & performance reports not submitted in accordance to Treasury regulation; and records management systems that were not able to maintain reliable, accurate and complete information that was easily accessible. USAASA had started to make constructive use of the input of the AG. The R45 million in legal opinions had related to prior years and the process of getting these payments condoned was under way. Other legal processes had been engaged with by the Board. In respect of the R11.5 million relating to trade and other payables, as mentioned by the AG, she  said that this related to existing projects where the AG was not satisfied with documentation provided. USAASA had now managed to provide more detailed documents and verification by the actual centre owners and schools.

She then outlined the audit findings in relation to USAASA itself. The AG had made material findings on the fact that 43% of the targets were not specific and not measurable and 29% of targets were ambiguous. USAASA also had a capacity issue, which it had dealt with. Other AG findings included the fact that expenditure management payments were not settled within 30 days; and goods and services under R 500 000 were procured without obtaining required quotations. With regard to the capacity problem, she noted that a new Chief Financial Officer (CFO) had come on board recently.

In conclusion, Ms Moiloa said that there had been progress in delivering tangibles especially in the last six months, where necessary leadership was instituted. USAASA was making constructive use of the AG inputs and the AG would be checking on its progress in November. Work output on the National Strategy now formed a key component of the ICT Policy Review Process. USAASA had been invited to sit on the Panel as a result of this. The majority of key vacancies had been filled so the issue of leadership stability had been taken care of.

Discussion
Ms M Shinn (DA) asked if the broadband strategy was being handled by the national government entities only. She was appalled that penetration of connectivity was poor. She asked if USAASA had put forward any suggestions to deal with improving connectivity, especially amongst government entities. She commended the fact that no bonuses had been paid to staff, but she did question the very expensive Christmas party, that it had apparently cost R1 200 per head.

Ms Shinn asked when the USAF operation guidelines report would be out for public consultation. She also asked what the scheme was for paying the Board members. She asked what the performance payments on page 81 of the Annual Report were for. She asked about the status of criminal charges and disciplinary hearings listed on page 83 of the Annual Report. She asked about the late payments of PAYE and Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) for employees. She asked what disciplinary steps were taken and what the status was for each of the criminal charges against these staff members.

Ms J Kilian (DA) noted that targets seemed to have changed since the previous time USAASA had come to present to the Portfolio Committee. She requested USAASA to break down the changes on targets made and asked for clarity on these moving targets, for accountability purposes. She referred to the connected site service provider, who should have been paid only after service had been delivered, and asked if there were proper procedures in place to ensure that payment was processed only once it had been verified that the work had been completed.

Ms Kilian wanted to address the issue of management because the Portfolio Committee has taken note of the wasteful expenditure. She wanted to see everything being done according to the targets. In relation to the note that the legal advice target had been “achieved” she pointed out that in fact there were still outstanding cases. She asked USAASA to give a guarantee that everything possible was done to ensure that there would be no more CCMA hearings. In relation to the labour hearing with the Acting Executive: Business Development Services, she asked if USAASA was sure that there would be no come-back on the CCMA hearings.

Ms Kilian asked again why USAASA reported 200 sites established in March but now it had reported 120. She asked what the establishing element was for those sites that were being currently established.

In respect of the Mthinte Communications contract she noted the forensic report by Gobodo and asked for a report on the details of the findings, because there were huge shortcomings. She asked why Sentech could not conclude connectivity on time. In relation to page 24 of the presentation slides, she asked what the criteria were for selecting the districts in the provinces, for improving broadband connectivity.

Mr A Steyn (DA) said that he found it problematic that there seemed to be information in the presentation which was not in the actual Annual Report. He referred to Page 5 of the presentation and page 22 of the Annual Report, saying the target for “subsidising integration of broadband connectivity sites in rural areas” was not mentioned in the Annual Report. He further noted that “internal audit review” was marked as “achieved”, according to page 8 of the presentation, but page 34 of the Annual Report highlighted shortcomings with internal audit report so there seemed to be a contradiction there. Page 11 of presentation slides showed that USAASA achieved 85% of its targets. However, according to the Annual Report, USAASA did not achieve 43% of the targets as reported by the AG. He asked how USAASA measured the 85% if there was no supporting evidence and documentation.

Mr Steyn was curious to know whether, in respect of page 40 of the Annual Report, USAASA used information from Stats SA for its proxies for qualifying criteria. He added that in the presentation there was information on deployment of cyber-labs, but this too was not mentioned in the Annual Report.

Mr Steyn referred to the USAASA vision and mission and asked whether USAASA thought it would achieve its vision to achieve connectivity throughout the country, given that there has been little progress over the years, and the budget was not enough for it to achieve so much. He asked when the documents on the Turn-around Strategy document mentioned in pages 11 and 13 of the Annual Report would be made available to the Portfolio Committee. He also asked about deviations from planned targets that Ms Kilian had addressed. He added that information about revitalised centres was not included in the Annual Report. He was disappointed that USAASA did not spend 38% of remainder of the CAPEX budget  on the ERP accounting software. He noted that CAPEX projects were usually done in stages and he would have like to see this money spent for that year and carry on with payments over the next financial years.

Mr Steyn further noted the difference in employee numbers, between one year and the next, for the Annual Report, and was confused on this point. He commented on the spelling errors on page 48 of the Annual Report and expressed his surprise that it was not picked up. He asked about the legal fees on page 78 of the Annual Report, which had increased by R1.3 million. He asked what the stabilisation expenses of R 3 m were for. He asked from page 81 of annual report why someone with an acting executive position for 3 months received higher pay in relation to one who had filled in the position for 12 months. He asked about the huge discrepancy in compensation. He asked why the settlements for resignations were so high.

Mr Steyn asked about fruitless and wasteful expenditure on Pages 81, 83, and 85 and inquired why no one was held responsible for some cases; he referred, in particular to the Protea Hotel venue booking, where training was organised with no attendance. There were payments made without a contract. He said these could be avoided if good business practices were followed. He said that he did not expect so many inefficiencies from USAASA. He urged that the oversight and leadership be enhanced. He said USAASA should not still be having the same type of issues for so many years, since it was a well-established organisation by now.

Ms R Morutoa (ANC) felt that the USAASA Chairperson had deviated from the undertaking.  She said that she was not confused by the Report as the presentation summarized the Annual Report well and provided details. She said USAASA had come a long way, but was worried as to how USAASA incurred so many costs. She asked why USAASA had incurred this increased fruitless and excess expenditure of R3.195 million. She commented on the AG’s statement that failed to adhere to National Treasury regulations. She asked why this was so. She asked what USAASA had done about its financial goals. She asked how the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) services could be made readily available, accessible and affordable. She asked what USAASA had done about the programme structure goals that it was intending to work on. She said she was not satisfied with what has been recorded in the report. She asked for more elaboration on progress.  She wanted to know what exactly made it difficult for USAASA to meet all its goals. She wanted more explanation on the point that phase 2 of new access centres has come to an end”.

Mr G Schneemann (ANC) said that the AG raised a lot of issues of leadership instability that had resulted in poor oversight. He said the findings of the AG should not be taken lightly. He said that if there were correct structures in places, there should not be so many issues identified by the AG. He said USAASA needed to be careful how it used selected statements from the AG in the presentation, because in fact these were not a proper representation of all inputs by AG. He, like Mr Steyn, felt that the presentation did not reflect fully what was in the Annual Report, and commented that it also fell short and did not provide much detail. He said that a lot more work needed to be done around financial controls.

Mr Schneemann referred to slide 28 and asked whether there was no way possible that the target of establishing 50 new sites per year could be established in less than the proposed 5-year period.

Ms Radebe responded firstly on staff questions. There were no records of USAASA having a Christmas party, because there was not one. The discrepancies in salaries paid were affected by performance payments. The settlements upon resignation differed, depending on the relevant terms of agreement in the employment contracts. The financial statements for the next year would reflect some payments from the current financial year. She explained that documentation for criminal charges was with the South African Police Service (SAPS), and she was not sure how far the cases were but she awaited a response, so that action could be taken. She added that most people who were facing criminal charges were not employed by USAASA any more, and that was why USAASA had found it easier to appoint a new Chief Financial Officer. She noted that Winile Lamani was appointed as Acting Executive: BDS because the newly appointed Executive had at the time been placed under suspension.

Ms Radebe pointed out that the Mthinte communications report by Gobodo Forensics was a ministerial assignment and thus she could not make any remarks about this. She said she took Mr Schneemann’s input about the AG input and financial controls with humility, seriousness and with good spirit.

Ms Moiloa responded on the operational questions. USAASA did have plans to close the access gaps and was more than open to give a report on what it proposed to do. She was also shocked about the process of public broadband and would work on improvements. The aim was to be up and running on broadband by the year 2030. Public consultation was supposed to take place by the end of October 2013 but the Department requested USAASA to put this on hold. She explained that the draft meeting would take place next year. She added that USAASA had been instructed by the Department not to continue with broadband sites because it had a rollover request from Treasury so the funds have not been used and it would remain accountable.

In relation to the original figures in the Annual Performance Plan (APP), she noted that 200 centres were in last year’s plans, but this was amended to 120 centres in this year. USAASA could, today report that there had been progress on 140 centres. She apologised for this confusion. She said she would provide details regarding the exact locations of these centres around the country.

Responding to Ms Kilian’s question about outstanding numbers on 22 March 2013, Ms Moiloa explained that what USAASA was reporting was what it had signed off at that point in time, as being complete and confirmed. Sentech sent a letter explaining that it was falling behind with its project and hence it was rolled over to this financial year. The criteria for selecting the areas were those areas that were deemed under-serviced locations according to ICASA. Emalahleni in the Eastern Cape was an example of an under-serviced area.

Ms Moiloa responded to Mr Steyn’s question about the reports not providing enough information by saying that National Treasury regulations dictated what information should appear in the report and how. The regulations limited the amount of information that was reflected. USAASA had a more detailed report that it had also compiled and would send it to the Portfolio Committee. The postal service map showing how many parts of South Africa (SA) were being reached was based on census data and Post Office data. She reiterated that the inadequate information on the Annual Report was a result of National Treasury requirements.

Ms Moiloa agreed that the USAASA vision was a very bold statement. She said the National Development Plan (NDP) consistently was referring to internet connectivity. This vision needed to be fulfilled for South Africa to move forward. Given the deficit in SA, USAASA had no choice but to make the vision real. It was undertaking this vision to make sure that government understood how much investment and work needed to be done in SA. She said that the Portfolio Committee was also a critical stakeholder in this, and USAASA would give the members a report on the progress. Last year USAASA undertook new centres under the RAPID deployment movement, which created new jobs. The 80 revised centres was the handover project and would help people keep their jobs.

Ms Moiloa responded to Ms Morutoa’s question, saying non-compliance with legislation was a result of the discrepancy on the reporting format. The deployment project was completed this year and USAASA was starting a new project for 30 new sites which must be rolled out this coming financial year. In relation to the plan to close gaps by providing 250 towns with 50 points of presence and 150 municipalities with network infrastructure, USAASA could achieve this within five years but only if the finances were readily available to do so. USAASA engaged with the sector stakeholders about this who were responsible, about rolling out much faster.

Mr Zami Nkosi, Chief Executive Officer, USAASA, discussed the question of the USAASA board working on the National Strategy that addressed the gaps. Part of the biggest problem was that with communication, there was not enough infrastructure to increase connectivity, especially in the most rural areas of the country. He noted that this was the first time that USAASA had experience the problem of late payment of PAYE, and UIF, and one employee had been suspended. Persons responsible were being dealt with.

Mr Nkosi said that the definition of a functional site was one that had personal computers that were connected to the internet and had various applications. Verification of this was done through initial project documents that must be filled in, then the school principal had to sign off, verifying that everything was in order. Finally, USAASA would call the school to verify whether this was so. USAASA had done these verifications during the week of 7 October and even visited some of the sites. In relation to the R2.4 million of CAPEX, he commented that what was left was too little to roll out ERP solutions  which cost R15 million to implement. This would help integration of the Post Office, SENTECH, and SABC. He promised that remaining funds would be used. The Department of Communications would provide the rest of the money and procurement was under way.

Mr Nkosi confirmed that on the HR side, the budget head count of employees was 67. 51 were employed when there were vacancies. Critical vacancies were currently being filled. The R1.3 million in legal fees was incurred during the period of disciplinary process. USAASA now had an internal lawyer to deal with such matters. For strategy and research, USAASA had consulted other agencies of the State. The ICT review policy was using the new policy. The work USAASA had to do for the Digital Terrestrial Television (DDT) was still under way, with a R680 million budget. Processes and capacity had to be prepared first. USAASA had a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Post office and this was 99% under way.

Mr Zane Mheyamwa, Chief Financial Officer, USAASA, gave a report on finances. He said that equipment had not been fitted yet. USAASA had created systems to ensure that each time it fitted equipment, it also verified and recorded. With respect to compliance, the AG issues were taken seriously. Every two weeks, USAASA held a meeting to consider all the inputs of the Auditor-General and assessed what progress had been made in accordance with recommendations. The non-compliance was due to lack of policy. USAASA hade since come up with 40 policies to fill the gaps. It had a non-compliance register and a permanent BAE structure to ensure that every compliance structure was taken care of. He was pleased to announce that the financial services department was “going green” and even had a green dashboard to lower its carbon footprint.

Ms R Lesoma (ANC) thanked USAASA for the turn-around strategy (TAS). She asked whether the working hours were capped to prevent people from being paid beyond what was allowed, by them working exorbitant hours. She asked who monitored the DoC. She asked if USAASA had looked into the Thusong Centres that had been deemed not useful. She asked where exactly the rehabilitated centres were located. She asked how it did oversight to monitor the goal to achieve universal success and whether it might, perhaps, view the sites from the air. She asked for elaboration on the sponsoring and asked it USAASA had MOUs and service level agreements with SENTECH, and which framework it was using. The mentioned the risk audit issues in the supply chain, and asked how collusion was prevented.

Mr Schneemann acknowledged the effect of Treasury regulations on the Annual Report format and content. However, he still felt that, even within the bounds of the regulations, USAASA would not be penalised for adding detail to sections that really needed more detail in order to be understandable. For example, the AG would not penalise USAASA for recording on the Annual Reports which of the 98 centres were upgraded. Because of the need for transparency, he said it was important for the reports to be more understandable. He said he hoped that the meetings that took place every two weeks would ensure that the same problems did not come up again in the next financial year.

Ms M Shinn was dissatisfied with the answer about criminal action. She asked for a list of all the people who were being investigated, the name of the police station(s), and what were the cases. She wanted this report within two weeks. She said that culprits could not be allowed to get away with their misdemeanours. She asked when the cases would be conducted. She asked what would be done about the irregular expenditure on travel expenditure, which was an issue even in the 2012 report.

Ms Kilian supported Ms Shinn’s question on criminal cases, saying that not even one person in the public service had been prosecuted for his misdemeanour because they simply resigned when they were caught. This was unacceptable. She also added that the leadership instability should not still be one of the issues next year. She asked if the Executive Manager (EM) of Corporate Services was present at the meeting. To her understanding, that person had been recently suspended, and she wanted an update on that point. She really hoped that there would be no other disciplinary cases. She said the Gobodo investigation report referred to several forensic investigations and she asked if these were different cases. She asked if USAASA was satisfied with its service provider and asked for an explanation why most of the access sites were in the province of Kwa-Zulu Natal (KZN) and how this happened.

Ms Morutoa thanked the team for the responses. She asked that, in the event that USAASA would monitor the internet, whether it would still pay SENTECH for interconnection, even where some centres were not connected. She asked how USAASA dealt with duplication of core mandate of USAASA with other departments, such as the National Youth Development Agency. She asked for clarity on the Auditor-General’s concern that USAASA did not adhere to the Electronic Communications Act over the past three years.

Ms Radebe talked about the capping on remuneration. She said that most expenses were incurred before she arrived at USAASA. The long meetings and workshops for training, induction, and so forth resulted in higher remuneration having to be paid, due to more hours spent at work. She said there were caps on salaries and USAASA was currently working on salary limits. She confirmed that USAASA would provide list of criminal charges and suspended employees to the Portfolio Committee within the next week.

Mr Z Nkosi said he had a subsequent meeting with Government Communications and Information Systems on closing down centres. There were discussions for government to manage these centres. He explained that the rehabilitation of centres was part of the handover project, through Sentech, to fix connectivity. He said USAASA had asked the Board for a system to track connectivity from the USAASA office to cut costs. It had engaged Cell C, Vodacom and MTN to monitor what people were using internet access for. As at 8 October 2013, all the sites were connected. An MOU contract between USAASA and Sentech existed, and he would be grateful to get advice on this. ICASA and USAASA had an agreement to share office space. He said the MOU between USAASA and DTT was 99% complete.

Mr Z Mheyamwa said he was checking the Public Finance Management Act. He accepted Mr Schneemann’s comment about the additional information that USAASA could have included in the annual report. USAASA had a process to improve issues with the Executive Manager of Corporate Services. On the majority of cyber-labs in KZN, reference was made back to the presentation slides which showed that the bulk of cyber-labs were actually in the Eastern Cape and not in the KZN province.

Ms Moiloa admitted that the USAASA mandate was not taking off in the past, but assured Members that now USAASA was taking it on fully and it would take the Portfolio Committee through details of the strategy. She said that USAASA no longer paid Sentech for no connectivity. It had a revised agreement to deliver connectivity all the way through.

The Chairperson asked USAASA to provide a report covering the concerns that the Members raised. He said that it was for the Minister to give report on Gobodo Forensic Report, upon completion. In relation to the jobs created through 80 centres revived, he asked how many jobs were actually created and in which areas. He said that Members would appreciate the more detailed report from USAASA answering these questions. He also asked how many of the sites checked were the revitalised sites. He said that Members were generally satisfied with the responses. He added that the amendments would make USAASA’s work much easier.

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) briefing postponed
The Chairperson explained that Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) had sent a letter to the Portfolio Committee requesting an extension because ICASA did not meet the deadline for submitting the Annual Report. This meant the Report had not been referred to the Committee yet, through the ATC, for it to be finalised. The Chairperson suggested that ICASA present the report on 16 October 2013 if it was already in the ATC. He said that the Members could also deal with the report only as a draft, if they wanted to commence with the meeting.

Ms R Lesoma (ANC) asked how the meeting would start and end, without a report. She asked why the entire ICASA delegation had come here if there was no report. Lastly, she said that commencing the meeting would simply be a Public Relations (PR) exercise, when due processes were not followed by ICASA.

Ms R Morutoa (ANC) asked who was responsible for the annual report not going through the ATC on time.

Ms J Kilian (DA) thanked the Chairperson for giving Members the background on the situation. She said that the meeting should be a formal process, and thus, in her view, there was no point in continuing. She too wanted to know who was responsible for the mishap. She agreed with Ms Lesoma that the meeting should not proceed today. She added that communication should have been stepped up, to reschedule this meeting well in advance, if it was known that the report was not ready, and she asked whether the ICASA delegation planned to fly back to Johannesburg or stay in Cape Town for another day and possibly have a meeting with the Portfolio Committee tomorrow.

Mr Schneemann said he had checked with the Parliamentary administration to confirm whether the report had been tabled with Parliament or not and was awaiting feedback. He thought that Members could engage in informal discussion with the ICASA delegation if they wanted to.

Mr Steyn was concerned about the possible wasteful expenditure for travelling costs incurred for a meeting that could not take place. He agreed that someone should be held responsible, but added that the Portfolio Committee should feel partly responsible. He suggested that the Members proceed with discussing the draft report. He expressed his concern about wasted money, especially since he had been seeing the Chairperson of ICASA in Parliament since the previous week when this person well knew the report had not been tabled yet.

Ms Morutoa requested that someone from ICASA respond. She was not prepared to engage in informal discussions with ICASA. She said there was no time to look at the draft.

Ms Shinn suggested that ICASA be sent home and that the Committee schedule a day and time for the following week, and maybe have fewer Board members fly to Cape Town the next time around, to minimise the expense.

The Chairperson explained that ICASA had failed to table the report on time, following the minimum tabling requirements. He suggested that the meeting take place the following day, 16 October.

Ms Zolisa Xabadiye, Parliamentary Liaison Officer for the Department of Communications, explained that according to the Parliamentary process, the report must be tabled before 12 pm, for presentation on the following day. She said ICASA had not submitted it yet.

Ms Morutoa said that in that case, the people responsible should be held accountable for this mistake due to the fruitless expenditure that had been incurred.

Ms Lesoma maintained that the Committee could not proceed with the meeting. She asked why ICASA was here if it knew it had not met the requirements. She proposed that when the delegation did come back to report, ICASA must report also on the fruitless expenditure incurred on this day.

Mr Schneemann cautioned ICASA that even if a meeting was scheduled for the following day, there was no guarantee that the report would be referred by tomorrow, as the letter indicating the lateness of this report had only just been ATCed.

Ms Morutoa said CASA should be given an opportunity to explain who was responsible.

Dr Stephen Mncube, Chairperson. ICASA, explained that the reason why he came to Parliament without the Report being explained was to honour the Portfolio Committee and listen to the Auditor General. He said that, before coming to the meeting, he had done everything in his power to ensure that the Report would be sent through on time. He noted that this was human error and apologised for the mishap, on behalf of the person responsible. He also apologised to his ICASA colleagues as they came all the way to Cape Town for no reason. He would not attempt to single out one person but would take the blame.

The meeting was adjourned.