Which Foreign Missions were routinely reviewed by the department in the 2008/09 and 2009/10 financial years and during the period of 01 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available

QUOTE

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

FOR WRITTEN REPLY

QUESTION NO: 846   (NW919E)

PUBLISHED IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO 5-2011 OF 11 MARCH 2011

MR S MOKGALAPA (DA) TO ASK THE MINISTER OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND COOPERATION:

  1. With reference to her reply to question 67 on 28 February 2011, which Foreign Missions were routinely reviewed by her department (a) in the (i) 2008/09 and  (ii) 2009/10 financial years and (b) during the period of 01 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available;
  2. For each review conducted, what where the main findings for each mission during the specified period with regard to its (a) successes and (b) challenges;
  3. (a) which missions have been found to be the (i) best performing and (ii) worst performing foreign missions and (b) what were found to be the reasons for their performance;
  4. Whether any missions were considered (a) dysfunctional or (b) not fulfilling its mandate; if so, which missions in each case;
  5. Whether her department intends closing down missions identified as dysfunctional or not fulfilling its mandate, if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?           

REPLY:

1) 2008-2009: 28 Missions
2009-2010: 24 Missions
2010-2011: 12 Missions

MISSIONS: 2008/09

Accra

Bangkok

Bujumbura

Beijing

Conakry

Canberra

Dakar

Colombo

Dar Es Salaam

Damascus

Gaborone

Hong Kong

Kampala

Riyadh

Lagos

Seoul

Malabo

Shanghai

Maputo

Suva

Maseru

Copenhagen

Ouagadougou

Prague

Windhoek

Stockholm

Warsaw

Montevideo

MISSIONS: 2009/10

Algiers

Abu-Dhabi

Asmara

Dubai

Yaoundé

Muscat

Juba

Tel Aviv

Kampala

Wellington

Khartoum

Helsinki

Kinshasa

London

Libreville

Vienna

Sao Tome

Buenos Aires

Lusaka

Kingston

Moroni

Port of Spain

Nouakchott

 

Port Louis

 

MISSIONS: 2010/11

Munich

Brazzaville

Paris

 

Sofia

 

Ankara

 

Berlin

 

Berne

 

Budapest

 

Geneva

 

Jakarta

 

Niamey

 

Tripoli

 


2) Missions are audited according to the PFMA Act, National Treasury and Departmental regulations and policies. Missions are audited by the Internal Auditors, the Auditor General and the External Audit Committee. This entails that there are hundreds of items being audited. Taking into account the findings of the various reports, the Auditor General’s final conclusions are presented to the Accounting Officer at the end of the Financial Year. It may be recalled that the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) received an Unqualified Audit Report/ opinion for the Financial Year 2010-2011.

3) The Department does not have a grading system to determine the best performing and worst performing Missions. The Department expects all the Missions to be fully functional.  To ensure this, the Department has a holistic system whereby the various Business Units monitor the Missions through their Business Plans, Quarterly Compliance Reports, Monthly Expenditure Reports, Midterm Reviews and Annual Reports. In addition to these actions, there are also the various Auditing initiatives. Previous Audit findings pointed out the following challenges pertaining also to Missions.

(a) Non- review and approval of business plans and quarterly performance information reports: no adequate feedback to Missions
(b) Business plans not in accordance with SMART principles
(c) Performance information achieved without adequate evidence
(d) Supply chain management

4) Please refer to the answer of question 3. All Missions are fully functional.
5) The Department has no intention of closing any of its Missions.

UNQUOTE
Quick Links

Disclaimer | Contact Us | HomeLast Updated: 12 December, 2011 10:03 AM
This site is best viewed using 800 x 600 resolution with Internet Explorer 5.0, Netscape Communicator 4.5 or higher.
2003 Department of Foreign Affairs, Republic of South Africa