Question no

QUESTION 893

DATE OF PUBLICATION: Friday, 30 May 2008

INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 15 of 2008

Mr S J F Marais (DA) to ask the Minister of Home Affairs:
(1) Whether, with regard to her department’s refusal to issue an identity document (ID) to a certain person (name and details furnished) as a result of her disability, her ID has been issued; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether any action has been taken against those responsible for refusing to issue the said person with the ID; if not, why not; if so, what action;
(3) whether her department has introduced any measures to ensure that this type of discrimination does not occur in the future; if not, why not; if so, what measures;
(4) whether her department has any policy in place to treat persons with disabilities, especially those without hands to make up for the finger print requirements; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

5. 
   whether her department consults persons with disabilities when deciding on policies and/or regulations; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
   

NW1585E

REPLY

1. 
   Yes. An Identity Document (ID) has been issued on 5 May 2008, and it was hand-delivered to the said person by the Office of the Director-General. It must, however, be clearly stated that the Department of Home Affairs never refused to issue an ID to the said person, as she had, already, had an ID issued to her, before. The latest application, under question, was an application for the re-issue of an ID.
   

2. 
   As stated above, the Department never refused to issue an ID to the said person, and an ID was re-issued on 5 May 2008. However, disciplinary steps, pursuing the manner by which the applicant was handled, have been instituted, in terms of the Departmental Disciplinary Procedures, against the official who attended the said person.
   

(3) Yes. The Department will, again, make all of its officials aware of its policy relating to applicants with any type of disability. It will, furthermore, continue to ensure that the policy is correctly applied when persons without arms, or hands submit applications for IDs through ongoing training.

(4) Yes. The Department of Home Affairs has existing policy in place on how to attend to, and assist clients with such disabilities. The following policy is in place:

• 
  If an applicant has a disability, such as no hands, fingerprints cannot be taken but an application (BI-9 application form – first application for an identity document) will be completed, photos of the applicant will be attached to the application form and on the demographic side of the BI-9 application form (where fingerprints are taken), space is provided for reasons why the applicant’s fingerprints cannot be taken.
  

• 
  With the new HANIS (Home Affairs National Identification System) system, the applicant’s identity document number, personal particulars as well as a photograph of the applicant will be stored on its permanent database.
  

(5) Yes. For example, in 2007, the Department consulted with the Society for the Blind and stemming from these consultations, the Department was able to translate all application forms into braille. These application forms were then handed to the said society for assistance to its members when services or documents, from the Department of Home Affairs, are required.

QUESTION NO: 894

MR J SELFE (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES:

(1) Whether the Department of Correctional Services makes use of private security firms; if so, how much money was spent on such firms in 2007? ;

(2) Whether these firms are used on a contractual basis; if so, (a) how many contracts did the Department of Correctional Services take out in this regard in 2007, (b) with which firms were these contracts taken out, (c) for what specific purpose was each contract taken out and (d) what was the value of the contract in each case;

(3) Why is there a need for the Department of Correctional Services to use a private security firm as opposed to state security?

REPLY

1. 
   Yes, the Department of Correctional Services made use of one private security firm and an amount of R59, 371.798 was spent in the 2007/2008 financial year.
   

2. 
   Yes, the firm is used on a contractual basis.
   

1. 
   Only one contract was taken out in 2007 which will be valid for a four year period.
   

2. 
   The contract is with the company Sondolo IT.
   
3. 
   The contract makes provision for the staffing of security control rooms from where the integrated security systems are monitored.
   

4. 
   The value of the contract is calculated at R5,3 million per month or ± R64,2 million per annum. Over the four year period the contract value will amount to ±R256,9 million.
   

3. 
   The outsourcing of the staff manning the security control rooms was done for the following reasons:
   

• 
  To minimize the possibility of the collusion by staff manning the control rooms and staff working at Correctional Centres.
  

• 
  The transfer of risk in the case of the replacement of damaged equipment and dealing with personnel problems.
  

• 
  The transfer of the risk of budgeting for fluctuating fees with regard to staffing issues. This option showed improved value for money.
  

QUESTION NUMBER: 895
DATE PUBLICATION: 30 MAY 2008
DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: 28 AUGUST 2008
MR M M SWATHE (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY:

1. 
   Whether the Presidency makes use of private security firms; if so, how much money was spent on such firms in 2007;
   

2. 
   Whether these firms are used on a contractual basis; if so, (a) how many contracts did the Presidency take out in 2007, (b) with which firms were these contracts taken out, (c) for what specific purpose was each contract taken out and (d) what was the value of the contract in each case;
   

3. 
   Why is there a need for the Presidency to use a private security firm as opposed to state security?
   

NW1588E
REPLY:

1. 
   The Presidency does not make use private security firms.
   
   
   
2. 
   N / A
   
   
   
3. 
   N / A
   

QUESTION NO 896
DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: WEDNESDAY, 25 JUNE 2008
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 30 MAY 2008 (INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 15 – 2008)
Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:
(1) Whether his department makes use of private security firms; if so, how much money was spent on such firms in 2007;
(2) whether these firms are used on a contractual basis; if so, (a) how many contracts did his department take out in 2007, (b) with which firms were these contracts taken out, (c) for what specific purpose was each contract taken out and (d) what was the value of the contract in each case;
(3) why is there a need for his department to use a private security firm as opposed to state security?

NW1589E

REPLY:
The Minister of Transport:
(1) Yes, the Department of Transport (DoT) made use of a private security firm in 2007. The amount paid to the security firm for the 2007/08 financial year is R1 094 126, 40.
(2) (a) and (b)
Yes, the DoT used one security firm, namely Protea Security Services, on a contract basis in 2007.
(c)
Protea Security Services rendered security services at the DoT’s office building, i.e. the Forum Building at the corner Struben and Bosman Streets in Pretoria.
(d)
The amount paid to the security firm for the 2007/08 financial year is R1 094 126, 40.
(3) State Security Agencies are used for guarding selected government areas and properties.
It is not within the mandate of the State Security Agencies to provide and render guarding security services to the building of the Department of Transport, hence the private security firm was contracted.


QUESTION NO. 897
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: 30 MAY 2008

(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 15)

Ms S J Loe (DA) to ask the Minister of Health:

(1) Whether her department makes use of private security firms; if so, how much money was spent on such firms in 2007;

(2) whether these firms are used on a contractual basis; if so, (a) how many contracts did her department take out in 2007, (b) with which firms were these contracts taken out, (c) for what specific purpose was each contract taken out and (d) what was the value of the contract in each case;

(3) why is there a need for her department to use a private security firm as opposed to state security?

NW1590E

REPLY: