TUESDAY, 16 MAY 2000 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:04.

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Dr E E JASSAT: Madam Speaker, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) welcomes the decision by the President of the United States not to put undue pressure on African governments in their efforts to improve access to essential medicines through legal measures consistent with international trade agreements;

(2) acknowledges the offers by five multinational drug companies to reduce the prices of antiretroviral medicines;

(3) believes that such a reduction is a positive step, but recognises that the reduction will not make antiretroviral therapy affordable for equal access by all South Africans; and

(4) supports the efforts of our Government to find solutions to making expensive drug therapy available to all South Africans through a multipronged approach, including negotiations with drug companies, generic substitution, parallel imports and compulsory licensing.

[Applause.]

Mr N J CLELLAND: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House -

(1) notes -

     (a)     the admission by the ANC that senior members of that party
            may have received money from Allan Boesak's Foundation for
            Peace and Justice [Interjections.]


     (b)     that the money was donated for charitable works; and


     (c)     that Boesak is currently serving a prison sentence for
            misappropriating the money; and

(2) calls on those senior ANC members to -

     (a)     disclose how much money each received;


     (b)     account for how that money was spent in order to give
            credence to ANC assurances that no one benefited personally
            from the money;


     (c)     undertake to repay the donors who were defrauded of their
            money; and


     (d)     make restitution to the poor communities who were meant to
            benefit from the donor funds.

[Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mr E T FERREIRA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) notes the improvements in the administration and running of the Chatsworth police station after the transfer of senior personnel from this station;

(2) congratulates the acting senior management on making numerous arrests within weeks in office; and

(3) encourages them to keep up the good work until respect for the police station and the SAPS in general has been restored.

Mr G P MNGOMEZULU: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

     (a)     the President of Zimbabwe, Mr Robert Mugabe, has set down
            24 June and 25 June 2000 for the country's parliamentary
            elections; and


     (b)     this announcement has been made when there is concern by
            the international community about violence, democracy and
            the rule of law in Zimbabwe;

(2) believes that these elections will help in stabilising the crisis engulfing the country; and

(3) calls on the government of the day to ensure that the elections are conducted in a manner that is free and fair.

[Applause.]

Mnr H A SMIT: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die Nuwe NP sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis -

(1) kennis neem van dr Allan Boesak se skokkende bewerings op ‘n mediakonferensie op Sondag, 14 Mei 2000, dat top-C-lede en ANC- kabinetslede geld van die stigting ontvang het ten opsigte waarvan hy skuldig bevind is en nou tronkstraf uitdien;

 2) van mening is dat hierdie uitlatings 'n skadu oor elke ANC-minister
    werp; (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr H A SMIT: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the New NP:

That the House - (1) notes Dr Allan Boesak’s shocking allegations, at a media conference on Sunday, 14 May 2000, that top ANC members and ANC Cabinet members received money from the foundation in respect of which he was found guilty and is now serving a prison sentence;

(2) is of the opinion that these remarks cast a shadow over each and every ANC Minister;]

(3) demands that every ANC Minister should, within 24 hours, declare whether he or she received any money or favour from any of the relevant trusts, and, if so, in what form it was received …

[Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, will you please take your seat! [Interjections.]

Mr H A SMIT: And -

(4) should no reaction be forthcoming from ANC Cabinet Ministers, the public will have to assume that such members actually did receive favours and are therefore also guilty …

[Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Members, if you make such a row, the people who are speaking cannot hear. [Interjections.] I was trying very hard to be heard over the speaker and it was not possible. So please desist from making such a noise.

Mr T M GONIWE: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: That motion is exactly the same as the one that was moved by the DP.

The SPEAKER: Order! This very often happens. [Interjections.]

Mr T M GONIWE: Madam Speaker, he was just saying it in soprano. That is all.

The SPEAKER: Order! Well, I will not comment on the musical notes used.

Mr H A SMIT: Madam Speaker, will you allow me to complete my motion? [Interjections.] The SPEAKER: Order! You had actually used up all your time. Your entire motion will be printed. [Interjections.]

Dr G W KOORNHOF: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) notes the reported Cosatu meeting today which will discuss, among other things, the six-day ultimatum that Cosatu gave at its national strike on 10 May;

(2) calls on Cosatu to return to the bargaining table to seek solutions in partnership, not in conflict, with Government and business; and

(3) acknowledges that solutions to jobless growth and rising unemployment will not be found through another national strike.

Mr D LOCKEY: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

     (a)     the people of Ethiopia, undeterred by war with
            neighbouring Eritrea, voted on Sunday in the second
            parliamentary and regional elections held in this troubled
            country; and


     (b)     1 080 candidates were contesting 548 seats in the Council
            of Peoples' Representatives or parliament;

(2) recognises that the election was overshadowed by the resumption of fighting in the border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea; and

(3) calls on both governments to commit themselves to peace and stability in order to enhance democracy in their respective countries.

[Applause.]

Mr L M GREEN: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the ACDP:

That the House -

(1) takes note of the University of Cape Town’s Prof Wilmot James’ report entitled Values, Education and Democracy, which was handed to the Minister of Education this week; and

(2) requests the Minister, since the report deals with major ethical issues, to consult the wider church and religious communities for their comments, particularly on the secular humanist content, that may well violate widely held religious beliefs, before introducing these ideas in our schools.

Dr P W A MULDER: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die VF sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis -

(1) kennis neem dat daar na bewering mense is wat die herdenking van die Anglo-Boereoorlog vir finansiële gewin misbruik;

(2) verder kennis neem van ernstige bewerings van korrupsie en moontlike finansiële gewin by die Anglo-Boereoorlog-stigting in Bloemfontein;

(3) versoek dat die akte van oprigting van hierdie stigting, die name van sy lede en alle skenkings wat die stigting ontvang het in die openbare belang bekend gemaak word; en

 3) die Ouditeur-generaal versoek om alle rekords van die stigting
    dringend te ondersoek, aangesien staatsgeld betrokke is, omdat dit
    onaanvaarbaar is dat 'n stigting gebruik word om die doeltreffende
    beheer van staatsgeld onmoontlik te maak. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Dr P W A MULDER: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the FF:

That the House -

(1) notes that it is alleged that there are people misusing the commemoration of the Anglo-Boer War for financial gain;

(2) further notes serious allegations of corruption and possible financial gain by the Anglo-Boer War Foundation in Bloemfontein;

(3) requests that in the public interest the memorandum of association of this foundation, the names of its members and all donations received by the foundation be made known; and

(4) requests the Auditor-General urgently to investigate all records of the foundation, since public funds are involved, as it is unacceptable for a foundation to be used to make the efficient control of public funds impossible.]

Mr N M DUMA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that the opening of the Kalahari peace park has been hailed as Africa’s conservation model for the 21st century;

(2) further notes that the Kalahari Transfrontier Park is a result of the amalgamation of the Gemsbok National Park in Botswana and South Africa’s Kalahari Gemsbok National Park into a single ecological and tourism unit;

(3) recognises that tourists will now be able to buy permits to travel through the park without constraints; and

(4) commends the governments of South Africa and Botswana for setting the trend in managing Africa’s sensitive ecological and tourism industries.

[Applause.]

Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House - (1) notes the comments of the secretary-general of the ANC that members of Cosatu must ``intensely hate capitalism and engage in a struggle against it’’;

(2) resolves to condemn the most senior party-political office bearer of the ANC for his unpatriotic behaviour, the effect of which will be to further turn investors away from South Africa;

(3) calls on the Government to repudiate the secretary-general of the ANC in view of the fact that his inflammatory rhetoric will totally undermine the economic policies which the Government claims to be pursuing; and

(4) calls on Government and the ANC to have the courage of their convictions and to declare whether or not the secretary-general of the ANC represents Government policy or not, whatever the case might be.

[Interjections.]

Mr V B NDLOVU: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) notes the raging fight between the police and gangsters here in the Western Cape;

(2) points out to the senior management of the province that they should beef up their human resources in order to fight these hooligans;

(3) requests equipment for the police reservists who work among these groups so as to prevent them from being injured; and

(4) requests the community of the Western Cape not to support these thugs and gangsters, but to isolate them.

Sister B NCUBE: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

     (a)     the International Day of Families was observed for the
            seventh time yesterday; and

     (b)     this annual observance reflects the importance the
            international community attaches to families as basic units
            of society and its concern regarding the wellbeing of
            families around the world;

(2) recognises that the International Day of Families provides an opportunity to promote awareness of issues relating to families and to promote appropriate action; and

(3) calls on the Department of Welfare to continue with its efforts to reclaim the family as an important unit in realising our vision of a caring society.

[Applause.]

Mr F BEUKMAN: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the New NP:

That the House -

(1) calls on the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr N Dlamini-Zuma, to discuss with Mr Kabila, on an urgent basis, the detention of journalists in the Democratic Republic of Congo to try to bring about their immediate release;

(2) calls on the South African Government to put diplomatic and political pressure on Mr Kabila to ensure that the right of journalists to act under section 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is respected;

(3) condemns the illegal detention of the editor of La Libre Afrique;

(4) condemns the detention of the journalists of the Umuja Daily;

(5) acknowledges that the assault on press freedom and media diversity in OAU member states is a serious threat to the concept of an African renaissance; and

(6) calls on the South African Government to promote the principle of press freedom and media diversity as an integral part of its domestic and foreign policy.

Chief N Z MTIRARA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) expresses its appreciation of the decisive disciplinary measures taken by the officials of the MTN League in banning Mr Peter Rabali for life on charges of match-fixing in a league match between Dynamos and City Sharks; and

(2) hopes that this decision will send a clear message to all sporting officials to keep the sport, which is of national interest, clean.

        PRESIDENT MBEKI'S MEETING WITH BRITISH PRIME MINISTER

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) notes that President Mbeki departs today to meet with British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, where the issue of a solution to the unrest in our region will dominate the agenda;

(2) believes that our country, and in particular President Mbeki, has unique skills and experience which can contribute to regional peace and stability; and

(3) wishes the President every success in achieving a peaceful solution to the unrest.

Agreed to.

                      ACCIDENT AT BEATRIX MINE

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) notes with sadness the tragic deaths of seven miners at the Beatrix Mine near Virginia in the Free State;

(2) extends its heartfelt sympathies and condolences to the bereaved families; and

(3) expresses the hope that no effort will be spared in order to prevent the recurrence of such a tragedy.

Agreed to.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

Debate on Vote No 4 - Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:

The MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the presence here of my provincial colleagues who, jointly with the department and the Ministry, manage the arts and culture in South Africa. They are the provincial MECs of arts and culture. I would also like to pay tribute to our portfolio committee in the National Assembly and the select committee in the NCOP, who deal with issues of language, culture, science and technology.

I, of course, would also like to pay tribute to my colleagues who are here to participate with us in this important debate that relates to the future of this country. I would like to express my gratitude for the constant support we have received from the Presidency with regard to our efforts to reach out and form international relationships with other countries, and to help us bring innovation to the centre of thinking in this country.

At this dawn of the 21st century we are, indeed, as our hon President has said, a nation at work for a better life. Increasingly, we find ourselves as part of the global community, challenged to continue to redefine ourselves as a nation and as a country, and to adapt to ever-changing circumstances and developments. In the sectors of arts, culture, science and technology, I believe that we are excellently positioned to grasp emerging opportunities in a meaningful and fruitful manner and to play a defining role in the success of our nation in the African century. Indeed, we will continue to shape and promote the emerging society, ie South Africa.

The promotion and appropriate use of creativity and innovation will, I believe, determine the socioeconomic success and global impact of different countries in the coming years, and creativity and innovation are the heart of my department’s work. My Ministry continues to impact on our national identity, and South Africa’s new coat of arms, which was unveiled by President Thabo Mbeki on Freedom Day last month, is a symbol in which we can all take pride. A national coat of arms or state emblem is the highest visual symbol of the state, and the change reflects Government’s aim to highlight the democratic transition in South Africa and infuse a new sense of patriotism.

In my speech at last year’s debate on my Vote, I outlined our work since 1994 and illustrated our multifaceted range of activities and programmes. As hon members know, we underwent an extensive process of research and consultation, both looking at international best practice and closely examining our particular local context in formulating and introducing legislation for the sectors in our portfolio, and successfully establishing an institutional framework based on democratic principles.

The challenge of the next years is to further build on established policy and to dynamically adapt our thinking and action for the future, based on the realities of changing circumstances. Our work has been, and will continue to be, based on the principle of Batho Pele, and I hope to show in the few minutes that I have to speak today that this theme runs through a broad and diverse range of programmes which fall under the auspices of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology.

Developing on this theme, I wish to state the earnestness with which we have shaped our work and that of our institutions in line with presidential imperatives, national priorities and the cluster structures of Government. For instance, it gives me pleasure to note that the department played a pivotal role in the recently convened Presidential Aids Advisory Panel and contributed scientific validity to an increasingly political debate. We are actively addressing the threat of HIV/Aids to our nation through a diverse range of projects and interventions aimed at having a multisectoral impact on combating the power of the disease. Importantly, one of our strategies is the development of a vaccine. The department’s contribution to this, which is part of a package of funding from the private sector, international funding agencies and others, has been doubled this year.

The amount of R925,287 million allocated to my department for the year 2000- 01 reflects an increase in our budgetary allocation of R120,8 million or 15,3%. This increase to nearly R1 billion is significant when compared to the amount of R329,174 million allocated in 1994.

As I have mentioned, we have adapted our structures to ensure congruence with the cluster structure and an increasing integration of arts, culture, science and technology activities. Broadly, the department is divided into six business units based on the Cabinet clusters in which we are directly involved. This improved synergy, it is hoped, will further enable the effective utilisation of resources, including human resources.

However, if we simplify the division of our budgetary allocation, we can then say that an amount of R333,803 million will go to arts and culture and R566,223 million to science and technology activities. Innovation and creativity are key to success this century, and I believe that our Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology has successfully based its work on these tenets.

The concept of moving innovation to the centre is supported in fiscal terms by our budget and there is a significant increase in allocation to the Innovation Fund to an amount of R125 million, up by R50 million from last year. To complement this, the allocation to special science and technology projects and investigations has been increased from R45,4 million to R68,4 million.

Innovation-based research and the effective use of forecasting and foresighting are closely linked. This century we are constantly challenged to shape and reshape our identity, informed by our past, contextualised by our present and given direction by our future. Foresighting is the most effective map for charting that future. It was a significant achievement for South Africa and our department when just over a month ago the 12 sector reports of the foresight project were handed to the President. Beyond the value for the nation of our foresight initiative, it is my hope that the results will have a significant impact on our region and on other developing countries around the world. I will touch on this again in connection with my work as chairperson of the Commonwealth Science Council.

The foresight findings indicate a decline in resource-based economic activities and signal the future ascendancy of a knowledge-based economy. The wealth of biodiversity in South Africa and our immense tourism potential are focal points for growth. We need to develop our human capital, significantly enhance South Africa’s ability to commercialise and exploit emerging technologies, and capitalise on niche markets. I am confident that the many programmes of my department, our national system of innovation and our evolving policies on arts, culture and heritage, as well as, for instance, the enhancement of access to information through the establishment of the unified National Library of South Africa, will all contribute significantly to our ability to meet the challenges and use the opportunities that lie ahead.

The department is geared to meeting the future with an eye on the present and a strong foothold in the past. As our hon President so richly illustrated in his speech at the launch of the foresight results, South Africa has a diverse and dynamic heritage that is a rich source of ideas and traditions, and is only now receiving the recognition due to it.

The recent discoveries at Drimolen take us back to the cradle of mankind, the innovative use of our indigenous technologies and other knowledge bases propel us forward and the Southern African Large Telescope project, sets our sights on the stars. During this financial year my Ministry will introduce legislation aimed at establishing regulatory mechanisms for the protection of such resources, for instance the Protection and Promotion of South African Indigenous Knowledge Bill.

Another mechanism through which we have made a significant impact on the cultural landscape in South Africa is the legacy project and its work to ensure that previously marginalised and neglected aspects of our heritage are addressed. The Nelson Mandela Museum in the Eastern Cape, currently receiving over 700 visitors a day, is proving both a local and an international success.

Numerous different legacy projects are under way, and this year’s budget will fund, inter alia, the Albert Luthuli House museum, which has been allocated R500 000, and the Khoisan project, which has been allocated R2 million. The budget also makes provision for the establishment of the SA Heritage Resources Agency, commonly known as Sahra, and the National Heritage Council, which has been allocated R3,7 million. Integrating legacy projects, other heritage initiatives and cultural tourism projects with our spatial development initiatives will have measurable socioeconomic effects for South African communities and will give depth and breadth to our unique South African image.

The further devolution of the archives to the provinces will also effectively safeguard our history for posterity, and the National Archives of SA will continue to play the central role in transparent and accountable governance that they have done since 1994. Over R18 million has been dedicated to supporting the performance of this key competency in equitable development and preservation, the key element in record keeping and responsible government.

The oral history programme, run under the auspices of the archives, is also vital in ensuring that inspiring oral history is not lost owing to inequitable resource distribution or illiteracy. I place much value on this project, because I believe that it will create a national treasure of material on and from our people.

Central to the multicultural heritage which informs us and our identity as a nation, is language. Langtag, the process of consultation towards a national language policy, started in 1995, with the adoption of the Langtag report in August 1996. This formed the basis of the draft language policy and plan presented at the second language indaba, held earlier this year in Durban. It gives me pleasure to note that our language plan was described as ``a realistic route to practical multilingualism’’.

The draft Language Policy Bill and the draft Translation and Interpreting Professions Council Bill will aim at promoting the equitable use of our official languages, as well as developing the previously marginalised languages. Appropriately, Heritage Day this year will celebrate our multilingualism.

The development of the performing arts in South Africa has rivalled language issues in terms of media interest and public opinion. As I have said, we are in the phase of growth in which we must build on existing policy in terms of changing contexts. The promotion and development of all South African art forms is of vital importance and worth to the country, and the department will continue to dedicate funding to a broad spectrum of programmes.

While institutions such as the National Arts Council and Business and Arts SA have had marked success as arms-length institutions in support of the arts, there have been varying levels of success in transformation with regard to the former performing arts councils. Most notably, the situation at the State Theatre has highlighted the complexity of arms-length management and adherence to due and democratic process by the state. The Playhouse Company, on the other hand, is a notable success, with transformation firmly in place and marketable programmes meeting public needs. I would like to restate my belief that solid institutions form the cornerstone of democracy.

A number of months ago, I initiated a process for strategically managing the future development of the performing arts in South Africa. I will be assessing, in detail, the current circumstances of the former performing arts councils and their former companies, as well as the Market Theatre, and will engage in consultation with relevant stakeholders, including Minmec and the portfolio committee. A document emanating from this process will be widely publicised.

I will also seek to examine the role of educational institutions in training and strategic arts development projects and have already raised the issue of arts in schools with the Department of Education. Any South African newspaper bears witness to the abundance of creativity and artistic expression in our country, and my Ministry will ensure that we chart a clear and strong course for the future. The promotion of arts and culture is budgeted to an amount of nearly R24 million, which complements the National Arts Council’s R25 million for arts funding and advocacy work.

The impoverished death of some of the leading figures on the South African music scene has focused attention on the need to redefine the local music industry and its processes. The recently held public hearings and the music industry task team sought to examine future strategies for the sector, with the input of local role-players and international experts. The process of developing the music industry is complex and involves a number of role- players and a range of Government departments. I intend to raise pertinent issues with my colleagues and leaders in the sector. Our music industry has huge potential in terms of job opportunities, building the national identity, nurturing local talent and wealth creation, and we will proactively engage with stakeholders in steering a course for the future.

The film industry’s potential is already being tapped, and my hon colleague Deputy Minister Mabandla will outline developments in this regard. Another key intervention by my department is aimed at skills development, job creation and economic growth, and this is contained in the technology diffusion programmes.

The technology stations programmes increase the capacity of small, medium and micro enterprises for technology assimilation, and our support is currently running at R13 million. The department has established a co- operative arrangement with certain technikons at which technology advisors are placed to facilitate interaction between the education institutions and small, medium and micro enterprises. This aims to promote efficient processing of, and innovative strategies to use, products such as metalworks, chemicals and electronics. Launched in May 1999, we envisage that this programme will be rolled out to a greater number of technikons during the course of the next five years.

The effective distribution of available knowledge is a critical function of a national system of innovation, as is an enhanced public understanding of science and technology. Technology diffusion can boost progress in South Africa through appropriate combinations of domestic and imported technologies. For small and medium enterprises to become more competitive and to carve out niche areas, access to technology and an innovative mind- set are crucial. The technology for SMMEs programme was designed to focus on encouraging technology transfer within the local economy to increase the capacity of small businesses to compete successfully in a globalised economy.

My department, in partnership with the Department of Trade and Industry, will, over a three-year period, establish three pilot programmes in the areas of technology development, innovation support and technology demonstration, including a technology demonstration centre, an innovation support centre and a technology incubator. I hope that the knowledge and experience gained in significant projects such as these will be of benefit to other developing countries as well, and one mechanism through which my Ministry aims to share such expertise is in championing knowledge- networking through my role as chair of the Commonwealth Science Council. I assumed this position in February, and I see the Commonwealth Science Council as a vehicle to bring together key stakeholders in government, industry and universities in both the formal and informal sectors to explore and exploit opportunities for innovation in niche areas. I will endeavour to draw attention to the need to harness indigenous capacity to design innovative solutions to development programmes and problems in Africa and Commonwealth countries.

I would like to raise the visibility of the Commonwealth Science Council and highlight its increasing role and relevance in innovation, knowledge- networking, the adaptation of foresight models for different regions and the promotion of science and technology for environmentally suitable development and improvement in the quality of life for communities. In short, we will implement the Batho Pele programme. Central to my vision for the Commonwealth Science Council is the concept of moving innovation to the centre. In South Africa we are well on the way to achieving this. As we have noted, there is a substantial increase to the Innovation Fund, which is funded to an amount of R125 million in this year’s budget.

We have successfully shifted scientific thinking and research into a more competitive, results-driven arena. The Innovation Fund encourages multi- disciplinary collaboration through consortia-type partnering on projects capable of addressing problems or challenges serious enough to impede socioeconomic development. Projects allocated funding last year proved the strategy’s ability to benefit the nation, especially the previously disadvantaged communities, in a variety of ways. For instance, the Crime Prevention Resources Centre, which is to be opened on 28 June, is a direct result of Innovation Fund support and will act as a conduit between Government and the research fraternity focusing on the prevention of crime through innovative and effective interventions based on sound research.

The in-depth research commissioned through our cultural industries growth strategy, Cigs, has been successfully used for the strategy’s project funding. With a budget of R3 million, certain crucial areas of intervention in the cultural industries have been identified. Some of the projects supported include the establishment of sector education and training authorities, Setas, for the cultural industry, an impact study of South Africa Music Day and a study into the visibility of glass-bead manufacturing, all so relevant to South African crafters and artists.

Under the cultural industries growth strategy, urban regeneration through cultural projects has also been addressed, and a model for South African creative city projects is being developed, targeting Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg. During the course of this year we will also roll out three pilot projects in support of rural development.

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, you are well over your time. Please draw your remarks to a close, please.

The MINISTER: Thank you! [Applause.] Well, I have been given the latitude to draw my remarks to a close. I will continue with some of the important issues in the summing-up time. My colleague the Deputy Minister will also deal with some of the issues. We have such a broad department, which is transversal in nature. Certainly, I think we need double the time of any other Minister when presenting our budget! [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, you may wish to take that up with the President!

Ngaka M W SEROTE: Mme Sebui, Tona ya Lefapha le Motlatsa-Tona, Motlotlegi Rre Jacob Zuma le maloko a Ntlokgolo, Tautona ya Aforika Borwa, Rre Thabo Mbeki, o itsege lefatshe lotlhe e le ene a eteletseng pele kgang ya tsoseletso ya lefatshe la rona la Aforika Borwa, le Aforika ka bophara. Gape kgang nngwe e a buisaneng ka yona ke ya go re bontsha gore lefatshe le la rona le na le merafe e le mebedi, morafe wa basweu le morafe wa bantsho. Go rialo re kaya bohumi le khumanego. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[Dr M W SEROTE: Madam Speaker, Minister and Deputy Minister, hon Jacob Zuma and hon members of this House, the hon the President of South Africa, Mr Thabo Mbeki, is well-known for his role in reviving the African renaissance in South Africa and the rest of Africa. He has also stated that our country consists of two nations, blacks and whites, the rich and the poor.]

An HON MEMBER: Madam Speaker, there is no interpretation service available.

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, you may proceed, but there is no interpretation. [Interjections.] Oh, the interpreter has just arrived, so we can now proceed. Please proceed, hon Mr Serote.

Ngaka M W SEROTE: Mme Sebui, ke tlaa simolola kwa tshimologong. Fa ke ne ke simolola ke dumedisitse Motlatsa-Tautona, Rre Jacob Zuma, mme gape ka bua ka fao Tautona ya lefatshe le e leng yona e eteletseng pele puisano ka ga tsoseletso ya Aforika ka bophara, le ya lefatshe la rona. Gape ke buile gore Tautona o bontsitshe ka mokgwa o lefatshe la rona le nang le merafe e le mebedi, mongwe e le wa basweu, mme o mongwe e le wa bantsho. Seo se supa bohumi le khumanego. Go matshwanedi gore fa re bua ka voutu e re buang ka yona gompieno, re ipotse gore yona e ama jang kgang e ya ga Tautona. Gape ke tshwanelo gore fa re re le kwa ditirong tsa rona, fa re bua ka tsa ngwao, boitseanape, maleme le tegenoloji, re ipotse gore aa re kgona go dira gore dilo tse re buang ka tsona di thuse go fetola matshelo jaaka Tautona a kaile. Aa dilo tse di kgona go fetola matshelo a rona, di ama malwetse a a leng teng, di buisanya ka kagisano le go bopa lefatshe la rona gore le kopane, mme gape di buisanya ka gore re dire jang go ka naya Aforika ka bophara sengwe.

Fa re le mo Ntlong e ya Palamante, ke tshwanelo go bo re akantse ka kgang e ya ga Tautona. Gape ke tshwanelo fa re le mo Ntlong e ya rona, megopolo ya rona e ame ntlha ya gore aa dilo tse tsa tlotla di ka kgonagala, jaaka Tautona a umakile.

Ked rata go bolelela Ngaka Ben Ngubane le Mme Bridgette Mabandla gore ke na le mathata. Mathatha a me ke gore erile fa ke ntse ke buisa dipampiri tse di buang ka ga voutu eno, ka seka ka bona gope kwa di umakang mokgwa o o kailweng ke Tautona. Gompieno fa ke ntse ke reeditse Ngaka Ngubane a bua, ke lemogile gore go na le dilo dingwe tse di dirilweng tse di amanang le ngwao, tse di dirang gore go nne le tswelelopele e e rileng. Mathatha ano a Tona, Motlatsa-Tona le komiti ya Palamente ba tshwanetse go dula mmogo, mme ba buisanye ka gore madi a puso e a abelang lefapha, a dirisiwe jang go netefatsa gore megopolo ya komiti le ya lefapha e tsamaelane.

Seno se tshwanetse go diragala kwa tshimologong, mme e seng kwa bofelong. Seo ke ntlha ya pele e ke ne neng ke batla go o tlhagisa. Sa bobedi ke gore ke utlwile Ngaka Ngubane a bua ka go emela thoko ga rona mo ntlheng ya ngwao le boitseanape. Re gorogile mo re tshwanetseng go ipotsa gore a mmuso a tshwanetse go emela fa thoko fa batho batho ba itirela boithathelo.

Ke dumelana le puo e e reng go na le fa Tona le komiti ya lefapha di tshwanetseng go ikgogela morago. Fela go na le mo re tshwanetseng go tsena mme re buisane gore go ka agiwa lefatshe le la rona jang, le gore madi a go dira seo a abiwe jang. Re ka se ikgogele kwa thoko, mme ra letla batho go itirela ka mo ba ratang ka teng gonne re ba neile madi.

Sa boraro, rona botlhe ba ba ntseng fano re a itse gore kgang e e kailweng ke Tautona ya merafe e mebedi mo Aforika Borwa, e ka fetola dilo tse re di fitlheletseng go tloga ka 1994. Fa re ntse re buisanya ka ga tlotla, re tshwanetse go swetsa gore re dire jang ka ga kgang e ya merafe e mebedi. Gape go tshwanetse gore fa re lebelela mokgwa o matlotlo a dirisitsweng ka teng, go bonagale gore re dirisitse madi jang go fedisa lebaka le la merafe e mebedi. Go ka dira seo, Tona, lefapha le komiti ya lefapha ba tshwanetse go nna mmogo, mme ba akanye gore ba dire jang ka kgang e; e seka ya nna sengwe se se diriwang ke batho ba ba rileng ka fa letlhakoreng le le lengwe, le ba bangwe ka mo go le lengwe. Re tshwanetse go nna mmogo, mme re buisanye ka ga yona.

Fa ke lebelela mokgwa o madi e dirisitsweng ka teng, ga go gope fa be bonang okare ntlha eo e etswe tlhoko, mme go dirilwe eng go ka fedisa bothata oo.

Re itse sentle gore thutho ele ya bogologolo e dirile batho ba le bantsi ba ba sa bueng sekgowa kgotsa sebun gore ba romele bana kwa dikolong tse e neng e le tsa makgowa. Bana bao fa ba boa, ba boa ba sa tlhole ba itse dipuo tsa rona. Rona re le ba ngwao re tshwanetse go dira eng go netefatsa gore e seke ya nna bana bao fela ba ba rutiwang maleme a, mme bana ba Aforika Borwa botlhe ba rutiwe maleme otlhe, ka gonne ke ngwao ya rona rotlhe. [Legofi.]

A go na le mo re tsenyang letsogo teng, re le ba Lefapha la Setso le la Boitseanape, gore re thuse go tsweletsa ntlha e? Gape re itse sentle gore Ngaka Verwoerd, fa a ne a okametse Lefapha la Thuto, one a bolela a sa tshabe gore batho ba bantsho ga ba tshwanela go ithuta sepe ka tsa boitseanape le tegenoloji, ka gonne fa ba ka ithuta tsona, ba tla ithaya ba re ke makgowa. Ke ka moo compieno fa o bua le Ma-Aforika boitseanape le tegenoloji, baa tshoga ka gonne ga ba itse gore a ba tlaa kgona kgotsa nyaya.

Ke ne ke ratile gore fa ke lebelela mo go buisanngwang ka madi a a tshwanetseng go bo a fetola dilo di tshwana le tse, ra be re bona gore re dira jang mmogo gore re fetole selo se gore bontsi ba bana ba tsenele dithuto tsa boitseanape le tsa tegenoloji.

Ke gopola thata gore ngwaga wa 1998 e ne e le ngwaga wa saense le tegenoloji. Go ne go sa tshwanela go bo go feletse foo. Go ne go tshwanetse gore re simolole sengwe se se tswelelang pele, mme gompieno re bone gore selo sele se re se simolotseng ka 1998 ke se fa se tsamayang teng, mme se lebile kwa. Fa ke bala dibuka tse di bontshang mokgwa o madi a dirisiwang ka teng, ga go gope mo go ntshupetsang ntlha e.

Sa bofelo, ke itumela thata gonne go na le sengwe se go ntseng go buisanngwa ka ga sone se go tweng Public Funds Management Act. Ke ne ke kopa gore molao o e nne one o re kopanyang, mme o dire gore rona re le ba Ntlokgolo le ba Lefapha la Setso re buisane ka mathatha a rona a mantsi. Public Finance Management Act e tla nna lona lerumo le le tla re thusang go lwa ntwa e ya gore re tsamaye mmogo jang re tshwarane ka matsogo, gonne ga go thuse sepe gore re fapane.

Gape ke itumelela gore rona ba Ntlokgolo le Lefapha ga re ise re fapane. Fa re bua jaana, ra bo re bona okare go na le diphoso tse go tshwanetseng gore re nne fa fatshe, re buisane ka tsona. Nna fa ke lebeletse ke itse sentle gore ga go moo Ngaka Ngubane kgotsa Mme Mabandla le rona maloko a Ntlo e re fapanang teng ka kgang e. Fela go na le mo o kareng ga re nne mmogo, re buisane. Ke ne ke kopa gore re tshwae poso e, gonne fa re dira jalo, re tlaa kgona go buisana ka kgang ya Tautona.

Maloba jaana ke ne ke ile kwa Kippies. Kippies ke ko maitisong. Ka malatsi a mangwe ke kopana le Mme Mabandla teng koo. [Setshego.] Ka labotlhano fa ke ne ke le kwa Kippies, go ne go le rre mongwe - ke tshepa gore Ngaka Ben Ngubane o a mo itse - o go tweng ke Phuzukhemisi. Puo e ke ne ke batla go e lebisa mo go yena, gonne erile fa ke ntse jalo, ipotsa gore ke ka ntlha ya eng rre yoo e le setswerere se se kanakana, a bo a sa itsiwe sentle jaaka go tshwanetse mo lefatsheng la rona, ka gonne dipina … [Tsenoganong.] (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)

[Dr M W SEROTE: Madam Speaker, I will start at the beginning. I started off by greeting the Deputy President, Mr Jacob Zuma, and spoke about the role played by the President of this country in reviving the African renaissance in South Africa and the rest of the continent. I also said something about the President’s comment that ours is a country consisting of two nations, the white nation and the black nation, ie the rich and the poor.

When we discuss this Vote we should ask how it is going to affect this matter that the President spoke of. It is also important that when we are at our workplaces and when we talk about arts, science, languages and technology we should ask whether we are able to help effect change as the President has indicated. Can these things change our lives, fight diseases, talk about peace and unite our country, and what can we contribute to the rest of Africa?

As we are seated here in Parliament, we should think about this matter that the President has raised. It is also important, as we go about our daily business, that whenever the issue of arts, languages, science and technology is raised, we should be looking at how these things can help change our lives, as the President said.

I want to inform the hon Dr Ben Ngubane and Mrs Brigitte Mabandla that I have a problem. When I went through the documentation which deals with this Vote, I noticed that it did not say anything about what the President said. As I listened to Dr Ngubane, I noted that progress has been made in the field of arts. The Minister, the Deputy Minister and the parliamentary committee should come together and discuss how money is to be spent, to ensure that the committee and the department work together.

This should happen at the beginning, not at the end. This is the first point I wanted to raise. Secondly, I heard Dr Ngubane mention that we do not participate in matters affecting arts and science. We should ask whether the state is supposed to stand aside when people do as they please.

I go along with the view that sometimes the Minister and the portfolio committee should stand aside and let others deal with issues. But there are areas where we should intervene to see how we can help build our nation, and how the money to do that is being distributed. We cannot stand aside and let people do as they please, merely because we have supplied them with funds.

Thirdly, we all know that the issue that has been raised by the President about the two nations in South Africa can reverse all the gains made since

1. As we deal with issues relating to respect, we should also come up with suggestions on how to deal with the question of the two nations. We should also look at how money is used, and how it can alleviate this issue of the two nations. In order to do this, the Minister and the portfolio committee should come together and deal with this matter; it should not be something that is only done by certain people on the one side and another group on the other. We should come together and talk about it. When I look at how the money is spent, there is nowhere where I can see how this matter is being dealt with and what has been done to resolve this problem.

We know very well that the education of the past caused many people who were not able to speak English or Afrikaans to send their children to previously white schools. Usually when these children return from such schools, they are unable to speak their own languages. What should we do to ensure that it is not only these children who are taught these languages, but that all South African children are taught all languages? [Applause.]

Is the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology doing anything to help take this issue forward? We also know very well that when Dr Verwoerd was Minister of Education, he stated that black people were not supposed to be taught science and technology, because they would think of themselves as white people if they learnt those subjects. That is why when one talks about science and technology to black people, they become frightened because they are not sure whether or not they will succeed if they learn these subjects. When we look at funds which are supposed to deal with this problem, we should look at ways of encouraging students to take science and technology as subjects.

The year 1998 was the Year of Science and Technology. This should not have ended there. If this had continued today, we would have seen how this has progressed and where it is headed. When I look at the documents which show how money is spent, I do not see this point being mentioned.

Lastly, I am pleased to note that something that people have been talking about, namely the Public Funds Management Act, has materialised. I want to make an appeal for this Act to unite us, so that we as the House and the Department of Arts and Culture can talk about our many problems. We will use the Public Funds Management Act as a weapon which will help unite us, because fighting will get us nowhere.

I am pleased that the House and the department have never crossed swords. I am saying this, because there are problems which need to be sorted out. We do not disagree with either Dr Ngubane or Mrs Mabandla on this matter, but sometimes it seems as if we do not agree on issues. We should correct this mistake and when we do, we will be able to deal with what the President spoke about. The other day I went to Kippies - I sometimes meet Mrs Mabandla there! [Laughter.] On Friday when I was at Kippies, there was a certain musician there - I hope Dr Ngubane has heard of this man - known as Phuzukhemisi. I wanted to direct this comment to him, because as I was sitting there, I asked myself why this talented man was not as well known as he should be in this country. His songs … [Interjections.]]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, I have allowed you extra time to make up for the interpretation mishap, but your time has now expired. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Dr P W A MULDER: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: I listened to the hon Mr Serote, and I want to compliment him on the proud and beautiful way in which he used his own language in this House. May more members do what he has done. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER: Order! It is not a point of order, but your sentiment is appreciated.

Mr V C GORE: Madam Speaker, in the words of the Microsoft Corporation, which is worth more than $600 million, more than the combined value of the entire Johannesburg Stock Exchange: ``Where do we want to go today?’’ The question needs to be asked where South Africa wants to go in the new information society. South Africa needs to get connected. E-commerce and M- commerce are the latest, fastest ways to connect the global chain of production, supply and distribution. Small and micro enterprises will increasingly need the Internet for on-line ordering services and other business-to-business transactions. Telkom, with its guaranteed monopoly until 2002-03, is a major stumbling block to the full realisation of this huge potential.

Fifty years ago, the American dream was to have a car in every garage. Today, the South African dream must be to have a personal computer in every home. South Africa needs to expand the knowledge base. An educated population is the key to a country’s survival. Millions of South Africans have never even sat down in front of a computer. Yet, the measure of power in the world today is personal computers per capita. Raising citizens’ levels of connectedness must be a top priority. The information revolution will change the way we interact with the outside and the inside world at an ever-increasing pace, but instead of it happening over 100 years, as with the Industrial Revolution, it will now happen over seven years.

South Africa currently lacks a national policy to facilitate the country’s optimal integration into the global information society and to outline clear responsibilities, goals and targets. This is a serious defect in our overall innovation strategy and must be addressed as a matter of urgency. To the Minister, I say that these are words from the 1996 White Paper on Science and Technology. Where are the White and Green Papers on the information society that were promised in that document of October 1996? If South Africa, as a country, wants to ensure that it is part of this revolution and is not condemned to the wrong side of the digital divide, we need to do something now and we need to do something urgently. [Applause.]

Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, six years ago, this nation was at the height of a great adventure, daring to go where no nation had gone before. But since then, we have fallen back into a state of nervousness. It is this nervousness which is costing this nation dearly.

We need to be able to say to two groups of people, two different things. On the one hand, there are those who are bemoaning the fact that opera, ballet and the conventional theatre are in a state of decline. We need to say to them: Yes, we need them and we support them; but the most that this nation can do is to support them morally. Whereas, in respect of the indigenous communities that were denied resources and the opportunity to grow to the full level of their potential, they need to be targeted with state resources in order that South Africa can once again do what is absolutely necessary, and that is to challenge itself. Not until we begin to brand ourselves as Africans and not until this country is able to establish its Africanness will we be able to make the great impact we hope to make on the world. [Interjections.]

The question of arms-length support, which we enunciated in our arts and science policy, was done because we did not want this country ever to have a government imposing a hegemony on the rest of the nation. But, at the same time, we need to unpack this in order that the stewardship obligations which are on us, as Parliament and the executive, are, in fact, fulfilled.

The fact is that we have at the moment a coat of arms which, like the Greek expression, roots itself in the African soil and roots itself in our dim and misty past, but, via the eagle, we are ready to leap forward into our most exciting future. The coat of arms has to be seen as one of the ways in which we are branding ourselves as Africans. We do not need to be afraid of that, because it is only through that and that process that ballet, opera and the rest of the arts in this country can once again be vitalised.

People all over the world are doing this. In the UK, for example, the British have just finished an exercise in which they rebranded themselves. The Indians, Japanese and Russians are doing precisely that. We are betwixt two worlds, not knowing who we are. As much as we want to be part of this IT adventure, we need first to become a nation. The USA would not have been where it is today if it had been two nations - one a nation of slaves and the other a nation of masters. Until we achieve unity, we will not be able to go forward.

The African renaissance gives us a great opportunity to be able to reinterpret ourselves in a completely African manner. That will not be a loss, but a gain. This is the daring that we need to be able to show. Inasmuch as we have started to amalgamate some of our institutions, this process of amalgamation needs to go further in order that we can achieve proper economy of scale. Only then will our institutions be able to create an impact. If 40% of the tourists are coming to our country because of our heritage, that percentage could be made into 60% or 70% through proper amalgamation.

It is also very necessary to recognise that, as with Morocco and a number of countries, crafts, craft villages and cultural centres are the best way of achieving the quickest economic returns and job creation. Our country’s most important priority is to create jobs. If we do not create jobs but continue to lose jobs, then the future stability of our country itself will be in question.

Designs which are uniquely South African need to be evolved, because, once again, via designs, the Italians are selling themselves to the world. They are showing a great deal of flair. That flair becomes fashion. South Africa should not be lagging behind. We have the ability to invest in our own creativity. Therefore democratisation and transformation must go apace. The problem with our museums and many of our institutions is that people within these institutions feel demoralised. Only if they are able to transform themselves faster and quicker, will they be able not only to preserve their positions but to create opportunities for all. The process of transformation can never be taken at a steady pace. It has to happen at an accelerated pace.

The establishment of the audit, finance and personnel internal committee within the department, according to the King commission on co-governance, is a very welcome development and we would like to follow what happens as a result of this. The Public Finance Management Act also allows us, for the first time, to make sure that programmes are properly thought out in order that implementation can then be executed, and Parliament has the role of monitoring that.

To the Minister, I want to say that the question of inventions is one which I think we should be looking at. Some of the inventions like eMox have already been showcased on world television, like on the programme Beyond

1. We have in our country great, young inventors. If we can showcase them, these inventors will have an opportunity within South Africa to contribute to job creation and growth. Our science and technology must also, like the Malaysian example, have a 2020 vision, so that by the year 2020 South Africa will be able to compete with the best in the world in terms of science and technology.

Finally, the problem that we have to guard against is the trickle-down effect, as with, for example, the National Arts Council, where 20% of the budget is used for salaries, so that what goes to the targeted audiences is only a trickle. This then prevents them from utilising state resources for the kind of development that such institutions should be involved in. Only if our arts and our sciences flourish, does this country have the potential of realising the objective of the department, which is: ``The full potential of all the people of our country.’’ [Applause.]

Ms H M MPAKA: Madam Speaker, it is our goal to transform our country so that there will be a better life for all and the poorest of the poor will be brought into the mainstream of our country and economy. The consciousness of the people needs to be awakened and the construction and development of the soul need to be undertaken in order for us to build a proud South African nation.

The ANC does not underestimate the problems that we inherited and acknowledges that we will not overcome these problems within a short period. The challenge facing us is to ensure a budget that will reflect a change in the lives of our people, particularly the previously disadvantaged.

No doubt we all know that our people have been denied access to or influence in facilities such as museums, libraries and monuments. Those libraries that were provided proved to be a disaster, as they were not equipped with valuable materials and resources. At no stage were such communities motivated and empowered in the use of these facilities. If one looks at these basic facilities in relation to communities, one concludes that much more needs to be done to achieve the desired impact, and this budget seeks to do just that.

The value of our culture, heritage, arts and history is immeasurable, particularly during the phase of our reconstruction. Valuable information and resources that would have shaped the evolution of this society have been either distorted or deliberately discarded. If one looks at monuments, large numbers of them reflect the imbalances of the past. In most of them there is no recognition of black heroes and heroines of our country who fell in the wars of liberation. That is a situation that we need to change.

We can sketch the existing ones. For instance, if one takes the Voortrekker Monument in Pretoria, one would probably need to have the Agtertrekker Monument'' in Mamelodi. If one takes the 1820 Foundation in Grahamstown, one may need the1990 Foundation’’ in Rhini, and because of the Huguenot Monument in Franschoek, we would indeed be happy to also have the ``Khoisan Monument’’. We could go on and on. The one that is really fascinating is the Vegkop battlefield at Heilbron, and I would not like to comment on that except to say that our budget needs to ensure change.

There are some 400 publicly funded museums comprising small municipal institutions, provincial museum services which co-ordinate both large and small institutions, and large nationally funded museums which each attract more than 0,5 million visitors a year. These museums are not accessible to the majority of our people.

The challenges we are facing are to ensure that the position of previously disadvantaged people, women, rural communities and disabled people is catered for, and to ensure that there is an equitable balance in the allocation of funding for local artists as against the funding of foreign artists, as well as their development and their improvement of employment status. The marketing potential of major tourist routes and whether the previously disadvantaged people are benefiting from these, should be noted. We need to ensure that all these museums are transformed institutionally and in terms of human resources development. We congratulate the successful endeavours of the community from the Strand, near Somerset West, who have created their own museum on an unused piece of land, with no financial assistance or recognition from any public institution.

In respect of libraries, we need to investigate the possibility of partnerships with the communities to promote Africans and popularise the libraries to enable those communities to account for the moneys spent and also to participate in decision-making on the acquisition of books and documentaries. [Applause.]

Mev A VAN WYK: Mevrou die Speaker, ek wil die swepery en die Parlement daarvoor bedank dat die begroting vir Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie die eerste keer sedert 1994 as eerste dagorder op die parlementêre Ordelys verskyn, en ons in die hoofvergadersaal van die Nasionale Vergadering ‘n perspektief kan probeer bied op die uiterste belangrikheid van hierdie onderskatte sektor. So ‘n geleentheid kan ‘n mens nie laat verbygaan nie.

Het agb lede geweet dat die kultuurnywerheid wêreldwyd beskou word as die vyfde grootste ekonomiese sektor ten opsigte van omset ná finansiële dienste, inligtingstegnologie, die farmaseutiese bedryf en bio- ingenieurswese, en toerisme? Het agb lede geweet dat hierdie sektor oor die algemeen vir tussen 3% en 5% van werkgeleenthede in ontwikkelde lande sorg? In die VSA is dit nog hoër. Het agb lede geweet in plekke soos Europa en die VSA is die primêre rede vir toerisme in die eerste plek kultuur? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs A VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Whippery and Parliament for the fact that for the first time since 1994 the budget for Arts, Culture, Science and Technology appeared as the first order of the day on the Parliamentary Order Paper, and that we can try and offer a perspective on the vital importance of this underestimated sector in the main Chamber of the National Assembly. One cannot allow such an opportunity to pass one by.

Did hon members know that worldwide the culture industry is regarded as the fifth largest economic sector in respect of turnover after financial services, information technology, the pharmaceutical industry and bio- engineering, and tourism? Did hon members know that this sector generally is responsible for between 3% and 5% of job opportunities in developed countries? In the USA this figure is even higher. Did hon members know that in places such as Europe and the USA the primary reason for tourism is in the first place culture?]

I know that our Minister knows this, and the Portfolio Committee knows this, but the rest of Government also needs to know this. I would like to draw the attention of, particularly, the Departments of Finance and of State Expenditure to the fact that this Government is not putting enough investment into the cultural sector.

It is with alarm that the New NP notes that although, as a percentage of the total, the Departmental budget for science, technology and meta- information will grow from 56,18% in the current financial year to 63%, the arts and culture share will diminish from 32% to 28% in the year 2003. This is clear proof that the Government does not realise that culture, heritage and the arts form the pressure cooker of knowledge, and that the great repositories and generators of such knowledge are our libraries, museums, art galleries and performing arts councils, together with educational institutions. This may seem obvious and yet it has not sunk in that learning, performing, producing, researching and publishing in the realm of culture in its widest application create whole people, integrate the heart and mind, produce sound judgment and value systems and, above all, give joy, which is something that cannot be measured in material terms.

I would like to thank the multitude of creative people in every walk of life for making life worthwhile. However, if Government does not want to give due recognition for these reasons, perhaps I may speak to it via its pockets. Did hon members know that industry experts consider the South African music industry to be worth around R2 billion, and that it employs around 12 000 people? Our music industry is still in its infancy and it already pays more than R250 million a year in VAT alone. The South African entertainment industry is valued at approximately R7,4 billion and employs an estimated 20 500 people. The global entertainment industry generated $172,5 billion in 1997, of which the single biggest money-spinner is the film, video and TV industry.

The wellspring of this is the arts and arts education and training. In our country, the Government has abolished art and music as subjects in state schools. Every single thing in our tangible world, from an AK-47 to a satellite, from our spectacles to the cars we drive and the clothes we wear, every single thing ever devised has to be drawn. Somebody has to take drawing and design as a subject. The Government must please reinstitute the study of the arts in schools.

Who will teach children to read music if orchestras are allowed to disappear? What would we do without the Soweto String Quartet? What would we do without an Abel Motsoadi, a Sibongile Khumalo, the Cape Town Philharmonic Ochestra? They create jobs, produce CDs, train students, bring tourists, and draw investment to our industries, because the investment potential of a country is also measured by its cultural development.

Because of the neglect of our culture and our cultural treasures, the lack of prioritisation and the unenlightened attitude towards culture as a focal point of upliftment and prosperity, the New NP regrettably cannot support this budget.

Mme N M TSHEOLE: Mme Sebui, bagaetsho, le wena rraetsho Motlatsa-Tautona, dumelang. Ke batla go lebisa puo ya me go bagaka ba ANC le badiragatsi bao ba tlhokofetseng ba be ba bolokiwa pele go ka lemosiwa botlhokwa ba ditiro tsa bona mo maphelong a rona gompieno, le mo setsong sa ga bo rona. Fa pelenyana monnasetulo wa komiti ya rona o buile ka ntlha e. Jaanong ke batla go ba tlotla: le kwa ba ithobaletseng teng, ba itse gore re gopola ditiro tsa bona.

Batho ba - bao bontsi ba bona ba neng ba sa rutega gonne thuto e ne e dirwa ka dipuo tseo e seng tsa ga bo bona - e ne e le baetapele, mme gompieno re ba re leng sona ka ntlha ya ditiro tsa bona, le mororo thutonyana ya bona e ne e le potlana.

Naga ya ga bo rona e itsiwe jaaka naga e e neng ya bona diphetogo tsa puso e ntšha, ntle le tshololo ya madi, mme seo se diragetse ka ntlha ya batho ba ke buang ka bona ba. Ke ka fao ke ba tlotlang gompieno.

Ke tlile go bua ka ga puo, gonne fa e ne e se ka puo, batho ba ke buang ka ga bona ba, ba ka be ba sa re kgontsha go fitlha fa re leng teng fa. Anthony Holiday, mo kgatisong ya Leadership ya kgwedi eno mo ngwageng o, o ne a lemoga botlhokwa ba puo, ke ka fao a buang a re:

Ours has been a revolution largely achieved through words and symbols.

Fa pelenyana o tswelela pele gape, a re:

The most effective weapons in our liberation have been the slogans, the pamphlets and the intelligence reports …

O ntse a tswelela pele, mme fela ke tlaa kgaola fao. Ke mo nopola jaana, le fa e le gore tota o ne a sa lebisa puo ya gagwe mo go bontsheng mosola wa yona: O ne a e nopola jalo, a bontsha gore o kare puo e ya patisetswa fa go twe puo ke sebetsa se segolo se batho ba ka se dirisang go aga kgotsa go thuba. Tota le mo Beibeleng go a buiwa gore leleme le ka aga kgotsa le ka thuba, mme kana ba raya puo.

Jaanong ke bua jaana, ke batla go gatelela ntlha ya gore dipuo tsa rona di tshwanetse go agiwa le go tlhotlhelediwa, re tle re kgone go fenya ntwa e re santseng re lebane le yona ya go fetola maboko, menagano le ditiro tsa batho ba naga e. Ke a boeletsa: ntwakgolo ke ya molomo.

Le fa Anna Van Wyk a setse a rile lekoko la bona ga nkitla le tshegetsa voutu eno ya tekanyetsokabo, ke rata go laletsa makoko a mangwe gore fa re batla diphetogo mo nageng ya ga bo rona, re tshwanetse go tshegetsa voutu eno, gore re tle re kgone go netefatsa gore bonnyane jo bo leng teng bo dirisiwa go tlisa diphetogo tse di tlhokegang. Fa re gana go e tshegetsa, go tshwana le gore re ka nna fela re sena sepe.

Ke buile le mo dingwageng tse di fetileng gore magareng ga 1994 le 1998 ga go aka ga nna le diphetogo tse dintsi mo go PanSALB le mo Lefapheng la Botaki tebang le dipuo. Fela ga jaana go na le diphetogo tse di leng teng, tse re ka buang ka tsona. Fare sale re ntsha molao o o fetotsweng wa PanSALB, ke gore Pan South African Language Board Amendment Act, go nnile le diphetogo tse dintsi mo go PanSALB. Re itse gore gona jaanong puo nngwe le nngwe mo nageng ya borona e na le lekgotla la go e tlhamela mafoko - ka mantswe a mangwe, dikišinare.

Ntlha e nngwe ke go re le bona Bakgothu le Barwana - ke raya morafe wa ma - Khoi le San - ba na le mokgatlo o o ba rulaganyetsang le go leka go tsosolosa dipuo tsa bona. Ga ke batle go ya lolololo - dikai tsa dilo tse nka di nopolang tse di dirilweng ke PanSALB di dintsi tota. Jaanong le fa madi a le mannye, a re tshegetseng ntlha e.

Fa re ya ka fa lefapheng, re fitlhela e le gore le bona ba dirile. Tona ya rona, Ngaka Ngubane, o boletse ka ga moono le leano la puo - ``language policy and language plan’’ - tseo rona ba komiti re ikemiseditseng gore gongwe e kare ka kgwedi ya Lwetse, fa go kgonega, ra ikgantsha le go ititaya mo magetleng le mo dihubeng gore re kgonne go naya naga ya bo rona lenaneo la dipuo. Jaaka ke setse ke buile, di dintsi tse nka fitlhelang kwa go tsona.

Ntlha e nngwe e e lebaneng le dipuo e ke batlang go bua ka yona ke e Rre Serote a e amileng fa a ne a bua ka bagaka bao ba sikileng ba fiwa tetla ya go bontshwa gore ke dinatla, mme setso le maphelo a rona a ikaegile ka bona. Rona re le komiti ya lefapha re na le lenaane le re batlang gore, fa go kgonega, re tswe ka moono le molao o o tla tlotlomatsang batho bao ba ntseng ba sa kaiwe jaaka batho, go ya ka seo ba se diretseng setso sa rona.

Tona le ena o fetiseditse mo ntlheng ya baopedi. Re a itse gore go setse go nnile le makga a a rileng, mo re boneng batho ba tlhokofala e le badidi, go be go tsamaiwa ka dikuane, go kopiwa ditšhelete gore ba kgone go bolokiwa, mme e le ka ntlha ya gore go ne go sena molao o o ba sireletsang, e bile o lemoga botlhokwa jwa bona. Jaanong rona re a re, le fa seo se le sennye: lemme le phala ga gona sepe. A re tshegetseng molao o, mme re kope gore kamoso ba Matlotlo ba itse gore le fa rona ba lefapha re seke re fapana ka mafoko kgotsa go kolopana ka noga e tshela - kwa ntle ga Anna Van Wyk wa New NP - ga se gore re tshwanetse go okelediwa fela fa re lwa. [Legofi.] (Translation of Setswana speech follows.)

[Mrs N M TSHEOLE: Madam Speaker, hon members and Deputy President, greetings. I want to dedicate my speech to those ANC members and comrades who passed away before their contributions to our lives could be recognised. At the beginning of the debate the chairperson of the committee spoke about this issue. I want to honour them and wish them a peaceful rest. They should also know that we remember their great deeds.

Many of these people were not educated, because education was conducted in languages which they did not understand. They were leaders and even though their education was minimal, we are what we are because of what they did.

Our country is known for the change which brought about a new Government, without blood having being spilled. This was possible because of the people I have spoken about. That is why I am honouring them today.

I am going to talk about language. If it had not been for language the people I have mentioned would not have enabled us to reach where we are today. Anthony Holiday in Leadership of May of this year realised the importance of language. He stated and I quote:

Ours has been a revolution largely achieved through words and symbols.

Further on he stated and I quote:

The most effective weapons in our liberation have been the slogans, the pamphlets and the intelligence reports.

He goes on but I will end there. I quote him even though he was not showing the importance of language. He was referring to language as a builder or a destroyer. Even the Bible states that language can either build or destroy.

Now I want to emphasise the fact that our languages should be built and strengthened so that we can win the war that we are still fighting. We should also change the perceptions of the people of this country. I repeat: the greatest fight is about language.

Even though Anna van Wyk has stated that her party is not going to support this Vote, I would like to appeal to other parties that if we want change in this country then we should support this Vote. This will ensure that the little bit that is available will be used to bring about the necessary change. By not supporting this Vote it would be like sitting back and doing nothing.

I have stated that there were never any changes within PanSALB and the Department of Arts between the years 1994 and 1998 in relation to languages. But now there are changes that we can talk about. After we amended the Act of PanSALB, that is the Pan South African Language Board Act, there were many changes in PanSALB. Now we know that each and every language in this country has a unit responsible for setting up words, in other words dictionary units.

Even the San and the Khoi have units which are arranging for the revival of these languages. I do not want to talk endlessly, because the examples of what PanSALB has done are too numerous to mention. Even though there is less money, let us support this Vote.

The department has also done enough. The Minister, Dr Ngubane, has spoken about a language policy and plan which we as a committee intend to implement, possibly by September. These are policies which will make us proud of the work that we have done to enable us to implement a language plan for our country. As I have already stated there are many things that I can mention.

Another point that was raised by Dr Serote concerned people who were never recognised for their courage and deeds. Our lives and culture depend on them, because of what they did. As a committee we have a programme which, if possible, should come up with a policy and plan which will recognise all those who were previously disadvantaged according to what they have done for our nation.

The Minister has also spoken about singers. We know that there have been instances where people died as paupers. Sometimes money was collected in collection plates so that these people could be buried. This happened because there was no law which protected them and realised their importance. Half a loaf is better than no bread at all. Let us support this Vote and direct a request to the Department of Finance that even though we do not agree on issues - with the exception of Anna van Wyk of the New NP - the money should not only be increased when we fight. [Applause.]]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Madam Speaker and hon Deputy President, let me begin by paying tribute to all partners in the advancement of arts, culture, science and technology: Minister Ngubane, for being a great partner to work with, the director-general, Dr Rob Adam, and all the staff of the department - including my personal staff - for their dedication and hard work, the chairperson of the portfolio committee, Dr Wally Serote, and the committee itself, for their contribution to the advancement of arts, culture, heritage, language, science and technology, the MECs of arts and culture, for their unrelenting commitment and hard work, the science councils, for their dedication and hard work, and the arts and culture community, for their passion and success in enriching the lives of all South Africans.

Having served in this portfolio for the past four and a half years, I am now convinced that the establishment of the Ministry of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology that links to such seemingly different areas of governance, was a highly strategic move. In a sense, arts, culture, science and technology are inextricably linked, especially when it comes to the new knowledge economy. Both areas have to do with human endeavour. The arts and culture have to do with creativity, while science and technology are largely concerned with innovation and invention.

I must say that this was, indeed, a strategic move, considering what we inherited in 1994. Thus, our mission - which is to realise the full potential of arts, culture, science and technology in social and economic development, while nurturing creativity and innovation, and promoting the diverse heritage of our nation - stands as a great challenge to South Africa. I think that we have made some progress since our inception in realising the potential of arts, culture, science and technology. Yet let me say: Very great challenges remain and, as hon members have heard from previous speakers, the road ahead is going to be a very difficult one.

Our department recently undertook a study to assess the expertise that exists in various economic sectors in South Africa. This was conducted as part of the research and technology foresight project in order to identify and assess the distribution of expertise across the research and technology sectors so as to inform future priorities and policy. What this study makes clear is that South Africa is only utilising a small portion of its human resources. The potential of the majority of South Africans, and particularly women, still remains untapped. Unlocking this potential, so that it can contribute to the overall economic and social development of the country, has become a key strategic role for our department to play. This can only be done through redressing past imbalances and making arts, culture, science and technology serve the interests of the majority of South Africans.

In reviewing the state of arts and culture in the country now, compared to 1994, it is clear that arts activity has increased. Notwithstanding the difficulties that some of our institutions experience, increased and broad- based access to funding and the creation of new institutional frameworks have encouraged an explosion of artistic and cultural activity. This increase in artistic activities is being experienced across a wide range of artistic practices, in areas all over the country, from aspiring cultural workers in the rural areas and townships to those long in the practice of various art forms.

We are seeing the growth of new audiences, particularly for jazz and for orchestras, and the development of new art forms that weld together a number of different art forms to produce something uniquely South African. To illustrate this point: For the first time in our history since 1994, we now have festivals which are uniquely South African like isicathamiya'' at the Playhouse. Ngabe labo abaphuma KwaZulu-Natali bake baya yini ukuyobona isicathamiya? Umgubho wesicathamiya wenzeka njalo ngonyaka. [Have the hon members from KwaZulu-Natal ever attended theisicathamiya’’? This festival happens annually.] We also have so many other festivals.

Since we established Business and Arts SA three years ago, an increased number of businesses have realised the benefit that lies in forming partnerships with the arts and are sponsoring a significant number of diverse art forms. In the three years in which it has been operating, the National Arts Council has disbursed R44 million to a vast range of art forms, artists and community projects. As the Minister has already indicated, we are currently addressing the problems faced by the performing arts councils. I firmly believe that we will see an improvement in the management of the arts as the new institutions, such as the National Arts Council and the National Film and Video Foundation, gain strength.

The interim film fund was established in 1996 in order to provide funds for the development of film projects, while establishing the National Film and Video Foundation. In the past three years over 1 000 applications have been received, and out of these a total of 414 projects have received grants worth around R30 million. One hundred and seventeen of these grants have gone to women film-makers and 49% of the R30 million has gone to development and training in the form of scriptwriting, workshops and bursaries to young black film-makers. While not many long feature films have been made over the past few years, there is unprecedented activity in the making of short films and documentaries.

For the first time young black film-makers, rural film-makers and women film-makers are telling their stories. A young, rural film team, for example, living in a village on the outskirts of a game reserve in the North West province, has recently received a grant of R50 000 from the interim film fund. They are using this grant to make a film about the link between their totem animal, the buffalo, and the efforts going on in the game reserve to conserve this valuable member of the big five. Film-makers such as these would never have been given this kind of chance a few years ago.

The National Film and Video Foundation will be fully operational this year and will take over funding from the department. One of the key challenges that will face it will be to stimulate the production of more South African feature films. Hon members know what it will mean in terms of money if we as a country make a breakthrough in the film industry.

In its six years of existence, the Ministry and the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology have spent much time in harnessing the important strategic role that the arts and culture can play in improving the quality of people’s lives. Many of our projects are aimed at unleashing the potential that the arts and culture can have in stimulating jobs and creating investment in the most impoverished areas of our country.

In the past few months we have focused our attention on promoting cultural tourism by strengthening the crafts industry, as this has an immediate benefit for the poorest section of our society. Training in cultural industries associated with tourism, such as performance and craft production, has been the focus of the department’s work in the three spatial development initiatives - Lubombo, the Maputo Corridor and the Wild Coast. The department has worked with SDI management and the relevant provincial departments to train artists in these regions and to link them into the growing tourism infrastructure. This creates jobs for artists in the SDI areas, while also contributing towards attracting tourists to the region.

We continue to work with the provincial departments in ensuring that the 41 new community art centres, museums and libraries, built with RDP funding, are utilised effectively. This year we will be implementing a training programme for people working in these centres so that they can be run effectively and serve these communities. While we have attained a measure of success in promoting arts and culture generally, we have found the museum sector more difficult. We believe that museums can and must play a vital role in helping all South Africans to value their heritage. Museums in South Africa can also play a key role in building a truly democratic national consciousness, which is surely the cornerstone of peace and stability.

One of the problems that we have faced in transforming the country’s museum system is its unco-ordinated character. It is hoped, however, that the recent establishment of the northern and southern flagship institutions will at last ensure the optimum utilisation of Government funding to produce a dynamic museum service that truly serves the interests of the South African public. In addition to transforming existing museums, the department is doing a great deal to ensure that the previously neglected heritage of the majority of South Africans is officially protected and commemorated. The Minister has actually referred to this.

However, let me use this opportunity, with reference to museums, to say that on 9 August this year we will be unveiling the women’s monument at the Union Buildings, which will commemorate the anti-pass march of 1956. In general, with regard to our cultural institutions, we will spare no effort to ensure that our museums, archives and libraries become great centres of learning and we will do this - Comrade Wally Serote should note this - together, holding hands with the portfolio committee.

South Africa is part of the international scientific community and in this capacity the Ministry has aligned itself with the declaration at the World Conference on Science organised by Unesco in Budapest in 1999. The declaration commits us to making every effort to realise the objectives of promoting dialogue between the scientific community and society, and to remove all discrimination with respect to education, to act ethically and co-operatively within our own spheres of responsibility, to strengthen scientific culture and its peaceful application throughout the world, and to promote the use of scientific knowledge for the wellbeing of populations and for sustainable development and peace.

A key role of our department is, therefore, to encourage public understanding of science, engineering and technology as an important precursor to establishing a national system of innovation. On 10 March this year the national Science, Engineering and Technology Week 2000 was launched. It will be held over the next three years in three provinces, and will be aimed at stimulating public interest in science, engineering and technology. Science, Engineering and Technology Week will focus on human resource development, show people how science and technology impact on their lives and provide information on careers in these fields.

With the recent additional science communication within the department, a number of programmes, such as the science communication planning and media skills workshops for scientists and engineers, have been started. These workshops provide researchers with much-needed skills to promote their work, as well as techniques on how to resource funds and create partnerships with those in the business sector.

Within our public understanding programmes, members of the public have been awarded - through its award scheme - about R500 000 via a competitive process to create interactive and hands-on exhibits that will popularise Science, Engineering and Technology Week among learners, teachers and the general public. The annual Science Journalism Award is another project, run in conjunction with the science councils, which serves to promote excellence in the recently introduced field of science journalism in South Africa.

One of the agencies the department supports from our budget is the National Research Foundation. We have mandated the NRF to develop research capacity for natural and social sciences. I am happy to report that a review of their research grants and bursaries indicates a substantial increase with regard to both black and female grant holders. In addition, the growth in the number of science students, both black and female, has been beyond expectations at both the graduate and undergraduate level. In total, 52,2% of all bursaries granted were in favour of black students.

Since 1998 the Ministry and the department have addressed the gender question with regard to science and technology. One aspect arising from various women-in-science conferences held in South Africa has been the importance of gender sensitisation for both teachers and pupils. In adopting these as a focus, we hope to contribute to the elimination of gender stereotypes and myths that prevent girls from considering pursuing science careers. We have adopted a science and technology programme, organised as a girls camp, to provide learners from all over the country with an opportunity to embrace the wonders of science. In order to encourage more children to take up science in schools and as careers, role models are selected to encourage young girls to choose careers in science. It is hoped that this project - which is in its second year - will encourage better gender representation in the scientific professions in the future. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr G E BALOI: Mr Chairperson, Deputy President, Minister and Deputy Minister, this department maintains and promotes the Republic of South Africa’s culture in manifold dimensions, including the arts, science and technology.

An analysis of the Budget Review on the budget of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology for the year 2000-01, including the preceding year, 1999-2000, and the forward calculation for the years 2001- 02 and 2002-03, shows that the department realises the potential of arts, culture, science and technology in social economic development, nurturing creativity and innovation, and promoting the diverse heritage of our nation.

Lefapha le, le setse le tlhomile ditikatikwe di ka nna 37 tse di jetseng puso madi a a kana ka R50 dimilione. Le setse le ngokile bajanala ba ba ka dirang 46% tsa batswantle. Batho ba ba ka nnang 5 dimilione ba setse ba etetse ditikatikwe tsa setso. Fa e sale go tloga ka 1996, Ma-Aforika Borwa a a ka nnang 400 a setse a etetse mafatshe a a ka nnang 180 a kwa moseja ka lefapha leno. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[This department has already built about 37 complexes, which cost the Government about R50 million. It has managed to attract many visitors, 46% of whom were foreigners. About 5 million people have already visited the cultural villages. More than 400 South Africans have visited about 180 overseas countries through this department since 1996.]

Social development is one of the priority objectives that is to be undertaken through arts and culture, as well as institutional platforms. The revised estimate for the year 1999-2000 was R889,9 million and for the year 2000-01 the MTEF is R956,3 million, giving an increased estimate of R48,8 million.

However, with that R956,3 million, cultural centres such as Mmabana in Mmabatho should be reinstated and maintained. The Mmabana cultural centre in Taung and the one in Lehurutshe should be maintained, because they form part of the heritage of our nation. The orchestra department of Mmabana, which has already been closed, should be reopened. We hope to see an increase in the budget for the years to come.

There are hidden treasures that are still going to be revealed by this Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. The UCDP supports this Vote.

Mr B G BELL: Chairperson, it is an honour to speak on behalf of the DP in this debate. In the time I have available I intend discussing the apparent disinvestment in the arts and culture sphere. Our President, in his addresses to the nation and Parliament, has spoken a great deal about the African renaissance. We will support this philosophy and believe that to achieve that dream, a major part will come from the arts and culture field.

Music is an important factor in our culture and needs to be nurtured, encouraged and financed by the state and the private sector. During the immediate past many organisations have been forced to either change their emphasis or close their doors due to lack of funds. The fault cannot all be attributed to the state for not providing. Some blame must go to the organisations themselves. The list reads as follows: the Cape Town Symphony Orchestra changed to the Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra, and is now generating more of its own funds; the National Symphony Orchestra closed down when a major sponsor withdrew; the State Theatre is in financial difficulties due to an amazing investment strategy, and is closing down; the Windybrow Theatre in Johannesburg is closing its doors; and the latest is a major library announcing that it has no funds to purchase books and will have to close down. This is not a complete list, but it does illustrate our problem.

The disappointment is that during the preceding two budget years this department underspent its allocation for promoting arts and culture by R48 million. Surely, some of these funds, placed in the hands of organisations, would have assisted them to achieve our objective of developing our culture. I appeal to the Minister to allocate money and give moral support to these organisations, so that all can develop a love for music and the theatre and a culture of reading.

Ms E GANDHI: Chairperson, hon Deputy President, hon Minister and hon Deputy Minister, colleagues and comrades, in discussing the budget I would like to refer to two items for which there is no dedicated budget, but which influence the work of the department directly. I am referring to building common South African values through the work of this department as a whole and building values through the various religious and other value-based beliefs of South African society.

Indeed, I believe that arts and culture has to be the cornerstone of the building blocks of a nation. For far too long we, as a people, have been deliberately compartmentalised, with our differences emphasised and commonalities ignored. In building our nation, we need to move away from this disease of the past and start afresh by adopting a new approach which will help to bridge the gaps and build on the many commonalities which can be woven into a rich South African culture. Our multicultural diversity is indeed our wealth, and it provides the opportunity to systematically build our commonalities and uniqueness, which we call our own South Africanness, with respect and dignity for the diverse cultural values.

The process of rebuilding a devastated, divided society is painful and takes a long time, particularly as the process can be weighed down by those who resist transformation. We in South Africa are faced with the challenge to renew the moral fabric of our society, to affirm our African identity, to reconstruct and contribute to the development of a country which can be proud of its rich heritage of struggle, peace and reconciliation, and its adherence to values which have been articulated in the Freedom Charter of 1955, and again in our Constitution. In this House a question has been asked about the setting up of a commission for religious and linguistic rights. Although this is not the responsibility of this department, it does affect the work of this department. Our various religions have different forms of worship, but whether we are believers or nonbelievers, we have values which are universal. We all believe, for instance, in self-respect and respect for others, in honesty and in caring and sharing. These values are articulated differently by different religions. However, these values are basic humanitarian values which were ably demonstrated by our initiatives in Mozambique. Arts and culture are the best vehicles for transmitting these values.

We need to build into our culture not the anger of those who feel that their privileges are lost, or the arrogance of those who think that only they have the right answers, or the frustration of those who continue to be deprived, but the creation of a new hope for the young and powerful people of our country. Our nationhood can be built through finding the common thread that binds us as South Africans, but to achieve these goals, we need to make a strong and united effort. The dictum of ``unity in diversity’’ must bring us together. In order to bring on board the many peoples of our country, we need to change the mind-set of our people. For too long we have lived in a world with attitudes like that espoused by the late Mr S S Bhengu, who led a body called the Bantu National Congress. He said:

The Bantu must be guided by the Europeans because God has said … that an uneducated people must be guided by wiser counsellors.

Needless to say, for this inauspicious statement Mr Bhengu received a £50 donation from the SA Bureau of Racial Affairs. Many examples of similar mind-sets can be cited today in our society. It is this submissive, unholy, lowly and totally destructive attitude that, unfortunately, governs the thinking of many amongst us, including the media. Just to cite a few examples: Instead of building respect for our national symbols, such as our new emblem, some people, backed by the frenzied media, choose to ridicule it. Our media and members of the opposition, instead of offering constructive criticism and forward-looking suggestions, use taxpayers’ money to jeer at our President and Cabinet Ministers, such as the snide remark made by Mr Gibson, which, of course, received wide publicity.

We need a radical change in the thinking and behaviour, not only of our public officials, but also of those who help guide public opinion. I would like to quote from the book Let My People Go in which Chief Luthuli refers to the visit of Dr Loram, Natal’s first chief inspector for native education. On his visit to the school where Chief Luthuli was the principal, Dr Loram remarked:

There’s just one thing, Luthuli. You’re a teacher. You’re supposed to be a leader in your community. But the garden at this school is a shameful sight.

Chief Luthuli explained to him that he had no resources and that the place was sandy, saying ``It can’t be worked without implements.’’ But after further admonitions from the formidable inspector, Chief Luthuli said, much to the utter dismay of the inspector:

I can’t say I’m very pleased by your visit. On the subject of manual work, you regard me as an evasive liar. I can see it - you accept nothing that I say.

Again, this is the typical mind-set that we need to change. It can best be achieved by forging ahead, with all those who want to be aboard, in an assertive way towards the goal of nation-building and developing common national values which will guide the society.

Soon after India became independent Mahatma Gandhi said … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Mr Chairperson, I would like to congratulate the Minister and the Deputy Minister on the difficult task that they have with the department. The department is not an easy one to deal with.

Die groot probleem wat ek het met die Departement van Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie is dat dit eintlik net ‘n posbus is waardeur geld oorgedra word aan verskeie ander instansies waaroor die Minister en die departement self nie werklik beheer het nie. Die Landbounavorsingsraad, byvoorbeeld … [Tussenwerpsels.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The big problem I have with the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology is that it is actually just a postbox by way of which money is transferred to various other institutions over which the Minister and the department do not really have control. The Agricultural Research Council, for example … [Interjections.]]

Mrs A VAN WYK: Mr Chairperson, on a point of order: I was indicated as A I van Niekerk on the TV monitors, so I would like him now to be indicated as A van Wyk. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! That is not a point of order. Please continue, hon member.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Mr Chairperson, if she would lend me her dress, I could comply.

Die Landbounavorsingsraad werk in opdrag en funksie saam met die Departement van Landbou, en nie met die Departement van Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie nie. Net so werk die Mediese Navorsingsraad nouer saam met die Departement van Gesondheid, en so kan ek voortgaan met elke raad. Die meeste instansies wat dus deur die departement gefinansier word, staan ver weg van kuns, kultuur en tegnologie. Die Departement van Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie moet dus nie probeer om kuns, kultuur en tegnologie te beheer nie, maar eerder om dit in die algemeen te stimuleer en te beskerm.

Ons praat maklik van ‘n smeltkroes waarin ons alles moet sit, maar in die wetenskaptaal impliseer ‘n smeltkroes dat iets gesuiwer of veras word, want dit het daardie twee implikasies. Ek dink nie dit is wat ons in Suid-Afrika wil hê nie, naamlik om te suiwer en te veras nie. Ons moet ‘n vorm van naasbestaan kry waarin respek vir mekaar se tale, kulture en omstandighede ingebring word.

Ons lees hier ``Unity in diversity’’. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The Agricultural Research Council, in mandate and function, works with the Department of Agriculture, and not with the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. In the same way the Medical Research Council works more closely with the Department of Health, and I could continue in this vein with each council. The majority of institutions which are therefore funded by the department are far removed from arts, culture and technology. The Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology must therefore not try to control arts, culture and technology, but rather to stimulate and protect them in general.

We speak very easily of a melting pot into which we should put everything, but in scientific language a melting pot implies that something is to be purified or incinerated, because it has those two implications. I do not think that that is what we want in South Africa, namely to purify and to incinerate. We must achieve a form of coexistence which incorporates respect for one another’s languages, cultures and circumstances.

We read here ``Unity in diversity’’.]

This is the motto on our new coat of arms.

Ek verstaan in die oorspronklike San, volgens die vrye vertaling daarvan in Afrikaans, beteken dit nou Staan saam en sit jou straal ook in die pot''! [Gelag.] [I understand that in the original San, according to the direct translation in Afrikaans, it now meansStand together and add your stream to the pot’’! [Laughter.]]

``Unity in diversity’’ is the motto on our coat of arms. This means that the mission statement of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology - to realise the full potential of arts and culture through social and economic development, nurturing creativity and innovation and promoting the diverse heritage of our nation - is, compared to the reality out there, in stark contrast with the above ideals, even though there are positive results, as stated by the Minister.

South Africa is fast becoming a melting pot, with English becoming the official lingua franca of Public Service, courts and institutions of democracy. Arts and culture are struggling owing to budgetary constraints.

Ons eens bekende Nasionale Simfonie-orkes is nie meer daar nie. Die uitvoerende kunste- en streekrade sukkel. Suid-Afrika se rolprentbedryf sukkel. Dit is waar dat Suid-Afrika nie net een kultuur of taalgroep het nie, maar as dit so voortgaan, sal ons op die ou end uit die smeltkroes kom met net een ding - Engels vir alles - en dan sal ons kulture en die verskeidenheid van kulture op die ou end net verdwyn. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Our once famous National Symphony Orchestra no longer exists. The performing arts and regional councils are struggling. South Africa’s film industry is struggling. It is true that South Africa does not only have one culture or linguistic grouping, but if things continue like this, eventually we will emerge from the melting pot with just one thing - English for everything - and then our cultures and the diversity of cultures will disappear in the end.]

Arts and culture must reflect the rich diversity of South Africa. [Time expired.]

Prof I J MOHAMED: Chairperson, hon Minister and hon Deputy Minister, hon members, it is a pleasure for me to participate in this debate on the Vote of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, DACST. I congratulate Dr Rob Adam on his appointment as director-general and Dr Nthoana Tau-Mzamane on her appointment as deputy director-general.

The Vote of the department increased by 7,6% from the revised estimate of the previous year to R956 million this year. In real terms, this is an increase of only 1%. However, the increase is more than the 5,2% increase of the national Budget. I believe this indicates that Government sees science and technology as a major player in developing the economy.

I shall restrict my comments to the science and technology programme. This programme’s budget increased by 18,3% to R566 million this year. The science and technology share of the departmental Vote increased from 53,9% to 59,2% this year. This increase is in line with the importance this department gives to science and technology.

In order to comment on the subprogrammes that the department implemented to achieve its objectives, I will summarise the relevant objectives. They are, firstly, to promote public understanding of science and technology, targeting women, youth and rural communities; secondly, to administer the Innovation Fund so as to promote an information society, biotechnology and the adding of value to materials and manufacturing processes; and, thirdly, to co-ordinate funding of the science councils via the parliamentary grant for core operations.

I will firstly look at the subprogramme of technology development. Its funding increased by 0,5% to R12,8 million this year, which, after taking into account inflation, is a decrease of 6%. This is not what one would expect if we are serious about economic development, but I understand that State Expenditure may have a different view. A breakdown of allocations would assist us to assess this. We must also remember that as technological development takes place, jobs are lost through rationalisation although new jobs are created at higher technical levels. Therefore provision must be made for upgrading skills.

Secondly, let us consider the subprogramme of public understanding of science and technology. The objective of this programme is to promote the understanding of science and technology and its role in bringing a better life for all, and to draw women and youth into this area of study. This programme’s funding increased to R11 million this year, an increase of 87%. This is encouraging, knowing the problems of science and technology education and of bringing more advanced technology into the workplace. Of course, measurable outcomes will only show 10 or more years from now, but some report of what was achieved last year should be produced.

There is another aspect that must be addressed. The complex scientific and technical ideas as well as the ethical problems must be explained clearly and simply. I do not want to go into that, but members can see the problems that have arisen recently in this country and neighbouring countries where there were massive floods. Some of those occurred as a result of the deforestation that had taken place.

Thirdly, I comment on the funding of the science councils, of which there are eight, two of which are funded directly by the department. However, it is also responsible for the allocation of funding to the others. We are very happy that the Southern African Large Telescope project was approved. The department received R1,424 billion this year, an increase of 8% before inflation, to allocate to the science councils. The funding of four of these has decreased by 5%, or about 11,5% if inflation is taken into account. In terms of the MTEF estimates, these four will decrease by 19,6% by the year 2002. This, to my mind, is disastrous, but it is also strange that they all decrease by the same percentage, leaving the impression that they are not being funded according to their programmes.

Finally, I look at the Innovation Fund. This fund was increased by R50 million or 66,7% over the past year. This is very welcome as science councils and other institutions can compete for funding by developing innovative products and technology. This helps to make our industries more competitive. I would like to have a breakdown of the allocations to information technology, biotechnology and to value-adding to the materials and manufacturing processes.

I would like to return very briefly to the allocation to the science councils. The councils that I was referring to are the Human Sciences Research Council, the Council for Mineral Technology, the Council for Geoscience and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. I hope that we will not wait until we have a crisis, as in the case of the Medical Research Council and HIV/Aids, to give greater funding to these councils.

In conclusion, I would like to say to Minister Ngubane that I understand that our portfolio committee has not called him often enough to make clear the issues that I have raised, but I know that his department is doing very well. I am looking forward to meeting with his department so that we can clarify some of the issues that I have raised. [Applause.]

Mnr C AUCAMP: Mnr die Voorsitter, kuns en kultuur kan maklik die stiefkind word, die Aspoestertjie, tussen al die ander belangrike sake waarmee ons hier besig is. Wie raak nou opgewonde oor kuns, kultuur en wetenskap as jou lewe bedreig word deur misdaad, as die rand se waarde tuimel, as die massas daagliks moet veg om blote oorlewing?

Tog mag ons dit nooit afskeep nie. Deur die eeue heen was dit juis die maatstaf van die kwaliteit van ‘n beskawing; sy nalatenskap ten opsigte van kuns en kultuur. Ons moet in Suid-Afrika daarteen waak dat die stryd om oorlewing só oorheersend word dat die estetiese van die lewe verwaarloos word, of dat die gelykmakende effek van globalisering ons laat verdof tot vaal, identiteitlose gemeenskappe. Ons moet daarteen waak dat die bloot funksionele naderhand allesoorheersend word.

Ook die skepping is nie net funksioneel nie. As ons aan die einde van elke skeppingsdaad van God lees, en toe sien God dat dit goed was,'' kan ons dit ook vertaal meten toe sien God dat dit mooi was’’. Die ganse skepping is ‘n kunswerk van God, en die mens as kroon van die skepping is ook rentmeester van die mooie en die estetiese.

Ek wil dus pleit dat hierdie deel van ons menswees in Suid-Afrika nie deur die ``rat race’’ van elke dag se bestaan oorheers en gemarginaliseer word nie. Daarom steun die AEB ook ‘n stewige begroting vir die finansiering van kuns en kultuur in ons land.

Ek wil verder konsentreer op die diversiteit en die unieke eiesoortigheid van kuns en kultuur onder die verskillende volke in Suid-Afrika. Ek wil pleit dat ons verskeidenheid in ‘n groter mate verdiskonteer word in ons kulturele werksaamhede en veral in die finansiering deur die staat. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr C AUCAMP: Mr Chairman, arts and culture could easily become the stepchild, the Cinderella, among all the other important issues with which we are dealing here. Who gets excited about arts, culture and science when one’s life is threatened by crime, the value of the rand is falling, the masses have to fight simply to survive every day?

Yet we may never neglect it. Through the centuries this has been the yardstick of the quality of a civilisation; its heritage as far as arts and culture are concerned. We in South Africa must guard against the struggle for survival becoming so dominant that the aesthetics of life are neglected, or that the equalising effect of globalisation causes us to fade into colourless, identitiless communities. We should guard against the merely functional eventually becoming all-important.

The creation is also not only functional. At the end of each act of creation we read and God saw that it was good,'' which we can also translate intoand God saw that it was beautiful’’. The whole of creation is God’s work of art, and the human being, the crown of creation, is also the steward of the beautiful and the aesthetic.

My plea is therefore that in South Africa this part of our humanness should not be dominated and marginalised by the rat race of everyday life. That is why the AEB also supports a solid budget for the financing of arts and culture in our country.

I further wish to concentrate on the diversity and the uniqueness of arts and culture among the various peoples in South Africa. I want to make the plea that our diversity should be negotiated to a greater degree in our cultural activities and particularly in its financing by the state.] The eminent Canadian author Richard Simeon, in his Considerations on the Design of Federations, 1998, says that from the perspective of a multinational society, representative democracy can only be established by increasing opportunities for cultural minorities. The view of the AEB in this regard is that the building blocks for real nation-building are the recognition and advancement of the different cultures in South Africa.

In this regard, I want to state clearly that one overarching Big Brother state department of arts and culture is not the answer. I want to make a plea to the Government to devolve powers on issues intimately interwoven with a particular culture to the relevant community itself. The mission of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology should be to decentralise, not only geographically, but also culturally, as much as possible.

In this regard, the forthcoming Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, as envisaged in section 185 of the Constitution, can play an important role. Special provision ought to be made for the devolution of culture-related aspects of government currently vested in the department to the various cultural communities themselves. The establishment of different cultural councils, as envisaged in the draft Bill, is of the utmost importance and can play an important role in the promotion of the treasures of our diversity. The section 185 Commission could empower rural communities which belong to civil society to take control of their own affairs - this would be a positive step in the right direction.

This will, however, only be possible if state funding is made available to the different councils. The National Arts Council’s main task must be to distribute public funds to artists, cultural institutions and NGOs, and to facilitate processes in which every culture can blossom without the dominance of the forced uniculturism of globalism.

As ons kyk na die begroting van die departement, word gans en al te veel bestee aan groot nasionale feeste terwyl die onderskeie gemeenskappe en hul kulture gemarginaliseer word. Die Departement van Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie is die een departement wat die voortou kan neem in die proses om die bewaring van ons ryke kulture erfenis te verwesenlik. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[When we look at the department’s budget, far too much is expended on large national festivals, while the various communities and their cultures are marginalised. The Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology is the one department that can take the lead in the process of achieving the conservation of our rich cultural heritage. [Time expired.]]

Mr R S NTULI: Mr Chairperson, hon Ministers and hon members, the DP wishes to express its serious concern and alarm at the manner in which the issue of the coat of arms has been handled by the Government. In no other democratic country in the world would new national symbols be decided upon in some mysterious way and simply be announced without consulting the official opposition or Parliament. [Interjections.] National symbols should be unifying, and therefore, by so doing, eliminate unnecessary controversy. If we are serious about national unity in our cultural diversity, then consultation over such national symbols is very essential. The DP therefore calls for a snap debate on this issue, as it is of public importance.

The other issue of great importance is the present position of the Human Sciences Research Council. The HSRC shares the centre stage of the world as the melting pot of intellectual excellence. This organisation interrelates with all the academic institutions in the country, and its contributions permeate the very fabric of development for our future by reaching out to our impressionable learners at all our centres of education.

The recent budget cuts have placed severe pressure on the organisation to operate within the parameters of funds received. Having been forced by economic imperatives to downsize, many casualties have resulted, among whom are very highly educated and skilled researchers. In the spirit of national development, it is unforgivable to lose such people who have been trained at exorbitant cost to the organisation and to taxpayers simply to balance the books.

It is sad when the deciding factor of who goes or stays is governed by financial reasons and the discretion of line management. It is worse if the so-called discretion of line managers is alleged to be not completely above board. If it were fair and just, one may ask, why then did the HSRC staff unit seek a court interdict concerning the intended retrenchment? Why, after losing their case, we may also ask, at the Labour Appeals Court, are they contemplating an appeal against the verdict if they do not seriously believe that they have a genuine case? [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr B A D MARTINS: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, it is a self- evident truth that no country which is serious about its long-term development prospects can afford to neglect scientific research and that no country with a sense of destiny can abandon its culture, because culture lies at the core of how we see ourselves as a nation and as an integral part of the African continent. It is in this respect that the concept of the African renaissance and its implication for heritage policy need to be embraced.

For if, at a propitious moment, as much energy had been devoted to anticipating and forestalling the negative impacts of apartheid policies as to developing the apartheid policies themselves, no one would doubt that South Africa would have been in a much better position today. But then, as the late Comrade Harry Gwala often said: ``The battle of `if’ was never won.’’

In moving forward, one of the central challenges that we face as a nation is to enhance the synergy between science and technology and arts and culture as primary stimuli for economic development and a better quality of life. We thus need to bridge the apparent lack of an organic connection between scientific research and economic activity. The Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology’s new programme for technology diffusion to SMMEs is thus a welcome step in the right direction.

Furthermore, on the other hand, the establishment of the National Arts Council and the National Film and Video Foundation as statutory bodies has diversified nationally funded programmes for the arts by introducing a system where proposals are assessed by peers. On the other hand, the cultural industry’s growth strategy has provided both a theoretical framework and a practical programme for bringing cultural industries into the mainstream of the economy.

RDP funds have also been utilised to build cultural centres for more than 40 communities. A point of concern, however, is that, in some provinces, these community art centres are used as tender board offices and for other functions for which they clearly were not built. It is important to put an end to this type of malpractice and activity. An important challenge for this year is to continue promoting sound management and financial partnerships to enhance institutional stability in the arts and heritage sectors.

In order for the department to carry out its mission to realise the full potential of arts, culture, science and technology in social and economic development, nurturing creativity and innovation, and promoting the diverse heritage of our nation, it will have to support the arts and heritage by valuing diversity and promoting economic activity. It will also have to support the linguistic diversity of our country as a resource for empowering all South Africans to participate fully in their country’s social, political and economic life, and to support the equitable development and preservation, conservation, protection, promotion and making known of our collective history, national symbols and heritage.

It is against this background that all of us need to support South African dance, theatre, music, arts and crafts, literature, film, photography, graphics, design, beadwork, painting, etc. By so doing, we will actively be supporting and promoting South African art and culture.

Lastly, as opposed to the views expressed by the DP on the new coat of arms of our country, I, as a practising artist, would like to say that if one looks critically at the history of this country, it goes a long way to affirming the indigenous people of this country who have been mostly downtrodden, the San and Khoi people. The coat of arms affirms their role in the history of this country, and it is apt that the motto of our country is no longer written in Latin but in indigenous San language. [Applause.]

It shows that, as a country, we are taking the initial steps to forge greater unity amongst all the people of this country by not elevating one or another group above the other, but by going back to the original inhabitants of this country. By so doing, the artist who designed this coat of arms did a good service to this country. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Mr Chairman, I would like to tell the members of the DP that there was sufficient consultation on the issue of the coat of arms. Advertisements were placed in the media and designs were called for. We acted on those designs, ultimately synthesising our present coat of arms. The DP, for years, sat in the South African Parliament with a coat of arms that excluded millions of South Africans. They never complained. We never read of those complaints. [Applause.]

I would like to point out that the Innovation Fund is addressing the issue of the gap between the poor and the rich in this country. We are steering scientific research in a direction in which it produces value for those who have been marginalised for a long time. For instance, we are creating a new research programme and acquiring equipment through the Innovation Fund which addresses TB and the diagnosis of opportunistic infections in Aids cases. It will have a much bigger throughput and fewer requirements in terms of technological skills. So it will be available even in remote clinics, and there will be better service and diagnosis for our people.

We are also developing, through the Innovation Fund, a new vaccine to protect against cancer of the cervix, which is the most common cancer among African women in this country. We can even call it, in fact, a disease of poverty. We are dealing with this issue just as we are dealing with the issue of an HIV vaccine.

Also, our Innovation Fund, through the technology stations programmes at the different technikons, is helping new entrepreneurs, who are mainly women, to learn how to manufacture soap, cooking oil and many other chemical products, such as cleaning materials and antiseptics, which are needed on a daily basis in the community. Through this process, we are creating new entrepreneurs and new sources of income for our people. Thus, we are using the science Vote to actually address the needs of development, particularly the needs of our women.

We can confidently say that we are making very significant progress in evolving a new perspective on development in this country. Science and technology, arts and culture are being combined in creating a new product development centre where design, combined with computer-aided manufacturing, is going to significantly improve productivity and the global competitiveness of our products.

In the area of language, we are again making tremendous progress. To have 11 official languages is not an easy matter. However, we have handled this issue very sensitively and very responsibly, avoiding emotions and avoiding taking sides. Even the national motto ``!ke e: /xarra //ke’’ is an attempt to bring a balance in our multilingualism, so that we have a reference point that is common to all of us, at least to those who consider themselves to be Africans. [Interjections.] They will see the relevance in that motto in that it predates all the spoken languages found today. [Applause.]

A lot of issues have been raised in the course of the debate. I am thankful and I welcome the contributions. We shall certainly engage more closely with the portfolio committee on a number of very significant points that they have raised. The portfolio committee is our partner-in-working in Government, in connecting with the people and in developing best practice. That we are very much aware of. Equally so, with the communities, we are open to provincial suggestions. The provinces and the local governments are in touch with the communities and we expect them to respond to the needs in their areas of administration. We will be partners, again, in moving in that direction.

As far as the cut in the funding of the science councils is concerned, it is a global trend to level out funding for research because it is quite clear that there are two trends that have emerged. Firstly, a market responds to market failure which is brought about by uncertainty, the high cost of research and the inability to internalise a lot of spill-overs from research into products. Therefore the private sector has come together to form partnerships and alliances with research institutions. Government’s response is through policy adjustments in respect of funding, preferring more to facilitate leveraging of funding for science through these partnerships. We have to move in that direction.

We cannot continue pouring huge amounts of money into science councils to do exotic research which does not really relate to the needs of the country. Where research is relevant, there will always be a private sector partner, because the end result of that research must be commercialisation and the creation of profit. That is the policy direction we have taken. If there are science councils who feel unhappy, it simply means that their programmes are not relevant to the needs of the country.

As far as education is concerned, we are in direct and constant communication with Education. I have entered into discussions with the Minister of Science in India. India has truly performed a miracle. They have turned their country into the leading research centre for information and communications technology. Microsoft and certain countries are basing all their research in Bangalore, India, because India focuses very seriously on the development of science and mathematics skills. They are seeing the results of this today.

We need this type of research to look at new ways of teaching science and mathematics in our schools so that we can fast-track the development of a huge human resource which can be used to leapfrog a lot of stages of development. We are in contact with the Department of Education on these issues. We are also in contact with them about introducing arts subjects such as music and culture into the schools, so that we can fit and develop the young minds into a South African identity and perspective which will bring about creativity that is relevant to our needs.

There will be complaints from certain people who think that we are marginalising their cultures. There is no such thing. We are simply correcting huge disparities which were perpetrated by apartheid. There was no culture funding of any significance for African communities in this country. We have been very responsible in the way in which we have handled this issue. We have realised that it is highly emotive. But in terms of social justice to the majority of people in this country, we have done very little. We have preserved the State Theatres and the museums that we found there. What is their relevance to the people of this country? It is only relevant to a few who live in the cities and who happen to be white people.

I appeal to members to admire what we have done and to admire our President, who is a scholar and a gentleman, for the studied approach to restructuring and transformation. It is a responsible stance. It is producing results. It is building and not destroying. Yet, I find members in this House who say that we are neglecting their cultures, when their cultures have had the lion’s share as far as culture funding in this country is concerned. [Applause.]

I would like to thank business for the support it has given to the arts. Yesterday, we were awarding prizes to those businesses that have shown the best practice in supporting the arts. There are many of them who understand the situation in the country, who have moved forward to support the arts, particularly music, dance and arts education. Those are the South Africans who will contribute to long-lasting peace and stability in this country, because they are not blinkered. They look at the whole country and they participate as partners with Government in further development.

I would like to call on members of the opposition parties in this Parliament to also embrace this spirit of collective effort, the spirit of a new nationalism and the spirit of a new patriotism - supporting Government and working with the people of this country. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

    CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND
          CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON OPEN DEMOCRACY BILL

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

                     PROTECTED DISCLOSURES BILL
                       (Second Reading debate)

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Mr Chairperson, colleagues, comrades, ladies and gentlemen, with the Protected Disclosures Bill, we are, once again, tipping the scales of justice in favour of lawfulness and good governance.

Employees are most often in the best position to detect criminal activities or irregular conduct at their places of work. However, without the protection of the legislative framework before us today, such disclosures may be exacting too high a sacrifice. The enactment of this strategic protection procedure is a clear signal that lawbreakers will not be tolerated. By encouraging the exposure of work-based unlawful activities, Parliament is giving another firm directive in our national campaign to stamp out lawlessness and criminal behaviour.

We must expose covert activities by employers or fellow employees who intimidate workers into silence. By the very nature of the employment contract, employees are severely compromised by their fear that employers will retaliate against any disclosures of incriminating information. Workers are always vulnerable. Revenge and retribution on the part of the employers often lead to dismissal or other punitive action, and, in the face of high unemployment, the risk of losing an income is clearly too high a price to pay.

Parliament is sending an unequivocal message to the private and public sectors that every employee and employer has a responsibility to disclose criminal and other irregular conduct in the workplace. Employers will be expected, through the operation of this legislation, to take all necessary steps to ensure that employees who disclose such information are protected from any reprisals in the workplace.

The Bill gives clear directives. The categories of illegal or irregular conduct that can be exposed as a protected disclosure cast a wide net. It is not only the commission of a criminal offence or the failure to comply with any legal obligation that is mentioned. The Bill specifically offers protection for the disclosure of information regarding inadequate health and safety provisions and/or the threat of damage to the environment. In the latter case, we are starkly reminded of those women and men who have fallen victim to asbestosis at their places of work in the Northern Cape, the North West and the Northern Province, where the damaging effect and close contact with asbestos ruined the lives and wellbeing of entire communities. As is known, Government has intervened to help the 3 000 South African victims in their multimillion-pound damages suit against the UK- based mining company Cape PLC. Under our new democratic dispensation, and enabling legislation such as the Protected Disclosures Bill, similar injury and injustice should not go undetected.

Of particular significance is the explicit inclusion of unfair discrimination as one of the specific categories of irregular conduct that would warrant protected disclosure. The prohibition of unfair discrimination, as contemplated in the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, is a legislative landmark. The inclusion of conduct expressly prohibited by the equality Act places unfair discrimination on grounds of race, gender and disability within the purview of the protected disclosure legal mechanism. Hate speech and harassment are also grounds for seeking protection, and remedies are offered by this ground-breaking legislation. Acts of unfair discrimination continue to prejudice and impair the dignities of too many people. The private sector, in particular, needs to take proactive steps in affirming the rights of all South Africans, especially previously marginalised groups. Where they fail to do so, and commit acts that can be classified as unfair discrimination, there is a positive duty on them, as it is on us in Government, to prevent the message bearer from suffering any occupational detriment.

This legislation places a positive duty on every employer and employee, whether in the public or private sector, to disclose criminal and any other irregular conduct in the workplace. Employers are further obliged to protect those employees who expose the improper conduct. It also further entrenches the horizontal application of our Bill of Rights and promotes civil and criminal accountability, not only in Government, but also within the private sector, where white-collar crime is jeopardising sound corporate governance.

Most of the members in this House will be familiar with the history of this legislation. The need for legislative measures pertaining to the protection of persons who disclose information relating to criminal or irregular conduct in their places of work, was already recognised in the Open Democracy Bill of 1998. The ad hoc joint committee on that Bill was of the view that legislation dealing with the right of access to information, which the House passed earlier this year as the Promotion of Access to Information Act, should not include the whistleblower protection provision. However, the committee recognised the importance of legislation of this nature and, accordingly, redrafted the provision in a separate Bill, as it appears before us today.

I would like to highlight some of the details, and detail some key machinery of the Bill. Clauses 3 and 4 set out the protective measures that an employee who discloses information may rely on. Clause 3 prevents an employer from subjecting an employee to any occupational detriment on account of that employee having disclosed certain information. Clause 1 specifically lists adverse actions to which an employee may not be subjected, following a protected disclosure.

In short, any reprisal that will be detrimental to an employee, in respect of their employment, is prohibited. This includes the threat to employment opportunities and work security, harassment, suspension or dismissal on account of the fact that they have made a protected disclosure. An employee faced with negative reprisal may turn to the court or tribunal having jurisdiction in order to be protected from any occupational detriment. Provision is also made for an employee who reasonably believes that they may be adversely affected on account of having made a protected disclosure to be transferred to any other post or position within the organisation if this is reasonably possible or practicable.

It is important to note that in order to be afforded protection in terms of this legislation, an employee must have made a protected disclosure, as defined in clause 1, and to one of the following persons or bodies: A legal adviser, in accordance with clause 5; an employer, in accordance with clause 6; a member of the Cabinet or executive council of a province, in accordance with clause 7; the Public Protector, the Auditor-General or any other prescribed person or body, in accordance with clause 8; or any other person or body, in accordance with clause 9. This brings me to the procedural aspects of the Bill. The general aim of clauses 5 to 9, is to provide employees with prescribed procedures that must be followed when divulging information if they want to rely on a statutory remedy. An important principle in this regard is that the disclosure of information should take place in a responsible manner. It excludes persons from acting for personal gain.

The Bill is strict in its application and will not allow employees to assume protection for devious motives. Disclosures of a frivolous or vexatious nature will not be tolerated, and the Bill specifically forbids employees from concealing their own involvement in criminal or other irregular conduct. Such a situation would have defeated the purpose of the Bill.

Clauses 6 to 9 generally require that the disclosure of information should be done in good faith. The criteria established in each of these clauses become progressively more stringent, but do not follow any sequence and are in no sense of a compulsory nature. One employee may, for example, decide to make a disclosure to his employer, while another may decide to disclose certain information to a member of the press. Both employees will be protected from occupational detriment if their individual disclosures meet the relevant criteria. Clause 9 is the general protected disclosure clause. An employee who makes any disclosure to any person or body not specifically enumerated above may be protected from any occupational detriment if the disclosure complies with certain set requirements. Such a disclosure must be made in good faith and in the reasonable belief that the information disclosed is substantially true.

The general protection clause safeguards an employee who has reason to believe that she will fall victim to occupational detriment if she makes the disclosure to the employer, or where the employee has reason to believe that the disclosure to the employer will result in the concealment or destruction of evidence relating to the impropriety. The employee may also, previously, have made a disclosure of substantially the same information to his employer, but no action was taken within a reasonable period after the disclosure. It excludes persons acting for personal gain.

Clause 9, which is extensive in nature, introduces a reasonableness test to establish whether a disclosure falls within the ambit of a protected disclosure. Factors such as the identity of the person to whom the disclosure is made, the seriousness of the impropriety, whether the impropriety is continuing or is likely to occur in the future, and the public interest must be taken into consideration to establish whether it is reasonable for the employee to make the disclosure.

If this legislation is to be successful, individual members of the private and public sectors will have to act responsibly and in good faith. We all have a responsibility towards our colleagues who disclose information relating to criminal or other irregular conduct. They do not deserve to be marginalised or ostracised because they are aware of irregularities and decide to do something about it.

Accolades must go to the portfolio committee, which has, once again, shown its commitment to framing legislation that is crucial to the development of our democracy and to our fight against crime. I have noted that all the parties in the committee have supported the Bill and I wish to thank them for their support and contributions in this regard. I commend the committee, under the leadership of its chairperson, the hon Johnny de Lange, for its sterling efforts in steering this important piece of legislation through Parliament. I hereby submit the Bill to the House. [Applause.]

Adv J H DE LANGE: Chairperson, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, I rise on behalf of the ANC in unconditional support of this legislation, both in terms of its constitutionality and its desirability. I also want to thank the usual culprits I am not going to mention all of them, but I want to particularly single out two categories.

Firstly, from the department, Mr Henk du Preez and at a later stage Mr Johan de Lange, who came to help us out. I thank them for their tremendous work ethic, invaluable support and efforts in this regard. I also want to thank the NGOs that participated in the drafting of this legislation, particularly Miss Lala Camerer of the Institute for Security Studies and Adv Richard Calland from Idasa, who helped us tremendously with their inputs and guidance on this matter.

Also, in particular, I wish to thank all the parties in this House. Members will be happy to hear that this Bill is being passed unanimously, both in the committee and in this House. That is a very important message we are sending out to the criminals of this country, ie that when it comes to the fight against crime, we are prepared to stand together as political parties and pass the necessary legislation to do so. [Applause.] Lastly, this legislation can proudly be said to be a collective effort; no single person or institution will be able to claim glory for it. That in itself also sends out a strong message.

Usually, in the context of fighting corruption, it is said that one needs to do so from a society based on very firm and sound moral principles. Of course, I do not think that many of us can gainsay that, but we also know the state of the decline of the moral base and systems in the society in which we find ourselves. Although many of us have called for that moral base to be renewed, transformed and restructured, it is obviously going to take a long time to do so.

It is also important to mention that although it is important that our society be based on a sound moral base and firm principles, that in itself does not stop crime and corruption. There are many countries that could claim that they are based on such a firm moral foundation, and yet there is still crime and corruption in those countries. Therefore, although that moral base is important, one obviously needs something more than that. What is more, we need a solid, sound and progressive legal framework within which we can fight corruption and crime. I believe that in our country, we do have such a very sound and progressive legal framework in which we can do it. I am not the only one who says so: members will see that many commentators have said so, internationally and locally.

I can just mention a few of those legislative enactments without dealing with them in detail. Let us look at our laws pertaining to bail and sentencing. They are very tough laws, although still constitutional. If one looks at the laws that we have passed in terms of the special investigating unit or the Heath commission, then one will see that it is a unique vehicle to fight corruption, a mechanism which does not exist anywhere else in the world. One can also look at our legislation pertaining to organised crime, the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and the Promotion of Access to Information Act. Members will see that this matrix of very progressive legislation places us on a very firm basis, with a firm legal foundation, to fight such crime and corruption.

But the solution is not just a good moral base or a sound and progressive legal foundation or framework: one also needs efficient and effective implementation of such laws. I think we all agree that there are several weaknesses that prevail within our criminal justice system. I am not going to deal with all of them, but they do exist.

I have just recently attended with the Public Service Commission a series of workshops around the country, dealing with all the mechanisms to fight corruption. I must say that it is only when one gets down to the coalface and speaks to people that one actually sees the problems that they have in implementing many of these laws, as sound and progressive as they may be.

There are problems with capacity and, most importantly, the management systems that exist within our Public Service to fight corruption are not adequate. They are dated and antiquated. Not only was apartheid a morally corrupt and decadent system, but it was based on management systems that come from the 1950s and 1960s. For example, today if one goes to any country and looks at how their public service works, one finds that they are based on very strict risk-management systems. We do not know what that is in this country. There are very few structures in place to make sure that where there are loopholes and problems, the monitoring systems pick them up. We do not have that in this country. But it is good to note, when engaging with the Public Service Commission, that such a risk-management system, as a principle, has been adopted for implementation in our Public Service. Hopefully, that programme will unroll in a short while.

If one looks at the Public Finance Management Act that we passed and which was implemented in April 2000, one will see that it creates a very sound basis on which we can deal with corruption within our public financial management system. If one speaks to the Public Service Commission, one will see that they are putting in place certain monitoring systems to pick up the problems in the present system. So, on the whole, I think there is a basic, ever-changing but inadequate, framework with implementation mechanisms in place. It is against this background that one has to look at this important piece of legislation that is now being passed.

Before 1994 in this country, there was no legislation of general or specific application that protected whistleblowers. Since 1994, in one or two limited areas, whistleblower protection has been provided in legislation, particularly in the environmental sphere and in the intelligence services, but on a limited scale. This is the first attempt to pass a piece of legislation that has general application to protect whistleblowers. Hon members will remember that this legislation flows from the Open Democracy Act. There was a chapter therein which all the parties agreed we should remove, and the result is this separate Bill, the Protected Disclosures Bill.

Let me just share some thoughts on one or two issues which underpin the passing of this legislation. Firstly, in terms of research done in respect of other countries, we noticed that whistleblowing is only really protected in the employer-employee relationship. It is there in the workplace that, once a person has blown the whistle, he or she is victimised and therefore is given protection.

However, we have identified that there are certain other areas where we would also like to protect whistleblowers. Let us, for example, use a pensioner who stands in a pension queue, sees certain corrupt practices, blows the whistle and later is victimised in various ways - for example by being told to stand at the back of the queue, or to come back next week, or does not receive the pension at all. There is no employer-employee relationship in this case and therefore this protection does not prevail. Let us talk about a subcontractor who has a contract with contractors, blows the whistle on them and is subsequently victimised by not getting further subcontracts.

One can go through various examples where the protection of the employer- employee relationship will not apply. We have, as a committee, agreed in principle that we have to extend the protection beyond the employer- employee relationship, but we did not have the time to research such a possibility, and we have referred this matter to the SA Law Commission to see if we cannot expand this protection.

The second principle we picked up on was that we could not find any country in the world where the whistleblowing protection applies beyond the public sector. We as a committee could not see why that was so. We felt that there is particularly good reason why whistleblowers should also be protected in the private sector. If one is an employee in the private sector and blows the whistle on corruption - it is a crime whether it is in the public or private sector - one should be equally protected.

Therefore we have extended the operation of this Act. It is unique in the world, and I do not know of other legislation of general application that gives protection to whistleblowers in the private sector. I think this is an enormously important principle and takes the fight against crime into the private sector, particularly if one considers that, usually, if there is corruption in the public sector, it is done in conjunction with someone in the private sector. If one can get whistleblowing on the one side and on the other side, one’s chances of stopping such corrupt practices are much bigger.

We also noticed that everywhere in the world where there is such legislation, it is usually in the form of a shield, not a sword. It is a shield in terms of protecting a person, and not a sword in giving a person a proactive mechanism whereby that person can assert his or her rights, and so on. We also felt that there is a possibility that we should go beyond the shield and also provide, to some extent, a sword. Again, our capacity in the committee did not allow us to research this matter, and we referred this matter to the SA Law Commission to see if we can also extend its scope as to the extent to which a person can use this as a protective mechanism. For example, we have started looking at providing a special remedy whereby, if a person has been victimised because of blowing the whistle, we provide a special cause of action whereby such a person can then institute a court action for damages, and we further looked at whether such damages should not also include punitive damages, which is, of course, foreign to our legal system. We have, again, asked the SA Law Commission to see if there is not a way in which we can build out the protections and the remedies that whistleblowers will have and, in this way, capacitate them further to blow the whistle when it is necessary.

Let me quickly turn to a few other issues. The object of the Bill is simply this: to provide protection from victimisation for an employee in his or her workplace if he or she blows the whistle in accordance with the Act. Now where this Bill is unique - it is based on UK legislation - is that it provides procedures and mechanisms on how one goes about doing this. Usually, other pieces of legislation of this kind do not do so. They just state it as a principle: If one blows the whistle and one is being victimised, one must be protected. They do not spell out the procedures to be followed.

The procedures are as follows: Hon members should imagine this as a room with five doors in it. If one is a whistleblower, one has five options which route one wants to follow to blow the whistle. These options are not mutually exclusive. A person can use all five options, or one option or two. Once a person has used one option, that does not exclude the person from using the other. When using these options, the test is slightly higher for each option.

When a person is blowing the whistle internally - in that person’s organisation - thereby forcing his or her organisation to grapple with the problem and the source of such corruption - then the test is very low. Usually the test is merely good faith and that the person must follow the prescribed procedures. If a person starts going outside his or her organisation and blows the whistle, he or she is entitled to do so, but the test becomes slightly higher. The test again will be good faith.

If the person, for example, goes to a certain designated body mentioned in this legislation - the Auditor-General or the Public Protector, and the Minister can designate more bodies - then that person must also have a reasonable belief - which is an objective test - that the complaint is substantially true; not that what the person is blowing the whistle on is true, but that there is a reasonable belief that it is substantially true and that the person is still acting in good faith. Obviously the complaint must also be made to the right designated body. If it is a financial problem, it must be reported to the Auditor-General, maladministration must be reported to the Public Protector, and so on.

The next route - if a person does not want to follow any of the other routes and that person goes outside his or her organisation, for example to the media - the test will be good faith; that a reasonable belief exists that it is substantially true; that, in the circumstances, that person is acting reasonably; and, fourthly, that the person is not acting for personal gain. That is very important. We have set out, on the basis of the UK legislation, these five procedures and they give whistleblowers many more options in terms of how they act and how they blow the whistle, and will also fit in much more with the environment they find themselves in. We feel that these procedures and many other steps in the legislation - my colleagues will deal with those - provide a sound basis for us to now go out to our people and to really ask them to blow the whistle in respect of anything that is corrupt. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr J T DELPORT: Mnr die Voorsitter, die DP steun hierdie wetgewing. Die oorhoofse beeld van misdaad in Suid-Afrika is baie sleg. Die wyse waarop roof en fisieke geweld soos moord en aanrandings eerder toeneem as afneem, is skrikwekkend. Die wyse waarop weerlose mense op plase sistematies uitgemoor word, is barbaars.

Voeg hierby bedrog, diefstal en korrupsie wat ongekende afmetings aanneem. Die jongste skokkende inligting is die omvang van bedrog en diefstal in die Departement van Justisie self. In die Oos-Kaap alleen, word vanoggend berig, gaan 14 persone van die Departement van Justisie aangekla word. ‘n Totale bedrag van R20 miljoen is betrokke.

Om misdaad behoorlik vas te vat in Suid-Afrika, gaan die samewerking van die totale gemeenskap verg. Hierdie wetsontwerp wat nou voor die vergadering dien, is een, moontlik klein, maar een poging om die gemeenskap betrokke te kry om minstens met vrymoedigheid hulle gewig in te gooi by die bestryding van misdaad.

Die wetsontwerp het te make met werknemers wat binne werksverband die onbehoorlike optrede van ander openbaar maak. Sulke mense loop altyd die gevaar om binne werksverband geviktimiseer te word en dat daar teen hulle gediskrimineer sal word. Trouens, dit is menslik en natuurlik om te sê dat ‘n tikster, sekretaresse of junior amptenaar maar bevrees gaan wees om te openbaar dat ‘n direkteur of hoofamptenaar of senior persoon iets verkeerd gedoen het.

Hierdie wetsontwerp beskerm persone wat wangedrag openbaar maak. Daar mag nie teen hom gediskrimineer word nie en hy mag nie op enige wyse geviktimiseer word nie. Diskriminerende en viktimiserende optrede word nou inderdaad onregmatig verklaar deur hierdie wetsontwerp. Dit op sigself kan natuurlik sekere juridiese gevolge voortbring.

Natuurlik moet daar ‘n voorgeskrewe proses gevolg word wanneer iets openbaar gemaak word, want ons moes met die opstel van die wetsontwerp nie net met die swakhede van die skuldige rekening hou nie, maar ook met die menslike swakhede van die verklikker, want dit is maklik om die hoofopskrifte in die nuus te wil haal. Dit is maklik, en ons wil nie ‘n beskermde kanaal vir venyn, sensasie en selfs geldmaak skep nie.

Die komitee kon, soos die agb voorsitter van die komitee uitgewys het, verder gegaan het om dinge wat ons meen logies behoort te volg nou in te bou, maar die versigtige weg is gevolg deur stadig vorentoe te beweeg in hierdie nuwe veld wat ons betree. Dit is ‘n belangrike stap vorentoe.

Ek wil ten slotte baie spesiale gewag maak van die onderlinge gees van samewerking wat in die komitee geheers het. Die agb kollegas in die komitee weet dat ons - miskien ek in besonder - as die opposisie nie huiwer nie om verbete te veg en te opponeer in alle gevalle waar ons glo dat beginsels op die spel is. Veral sal agb lede nooit vind dat ons ‘n saak sal steun wat ‘n goeie gevolg mag hê, maar wat na ons oordeel op verkeerde beginsels berus nie. Ons sê die doel heilig nooit die middele nie.

In hierdie geval is dit dan miskien van betekenis om te hoor hoe positief ons reageer op die werksaamhede in die komitee en op die uitkoms wat nou voor die Huis dien. Ek spreek my dank uit vir die wyse waarop die kollega voorsitter, die agb lid Johnny de Lange, ook na ons voorstelle gekyk het, wat ons glo ook meegehelp het ter verbetering, soos andere ook gedoen het.

Ons het werklik hard, maar lekker saamgewerk. In die stryd teen misdaad en in die strewe na die handhawing van reg en geregtigheid op alle vlakke en op alle lewensterreine wil ons die Regering steun waar ons enigsins kan. Trouens, ons wil graag ‘n positiewe bydrae lewer. Misdaad mag nie van Suid- Afrika ‘n puinhoop maak nie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr J T DELPORT: Mr Chairperson, the DP supports this legislation. The overall picture of crime in South Africa is very bad. The way in which robbery and physical violence such as murder and assault are increasing rather than decreasing, is alarming. The way in which defenceless people are being systematically murdered on farms, is barbaric.

Add to this fraud, theft and corruption which are assuming unprecedented dimensions. The latest shocking information is the extent of fraud and theft in the Department of Justice itself. In the Eastern Cape alone, it was reported this morning, 14 people from the Department of Justice are to be charged. A total amount of R20 million is involved.

To clamp down on crime properly in South Africa, the co-operation of the whole community will be required. This Bill now before the assembly is one attempt, possibly a small one, to get the community involved by at least giving them the confidence to throw their weight behind the combating of crime.

The Bill deals with employees who disclose improper actions of others within the working environment. These people always run the risk of being victimised within the working environment and of being discriminated against. In fact, it is only human and natural to say that a typist, secretary or junior officer will be afraid to disclose that a director or chief officer or senior person has done something wrong.

This Bill protects people who disclose misconduct. He or she may not be discriminated against and may not be victimised in any way. Discriminatory and victimising behaviour is, in fact, declared unlawful by this Bill. This in itself could, of course, have certain judicial implications.

Of course a prescribed process should be followed when something is disclosed, because drafting the Bill we not only had to take into account the weaknesses of the guilty party, but also the human weaknesses of the informer, because it is easy to want to make the news headlines. It is easy, and we do not want to create a protected channel for viciousness, sensation and even money-making as the hon chairperson of the committee pointed out, schemes.

As the hon chairperson of the committee pointed out, the committee could have gone further to entrench aspects which we think should follow logically, but the cautious route was followed by moving forward slowly into this new field we are entering. It is an important step forward.

Lastly, I would especially like to mention the spirit of mutual co- operation which prevailed in the committee. The hon colleagues in the committee know that we - perhaps I in particular - as the opposition, do not hesitate to fight fiercely and to offer fierce opposition in every instance in which we believe that principles are at stake. Specifically, hon members will never find that we will support a matter which may have a good result but which, in our opinion, is founded on incorrect principles. We say that the end never justifies the means.

In this instance, then, it is perhaps of significance to hear how positively we have reacted to the activities in the committee and to the result which is now before the House. I express my thanks for the way in which our colleague and chairperson, the hon member Johnny de Lange, also looked at our proposals, which we believe also assisted in improving the legislation, as others have also done.

We really worked hard together, but pleasantly. In the fight against crime and in striving to maintain law and justice at all levels and in all spheres of life, we want to support the Government wherever we can. In fact, we would like to make a positive contribution. Crime may not reduce South Africa to a heap of ruins. [Applause.]]

Mr M F CASSIM: Mr Chairman, I think, first of all, congratulations are due to the Ministry, the portfolio committee and this House on having the privilege here this afternoon to discuss a Bill as important as this one.

I said earlier that we as a nation have demonstrated our willingness to go where no one has gone before. It is my privilege to be able to repeat this

• for the second time in one afternoon - because, as hon members heard, the hon Johnny de Lange said we were doing what other nations far more advanced and with a longer practice of democracy have not yet done. This intention of Government to start blocking all avenues for the crooked and the corrupt is a very important signal that Government is slowly getting all its ducks in a row and that, surely but steadily, the time has come for those who are crooked to start straightening out before they are caught in the net.

It is not only gangs and the Mafia which need to have their activities curbed. Many governments and many Presidents have turned their countries into gangster states where effective, accountable and transparent governance of organs of state have been completely overthrown, where democratic values are trampled underfoot; and where the newly liberated, once more, come under a new, oppressive yoke. To the credit of our country

• and as an inspiration to the whole continent of Africa - our Parliament remedies the lacuna of both our common law and our statutory law by making provisions for state and private sector employees to disclose information relating to suspected, alleged criminal or other irregular conduct by a colleague or by a superior.

If this is done, as the test allows, in a fair, responsible and honest manner, the cells of corruption which threaten to spread the cancer to the whole body can be arrested and excised quickly and efficiently. The Protected Disclosures Bill has the support of all parties, the IFP included, because we recognise that the alleged criminal and irregular conduct exists in our society.

So often commentators in our country are calling upon us, as the opposition, to be more aggressive. Should we be more aggressive against the good that Parliament is doing, when the problem is not one which actually nests here in Parliament? The problem, as Johnny de Lange rightly pointed out, is one of capacity. And because that is the problem, there is nothing that an opposition party can do to be aggressive against a governing party, because the problem does not lie there. It lies with the fact that we have to create capacity.

The Bill, therefore, recognises that law-abiding citizens up to now have had to swallow a bitter pill, knowing about the alleged irregularity or criminality of their colleagues or superiors but being unable to do anything about it. Now, for the very first time, the ball is in the court of the honest individual citizen, the law-abiding citizen, to play his or her part in picking up the litter to clean our society. Employers, Cabinet members, executive council members, the legal profession, the Public Protector, the Auditor-General and all those who will be involved in helping to clean up our society should begin to publicise the provisions of this Bill, and to provide the routes, guidelines and telephone numbers that individual citizens can use to make the protected disclosures.

This Bill says to all South Africans in high and responsible positions that they need to play their part in helping to create that ethos and culture which will allow us to have good, clean, corporate governance, because it is when a country has clean, good corporate governance that it will have stability and growth - when on the index of corruption it would be right at the very bottom. We hope that that is where our country will be.

Let us hope that the resources will be in place to enable disclosures to be investigated quickly and effectively, so that the message ``crooks beware’’ is sharply delivered to South Africans, wherever they are. Let us also hope that the department will help to prioritise acts of criminality which are rooted in our society in order that we can deal with the greatest evil in the quickest and sharpest way possible. We in the IFP are delighted to be putting ourselves behind this, because we believe that this is a great Bill and, indeed, in Africa - perhaps in the world - a very unique Bill. [Applause.]

Adv A H GAUM: Madam Speaker, this Bill makes provision for procedures in terms of which employees in both the public and private sectors may disclose information regarding unlawful and irregular conduct by their employers or fellow employees. It protects employees from victimisation, such as dismissal, suspension or demotion, which they may suffer as a result of disclosures.

In view of the fact that neither our common law nor our statutory law makes provision for mechanisms in terms of which employees may, without fear of reprisal, disclose information relating to suspected or alleged criminal or irregular conduct by their employers, this legislation may be one of the most telling milestones towards the eradication of such conduct in organs of state and private bodies. It will, undoubtedly, contribute towards good, effective, accountable and transparent governance.

Die afgelope aantal jare is gekenmerk deur die toenemende voorkoms van korrupsie en bedrog, veral in die staatsdiens. Een van die onlangse voorbeelde, wat die hele land geruk het, was die matriekvraestelskandaal in Mpumalanga. Aanduidings is dat die gevalle van korrupsie en bedrog wat die openbare arena bereik, slegs die spits van die ysberg is.

Met die aanvaarding van hierdie wetgewing vandag moet die Parlement se boodskap aan alle werknemers wees dat ons hulle wil aanmoedig om korrupte en bedrieglike aktiwiteite bloot te lê. Ons vra mede Suid-Afrikaners vandag om ons te help om klaar te speel met korrupsie. Hierdie wetgewing is egter nie ‘n uitnodiging om werkgewers en mede-werknemers te belaster nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The past few years have been characterised by the increasing incidence of corruption and fraud, especially in the Public Service. One of the most recent examples, which shook the entire country, was the matric questionnaire scandal in Mpumalanga. Indications are that the cases of corruption and fraud that reach the public arena are only the tip of the iceberg.

With the passing of this legislation today, Parliament’s message to all employees must be that we want to encourage them to expose corrupt and fraudulent activities. Today we are asking fellow South Africans to help us to put a stop to corruption. This legislation is, however, not an invitation to slander employers and fellow employees.]

Therefore only bona fide whistleblowers are protected. A defaming and vexatious malcontent is, by definition, not a bona fide whistleblower. This Bill is, therefore, not a blank cheque for employees to publicise personal grievances. In general, disclosures are only protected if the disclosing party reasonably believes that the information disclosed is substantially true, and if the disclosure is not made for purposes of personal gain.

The New NP also supports the committee’s view that it may well be appropriate to air the provision to the Bill in terms of which an employee would be committing an offence by making a false disclosure, or by making a disclosure not knowing or believing it to be true. Apart from this, there are also some other important outstanding issues which are not covered by the Bill. However, these issues have been referred to the SA Law Commission for recommendations.

The most important of these is perhaps that the operation of the Bill is confined to the relationship between the employer and the employee. Unfortunately this limitation may undermine the purpose of the Bill to an extent, ie rooting out criminal and other irregular conduct in organs of state and private bodies by removing from protection a whole range of potential bona fide whistleblowers who should be protected.

Surely, the intention of the Bill is not merely to add to the wide range of employment law remedies. Rather, by providing legal protection, the Bill seeks to encourage ordinary people to speak out against misconduct and corruption they may come across in the public, private and voluntary sectors. For example, as the Bill stands at the moment, Dr Allan Boesak will not be protected from victimisation by the ANC if he blows the whistle on the irregular activity of senior ANC Ministers. [Interjections.]

There are also other examples: a person who discloses that the prison warders in his section are sexually abusing prison inmates. Since reports of the prisoner’s good behaviour are important for parole, a person who blows the whistle could easily be prejudiced. Net ‘n grappie! [I’m only joking!]

One of the reasons given for the limited ambit of the Bill is that the extension to other relationships would require defining the different types of victimisation to which persons may be subjected as a result of making certain disclosures. It is doubted whether a close list of victimisation types would be necessary. Examples of victimisation, or even a general category dealing with the suffering of adverse effects by a whistleblower would have sufficed, at least for the interim. The courts or institutions such as the Public Protector could further develop such a general test. Be that as it may, we trust that recommendations on this important aspect will be made soon.

Clause 8 of the Bill makes provision for protected disclosures to the Public Protector and the Auditor-General. As disclosures to bodies in terms of clause 8 would be the most important remedy for whistleblowers who do not have money to approach the courts, it is perhaps a pity that more institutions established in terms of Chapters 9 and 10 of the Constitution were not included under this clause. At least the Public Service Commission, given its role of promoting public sector ethics and good administration, and the Gender Commission, given its role in relation to combating unlawful gender discrimination and sexual harassment, could have been included under clause 8. The Human Rights Commission and the new Commission for the Promotion and the Protection of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, could also have been good candidates for inclusion.

Although the Bill may have some shortcomings and matters that still need to be resolved, the New NP regards it as a very important piece of legislation which can make a huge contribution towards an open, transparent and clean society. We shall gladly support the Bill. [Applause.]

Mr M T MASUTHA: Madam Speaker, the Bill before us constitutes yet another missing piece in our crime prevention and anticorruption jigsaw puzzle.

Critics of our Government, some of which are in this House, have accused it of being too soft on crime and corruption. Some have gone so far as to accuse our constitutional dispensation of favouring criminals over loyal and bona fide citizens who are committed to the fight against crime and corruption. It is about time that these perceptions were put to the test.

Whilst it is true that section 35 of the Constitution, which forms part of the Bill of Rights, affords arrested, detained and accused persons certain rights, it is equally true that the Bill of Rights, central as it is to our new constitutional order, is but one of numerous other chapters of the Constitution. Chapter 10, which deals with public administration, for example, contains section 195, which sets out basic values and principles governing public administration. Some of the more critical values and principles listed under section 195(1), are that a high standard of professional ethics must be promoted and maintained in public administration, and that public administration must be accountable and transparent. It then proceeds, under section 195(3), to state that national legislation must ensure the promotion of these values and principles. To the extent that this Bill relates to the public sector, therefore, it should also be seen and understood in the context of the constitutional provisions I have just alluded to.

In addition to ensuring the full realisation of the goal of promoting and sustaining clean and good governance, the Constitution has established, under Chapter 9, state institutions supporting constitutional democracy, such as the Public Protector and the Auditor-General, with full powers to investigate and expose any form of corruption or impropriety. Chapter 9 further requires of other state organs to assist these institutions through, amongst other things, legislation, to ensure their effectiveness. This Bill does precisely that, as I will demonstrate in my presentation - and as, in fact, has already been demonstrated by others before me. Turning to the Bill itself, let me start by addressing the question of some of its limitations. Firstly, the Bill confines itself to the relationship between employees and their employers. It, therefore, does not address other forms of legal relationships in which whistleblowers may need protection: for example, a pupil who may wish to expose the corrupt behaviour of his or her teacher at school, a patient who may wish to expose a corrupt medical practitioner or, for that matter, an older person who may wish to expose the corrupt management of his or her residential facility, does not enjoy special protection under this Bill.

The reason for this, as stated in the committee’s report and as reiterated by some of the speakers, was that whilst the committee was not opposed to a comprehensive approach, most jurisdictions in the world have confined themselves to the employer-employee relationship in legislation of this kind, and that to go beyond this kind of relationship would require comprehensive and comparative research for which time was not available. Given the urgency for the introduction of this legislation, the committee was of the opinion that this Bill be introduced in its current form, but that further investigations be conducted in this regard in future.

In the drafting of the Bill, the committee has also sought to strike a healthy balance between providing maximum protection to whistleblowers on the one hand whilst at the same time avoiding the complete erosion of legal recourse for those innocent persons who may suffer harm as a result of wrongful conduct by employees who act with malice.

It is also important to note that this Bill is not confined to the public sector, in recognition of the fact that - contrary to popular belief - corruption or impropriety is just as rife, if not prevalent, in the private sector as it is in the public sector. Given the critical role that the private sector plays in the survival and development of our economy, it is critical that all measures be taken to fight white-collar crime in this sector as well.

Having outlined the scope of this Bill, allow me to deal with its objects with regard to the mechanism it seeks to establish for the purpose of protecting whistleblowers. This Bill purports to protect any employee from being subjected to occupational detriment on account of having made a protected disclosure in terms of the Bill. The Deputy Minister has given an elaborate explanation of what constitutes occupational detriment.

It seeks to provide an employee who is subjected to such detriment with legal remedies and to provide for procedures to be followed by an employee who seeks to expose impropriety committed by his or her employer. Protected disclosures can be made under this Bill to one’s legal adviser for the purposes of obtaining legal advice, to one’s employer, to a Minister or an MEC of a province as the case may be, or to the Public Protector or the Auditor-General.

This does not mean that a protected disclosure can only be made to the categories of persons or entities that I have just referred to. On the contrary, the Bill contemplates other forms of disclosure, but sets more stringent criteria with regard to the latter, for example regarding a disclosure to the media. In addition, the Bill makes it possible for the Minister responsible for Justice to, by regulation, increase the types of bodies to which protected disclosures can be made under this Bill. This could, for example, include the prosecuting authorities and other similar structures. In conclusion, allow me to revert back to the question I alluded to earlier, as to whether enough is being done to address the question of crime and corruption in our society. As I indicated at the commencement of my speech, this Bill constitutes a missing piece in our anticorruption jigsaw puzzle and its introduction is long overdue. The apartheid state conveniently opted to avoid introducing this kind of legislation because it would have contributed to its earlier demise. Perhaps, if legislation of this kind had been in existence then, the atrocities committed by persons in powerful positions that caused untold suffering to the people of this country and indeed to other nations in our region and elsewhere in the world during the apartheid era could long ago have been exposed and challenged in a more vigorous way by all our people. Equally, the many corrupt activities committed by some of the key players in the private sector during that era which have come to light in recent times could have been exposed and perhaps even prevented, with the result that major savings to our economy could have been made.

The call for a moral renewal of our society can only be reinforced by measures such as are contemplated in this Bill. For any act of corruption to be uncovered and dealt with, someone must blow the whistle. This Bill seeks to encourage such loyalty and dedication amongst our people to support our fight against crime and corruption. It will help to harness the gains that we have already made through the introduction of measures such as the Scorpions, the Prevention of Organised Crime Act and the establishment of the Asset Forfeiture Unit in the Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions. These measures, as we all know, are but a few amongst numerous other measures introduced by Government to combat crime and corruption.

In recent times we have seen how our Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and our Minister of Safety and Security have joined the police in the middle of the night, chasing unscrupulous wrongdoers to demonstrate how they are committed to engaging in the struggle against crime by adopting a hands-on approach. As I have indicated, these are all indications and evidence of our commitment as a country and as a Government to the fight against crime. [Applause.]

Mr M E MABETA: Madam Speaker, Ministers, hon members, the UDM supports this Bill and considers it an important companion to the Open Democracy Bill. We also think that it is an important milestone in the eradication of corruption in our society and in Government and in state institutions in particular.

I would like to thank the chairperson of the committee, the hon Mr Johnny de Lange, for directing the discussions there. I would also like to express my appreciation for the reference by the Deputy Minister to the need for the entrenchment of values that would draw the attention of all members of society towards fighting these issues and sensitise them in that regard.

In the limited time that I have I would like to concentrate on two points. Firstly, although it is good to borrow models from other countries, there is always a problem of limitations here. For example, the model, with the relevance of its procedures, from the UK only goes back as far as 1998. Then the Southern Australian model was only introduced in 1993. Though this is not an important limitation, I think a more specific focus on our society will help as we continue to interrogate the necessary steps that we must take in establishing measures to fight corruption in our society. I would also like to appeal for us to go beyond the employer-employee relationship and look at society broadly. For example, how is this likely to impact on traditional courts in our society?

The other issue is the training of the people who are going to implement these measures. We have only just come out of the interim Constitution, the current Constitution and a large plethora of procedures and regulations. The department really needs to find resources to train people who are going to implement these.

I would also like to make the point that it is unfortunate that we have gone this far on the basis of a very restricted Bill, that is, the employer- employee relationship. What happens, for example, in a case where there is a prisoner who is aware of irregularities or abuses in prison, but then is afraid to report them because he or she is expecting hearings and a decision on his or her parole very soon? What happens in a student-lecturer or student-teacher situation where there is a clear case of corruption, but the student expects to get his or her qualifications and to either work in the institution or go elsewhere?

I also think that it is important that we have a test that allows the members of society at large to come up with these disclosures. For example, if we had this we would not have a situation in which a member of government threatens to use state intelligence agencies to find a whistleblower and then to prosecute, just because Bantu Holomisa prepared a document and submitted it to the committee. We need to be honest and upfront about this. We have a serious problem in society.

Kufuneka ke sizijonge zonke ezi zinto. Abantu abaninzi apha eMzantsi Afrika bayaphila. Ngoko ke, kufanelekile ukuba babe namalungelo kule nkululeko sikuyo nokuba bayasebenza okanye abasebenzi ngakumbi xa ujonga into yokuba abantu abaninzi apha eMzantsi Afrika abaphangeli. Eli lungelo ke lokuba umntu adize iindaba xa kukho ingxaki malingapheleli apha. Ukuba izinto ziphelela phaya emsebenzini kuza kwenzeka ntoni? Umzekelo, ukuba ixhegwazana liyabona ukuba imali iyatyiwa emsebenzini, liyoyika ukuchaza, kufanele ukuba lithini? Ingaba kufuneka lithule limane liphindela emsebenzini? (Translation of Xhosa paragraph follows.)

[We should consider all these issues. Many people make their living here in South Africa. Therefore, it is appropriate that they should have rights in this democratic dispensation, whether they are employed or not, particularly when one considers that many are unemployed. This right of people to make a disclosure when there are problems should not end here. What will happen if issues do not go beyond the work premises? For example, if an elderly woman realises that money is being embezzled at her place of work and is afraid to report this, what should she do? Should she keep quiet and just keep on going to work?]

We support the Bill as it stands.

Mr S N SWART: Madam Speaker, hon Minister, the ACDP supports this piece of legislation. We contributed to the process by inter alia proposing that the whistleblowing provision be separated from the provisions of the Open Democracy Bill, as it was then known, and by suggesting that the Bill be renamed, rather than using the colloquial term, whistleblower.

Secrecy is the yeast that feeds the dough of corruption. This Bill will undeniably form an important shield for employees against reprisals after information has been disclosed relating to alleged criminal or other irregular conduct by employees, whether in the public or private sector. We share the view of the Institute of Security Studies that the balanced and effective protection for responsible whistleblowers will prove to be an invaluable tool in deterring and detecting corruption and wrongdoing, and in promoting individual confidence in Government, businesses and other organisations.

Citizens are consequently encouraged to disclose information to achieve these aims for the public good. Possibly the best international example of this was the courageous action of Christopher Meili, a Swiss security guard, who blew the whistle on the shredding of Swiss archive documents relating to Holocaust victims. Meili was fired and suffered significant condemnation for his act. Since he had no prior association with the Holocaust victims or any Jewish connections, his whistleblowing is all the more indicative of a totally selfless act motivated by public interest.

In supporting this Bill, the ACDP trusts that crime and corruption will be dealt a severe blow. Now citizens who complain about high levels of crime can take an active responsibility in rooting out this malaise from our society. We consequently encourage all citizens to take up the challenge of exposing crime and corruption in accordance with the procedures set out in this Bill, and thereafter, to enjoy the protection offered therein.

Dr C P MULDER: Mevrou die Speaker, op die voorblad van die jongste uitgawe van die invloedryke tydskrif The Economist word ons kontinent, Afrika, as ‘n vasteland sonder hoop uitgebeeld. Volgens die tydskrif kan Afrika se mislukkings aan verskeie faktore toegeskryf word, maar onder meer spesifiek ook aan korrupsie, ‘n probleem wat ons in Suid-Afrika ook ervaar.

In Die Burger van gister word berig dat die Departement van Justisie deurspek is met korrupte en skelm amptenare wat in die afgelope maande miljoene rande van die belastingbetaler se geld in hul sak gesteek het. Hierdie onthulling word gemaak deur niemand anders nie as die direkteur- generaal, mnr Pikoli self, wat skryf dat daar ‘n onrusbarende neiging onder personeel is om wanpraktyke en misdade te pleeg.

In die lig daarvan is dit gepas dat hierdie Wetsontwerp op Beskermde Bekendmakings vandag voor die Huis dien om die hele situasie van korrupsie te hanteer. Die wetsontwerp kom kortliks daarop neer dat werkers in sowel die private sektor as die openbare sektor gemagtig word om inligting bekend te maak met betrekking tot onwettige of onreëlmatige optrede van medewerknemers, of dan werkgewers, sonder enige vrees vir vergelding aan hulle toegemeet mag word.

Feit van die saak is, ek dink ons het hier met ‘n baie lofwaardige konsep te make, maar die probleem in ‘n groot mate is dat ons miskien hier probeer om iets deur middel van wetgewing te hanteer terwyl dit eintlik tuishoort in ``the hearts and minds’’ van die mense self, naamlik dat korrupsie nie aanvaarbaar is nie en dat dit nie geduld behoort te word nie.

Ek wil in die beperkte tyd wat ek het twee probleme omtrent hierdie wetsontwerp opper wat my pla. Die eerste is die bekommernis dat hierdie wetsontwerp deur probleemwerknemers wat op die punt staan om moontlik ontslaan te word, gebruik kan word om hulle posisie te beskerm deur ‘n onware bekendmaking te doen wat tot iemand se nadeel kan wees.

Die tweede probleem is dat ons ernstig voel dat hier ‘n tekort aan balans in hierdie wetgewing is en dat daar ook daarna gekyk moet word om mense af te raai om op ‘n kwaadwillige wyse bekendmakings te doen tot nadeel van ander mense. Dit moet reggemaak word, dan sal die wetgewing sinvol kan wees.

Die VF is egter ten gunste daarvan dat korrupsie so gou moontlik beveg moet word, en sal daarom baie graag die wetsontwerp steun. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, on the front page of the latest edition of the influential publication The Economist our continent, Africa, is being portrayed as a continent without hope. According to this publication Africa’s failures can be attributed to a variety of factors, but, inter alia, specifically also to corruption, a problem which we in South Africa are also experiencing.

In yesterday’s Die Burger it was reported that the Department of Justice is riddled with corruption and crooked officials who have, over the past few months, pocketed millions of rands of taxpayers’ money. This disclosure was made by none other than the director-general, Mr Pikoli himself, who writes that there is an alarming tendency amongst members of staff to commit malpractices and crimes. In the light of this it is appropriate that this Protected Disclosures Bill is serving before the House today to deal with the whole situation of corruption. This Bill briefly amounts to the fact that employees in both the private and the public sector are empowered to disclose information regarding the unlawful or irregular conduct of their fellow employees, or employers, without any fear of reprisals which might be meted out to them.

The fact of the matter is, I think we are dealing with a very laudable concept here, but to a great extent the problem is that we are possibly trying to deal here with something by way of legislation while it actually belongs in the hearts and minds of the people themselves, namely that corruption is not acceptable and that it should not be tolerated.

In the limited time at my disposal, I would like to raise two problems pertaining to this Bill which concern me. The first is the concern that this Bill could be used by problem workers, who are on the point of possibly being dismissed, to protect their position by making a false disclosure which could be to someone’s disadvantage.

The second problem is that we seriously feel that there is a lack of balance in this legislation and that we should also look at discouraging people from making malicious disclosures which could prejudice other people. This should be rectified, and then this legislation will make sense.

The FF is, however, in favour of corruption being combated as soon as possible, and for this reason will therefore very gladly support this Bill.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Madam Speaker, it is imperative to promulgate this Bill, because the society in which we live is sick and requires diverse means of remedying the malady. It is equally important to note that criminal conduct and other irregular conduct are detrimental to good, effective, accountable and transparent governance.

In order for this Bill to achieve its objective it is imperative that the whistleblowers’ protection is not compromised in any manner when they ensure that those who possess crucial information about any abuse of power or public office by Government officials are exposed and brought to book. The challenge for us is to strike a balance between the Bill of Rights and the advancement of this Bill’s objectives.

The way to achieve this will require that we devise implementation mechanisms which would protect whistleblowers by means of, firstly, embarking on public education about the Act itself throughout the country; secondly, availing resources for the office which is expected to administer the Act; thirdly, recruiting well-qualified professional staff to render ongoing support to whistleblowers; and, fourthly, ensuring that whistleblowers’ identities are well protected against any possible reprisals from employers and fellow employees.

We, the UCDP, support the Bill and congratulate the portfolio committee under the able, effective and efficient leadership of our chairperson, Adv De Lange.

Adv H C SCHMIDT: Madam Speaker, as has been stated earlier this afternoon, the Bill provides protection to employees, and only employees, who blow the whistle on criminal and other improper conduct from later victimisation by employers in both the public and private spheres.

The Bill, furthermore, forms part of a broader category of social security legislation, such as unemployment insurance, house and safety legislation, Road Accident Fund compensation, for which the Road Accident Fund Commission recently sought an extension to complete its investigation of the Road Accident Fund; and family benefits and health care. By adopting this piece of legislation, we are extending the ambit of the labour law and the social security protection already provided for in various countries, such as the UK. We are, however, still faced with the predicament as to whether to extend the ambit of this piece of legislation to inter alia the atypically employed and the so-called independent contractor situation; and to those who cannot be deemed to fall within the definition of the employer- employee relationship defined by labour law at present.

This Bill is welcomed in that it provides a tool not only to the formally appointed protectors of our society, such as the SAPS and officials of the Department of Justice, but also to the citizen who, as a victim of criminal conduct and other irregular conduct in the workplace, can report these wrongdoings in a responsible manner and join society in the fight against crime. The ambit of this Bill is wide in that it includes not only criminal offences, failure to comply with legal obligations, miscarriages of justice and unfair discrimination, as contemplated in the recently accepted the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, deliberate concealment of such behaviour.

It is foreseen that this Bill will not have a negative effect on the employee-employer relationship as employers still have common law remedies, as well as other existing legislation applicable to their availability, if employees misuse this process. Blowing the whistle on any employer is permissible in prescribed instances to the employer, to a member of the Cabinet or of the executive council of a province, to certain bodies such as the Public Protector, as well as that provided for in clause 9, in terms of which a general protected disclosure can be made to the media on the proviso that in this last instance, the employee believes that the information disclosed is inter alia substantially true and he does not make the disclosure for personal gain.

That this Bill intends to be made a practical guideline, in terms of which all employees are to be made aware of their rights in this regard, appears to be clear and is welcomed. This Bill provides an avenue by which the general public will participate and benefit in the fight against crime. Importantly, it also indicates how the ideal of social security can be provided by Parliament, acting as a facilitator, without any costs accruing to the state and/or private institutions as employers.

Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker and Ministers, I would like to convey my compliments to our comrade Johnny de Lange. For far too long, in the private and public sector, commercial corruption enjoyed a prosperous livelihood. In fact, corruption has become an establishment business in the expansion and liberation of the economy, owing to the imperfect procedures of control and the suppression of employees’ divulging information in the best interests of trustees. The lack of legal protection to employees and whistleblowers too afraid to disclose information facilitated the continuation of corruption in both the public and private sectors.

The Protected Disclosures Bill is a stepping stone, as a legal administrative component, to prevent corruption, and it forces individuals in the working environment to inevitably fight against irregular conduct which causes social damage. The overriding value expressed in the Bill is to create a culture that will facilitate the disclosure of information by employees according to statutory guidelines and to protect the informants concerned against any detrimental reprisals.

The freeflow of divulged information depends on the flexibility of statutory guidelines and whether the recipient of the particular information will undertake the task of executing an investigation based on the principles of transparency and accountability. It is clear from the content of the Protected Disclosures Bill that absolute confidentiality regarding the informants’ identities is not an unconditional guarantee, owing to the format of legal procedures and the need to investigate conflicting evidence. However, the remedies laid out in favour of employees in clause 4 of the Bill protect the individual from occupational detriment. The onus is on the employer to use the remedies through legal mechanisms to protect himself or herself against prejudice. Ultimately the aim of the Protected Disclosures Bill is to promote a legal responsibility among employers and employees to expose diverse criminals. The MF supports the Bill. [Time expired.] Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, when I read that the topic would be the whistleblowers’ Bill, I was very excited. I said it was about time we passed legislation against these Australian and New Zealand referees who were cheating the Springboks all the time! [Laughter.] But through the course of the debate I realised that that was not exactly what it was about. [Laughter.]

Die AEB wil graag hierdie wetsontwerp steun. Ons sien dit as ‘n eerlike poging om ‘n onderdeel te wees van ‘n oop demokrasie in Suid-Afrika. Menseregte sal ‘n illusie bly as ons dink dit gaan gedy in ‘n klimaat van korrupsie. Korrupsie en wanadministrasie, weet ons, is aan die orde van die dag, en ons glo dat hierdie wetsontwerp ‘n beskeie bydrae kan lewer om dit aan bande te lê.

Die wetsontwerp is nie waterdig nie. Ek dink dit sal die opsteller self ook toegee, maar ons glo dat dit ‘n raamwerk bied waarbinne die samewerking van die gemeenskap verkry kan word in die bestryding van korrupsie. Hierdie wetsontwerp skep myns insiens ‘n kultuur van medeverantwoordelikheid. Dit skep ‘n kultuur van, ``ek is my broer se hoeder,’’ wat ons aanmoedig om na mekaar om te sien. Ons is dankbaar vir die meganismes in hierdie wetsontwerp. Of dit subtiele diskriminasie en afpersing gaan uitskakel, weet ons nie, maar dit is die sein van medeverantwoordelikheid wat dit uitstuur wat tel. Ons steun ook die uitbreiding daarvan na die private sektor, waar korrupsie en bedrog ook hoogty vier. Ek verstaan nie heeltemal hoekom dit beperk moet word tot die sfeer van werkgewer-werknemer nie, maar ons glo optrede en uitsprake hieroor sal tog ook rigting gee aan die ander terreine van die samelewing.

Ek het ook die vrees dat dit dalk gebruik kan word in ‘n vendetta deur gefrustreerde werknemers, maar ons glo dat die vereistes van bona fides, die waarheid en geen eie gewin nie ook hierin beperkende maatreëls stel. Ons steun hierdie wetgewing. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The AEB would like to support this Bill. We see it as an honest attempt to be a component of an open democracy in South Africa. Human rights will remain an illusion if we think they will flourish in a climate of corruption. We all know that corruption and maladministration are the order of the day, and we believe that this Bill can make a modest contribution to combating this.

The Bill is not watertight. I think that even the drafter would concede that, but we believe that it offers a framework in which the co-operation of the community can be obtained in fighting corruption. In my opinion this Bill creates a culture of co-responsibility. It creates a culture of ``I am my brother’s keeper’’, which encourages us to take care of one another.

We are grateful for the mechanisms in this Bill. We do not know whether it is going to eliminate subtle discrimination and extortion, but it is the signal of co-responsibility which it sends out, that counts. We also support its extension to the private sector, where corruption and fraud are also the order of the day. I do not entirely understand why it should be restricted to the sphere of employer-employee, but we believe that actions and statements in this regard will also give direction to the other spheres of society.

I also fear that it could possibly be used in a vendetta by frustrated employees, but we believe that the prerequisites of bona fides, the truth and no self-gain also put in place restrictive measures. We support this legislation.]

I think the significance of this Bill is that every citizen becomes a small- scale public protector. [Applause.]

Mr M A MANGENA: Madam Speaker, the discovery of impropriety by an employer on the part of an employee or by a senior public servant against a junior in the Public Service will most probably lead to disciplinary action against the employee or the junior public servant concerned. So this Bill will not come into contention in such a case. But the same does not hold true if a junior public servant or an employee discovers impropriety by a senior public servant or employer.

This Bill gives junior public servants and employees in particular some teeth to act in the event that they observe or suspect impropriety on the part of their seniors or employers. Because the disclosures contemplated are not for personal gain or rewards, this Bill relies for its effectiveness on the goodness of people and the desire by people to do the right thing. Such virtues are not exactly in abundant supply, especially these days. Also, considering that bosses in both the private and public sectors are powerful people and that juniors or employees do not easily cross their paths, the noble intentions of this Bill might be difficult to realise.

However, these two considerations should by no means minimise the importance of the Bill. Good people need all the good tools to enable them to do good. It is conceivable that the Public Protector, Auditor-General and other political office bearers who receive protected disclosures might be obligated by their offices to act on information received. But employers and private legal practitioners might, for a variety of reasons including protection of the good name of their business, be inclined not to act on information disclosed to them. The Bill might have been strengthened a bit if there were provisions to compel employers, and legal practitioners in particular, to act on protected disclosures made to them.

Azapo supports this Bill. [Applause.]

Mr G SOLOMON: Madam Speaker, it is very heartening to note here so many political parties, particularly the opposition, behind the ANC in support of this Bill and also without politicising the issue, except, maybe, for Mr Gaum, who tried a shot at the recent incident of Dr Allan Boesak.

Without politicising the whole matter, I would just like to remind the young member of the New NP that it was Dr Boesak, first of all, who was fighting very hard to bring down that member’s party’s government which was not only corrupt, but illegitimate and also oppressive in this country. In 1977, the Auditor-General at the time - I think it was a Mr Gerald Barry - submitted a report to this Parliament of the then NP during the period of the notorious Department of Information, the total-onslaught strategy and the Bureau for State Security, which gave a picture of the Public Service as a den of rogues. That is the party he belongs to. [Interjections.] Nevertheless, when I looked at the Question Paper for tomorrow, I observed that there were 20 questions relating directly or indirectly to the topic on the table today, that is, fraud and corruption, which indicates the prevalence of this type of activity still in our administration.

We are discussing a very serious matter here, a type of crime which is secretive and pervasive in its nature and costs the country and its people billions, a crime perpetrated by academically and technically skilled persons in the offices and boardrooms of private and public bodies. Because of this context, these crimes often assume an air of respectability and legitimacy on the part of the perpetrator. The victims are invisible and the crime is apparently nonviolent. These are the unforgivable crimes of fraud and corruption whose weapons are computers and state-of-the-art information technology. Let us be very clear that this type of criminality, involving a minority of the Public Service and private sector, is more despicable and more damaging to the psyche of this nation, its economy and its national image than the confrontational and sensational, violent street crimes often associated and related to our local gang formations.

Without justifying any type of criminality, one can still understand and empathise with the poor, the unemployed and the hungry on the fringes of society. There are millions of them who might be tempted to commit crimes in order to acquire the basic needs of life. As for those who are employed and receiving good salaries and perks and who are tasked with power and responsibility, there is no justification whatsoever to abuse their positions and to misuse their talents and skills in order to defraud those whom they have to serve. The President, in his state of the nation address, on 4 February 2000, emphasised the Government’s commitment to step up the fight against crime. He singled out corruption and abuse of public resources when he said, and I quote: ``We will not relax our efforts to root out corruption in our society, with special focus on the public sector.’’

One can understand the President’s anxiety and the urgency of this message. Public officials are tasked with the duty of upholding the Constitution by developing a culture of good and honest public service with discipline and accountability, improving the quality and efficiency of management, strengthening financial and management controls and, most important of all, ensuring that the wealth of the country reaches the people in the form of service delivery to ensure a better life for all. This ethos is captured in our African Renaissance principle of Batho Pele [People First] or, as the saying goes: Motho ke motho ka batho ba bang. [A human being is a human being because of others.] This is at the heart of our African culture and the raison d’être of our African renaissance.

The minority amongst our public officials who enrich themselves by defrauding the pensions of the aged, the housing subsidies of the homeless, the medicine and equipment of the sick, the police who collude with criminals and the Justice officials who accept bribes are the most despicable people in our society and are traitors to the spirit of our Constitution and cause of the African renaissance. They do not belong amongst us.

This is a grave matter and one does not want to politicise the issue, as Mr Gaum attempted, but one cannot just dismiss the nexus of the unjust and racist system of the past and an inherited, bureaucratic system that was authoritarian, secretive and nontransparent and created fertile ground for rogue elements responsible for corrupting our young and fragile democracy, particularly in the public sector today. It is sad and depressing to listen to one Minister after another lamenting the high incidence of fraud and corruption in the respective departments and their auxiliary structures. The problem of fraud and corruption is subtle and complex. I was recently listening to the Director-General of the Department of Justice, Adv Vusi Pikoli, at the public hearings of the committee when he talked about this problem and the difficulty posed by this human element, the moral vulnerability of human beings in his department. What do we do? There are four basic areas which need to be looked at in order to manage this human failing: Education and proper skills training, means of curbing the opportunities for fraud and corruption, early detection and deterrence of corruption, and reinforcing the motivation to be patriotic and to do what is right for the country and its people. In any institution, public or private, this must be a collective responsibility which should also include an opportunity for well-intentioned and socially conscious whistleblowers who make disclosures in any employer-employee relationship to be provided with the means to make disclosures and a shield of protection when they refuse complicity in or tacit consent to fraud and corruption. This is the crux of the Bill before us.

At the heart of fraud and corruption lie the issues of moral responsibility, patriotism and adherence to our African renaissance. Corruption and fraud, in the final analysis, are a violation of the spirit of our democratic Constitution and a betrayal of our vision of a better life for all. No system of detection and deterrence, however elaborate and extensive, can possibly completely suffice to stem corruption. In the final analysis, the only force strong enough to resist corruption is the moral sense of the public servant to do what is right and to avoid what is wrong for the sake of our country and its people.

This morality, as is stated in the vision of the African youth, must find expression in our fight against crime and corruption, in respecting the lives and property of others, in commitment to honesty and hard work, in our pursuit of gender equality and nonsexism, in our pursuit of nonracialism, in our fight against HIV/Aids. If the young lions of the ANC Youth League can put this into practice, together with the implementation of this Bill, this House and the people of South Africa can certainly look forward to a bright future in the African century. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank all the participants in the debate for their positive inputs. This is clearly another form of witness protection which will safeguard the wellbeing of valuable witnesses without whom our human- rights-based, rule-of-law approach would not thrive.

For justice to be seen to be done, we need the co-operation of every South African in every sector, community and walk of life. Without each one of us choosing to act in the public interest, we will fail in our common aspiration to affirm the values of human dignity, equality and freedom as we are reminded to do in the preamble of the Bill before us today.

The hon Mulder expressed concern that the Bill may be abused by employees. However, in order to qualify for protection in terms of the Bill, it is clearly stipulated that the disclosure must be made in good faith. Disclosures made with ulterior or self-interest motives will not qualify for protection. Earlier drafts of the Bill made provision for indemnity against civil or criminal liability for a person who made a disclosure. This was deliberately omitted in this Bill to ensure that a person cannot escape the legal consequences of acting unlawfully. The department will however monitor the application of the Act, and if there is evidence of abuse, it should be addressed.

The hon member Johnny de Lange was quite right to say that the greatest challenge of this legislation lies in its implementation. We will drive all efforts to bring to fruition the many benefits offered by this legislation and trust that all those out there who are in employer-employee relationships and relations will join us in trying to make this Act real.

In conclusion, I would like, once again, to thank the portfolio committee for their effort and initiative, and I would also like to thank the legal drafters from the Department of Justice, Mr Henk du Preez and Mr Johan de Lange, who worked around the clock to finalise the Bill. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time.

The House adjourned at 18:00. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                         MONDAY, 15 MAY 2000

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    On 15 May 2000 the following Bills, at the request of the
     Minister of Transport, were introduced in the National Council of
     Provinces by the Select Committee on Public Services. They have
     been referred to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for
     classification in terms of Joint Rule 160:


     (i)     Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences
             Amendment Bill [B 31 - 2000] (National Council of Provinces
             - sec 76) - (Select Committee on Public Services - National
             Council of Provinces) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
             prior notice of its introduction published in Government
             Gazette No 21077 of 7 April 2000.]


       (ii)  Road Traffic Management Corporation Amendment Bill [B 32 -
             2000] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76) - (Select
             Committee on Public Services - National Council of
             Provinces) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of
             its introduction published in Government Gazette No 21077
             of 7 April 2000.]


 (2)    Assent by the President of the Republic in respect of the
     following Bills:


     (i)     Financial Services Board Amendment Bill [B 62B - 99] - Act
             No 12 of 2000 (assented to and signed by President on 20
             April 2000); and

     (ii)    Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Bill
             [B 14B - 2000] - Act No 13 of 2000 (assented to and signed
             by President on 4 May 2000).


 (3)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 15 May 2000 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bills as section 75
     Bills:


     (i)     Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill [B 27 - 2000]
          (National Assembly - sec 75) - (Portfolio Committee on
          Provincial and Local Government - National Assembly).

    (ii)     Sea Transport Documents Bill [B 28 - 2000] (National
           Assembly - sec 75) - (Portfolio Committee on Transport -
           National Assembly).


 (4)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 15 May 2000 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(4), classified the following Bills as section 76
     Bills:


     (i)     South African Council for Educators Bill [B 26 - 2000]
           (National Council of Provinces - sec 76) - (Select Committee
           on Education and Recreation - National Council of
           Provinces).

      (ii)    Meat Safety Bill [B 29 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec
           76(1)) - (Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land
           Affairs - National Assembly).

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 The following papers have been tabled and are now referred to the
 relevant committees as mentioned below:


 (1)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Home Affairs and to the Select Committee on Social Services:


     (a)     Report of the Independent Electoral Commission on the
          National and Provincial Elections of 2 June 1999 [RP 83-2000].

     (b)     Report of the Department of Home Affairs for 1999 [RP 98-
          2000].


 (2)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Safety and Security and to the Select Committee on Security and
     Constitutional Affairs:


     Regulation Number R.389 published in the Government Gazette Number
     21088 dated 14 April 2000, the South African Police Service
     Employment Regulations made in terms of section 24(1) of the South
     African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No 68 of 1995).


 (3)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Provincial and Local Government and to the Select Committee on
     Local Government and Administration:


     Reasons for declaring a state of disaster in the Magisterial
     Districts of Phutaditjhaba Transitional Local Council, Qwaqwa
     Rural Council and Maluti Transitional Rural Council in the Free
     State Province submitted to Parliament in terms of section 2(4) of
     the Civil Protection Act, 1977 (Act No 67 of 1977).


 (4)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Correctional Services and to the Select Committee on Security and
     Constitutional Affairs:


     Report and Financial Statements of the Judicial Inspectorate for
     the period 1 June 1998 to 1 February 2000.


 (5)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Health and to the Select Committee on Social Services for
     consideration and report:


     (a)     Protocol on Health in the Southern African Development
          Community, tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the
          Constitution, 1996.

     (b)     Explanatory Memorandum to the Protocol.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 Reports of the Auditor-General on the -

 (a)    Financial Statements of the South African Telecommunications
     Regulatory Authority for 1998-99 [RP 84-2000];

 (b)    Financial Statements of the Ciskei Broadcasting Corporation for
     1993-94 to 1996-97 and the period ended 30 November 1997 [RP 79-
     2000];

 (c)    Group Annual Financial Statements of Soekor (Pty) Ltd for 1997-
     98 [RP 78-2000];

 (d)    Financial Statements of the Commission on Gender Equality for
     1998-99 [RP 85-2000].

National Assembly:

Bills:

1. The Minister of Finance:

 (1)    Wetsontwerp op die Verdeling van Inkomste [W 8 - 2000].


     The Division of Revenue Bill [B 8 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec
     76(1)) was introduced by the Minister of Finance on 23 February
     2000 and referred to the Portfolio Committee on Finance.

                        TUESDAY, 16 MAY 2000

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 16 May 2000 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bill as a section 75
     Bill:


     (i)     Protected Disclosures Bill [B 30 - 2000] (National
          Assembly - sec 75) - (Portfolio Committee on Justice and
          Constitutional Development - National Assembly).