6.3.10 Departmental response: The SAPS in its presentations to the Committee did not express any concerns around the devolution of the capital works custodial function from DPW to the SAPS. In fact, in the presentation on 3 September 2010 in particular, the devolution of this building function from DPW to the SAPS was presented as having a number of advantages to the SAPS, primarily in terms of control over timeframes and contracts. The presentation seemed to imply that it would be desirable for the SAPS to take over this responsibility for other assets currently not included in the devolution agreement such as forensic science laboratories and training centres by recording as a disadvantage the fact that the 'SAPS has no control over contractual issues between a supplier/contractor' with respect to non-devolved assets. In addition, it was stated in the presentation that the SAPS wanted to actively drive the devolution process to ensure that more stations could be devolved in the next few years.