Status of Immovable Asset Register; Telkom Towers matter; with Deputy Minister

The Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure convened for a briefing by the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) on the status of the Immovable Asset Register (IAR). An apology from the Minister of Public Works and Infrastructure was noted. Several Committee Members rejected the Minister's apology, citing late submissions as a recurring issue and expressing frustration that a promised forensic report on Telkom Towers had not been provided, instead of a repeated presentation. The Chairperson expressed disappointment that the Minister had missed a meeting specially scheduled to accommodate him A significant portion of the discussion focused on the outstanding Telkom Towers forensic report. Members insisted on receiving the full, unedited report, rejecting any "recycled" presentations. They argued that the Committee had a legal right to the report for its oversight function and that the reason given for its non-submission, that it contained sensitive information, was insufficient and undermined Parliament. After deliberations, the Committee agreed to schedule a special meeting to receive the report. The DPWI delegation then proceeded with its presentation on the Immovable Asset Register (IAR). The officials explained that the IAR was a dynamic tool requiring continuous enhancement to ensure compliance with the Government Immovable Asset Management Act (GIAMA), proper accounting for immovable assets valued at R151 billion, and provision of credible information for service delivery. The presentation covered the breakdown of land utilisation per province, the progress on vesting state land, with an anticipated completion date of the 2026/27 financial year, and the release of land parcels for socio-economic objectives like land reform and human settlements. Critical success factors cited included full implementation of the IAR operating model, integrating the asset management system, and collaboration with key stakeholders. During the discussion, Members asked numerous questions. Questions were raised about state buildings on Ingonyama Trust land. Further questions covered the classification and valuation of land under traditional authorities, the disposal criteria for underutilised land, the consistency of recording systems across government departments, and the Department's plans to address staff capacity challenges within the asset registry.