(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 267 on 17 March 2015, the post in the office of the chief executive officer was of critical importance; if not, why did the SA Social Security Agency appoint someone to act in a post that was not vacant; (2) whether she has found that the amount spent on the acting allowance does not constitute wasteful expenditure; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, on what basis was the incumbent seconded to her department; (3) has the post been advertised after it was vacated; if not, why not?