SAPS report on Criminal Justice System modernisation, Integrated Case Docket Management System (ICDMS) and Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act (DNA Act) implementation

Meeting report

Committee Researcher Briefing on Technology Management Services (TMS)
Ms Nicolette Van Zyl-Gous, Committee Researcher, took the Committee through her briefing noting that the National Development Plan (NDP) placed significant focus on the implementation of the recommendations of the Review of the SA CJS through the CJS Seven point plan, which was approved in 2007. This process was started in 2005 because departments were working in ‘silos’ with little interaction. It was difficult to track individuals and information through the system. The process was divided into the CJS and Integrated Justice System (IJS) modernisation, for which the funding had since been amalgamated into the CJS Review and Modernisation. Implementation of projects under the Technology Management Services (TMS) of SAPS had been a significant concern for the last couple of years. Enormous amounts of resources had been allocated to the CJS. For the 2014/15 financial year, R1.1 bn was allocated to the CJS projects. It would be interesting to know the amount spent since 2007 to date. The IJS projects, such as PCEM Live Scan and ICDMS, had not performed well, mostly due to its transversal nature, which meant that it had many dependencies on other departments.

In terms of monitoring and oversight, in the 2012 Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR), the Committee started to make specific recommendations regarding reporting requirements. In the 2013 BRRR, the Committee recommended that SAPS must submit detailed project plans to Treasury before funding was allocated. The Minister of Finance accepted this recommendation and provided strict conditions on the CJS revamp programme in the allocation letter to SAPS for the 2014 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period. It stated that failure to comply with the conditions might lead to the withholding of funds and an in-year reduction of the allocation for the CJS programme where spending was significantly lower than planned at the time of the adjusted budget, subject to Parliament’s approval. The CJS funding was not earmarked in the 2015 Appropriations Bill. The Committee should establish the reason. In the 2014 BRRR, the Committee recommended that quarterly reports should be submitted to the Committee. On reporting by SAPS, the manner in which SAPS reported was not conducive to effective oversight. Approximately 70 technology projects were running in the CJS and IJS and it was easy to get caught up in details of individual projects, but some projects had significant challenges and needed close oversight, like PCEM and ICDMS (e-docket). The Committee should request SAPS to provide a broad strategic framework of the CJS/IJS projects and how this fed into the CJS Seven-point Plan (back to basics) and benefits the CJS, expenditure against performance should be clearly stated and there were significant inconsistencies in the reporting over the four quarters of the 2014/15 financial year.

With the budget allocation and expenditure for 2014/15, the allocation was R1.14 bn of which 100% was spent. A comparison of the 3rd and 4th quarter was briefly discussed for CJS and IJS projects. SAPS had a project progress review session in 25 November 2014 and 21 March 2015 during which the budget allocations to projects were adjusted significantly. SAPS should report on the outcomes of the review session and also the reasons for the major shifting of funds for projects. There was significant decreased allocation to the Criminal Record Centre (R109 million) but significant increases to FSL and Provincial, Cluster and Police Stations. The barcode for stations project was allocated a R31 million revised allocation.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous then discussed the investigative case docket management system (ICSDMS) noting that development ended 31 March 2015 and it was completed. With a R85 million allocation, R6.1m was spent in quarter one, R29.8 m in quarter two, R7.9 m in quarter three and R61 m in quarter four Investigate Case deliverables for the first phase was identified but it needed elaboration. The system had an allocation of R3.5m, which was revised on 21 March 2015 to zero allocation. R920 000 was spent in quarter two while R2.2m was spent in quarter three with 100% milestones achieved to date and 133% weighted milestones delivered in Q4 while spending no funds. The system was rolled out to 271 police stations, of which 47 were in the Western Cape and 41 in the Free State. There were questions around the link of the system to the courts and if the reluctance to use the new system had been addressed.

There were a number of pertinent questions around the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act (DNA), 2013, relating to:
▪ Were convicted offenders who were being released from prison being sampled before release? To date, since the promulgation of the Act in January, no convicted offenders had been sampled.
▪ What was SAPS action plan with regard to rolling out training and sampling? How many members were trained and how many samples were taken?
▪ How many reference (buccal) samples had been received at the Forensic Lab since January and how many had been processed? The reference lanes and crime scene lanes set up for processing were not operational, which meant the capacity of the lab had been greatly diminished as they were only processing samples manually and backlogs were already imminent.
▪ What was the challenge with the supply of the DNA processing kits which were used for processing samples - when did they expect this to be resolved and when will its capacity increase? What was current sampling capacity and what was future capacity?
▪ Was SAPS complying with the 30 day turnaround time provided for in the Act to process samples received at the Lab?
▪ What was the STR chemistry that was being employed in DNA Kits and did the chemistry comply with Best International Practice?
▪ What software solution was being used to manage the Database? CODIS was recommended by the previous Parliamentary Committee for dealing with the Act but no decisions had been taken.
▪ How was SAPS loading profiles onto the various indices as per the Act and how were they being expunged?
▪ Composition of the DNA Ethics Board – more detail was needed from SAPS in terms of who the members were, how often they were meeting etc.

Ms D Kohler Barnard (DA) asked if there was there any indication why Lt. Gen Adeline Shezi (SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Technology Management Services) was moved away from the DNA database – she really had the database under control. The Member had faith in her expertise in that position. Now she was suddenly moved. The Member was worried the project would now stall without Lt. Gen Shezi.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous did not know why Lt. Gen Shezi was moved – this could be a question to ask SAPS. She was also a critical part of the establishment of the DNA Act.

The Chairperson asked who was really ultimately responsible for demand and control of the CJS revamp process being spread over many areas. He was concerned by this wide spread.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous said the whole revamp was under the control of the TMS division so the head of this component should take ultimate responsibility. The IJS projects were also located in the TMS where there were several programme management structures. There was also the coordinating CJS/IJS board. For future engagements, she suggested the Committee also call the Board to account.

SAPS briefing on Criminal Justice System (IJS) Division: Technology Management Services
Lt. Gen Adeline Shezi, SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Technology Management Services, began the lengthy presentation by taking the Committee through the planned quarterly budget vs. actual expenditure for the TMS CJS revamp programme for all four quarters of the previous financial year. This information was provided for various projects including capacitation and modernisation of the component criminal record centre, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) replacement – for this specific project, SITA will not be awarded in the current financial year, the anticipated budgeted amount of R30 000 000 had been re-allocated and the project had been included in the CJS revamp plan for 2015/16. The planned quarterly budget vs. actual expenditure for all four quarters of the previous financial year was outlined for the replacement of stolen equipment at the provincial local record centres in Springs and Vryburg and here the anticipated expenditure equalled actual expenditure. The project was completed during the third quarter and the stolen equipment was replaced during September 2014 after security upgrading of the offices were completed.

Lt. Gen Shezi discussed budget and expenditure for the provision of end-user equipment for the newly appointed criminal record centre members where suppliers delivered equipment to the value of R4 806 211. With audio visual and video conferencing, the quotation received for the solution exceeded the initial allocation. An individual amount of R27 498 had been allocated to the project. In terms of electronic plan drawing, a successful bidder had not been appointed by SITA before 31 March 2015 and the allocation of R320 000 had been re-allocated. The project was still a priority and will be included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. For facial compilation, the suppler will not be appointed and in terms of biometric enhancement solution maintenance, more devices will be maintained by SITA than was initially planned for.

Lt. Gen Shezi moved on to look at additional devices for enhancement and presentation of digital latent prints where the expenditure was less than what was anticipated and an amount of R87 780 was re-allocated. For additional devices for panoramic image capturing cameras, an amount of R 44 233 709 was re-allocated. The project was still a priority and included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. There was also a system for integration with the HANIS of Home Affairs - The amount of R62 500 000 was re-allocated. The Department of Home Affairs indicated that they will not conclude the upgrade as planned. The project was still a priority and included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. With the decentralisation of JUDDIS, the expenditure will be less than initially anticipated and an amount of R5 290 237 was re-allocated.

No funds were allocated for the re-prioritised criminal record centre projects included in the SAPS Annual Performance Plan for 2014/15 - The projects had been re-prioritised against the Criminal Record and Crime Scene Management available funding and business priorities and will be re-considered during the planning for the 2015/16 financial year. With the Ballistic Interface Unit (BIU) capabilities, expenditure was less than initially anticipated and this was also the case with Automated Ballistic Identification System (ABIS), end user equipment for the forensic science laboratories, barcode printers for Ri Lane in Cape Town and Arcadia and the Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) and Access Control. With the procurement of iPads, the quotation received for the solution exceeded the initial allocation but the project was completed and 32 iPads were provided for utilisation with the forensic science division.

The expenditure for high resolution cameras for the scientific analysis unit was less than initially anticipated but the project was completed and four high resolution cameras for the scientific analysis unit in Pretoria had been provided enabling the gathering and analysis of evidence. The initial allocation for X-Ray devices was re-prioritised and as a result the requirement for the procurement was cancelled. The project for semi-automated DNA isolation instrument in the DNA Crime Lane in Biology section in Pretoria and Western Cape was completed in the first quarter. The supplier payment was to be finalised for the scientific data management system upgrade once a decision was made on the project finalisation. The outstanding amount on the budget on the expert system and expert assistant system will only be paid once training was completed. Also highlighted was the Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), where the expenditure for the project would be completed will be less that initially anticipated, the mobile cyanoacrylate fuming system where funding of this project was initially included in the forensic services CJS priorities. However, after rep-prioritisation of the budget allocation, the TMS division paid the supplier and tyre-tread ID mark systems where the funding for the project was initially included in the forensic services CJS priorities. After re-prioritisation of the budget allocation, the TMS division paid the supplier.

Lt. Gen Shezi looked at capacitation and modernisation of provincial divisions, clusters, police stations and national divisions, end user equipment procurement, deployment and configuration, capacitation and modernisation of detective services, voice recorded, expansion of digital extraction devices (actual expenditure was 100% against planned expenditure), capacitation and modernisation of Visible Policing (VISPOL), mobile connectivity devices (field terminal devices) expansion and maintenance, the capacitation and modernisation of protection and security services and video wall nerve centre (war room) maintenance.

Discussion
The Chairperson noted the pattern was that many vital technology projects, which were instrumental to improve the fight against crime, were stopped half way or stalled because of other processes– what alternatives could be put in place to jump start these programmes? He was worried about it affecting the ability of SAPS to ensure convictions, make arrests etc.

Ms Riah Phiyega, SAPS National Commissioner, said the dependencies were there and it was a reality that not everyone was moving at the same time and this explained why the CJS was a crucial aspect. DGs at the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster, had profiled the role of the CJS Board very highly in terms of accountability and that processes ran concurrently between departments. The Board was now fully in the Department of Justice and all transversal systems had been migrated to the Board. She was of the opinion that there were some in-roads even with the commitment of finances. The focus just needed to be maintained. More information could be shared with the Committee by the chairperson of the CJS/IJS Board in terms of reengineering and problematic dependencies.
 
Mr Z Mbhele (DA) asked for clarity to understand the sequence of operations - was SAPS going to contribute funds for Home Affairs to upgrade HANIS or was it for SAPS to do its own thing or would there be a collective pot for other departments to contribute to?

Nat. Comm. Phiyega replied that with fingerprints, SAPS kept only criminal fingerprints while Home Affairs kept everything so it was necessary to connect the two so that if there was a fingerprint SAPS did not have, it could check documentation of the individual on the Home Affairs HANIS system. The issue was how to interface the two systems – the R62m was geared towards creating those abilities to interface. SAPS also needed much more than what HANIS was currently capable of so there were more issues to consider in the process. This formed part of the re-scoping engagement between TMS, FSL, Home Affairs, CJS/IJS Board and Treasury.

Gen Phalela added AFIS was SAPS specific mainly to refresh its own internal capabilities. Then came HANIS. In terms of the Act, SAPS was supposed to have access to HANIS because not every citizen would be on SAPS’ database because it only housed those with a criminal record. For purposes of identification, HANIS should be able to be accessed. While integration in terms of the law had not been recognised, there was a mechanism to ensure SAPS could access the system. This was how SA nationals were identified in the collapse of a church in Lagos, Nigeria last year who were not on the criminal database. The cost was escalated because, initially, SAPS was led to believe there were no funds in the baseline of Home Affairs for integration. SAPS then committed, because it was a burning issue, to redirect funds from the CJS. In the process, SAPS received quotations from Home Affairs in the middle of the financial year. Another challenge was that the HANIS contract of Home Affairs was nearing the end of its life. Home Affairs indicated it would be very difficult to continue with integration with the current infrastructure of HANIS which was nearing the end of its life and needed to be refreshed in terms of new equipment and software. This was where the escalation of costs came from where the amount was simply not feasible for SAPS and so Treasury was engaged. SAPS’ own resources were then deployed in Home Affairs to be able to do searches and not be disadvantaged. The first prize was integration and it was never the intention for Home Affairs to have access to AFIS - only SAPS could host and access its criminal records. The issue was that when submitting fingerprints for the ID document, Home Affairs did not need the prints for each finger and this was a problem for SAPS where it needed all 10 fingers active.

Mr L Ramatlakane (ANC) appreciated the degree of frankness in which the presentation was delivered but he was concerned that some of the issues were not necessarily under the control of SAPS but was within the cluster/sector which meant that SAPS management could not always get to the bottom of the problem to find a solution. When he listened to the presentation, he felt compelled to urge that the papers must be closed and there should just be a frank discussion to just talk directly, face-to-face, but it was still good to get all the information. The Committee probably, after listening to the presentation, should invite all the involved role-players needed because some were dragging their feet and were in the culprit category. He was worried that SAPS was doing what it could but it was unable to move unless the whole sector moved. The work was integrated so it did not just rely on SAPS. There was a need for the cluster, led by the police, to look at the percentage of satisfactory completion, of this project, in terms of the money, to get results out of the project. There were problems of capacity in the sector not only in SAPS. Budget and integrated management was key for him. For the Committee, there needed to be an identification of which mechanisms needed to be unblocked for progress to be made – one of which was the SITA issue. He found the issue very painful because one could not take two years to finalise a tender - was this an issue of capacity in SITA? These were just some of the issues to tackle for there to be unblocking so progress could happen in the sector. From where he was sitting, in terms of SAPS specifically, conversation needed to be had on forward-management and planning. All other detail needed to be cut and the heart of the issue should be resolved in one room roundtable with all the role-players otherwise the same problems would still be here next year, especially as some still came from 2007. He would resist asking detailed questions otherwise the Committee would be there all day.

Ms Kohler Barnard noted SAPS Act made reference to comparative searches against databases of other ministries for fingerprints etc, in the detection of crime and for missing person identification. The Act also said that the various DGs of the ministries must develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) regarding access to the databases and safety measures to protect the integrity of the information so that databases may only be accessed in terms of SOPs. The Act did not say anything about integration of the databases and she recalled some people not wanting searches done for trawling of suspects, as it were. She sought some input on these matters to ensure there were no complaints of human rights violations. She asked for the status of the dreaded e-docket system – was it still the unicorn that everyone talked about but no one had seen. She had never seen any station using it. How was the percentage points of the milestones achieved determined? What was the video wall nerve centre and what was the timeline for completion?

Mr Mbhele said the presentation spoke to the back and forth between SAPS and SITA where SITA sent remarks from the review on the bid specifications. He was curious as to what the nature of these remarks were, in general. Was there a problem with SITA communication in that there was a back and forth and was this a major part of systemic challenges? There was no mention of the challenges with the rhino poaching unit in Kruger Park as came up during the Committee’s oversight visit to Mpumalanga. Lt. Gen Vinesh Moonoo (SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Detective Services) alerted Members to problems of cell phone reception where satellite phones were needed to operate in the more remote areas of the Park and issues of thermal visual equipment for night time operation. Were the needs for this project on the radar and if not what was the plan for integration of these challenges? Where was the discussion on links with the court system to allow for seamless operability as the final stage of the chain?

Mr L Twala (EFF) questioned the capacitation of detectives especially with the e-docket system. He was concerned that laptops primarily became typewriters and this did not speak to a system in the office. What was the programme inherent to the Department to create linkages and the ability of the laptop to update systems in the office as back-up. Was this why iPads were being procured because of the failure of laptops? He asked for an update on the status of TETRA.

Ms A Molebatsi (ANC) asked how far the CODIS database was. The previous Fourth Parliament Committee undertook an oversight trip to the forensic labs in Pretoria where the Committee found huge and very expensive machines, some worth R35m, just gathering dust and some were even dismantled – had this situation improved? What was the readiness of SAPS to implement DNA legislation in terms of equipment and capacity?

The Chairperson agreed with Mr Ramatlakane about meeting with the other role players to unblock the total process and assist SAPS. The Committee had space in its programme to accommodate this in June.

Nat. Comm. Phiyega noted that presentations to come would answer some of the questions so suggested these be presented first and any outstanding questions could then be addressed. She agreed absolutely with Mr Ramatlakane's sentiments and would talk to this after the presentations.

Status of DNA Act Implementation Plan: SAPS Forensic Services briefing
Lt. Gen Johannes Phahlane, SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Forensic Services, took the Committee through the presentation noting that, in terms of an overview, the legislation was split in two:
1. Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, Act 6 of 2010 - regulated the powers in taking and processing of fingerprints, body prints and photographic images
2. Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, Act 37 of 2013 - regulated the powers in taking DNA buccal samples and the establishment of the National Forensic DNA Database.

The objective of the DNA Act was to establish and maintain a national forensic DNA database in order to perform comparative searches for the following purposes:
▪ To serve as a criminal investigative tool in the fight against crime;
▪ To identify persons who might have been involved in the commission of offences, including those committed before the coming into operation of this ACT;
▪ To provide the innocence or guilt of an accused person in the defence or prosecution of that person;
▪ To exonerate a person convicted of an offence; or
▪ To assist with the identification of missing persons or unidentified human remains.

Lt. Gen Phahlane provided an overview of DNA collection and processing where detective services was key to stage one, the forensic science laboratory to stage two and quality management to stage three. At stage one, detective services took reference and crime samples which were then set to the forensic science laboratory where the samples received were issued with receipt and were registered before analysed and then reviewed after which it underwent quality management at the National Forensic DNA Database (NFDD) – this quality management was critical.

The function of the board was to monitor the implementation and make proposals to the Minister:
▪ On the improvement of practices regarding the overall operations of the NFDD;
▪ The ethical, legal and social implications of the use of forensic DNA; and
▪ On training and the development of criteria for the use of familial searches
▪ Provide oversight over the processes relating to:
▪ The collection, retention, storage, destruction and disposal of DNA samples;
▪ The retention and removal of forensic DNA profiles, as provided for in this ACT; and
▪ Familial searches.

The six key focus areas of the Act included enabling a legislative/regulative framework, establishing an enabling capacity responsive to the Act, modernisation of forensic services, infrastructure and development (physical resources), establishment of the NFDD and business performance. These key areas were unpacked in further detail.

Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act (DNA Act) 2014:15 Financial Year - TMS Division
Lt. Gen Shezi began by noting that some of the answers to the questions Members had posed were contained in this presentation. The presentation outlined the quarterly progress of SAPS, for the 2014/15 financial year, in relation to various aspects of the legislation including the taking of buccal samples and capturing of buccal sample barcode details as required in Section 36D (1) of the Act. This fell under the Case Administration System (CAS) and the Investigation Case Docket Management System (ICDMS) enhancement. Measurables were determined by weighing progress in the systems, as a percentage, with regard to planning etc with regard to the targeted timelines of the different projects.

Lt. Gen Shezi spoke to the Criminal Record System (CRIM) enhancement which also supported Section 36D (1) of the Act in taking buccal samples, capturing of buccal samples data and subsequent updating of DNA profiles in the database. The next function was related to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) administration system to support the taking of buccal samples and acceptance of the samples at the forensic laboratory as required in Section 36D (4) in the Act.

In terms of the Property Control and Exhibit Management (PCEM) system, Version 1 was working very well in the labs and there were no complaints at this stage. Submission was made on the bid specification for the LABWARE and the award stage was still to follow. A trip was undertaken to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to conduct a technical assessment of CODIS in June 2014. The signing of the contract with the FBI was still outstanding and the training and installation of CODIS was dependent on the signing of the contract and availability of FBI personnel. Business reporting was also required by the Act in terms of management information and accessibility to systems. An important function was also that of risk management and host management.

Integrated Justice System (IJS) – Division: TMS
LT. Gen Shezi proceeded to take the Committee through the final presentation noting that it was very similar to the CJS one so she would go through it rapidly keeping the questions of Members in mind. While the funding for the CJS was very inward looking, IJS was more inter-departmental for e-communications with the applicable departments. After looking at expenditure and allocation, she noted the programme was divided between two main sub-programmes: SAPS IJS sub-programme and the IJS transversal sub-programme. The first programme was that of PCEM where full payments had been made for maintenance and support of PCEM version 1.1. Also discussed was the detention management system, Identity and Access Management (IDAM), the National Photo Image System (NPIS) (where all planned milestones were achieved) and the Facial Recognition System (FRECS).

Other projects/functions briefly spoken to was the Disaster Victim Identification (DVI), used in the case of the Nigerian Church collapse, was completed as was the Action Request for Services (ARS). With the ICDMS case administration, or e-docket, all projects planned for were completed, and in quarter four alone, the system had been rolled out to nearly 70 stations and four provinces to date (Northern Cape, North West, Eastern Cape and Limpopo). She would provide the stats on all the roll-out information. 788 scanners had already been procured. She also spoke to the functions of Service Integration Bus (SIBUS), SAPS Service Orientated Architecture (SOA) advancement, Field Terminal Devices (FTD) front and back end development,

Discussion
The Chairperson said the Committee would resume the presentation on 10 June to include SITA and other role-players vital to discussion, on advice of the National Commissioner, and Members could hold their questions until then.

Nat. Comm. Phiyega added that the other stakeholders included the Department of Justice, in the form of the chairperson of the CJS/IJS Board, the Council for Science and Industrial Research (CSIR), as an observer, SAPS TMS to lead the process, SAPS internal consumers (such as detectives, VISPOL, DPCI) the Department of Public Works for facilities, SITA and Home Affairs for extended dependencies.

The Chairperson said this was critical because the first quarter of the year was already completed and the environment needed to be clean from an oversight perspective. Also some of the initiatives could not go ahead if the other role players did not come on board, so critical direct engagement was needed.

Mr Ramatlakane asked that the current non-restricted document be provided to Members.

Draft Portfolio Committee on Police Strategic Plan for 2015
The Chairperson indicated MANCO considered the amended strategic plan of the Committee which was now aligned with the budget of Parliament. The amendments were largely in the third and fourth quarter to consider legislation and to accommodate the proposed study tour in October. The Plan covered the vision and mission of the Committee, oversight role, tools used for oversight and core objectives. It also covered key issues facing the Committee highlighting the pieces of the legislation Members would need to consider after the June recess. Other matters to consider were intersectoral oversight, regulations and general and specific policies for oversight. There were also provinces the Committee still needed to make space for oversight visits and if Members knew of any hotspot areas to visit, they should make these known. Ongoing oversight priorities and specific focus areas for the entities were also highlighted along with administrative support. He received the study tour proposal today so it would go to the Chair of Chairs, Mr C Frolick, and it would depend on funding and buy-in. It was felt that maybe last year the Committee did not give enough attention to the adjusted estimates so this will be scrutinised more intensely.

Mr Ramatlakane noted it was a living document so this should be taken into consideration.

The Chairperson agreed noting that things could change but the purpose was just to make Members aware of the focus areas of the Committee for the rest of the year. If any pressing matter arose the Committee would make space to consider it.

Ms Kohler Barnard suggested the Committee look at the reports of Standing Committee for Public Accounts (SCOPA) and the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency, and see what they had been saying about SAPS for consideration and further insight.

The Chairperson highlighted SCOPA was included in the Strategic Plan but SAPS and the entities had not been to SCOPA for some time because they had been receiving unqualified audits and there no major issues. The Committee would still keep an eye out.

The Committee adopted the Draft Amended Committee Strategic Plan with no further amendments.

The Chairperson wished Members good luck for their budget vote speeches on Friday.

The meeting was adjourned.


Committee Researcher Briefing on Technology Management Services (TMS)
Ms Nicolette Van Zyl-Gous, Committee Researcher, took the Committee through her briefing noting that the National Development Plan (NDP) placed significant focus on the implementation of the recommendations of the Review of the SA CJS through the CJS Seven point plan, which was approved in 2007. This process was started in 2005 because departments were working in ‘silos’ with little interaction. It was difficult to track individuals and information through the system. The process was divided into the CJS and Integrated Justice System (IJS) modernisation, for which the funding had since been amalgamated into the CJS Review and Modernisation. Implementation of projects under the Technology Management Services (TMS) of SAPS had been a significant concern for the last couple of years. Enormous amounts of resources had been allocated to the CJS. For the 2014/15 financial year, R1.1 bn was allocated to the CJS projects. It would be interesting to know the amount spent since 2007 to date. The IJS projects, such as PCEM Live Scan and ICDMS, had not performed well, mostly due to its transversal nature, which meant that it had many dependencies on other departments.

In terms of monitoring and oversight, in the 2012 Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR), the Committee started to make specific recommendations regarding reporting requirements. In the 2013 BRRR, the Committee recommended that SAPS must submit detailed project plans to Treasury before funding was allocated. The Minister of Finance accepted this recommendation and provided strict conditions on the CJS revamp programme in the allocation letter to SAPS for the 2014 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period. It stated that failure to comply with the conditions might lead to the withholding of funds and an in-year reduction of the allocation for the CJS programme where spending was significantly lower than planned at the time of the adjusted budget, subject to Parliament’s approval. The CJS funding was not earmarked in the 2015 Appropriations Bill. The Committee should establish the reason. In the 2014 BRRR, the Committee recommended that quarterly reports should be submitted to the Committee. On reporting by SAPS, the manner in which SAPS reported was not conducive to effective oversight. Approximately 70 technology projects were running in the CJS and IJS and it was easy to get caught up in details of individual projects, but some projects had significant challenges and needed close oversight, like PCEM and ICDMS (e-docket). The Committee should request SAPS to provide a broad strategic framework of the CJS/IJS projects and how this fed into the CJS Seven-point Plan (back to basics) and benefits the CJS, expenditure against performance should be clearly stated and there were significant inconsistencies in the reporting over the four quarters of the 2014/15 financial year.

With the budget allocation and expenditure for 2014/15, the allocation was R1.14 bn of which 100% was spent. A comparison of the 3rd and 4th quarter was briefly discussed for CJS and IJS projects. SAPS had a project progress review session in 25 November 2014 and 21 March 2015 during which the budget allocations to projects were adjusted significantly. SAPS should report on the outcomes of the review session and also the reasons for the major shifting of funds for projects. There was significant decreased allocation to the Criminal Record Centre (R109 million) but significant increases to FSL and Provincial, Cluster and Police Stations. The barcode for stations project was allocated a R31 million revised allocation.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous then discussed the investigative case docket management system (ICSDMS) noting that development ended 31 March 2015 and it was completed. With a R85 million allocation, R6.1m was spent in quarter one, R29.8 m in quarter two, R7.9 m in quarter three and R61 m in quarter four Investigate Case deliverables for the first phase was identified but it needed elaboration. The system had an allocation of R3.5m, which was revised on 21 March 2015 to zero allocation. R920 000 was spent in quarter two while R2.2m was spent in quarter three with 100% milestones achieved to date and 133% weighted milestones delivered in Q4 while spending no funds. The system was rolled out to 271 police stations, of which 47 were in the Western Cape and 41 in the Free State. There were questions around the link of the system to the courts and if the reluctance to use the new system had been addressed.

There were a number of pertinent questions around the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act (DNA), 2013, relating to:
▪ Were convicted offenders who were being released from prison being sampled before release? To date, since the promulgation of the Act in January, no convicted offenders had been sampled.
▪ What was SAPS action plan with regard to rolling out training and sampling? How many members were trained and how many samples were taken?
▪ How many reference (buccal) samples had been received at the Forensic Lab since January and how many had been processed? The reference lanes and crime scene lanes set up for processing were not operational, which meant the capacity of the lab had been greatly diminished as they were only processing samples manually and backlogs were already imminent.
▪ What was the challenge with the supply of the DNA processing kits which were used for processing samples - when did they expect this to be resolved and when will its capacity increase? What was current sampling capacity and what was future capacity?
▪ Was SAPS complying with the 30 day turnaround time provided for in the Act to process samples received at the Lab?
▪ What was the STR chemistry that was being employed in DNA Kits and did the chemistry comply with Best International Practice?
▪ What software solution was being used to manage the Database? CODIS was recommended by the previous Parliamentary Committee for dealing with the Act but no decisions had been taken.
▪ How was SAPS loading profiles onto the various indices as per the Act and how were they being expunged?
▪ Composition of the DNA Ethics Board – more detail was needed from SAPS in terms of who the members were, how often they were meeting etc.

Ms D Kohler Barnard (DA) asked if there was there any indication why Lt. Gen Adeline Shezi (SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Technology Management Services) was moved away from the DNA database – she really had the database under control. The Member had faith in her expertise in that position. Now she was suddenly moved. The Member was worried the project would now stall without Lt. Gen Shezi.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous did not know why Lt. Gen Shezi was moved – this could be a question to ask SAPS. She was also a critical part of the establishment of the DNA Act.

The Chairperson asked who was really ultimately responsible for demand and control of the CJS revamp process being spread over many areas. He was concerned by this wide spread.

Ms Van Zyl-Gous said the whole revamp was under the control of the TMS division so the head of this component should take ultimate responsibility. The IJS projects were also located in the TMS where there were several programme management structures. There was also the coordinating CJS/IJS board. For future engagements, she suggested the Committee also call the Board to account.

SAPS briefing on Criminal Justice System (IJS) Division: Technology Management Services
Lt. Gen Adeline Shezi, SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Technology Management Services, began the lengthy presentation by taking the Committee through the planned quarterly budget vs. actual expenditure for the TMS CJS revamp programme for all four quarters of the previous financial year. This information was provided for various projects including capacitation and modernisation of the component criminal record centre, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) replacement – for this specific project, SITA will not be awarded in the current financial year, the anticipated budgeted amount of R30 000 000 had been re-allocated and the project had been included in the CJS revamp plan for 2015/16. The planned quarterly budget vs. actual expenditure for all four quarters of the previous financial year was outlined for the replacement of stolen equipment at the provincial local record centres in Springs and Vryburg and here the anticipated expenditure equalled actual expenditure. The project was completed during the third quarter and the stolen equipment was replaced during September 2014 after security upgrading of the offices were completed.

Lt. Gen Shezi discussed budget and expenditure for the provision of end-user equipment for the newly appointed criminal record centre members where suppliers delivered equipment to the value of R4 806 211. With audio visual and video conferencing, the quotation received for the solution exceeded the initial allocation. An individual amount of R27 498 had been allocated to the project. In terms of electronic plan drawing, a successful bidder had not been appointed by SITA before 31 March 2015 and the allocation of R320 000 had been re-allocated. The project was still a priority and will be included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. For facial compilation, the suppler will not be appointed and in terms of biometric enhancement solution maintenance, more devices will be maintained by SITA than was initially planned for.

Lt. Gen Shezi moved on to look at additional devices for enhancement and presentation of digital latent prints where the expenditure was less than what was anticipated and an amount of R87 780 was re-allocated. For additional devices for panoramic image capturing cameras, an amount of R 44 233 709 was re-allocated. The project was still a priority and included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. There was also a system for integration with the HANIS of Home Affairs - The amount of R62 500 000 was re-allocated. The Department of Home Affairs indicated that they will not conclude the upgrade as planned. The project was still a priority and included in the CJS Revamp Plan for 2015/16. With the decentralisation of JUDDIS, the expenditure will be less than initially anticipated and an amount of R5 290 237 was re-allocated.

No funds were allocated for the re-prioritised criminal record centre projects included in the SAPS Annual Performance Plan for 2014/15 - The projects had been re-prioritised against the Criminal Record and Crime Scene Management available funding and business priorities and will be re-considered during the planning for the 2015/16 financial year. With the Ballistic Interface Unit (BIU) capabilities, expenditure was less than initially anticipated and this was also the case with Automated Ballistic Identification System (ABIS), end user equipment for the forensic science laboratories, barcode printers for Ri Lane in Cape Town and Arcadia and the Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) and Access Control. With the procurement of iPads, the quotation received for the solution exceeded the initial allocation but the project was completed and 32 iPads were provided for utilisation with the forensic science division.

The expenditure for high resolution cameras for the scientific analysis unit was less than initially anticipated but the project was completed and four high resolution cameras for the scientific analysis unit in Pretoria had been provided enabling the gathering and analysis of evidence. The initial allocation for X-Ray devices was re-prioritised and as a result the requirement for the procurement was cancelled. The project for semi-automated DNA isolation instrument in the DNA Crime Lane in Biology section in Pretoria and Western Cape was completed in the first quarter. The supplier payment was to be finalised for the scientific data management system upgrade once a decision was made on the project finalisation. The outstanding amount on the budget on the expert system and expert assistant system will only be paid once training was completed. Also highlighted was the Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), where the expenditure for the project would be completed will be less that initially anticipated, the mobile cyanoacrylate fuming system where funding of this project was initially included in the forensic services CJS priorities. However, after rep-prioritisation of the budget allocation, the TMS division paid the supplier and tyre-tread ID mark systems where the funding for the project was initially included in the forensic services CJS priorities. After re-prioritisation of the budget allocation, the TMS division paid the supplier.

Lt. Gen Shezi looked at capacitation and modernisation of provincial divisions, clusters, police stations and national divisions, end user equipment procurement, deployment and configuration, capacitation and modernisation of detective services, voice recorded, expansion of digital extraction devices (actual expenditure was 100% against planned expenditure), capacitation and modernisation of Visible Policing (VISPOL), mobile connectivity devices (field terminal devices) expansion and maintenance, the capacitation and modernisation of protection and security services and video wall nerve centre (war room) maintenance.

Discussion
The Chairperson noted the pattern was that many vital technology projects, which were instrumental to improve the fight against crime, were stopped half way or stalled because of other processes– what alternatives could be put in place to jump start these programmes? He was worried about it affecting the ability of SAPS to ensure convictions, make arrests etc.

Ms Riah Phiyega, SAPS National Commissioner, said the dependencies were there and it was a reality that not everyone was moving at the same time and this explained why the CJS was a crucial aspect. DGs at the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster, had profiled the role of the CJS Board very highly in terms of accountability and that processes ran concurrently between departments. The Board was now fully in the Department of Justice and all transversal systems had been migrated to the Board. She was of the opinion that there were some in-roads even with the commitment of finances. The focus just needed to be maintained. More information could be shared with the Committee by the chairperson of the CJS/IJS Board in terms of reengineering and problematic dependencies.
 
Mr Z Mbhele (DA) asked for clarity to understand the sequence of operations - was SAPS going to contribute funds for Home Affairs to upgrade HANIS or was it for SAPS to do its own thing or would there be a collective pot for other departments to contribute to?

Nat. Comm. Phiyega replied that with fingerprints, SAPS kept only criminal fingerprints while Home Affairs kept everything so it was necessary to connect the two so that if there was a fingerprint SAPS did not have, it could check documentation of the individual on the Home Affairs HANIS system. The issue was how to interface the two systems – the R62m was geared towards creating those abilities to interface. SAPS also needed much more than what HANIS was currently capable of so there were more issues to consider in the process. This formed part of the re-scoping engagement between TMS, FSL, Home Affairs, CJS/IJS Board and Treasury.

Gen Phalela added AFIS was SAPS specific mainly to refresh its own internal capabilities. Then came HANIS. In terms of the Act, SAPS was supposed to have access to HANIS because not every citizen would be on SAPS’ database because it only housed those with a criminal record. For purposes of identification, HANIS should be able to be accessed. While integration in terms of the law had not been recognised, there was a mechanism to ensure SAPS could access the system. This was how SA nationals were identified in the collapse of a church in Lagos, Nigeria last year who were not on the criminal database. The cost was escalated because, initially, SAPS was led to believe there were no funds in the baseline of Home Affairs for integration. SAPS then committed, because it was a burning issue, to redirect funds from the CJS. In the process, SAPS received quotations from Home Affairs in the middle of the financial year. Another challenge was that the HANIS contract of Home Affairs was nearing the end of its life. Home Affairs indicated it would be very difficult to continue with integration with the current infrastructure of HANIS which was nearing the end of its life and needed to be refreshed in terms of new equipment and software. This was where the escalation of costs came from where the amount was simply not feasible for SAPS and so Treasury was engaged. SAPS’ own resources were then deployed in Home Affairs to be able to do searches and not be disadvantaged. The first prize was integration and it was never the intention for Home Affairs to have access to AFIS - only SAPS could host and access its criminal records. The issue was that when submitting fingerprints for the ID document, Home Affairs did not need the prints for each finger and this was a problem for SAPS where it needed all 10 fingers active.

Mr L Ramatlakane (ANC) appreciated the degree of frankness in which the presentation was delivered but he was concerned that some of the issues were not necessarily under the control of SAPS but was within the cluster/sector which meant that SAPS management could not always get to the bottom of the problem to find a solution. When he listened to the presentation, he felt compelled to urge that the papers must be closed and there should just be a frank discussion to just talk directly, face-to-face, but it was still good to get all the information. The Committee probably, after listening to the presentation, should invite all the involved role-players needed because some were dragging their feet and were in the culprit category. He was worried that SAPS was doing what it could but it was unable to move unless the whole sector moved. The work was integrated so it did not just rely on SAPS. There was a need for the cluster, led by the police, to look at the percentage of satisfactory completion, of this project, in terms of the money, to get results out of the project. There were problems of capacity in the sector not only in SAPS. Budget and integrated management was key for him. For the Committee, there needed to be an identification of which mechanisms needed to be unblocked for progress to be made – one of which was the SITA issue. He found the issue very painful because one could not take two years to finalise a tender - was this an issue of capacity in SITA? These were just some of the issues to tackle for there to be unblocking so progress could happen in the sector. From where he was sitting, in terms of SAPS specifically, conversation needed to be had on forward-management and planning. All other detail needed to be cut and the heart of the issue should be resolved in one room roundtable with all the role-players otherwise the same problems would still be here next year, especially as some still came from 2007. He would resist asking detailed questions otherwise the Committee would be there all day.

Ms Kohler Barnard noted SAPS Act made reference to comparative searches against databases of other ministries for fingerprints etc, in the detection of crime and for missing person identification. The Act also said that the various DGs of the ministries must develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) regarding access to the databases and safety measures to protect the integrity of the information so that databases may only be accessed in terms of SOPs. The Act did not say anything about integration of the databases and she recalled some people not wanting searches done for trawling of suspects, as it were. She sought some input on these matters to ensure there were no complaints of human rights violations. She asked for the status of the dreaded e-docket system – was it still the unicorn that everyone talked about but no one had seen. She had never seen any station using it. How was the percentage points of the milestones achieved determined? What was the video wall nerve centre and what was the timeline for completion?

Mr Mbhele said the presentation spoke to the back and forth between SAPS and SITA where SITA sent remarks from the review on the bid specifications. He was curious as to what the nature of these remarks were, in general. Was there a problem with SITA communication in that there was a back and forth and was this a major part of systemic challenges? There was no mention of the challenges with the rhino poaching unit in Kruger Park as came up during the Committee’s oversight visit to Mpumalanga. Lt. Gen Vinesh Moonoo (SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Detective Services) alerted Members to problems of cell phone reception where satellite phones were needed to operate in the more remote areas of the Park and issues of thermal visual equipment for night time operation. Were the needs for this project on the radar and if not what was the plan for integration of these challenges? Where was the discussion on links with the court system to allow for seamless operability as the final stage of the chain?

Mr L Twala (EFF) questioned the capacitation of detectives especially with the e-docket system. He was concerned that laptops primarily became typewriters and this did not speak to a system in the office. What was the programme inherent to the Department to create linkages and the ability of the laptop to update systems in the office as back-up. Was this why iPads were being procured because of the failure of laptops? He asked for an update on the status of TETRA.

Ms A Molebatsi (ANC) asked how far the CODIS database was. The previous Fourth Parliament Committee undertook an oversight trip to the forensic labs in Pretoria where the Committee found huge and very expensive machines, some worth R35m, just gathering dust and some were even dismantled – had this situation improved? What was the readiness of SAPS to implement DNA legislation in terms of equipment and capacity?

The Chairperson agreed with Mr Ramatlakane about meeting with the other role players to unblock the total process and assist SAPS. The Committee had space in its programme to accommodate this in June.

Nat. Comm. Phiyega noted that presentations to come would answer some of the questions so suggested these be presented first and any outstanding questions could then be addressed. She agreed absolutely with Mr Ramatlakane's sentiments and would talk to this after the presentations.

Status of DNA Act Implementation Plan: SAPS Forensic Services briefing
Lt. Gen Johannes Phahlane, SAPS Divisional Commissioner: Forensic Services, took the Committee through the presentation noting that, in terms of an overview, the legislation was split in two:
1. Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, Act 6 of 2010 - regulated the powers in taking and processing of fingerprints, body prints and photographic images
2. Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, Act 37 of 2013 - regulated the powers in taking DNA buccal samples and the establishment of the National Forensic DNA Database.

The objective of the DNA Act was to establish and maintain a national forensic DNA database in order to perform comparative searches for the following purposes:
▪ To serve as a criminal investigative tool in the fight against crime;
▪ To identify persons who might have been involved in the commission of offences, including those committed before the coming into operation of this ACT;
▪ To provide the innocence or guilt of an accused person in the defence or prosecution of that person;
▪ To exonerate a person convicted of an offence; or
▪ To assist with the identification of missing persons or unidentified human remains.

Lt. Gen Phahlane provided an overview of DNA collection and processing where detective services was key to stage one, the forensic science laboratory to stage two and quality management to stage three. At stage one, detective services took reference and crime samples which were then set to the forensic science laboratory where the samples received were issued with receipt and were registered before analysed and then reviewed after which it underwent quality management at the National Forensic DNA Database (NFDD) – this quality management was critical.

The function of the board was to monitor the implementation and make proposals to the Minister:
▪ On the improvement of practices regarding the overall operations of the NFDD;
▪ The ethical, legal and social implications of the use of forensic DNA; and
▪ On training and the development of criteria for the use of familial searches
▪ Provide oversight over the processes relating to:
▪ The collection, retention, storage, destruction and disposal of DNA samples;
▪ The retention and removal of forensic DNA profiles, as provided for in this ACT; and
▪ Familial searches.

The six key focus areas of the Act included enabling a legislative/regulative framework, establishing an enabling capacity responsive to the Act, modernisation of forensic services, infrastructure and development (physical resources), establishment of the NFDD and business performance. These key areas were unpacked in further detail.

Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act (DNA Act) 2014:15 Financial Year - TMS Division
Lt. Gen Shezi began by noting that some of the answers to the questions Members had posed were contained in this presentation. The presentation outlined the quarterly progress of SAPS, for the 2014/15 financial year, in relation to various aspects of the legislation including the taking of buccal samples and capturing of buccal sample barcode details as required in Section 36D (1) of the Act. This fell under the Case Administration System (CAS) and the Investigation Case Docket Management System (ICDMS) enhancement. Measurables were determined by weighing progress in the systems, as a percentage, with regard to planning etc with regard to the targeted timelines of the different projects.

Lt. Gen Shezi spoke to the Criminal Record System (CRIM) enhancement which also supported Section 36D (1) of the Act in taking buccal samples, capturing of buccal samples data and subsequent updating of DNA profiles in the database. The next function was related to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) administration system to support the taking of buccal samples and acceptance of the samples at the forensic laboratory as required in Section 36D (4) in the Act.

In terms of the Property Control and Exhibit Management (PCEM) system, Version 1 was working very well in the labs and there were no complaints at this stage. Submission was made on the bid specification for the LABWARE and the award stage was still to follow. A trip was undertaken to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to conduct a technical assessment of CODIS in June 2014. The signing of the contract with the FBI was still outstanding and the training and installation of CODIS was dependent on the signing of the contract and availability of FBI personnel. Business reporting was also required by the Act in terms of management information and accessibility to systems. An important function was also that of risk management and host management.

Integrated Justice System (IJS) – Division: TMS
LT. Gen Shezi proceeded to take the Committee through the final presentation noting that it was very similar to the CJS one so she would go through it rapidly keeping the questions of Members in mind. While the funding for the CJS was very inward looking, IJS was more inter-departmental for e-communications with the applicable departments. After looking at expenditure and allocation, she noted the programme was divided between two main sub-programmes: SAPS IJS sub-programme and the IJS transversal sub-programme. The first programme was that of PCEM where full payments had been made for maintenance and support of PCEM version 1.1. Also discussed was the detention management system, Identity and Access Management (IDAM), the National Photo Image System (NPIS) (where all planned milestones were achieved) and the Facial Recognition System (FRECS).

Other projects/functions briefly spoken to was the Disaster Victim Identification (DVI), used in the case of the Nigerian Church collapse, was completed as was the Action Request for Services (ARS). With the ICDMS case administration, or e-docket, all projects planned for were completed, and in quarter four alone, the system had been rolled out to nearly 70 stations and four provinces to date (Northern Cape, North West, Eastern Cape and Limpopo). She would provide the stats on all the roll-out information. 788 scanners had already been procured. She also spoke to the functions of Service Integration Bus (SIBUS), SAPS Service Orientated Architecture (SOA) advancement, Field Terminal Devices (FTD) front and back end development,

Discussion
The Chairperson said the Committee would resume the presentation on 10 June to include SITA and other role-players vital to discussion, on advice of the National Commissioner, and Members could hold their questions until then.

Nat. Comm. Phiyega added that the other stakeholders included the Department of Justice, in the form of the chairperson of the CJS/IJS Board, the Council for Science and Industrial Research (CSIR), as an observer, SAPS TMS to lead the process, SAPS internal consumers (such as detectives, VISPOL, DPCI) the Department of Public Works for facilities, SITA and Home Affairs for extended dependencies.

The Chairperson said this was critical because the first quarter of the year was already completed and the environment needed to be clean from an oversight perspective. Also some of the initiatives could not go ahead if the other role players did not come on board, so critical direct engagement was needed.

Mr Ramatlakane asked that the current non-restricted document be provided to Members.

Draft Portfolio Committee on Police Strategic Plan for 2015
The Chairperson indicated MANCO considered the amended strategic plan of the Committee which was now aligned with the budget of Parliament. The amendments were largely in the third and fourth quarter to consider legislation and to accommodate the proposed study tour in October. The Plan covered the vision and mission of the Committee, oversight role, tools used for oversight and core objectives. It also covered key issues facing the Committee highlighting the pieces of the legislation Members would need to consider after the June recess. Other matters to consider were intersectoral oversight, regulations and general and specific policies for oversight. There were also provinces the Committee still needed to make space for oversight visits and if Members knew of any hotspot areas to visit, they should make these known. Ongoing oversight priorities and specific focus areas for the entities were also highlighted along with administrative support. He received the study tour proposal today so it would go to the Chair of Chairs, Mr C Frolick, and it would depend on funding and buy-in. It was felt that maybe last year the Committee did not give enough attention to the adjusted estimates so this will be scrutinised more intensely.

Mr Ramatlakane noted it was a living document so this should be taken into consideration.

The Chairperson agreed noting that things could change but the purpose was just to make Members aware of the focus areas of the Committee for the rest of the year. If any pressing matter arose the Committee would make space to consider it.

Ms Kohler Barnard suggested the Committee look at the reports of Standing Committee for Public Accounts (SCOPA) and the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency, and see what they had been saying about SAPS for consideration and further insight.

The Chairperson highlighted SCOPA was included in the Strategic Plan but SAPS and the entities had not been to SCOPA for some time because they had been receiving unqualified audits and there no major issues. The Committee would still keep an eye out.

The Committee adopted the Draft Amended Committee Strategic Plan with no further amendments.

The Chairperson wished Members good luck for their budget vote speeches on Friday.

The meeting was adjourned.