(1) Whether the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) has been held accountable for its alleged failure to regulate the practice of registered engineers and technologists who have contributed to (a) the ordering of trains that are too tall by the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa, (b) various bridge collapses, including the bridge on the M1 highway in Johannesburg, (c) the collapse of the roof of the Tongaat Mall and (d) the delay in the completion of Eskom’s Medupi and Kusile power stations that are running 10 years behind schedule; if not, in each case, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, what (i) steps have been taken and (ii) are the further relevant details in this regard;
(2) Whether she has found that the ECSA’s practice of assessing the registration applications of prospective applicants based on a professional review conducted by peers is fair, ethical and transparent; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, has she found that this practice has been used to gatekeep the applications of certain applicants;
(3) Why is a peer review required before a prospective applicant is registered with the ECSA, unlike many other professional bodies where registration is subject to the obtainment of a professional qualification?