(1) Whether each Head of Department (HOD) of his department signed a performance agreement since their appointment; if not, (a) what is the total number of HODs who have not signed performance agreements, (b) what is the reason in each case, (c) what action has he taken to rectify the situation and (d) what consequences will the specified HOD face for failing to sign the performance agreements; if so, (i) when was the last performance assessment of each HOD conducted and (ii) what were the results in each case; (2) whether any of the HODs who failed to sign a performance agreement received a performance bonus since their appointment; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) at what rate and (b) what criteria were used to determine the specified rate; (3) whether any of the HODs who signed a performance agreement received a performance bonus since their appointment; if so, (a) at what rate and (b) what criteria were used to determine the rate?

What formal qualifications does each of his department’s (a)(i) Chief Financial Officers and/or (ii) acting Chief Financial Officers and (b)(i) Directors-General and/or (ii) acting Directors-General possess?

(1) How many appeals (a)(i) are pending in terms of section 96 of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, Act 28 of 2002, as amended and (ii) were pending as at 1 April 2016 and (b) have been dealt with in each of the past five months of the 2016-17 financial year, in each case indicating the number of appeals (i) granted and (ii) denied (2) (a) for how many days has the oldest pending appeal been outstanding and (b) what plans have been put in place to address the specified pending appeals?

(1) Whether, with reference to his media statement of 1 September 2016, the report of the recommendations (a) was tabled at and (b) approved by Cabinet; if not, in each case, why not; if so, in each Friday, 16 September 2016 717 INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY NO 28 - 2016 case, on what date was the specified report (i) tabled at and (ii) approved by Cabinet; (2) whether he was authorised to release the specified media statement; if not, why not; if so, by whom; (3) when was an Inter-Ministerial Committee to investigate the termination of financial services to Oakbay Investments (Pty) Ltd established and (b) by whom; (4) whether he intends to pursue the recommendations of the specified report; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (5) whether he intends to pursue the recommendation of the establishment of a Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the termination of financial services to the company, since the company has recourse to the courts; if not, why not; if so, why?

(a) How many successful mining rights applications have been made through the SA Mineral Resources Administration System without the assistance of his department’s officials (i) in the (aa) 2013-14, (bb) 2014-15 and (cc) 2015-16 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2016 and (b) what is the approximate annual cost of (i)(aa) maintaining and (bb) operating the specified system and (ii) remunerating officials assigned to the specified system?

(1) How many appeals (a)(i) are pending in terms of section 96 of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, Act 28 of 2002, as amended and (ii) were pending as at 1 April 2016 and (b) have been dealt with in each of the past five months of the 2016-17 financial year, in each case indicating the number of appeals (i) granted and (ii) denied; (2) (a) for how many days has the oldest pending appeal been outstanding and (b) what plans have been put in place to address the specified pending appeals?

(1) Whether Atha-Africa Ventures has been issued with (a) a prospecting and/or (b) mining right and/or permit in Mabola, a proclaimed protected environment area close to Wakkerstroom in the Dr Pixley Ka Isaka Seme Local Municipality in Mpumalanga; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (2) whether the relevant (a) Environmental Impact Assessment and/or (b) Environmental Management Programme was undertaken before the specified rights and/or permits were issued; if not, why not; if so, what were the (i) results of the assessments and/or programmes undertaken and (ii) details of the public participation process followed; (3) whether the public participation process, as required in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Resource Development Act, Act 28 of 2002, as amended, and its regulations were complied with in this regard; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

(a) How many advisors are paid to advise him, (b) what are the (i) names, (ii) designations, (iii) qualifications, (iv) brief employment histories and (v) remuneration packages in each case and (c) what are the full relevant details of the processes followed to employ each of the specified advisors?

(1) (a) Why was the mining permit issued to the successful land claimants of the Khanyisa community near Wolmaransstad in the North West withdrawn by his department and (b) to whom was the specified permit subsequently issued; (2) whether the specified permit has changed hands since it was reissued after being taken away from the Khanyisa community; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) on what dates were such changes made and (b) what are the further relevant details in this regard; (3) (a) who currently holds the specified mining permit and (b) what is the estimated value of all diamonds mined on the specified community’s land since it lost the specified mining permit; (4) (a) what was the reason for stopping mining on the specified community’s land in February 2016 and (b) what are the full details of the rectification work that was done, which enabled mining to begin on 25 April 2016 again; (5) where are the officials based who (a) stopped operations on the specified community’s land and (b) allowed operations to recommence in April 2016? NW1566E

(1)Whether he is aware (a) of the existence of a provincial heritage site, Canteen Kopje, in the Northern Cape, which is of archeological and heritage significance and is facing imminent destruction, (b) that research at the specified site began in the mid-20th century and has been on-going since 1997 (c) that various excavations in a number of locations at the site have revealed tools dating back 2,3 million years to the three phases of the Acheulean hand axe, Middle and Later Stone Age occupations, a Tswana/!Kora occupation relating closely to local communities and the remains of historic activities, (d) that a mining permit was issued in 2014 and the SA Heritage Resources Agency successfully acquired a Cease Works Order which was lifted in March 2016 after which work by a diamond mining company commenced on 16 March 2016, (e) that the current mining programme will, conservatively estimated, destroy up to 40% of the heritage site, (f) that the fenced-off area includes the excavation areas of the University of the Witwatersrand and of Toronto and the area developed for tourism, (g) that no heritage impact assessment or archaeological impact assessment was conducted and the mining company does not have a heritage permit, which is in contravention of the National Heritage Resources Act, Act 25 of 1999, (h) that there is a conservation management plan for the site and (i) that our country has a constitutional, legal and moral obligation and responsibility to preserve and protect the heritage resources and resources with archaeological significance; if so, what steps does he intend to take to ensure the protection and preservation of the specified heritage resources; (2) (a) how many schools for the visually impaired learners are registered with each provincial department of education and (b) how many appropriately trained educators in the field of braille are teaching at schools for the visually impaired?