Parliamentary Question: DoJ:The establishment of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee

1000

Question 2572

Mr D J Maynier (DA) to ask the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development:

Whether, since the establishment of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee, the Inspectorate has carried out any investigations relating to internal regulatory processes; if not, why not; if so; in respect of each investigation , (a) what was investigated, (b) what were the main (i) findings and (ii) recommendations and (c) on what date was the investigation completed?

Written Reply

An Internal Audit on Scrutiny Committee and National Conventional Arms Control Committee Agenda’s and Minutes for the period 11/06 to 10/07 was conducted with relation to the regulatory processes of the NCACC. 
(a)      What was investigated?

The process of applications made by the Armaments Related Industry by the Directorate Conventional Arms Control, distribution of applications for Departmental Review input, the registration of such input, the submission of applications to the Scrutiny Committee for recommendation to the NCACC and the registration and processing of NCACC decisions and the subsequent execution of such decisions.
(b)(i)       The main findings, among others, in the report were as follows :
1.Non-corresponding reference to Contracting Applications in relevant schedules and subsequent minutes.
2.Items indicated as “Hold Over” in Scrutiny Committee minutes omitted from subsequent NCACC Agenda’s.
3.Inclusion of lose documentation / additional item documentation in NCACC Agenda’s without proper recording thereof for future reference.
4.Decisions of the NCACC not executed on DCAC System.
5.Omissions of discussions / decisions of additional items tabled from the subsequent minutes.
6.Request for amendment of contracting permits submitted for approval without a corresponding request from company.
7.Omission of inclusion of minutes of previous meetings in subsequent agenda’s for approval.
8.Proof of communication to applicants with regard to the approval of internal transfers subject to certain conditions by the NCACC could not be provided.
(ii)The recommendations were:
1.The numbering of and reference to contracting schedules and the subsequent reflection thereof in corresponding minutes be made the same.
2.All administrative errors found be corrected on the DCAC system.
3.Ensure that Executive Notes correctly reflects the content of applications.
4.A register be kept of additional documentation submitted at meetings.
5.Discussions on additional items be minuted accordingly.

The above recommendations were not made to the NCACC as reported in Question 999 (NW1144E) which were as follows :

As per Scrutiny Committee instruction, this report was not submitted to the NCACC.

Internal Audit Report:  SC and NCACC Agendas and Minutes 11/06 to 10/07.

The SC considered the report and after consideration, the Acting SC Chairperson raised the following:
a. The inappropriate focus period of the report, this includes the period already audited by the Auditor General.
b. The process followed by the Inspectorate in respect of norms and standards.
c. The competency of the “auditors” to make audit findings.
d. The application of the principles of significance and materiality in making conclusions.

The Acting SC Chairperson concluded that in order for future regular audits to be conducted by the Inspectorate, the DCAC, Auditor General and the Inspectorate must meet, discuss and agree on the audit process.



A meeting was held between the Auditor General and the Inspectorate and it was agreed that there is no requirement for any procedures of the Inspectorate to be changed. 
(c)      The audit was completed 6 February 2009.