THURSDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2001 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:07.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

              RULINGS AND REMARKS BY PRESIDING OFFICERS

                              (Ruling)

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! before we begin, I wish to deliver a ruling in respect of remarks and rulings that were made during the sitting on 27 September 2001.

I recently received correspondence concerning the remarks and the rulings of the officers presiding during the address by the Deputy President on 27 September 2001. Having referred to the Hansard, I wish to take this opportunity to respond to the correspondence.

The remarks of the Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP were that he had allowed the hon member Mr Matthee to proceed to debate a Bill which was not before Parliament and which was also not the subject matter of the debate in the NCOP on that day. He concluded by saying that it was not a matter before the House.

When the hon member Ms Botha proceeded to raise the issue of the constitutional amending Bills during her speech, the Chairperson of Committees indicated that, given the earlier remarks of the Deputy Chairperson, the member was referring to a matter that was still to be tabled before the House. Her ruling was that the member continue with her speech, but refrain from referring to the matter.

Although the Chairperson of Committees did not expressly refer to NCOP Rule 49, which deals with the anticipation of a discussion, it would seem that it was the Rule which was invoked. According to the Rule, no member may anticipate the discussion of a matter appearing on the Order Paper.

The Rule further provides that, in determining whether a matter is out of order on the ground of anticipation, the officer presiding must consider whether it is probable that the matter anticipated will be discussed in the Council within a reasonable time. The Chairperson of Committees therefore had a discretion which she exercised accordingly.

I do wish to emphasise that the ruling must not be interpreted as implying that members are being restricted in terms of the issues that they may wish to raise in the course of a debate. Members do address a range of auxiliary issues in the course of a debate. However, the nature of a parliamentary debate and, indeed, the Rules require that members focus on the subject matter before the House. In particular, where there is a subject or motion set for discussion, the expectation is that members will adhere to that subject or motion.

The constitutional amending Bill is on the Order Paper and members will have a full opportunity to debate it. The ruling that the hon member Ms Botha could not continue to speak on that subject was therefore correct.

By agreement of the Whippery, Notices of Motion will be dealt with after the last Order of the Day.

                  PUBLIC SERVICE WAGE NEGOTIATIONS

                             (Statement)

The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Madam Chairperson and hon members of this House, every year the Public Service enters into protracted negotiations with the Public Service unions on wages and other aspects of conditions of service. This year, the Department of Public Service and Administration, encouraged by agreements arrived at at the jobs summit, has taken an innovative and strategic approach to negotiating the 2001-2004 negotiations on the improvement of conditions of service for the Public Service with the 12 public sector unions.

I would like to present to this House this afternoon the rationale, status and outcome of the negotiation process, and the rest that came about in terms of where we are today.

The start of the negotiations was characterised by deliberate and, I believe, constructive engagements. This was preceded by a thorough workshop on budgeting in government with unions, designed to expedite the negotiations. We wanted everybody to understand what was in the fiscal envelope to understand its dispersion.

Each union presented its own demand for salary increases, which ranged from 9% to 13%. At the second stage of the negotiations, unions tabled what we referred to as consolidated proposals. These ranged from 13% to 25%. This complicated the negotiation process, as the consolidated proposal was twice that of the original proposal.

In an attempt to find an agreement, and after careful consideration, the Government revisited its offers on numerous occasions to accommodate what we believed were reasonable demands from unions during the negotiations. Our final position was a considered offer that balanced the pressing and competing demands on Government’s resources, and addressed what we believed were some of the genuine concerns raised by unions.

On Tuesday last week, 2 October 2001, we offered unions until the close of business to sign the agreement on the table. This offer, at that point, included revisions made by the Government around the issue of restructuring of the Public Service, in the hope that this would secure an agreement signed by the majority of Public Service unions. The Government believes that this was a fair offer and an innovative attempt at fostering a broader, integrated and multiterm agreement.

In demonstrating this commitment, we extended our deadlines from last week. Headlines screamed: ``Minister revises offer’’, I think for the third time or something like that, because we felt that we needed to reflect our willingness to negotiate in good faith.

Hence, we further accommodated proposals made by labour for changes to the draft agreements. Regrettably, by yesterday, with the exception of four unions, the majority of unions in the Public Service Co-ordinating Council did not accept the agreement that we presented. I am not going to go into the background to our constraints and challenges. I trust that members will look at a copy of my input which will be circulated.

In view of a more expansionary budget, as the Government we thought that there were certain things that we would like to do, including hiring more people, giving larger increases and designing new measures to attract and retain scarce skills. This was a costly exercise, and if we look at growing capital spending, expanding the welfare net and paying for free municipal services, and these all being demands from the same part, I am sure we will all agree that it is clear that available resources are limited and we need to look at making trade-offs.

Trade-offs are difficult, but they need to be made in a way that improves the chance of the Government meeting its objectives with a finite amount of money. There are times in public policy when choices have to be made between equally laudable objectives, and this is one of those situations.

Hiring more people will reduce the workload, and allow for an expansion of the services that the Government delivers. In keeping with this, the Government is committed to creating employment over the medium term in key service delivery sectors which include education, correctional services and justice, health and welfare, and safety and security. Why are we committed to increasing employment in the above sectors? It is true that there are areas in the Public Service that are overstaffed and that there are areas that require fundamental restructuring in keeping with the agreements made by the Government with the public service sector unions at the Jobs Summit in January 2001 in Pietersburg.

In this House, we have repeatedly reflected on some of the inefficiencies in the Public Service. In this House, members reflect on some of the inabilities in service delivery. We need to ensure that the Government and unions together develop innovative tools and procedures that will deal with the situation to ensure the necessary fundamental transformation, and it is to this end that we remain committed to ensuring a process that complies with the Public Service Co-ordinating Bargaining Council’s resolution 7 of

1. For all of us here, resolution 7 comprises the commitments of the Jobs Summit agreement.

The envisaged process provides a framework for ensuring that the rights of public servants and the need to retain jobs are balanced with service delivery imperatives that emerge across the Government. The critical imperative is to have a fair process, and to ensure that all possible alternatives are exhausted before anyone is retrenched.

The current agreement - members should please look at paragraph 8 of the agreement that we as the Government signed in that Chamber - it gives unions adequate time to negotiate with the Government on these issues, but insists that in order to have certainty, all parties should agree to arbitration in cases where no agreements are reached.

A false impression is being deliberately created that the Government is forcing unions to agree to retrenchments. In actual fact, the agreement provides for ample opportunity for negotiation and, as the last resort, it proposes arbitration as a fair and final solution.

Clause 8 of the resolution reads:

Parties agree to convene a special PSCBC meeting which shall remain in session for an uninterrupted period between 16 October 2001 and 12 December 2001 in order to conclude a collective agreement on restructuring.

This came about in view of concerns that the Department of Labour had, and we effected it in because we thought that it made good sense to us to be able to have adequate consultation to resolve this particular question through collective bargaining.

The negotiations contemplated in the clause that I mentioned are based upon the resolutions contained in the Public Service Jobs Summit. In the agreement on the table, we believe that resolution was a step in the right direction to build a sense of consistency, moderation and balance in our respective approaches.

It was to shift away from antagonistic annual negotiations - five months this year and seven months in 1999 - to a situation in which there is a three-year multiterm agreement that is in line with the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework. No party could argue that anyone was negotiating in bad faith.

Our wage offer was 8% for level 1, 7% for levels 2 and 3 and 6,5% for levels 4 to 12. We were willing to put on the table money that we would vote on, on 30 October in the adjustments estimate appropriation, in order to have a package deal - money that was not and is not in this year’s budget appropriation - because we felt it important to have a multiterm agreement.

We felt it important to actually ensure that Public Service workers would, for the next two years, know that on 1 July they would get increases that are above inflation: 0,5% above inflation next year and the year thereafter an additional 1%.

In addition to that, there would also be a pay progression system that would be based on 1% of the wage Bill. That would improve merit awards for productivity in order to be an incentive for those public servants who are working hard. That pay progression system would take into account teachers and educators who, at this point in time, do not have any form of pay progression. That system would come into operation as from April of 2002.

The mind boggles. Why was this agreement not signed, when it is to the benefit of the bulk of Public Service workers who, at this particular point in time, do not have a form of pay progression that acknowledges their outcome? It is amazing, but I am certain that we will find answers to this.

I think a further issue to raise is that the shift towards a multiterm agreement and the commitment to the imperatives of restructuring will open the way for a more sustained interaction with our labour partners on the critical issues of transformation and conditions of service, because in essence the core business of negotiators cannot be simply negotiating a percentage wage increase.

That would be a narrow, economist approach to the issue of wage negotiations, which have to take into account the broader issues. They should facilitate the strategy of addressing needs related to the development needs of public servants and the shortage of critical skills in particular areas of the Public Service. Additionally, there is a need to prioritise the provision of the compulsory health care package for all public servants. As the Government we believe that we did everything possible.

We did negotiate in good faith and with integrity, and we were flexible about the issues, as we can see if we trace back the percentage wage increase. We started with 5%. We went to 5,5%. We actually jumped to an overall increase of 6,58%. We moved on the issue of not having had a clause in the restructuring component, in section 8, that dealt with the need for consultation and negotiation on restructuring in the chamber by saying that we would sit for an uninterrupted period from next week until 12 December. Now that sounds to me like flexibility.

We went further to say that from having had an inflation-related increase, we would have inflation plus 0,5%. We said inflation plus 1% for the year thereafter. We also said, in order to cover both employers and employees, that if inflation was below 4% or higher than 7,5%, we would reopen negotiations on the wage increases. That sounds like flexibility to me.

I need to ask, at this point, whether there are winners and losers. The position taken by the majority of unions raises a number of concerns and I want to say that there are no winners in this current impasse. We have demonstrated a deep commitment towards transformation and fostering sustainable economic and employment growth. Central to this agreement is a more strategic medium-term approach designed to facilitate planning and restructuring for improving service delivery.

The risks with this impasse are manifold. It undermines the progressive shift towards a multiyear agreement that will allow for greater predictability and planning of the Public Service’s enhancement over the medium term. This is a demand, a concern that both Government and labour have had over the years. It limits the scope for a more sustained, dynamic and innovative interaction with our labour partners on critical issues that Government believes are important, including transformation. The proposed agreement includes, as I said, an increase in salaries and wages that is above CPIX inflation.

Given these risks, we as Government still believe that the labour unions and we had much to gain from accepting this offer. This is particularly true for those sectors that have already gone through major restructuring, like education.

Why should educators threaten to strike when the restructuring process in terms of realigning numbers is done? Why should educators threaten to strike when we clearly stated that in terms of restructuring, a sector identified for employment creation is education? Maybe the House will help me answer that question.

In the other sectors the package agreement provides a generous monetary and other benefits for all low-paid workers, unlike a flat rate of 5% across the board that does nothing to narrow the divide between wages. We had a situation of 8%, 7% and 6,5%.

Does it mean that employees and members of unions mandated the unions to take the stands they did take? We have reflected the commitment to minimising the negative impacts of restructuring, but we felt that it gave us an opportunity to jointly confront the much required transformation and restructuring.

We cannot have a situation where people in the Public Service are digging a hole and filling a hole and taking a week to do it. That is not improving service delivery to the numbers of South Africans that are entitled to effective and efficient service delivery from this Public Service machinery, and we have a responsibility. We are committed to building a developmental state, and developmental Public Service underpins that. A developmental state does not come about by simple declaration or rhetoric. It requires that we transform the Public Service in fundamental ways.

I just need to conclude by saying that as Cabinet we took a decision yesterday that, in order to overcome the impasse in which public servants for the past five months had no certainty on increases, we are implementing the monetary side of the agreement that we initially put on the table when we started negotiations at the end of May, that is, 5% across the board plus R850, and that is because we cannot implement a package deal. The package deal for the gradual increases of between 8% and 6,5% went hand in hand with restructuring, with a multiterm agreement, pay progression and our addressing scarce skills.

Our agreement signed by Government is in the chamber, but we have started the process to implement the 5% and R850. I believe that the House will appreciate the fact that, like Government, unions have an important and constructive role to play in assisting us to confront the large challenges in the Public Service sector, but they need to be strong unions that are willing to drive in a particular way and deal likewise with challenges that may in the short term seem to be unpopular.

It is a difficult but necessary task, and I hope the House will understand our process in this regard. I want to express thanks to all those who are walking this road with us. [Applause.]

Ms C S BOTHA: Chairperson, the hon the Minister is always so articulate that one is almost tempted to feel sorry for her, but, seeing as I do in the papers that the unions have come off second best, I think I should keep my sympathies for them.

The hon the Minister and the unions, or, as she calls them, her ``labour partners’’, remind me very much of two people trying to learn to dance together; one step forward, two steps back and in the process a lot of injured toes and, it seems, injured children if the teachers’ unions are going to strike. Striking over wage increases tends to show that one partner wears jackboots to the dance floor.

This whole wage negotiation saga leaves one with a sense of déjà vu. We annually go through this painful process for months, only to find that the discordant noise is not harmonised and that the whole process will start again. One wonders why they do not get it right.

One of the problems seems to be that the unions want to sing from one song sheet only, called collective bargaining, while the Minister has her own solo, sometimes restructuring, sometimes no package deal.

Collective bargaining has the appeal of simplicity and gives the appearance of uniformity of principle and intent, ``‘n soort van eendrag maak mag’’ [a kind of unity is strength’’], and therefore deceptive strength, but it is actually a crude method of dealing with the divergent needs probably at the base of the problems that we face now.

It gives power to the negotiators but it takes power away from the people whose interests should be served. There is a simple answer to Minister Fraser-Moleketi’s dilemma: Get rid of the Public Service as a homogenous entity. Collective bargaining in the Public Service is obviously a stumbling block and these broadband adjustments of wages are inappropriate.

Last week the Minister warned civil servants and said that they would get a pay rise of only 5% if the majority of unions did not accept her offer of between 6,5% and 8%. This has now happened. It is clear that some wanted to settle for her offer, so why are they being sacrificed to the collective chorus?

The core issue is that public servants must be paid what they are worth and the public must get the service it deserves. Let us hope that the Minister is eventually going to get it right. [Applause.]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, I have to say that I agree with everything the Minister said and I have to congratulate her on her courage and fortitude. That is not to say that I do not think that the Government have not been patient; I think they have been patient.

The negotiations were long and protracted. The unions are lucky that they have a sympathetic and receptive Government that listen to them, but the Government must also draw the line somewhere.

The fact is, short-termism is the worst possible approach the Government could adopt now. Unless we defer consumption, and unless we actually develop the state, we will be arguing about less and less as we go forward. In my opinion, after the long and comprehensive discussions, any reasonable person would think that the offer Government have on the table is a reasonable one. I am sure that business supports it. I am not sure whether the Minister would like to hear that, but nevertheless it is true.

I know that the Government is doing its best and, in some respects, is doing extremely well. There might be a few consumers of the Public Service’s service that think that there have been dramatic improvements in the services. We see poor service delivery all over the place. We know that it is being addressed and we can see improvements, but it is a long haul and it is part of the whole developmental picture that the Minister sketched for us.

When one looks at the package as such - the notches, the 13th cheques, the 14th cheques, the merit awards and the other things which go with it - our civil service is well off, in the circumstances.

The large number of unemployed people who are neither part of organised labour nor in the civil service will have the greatest sympathy for the Minister’s position. These people know that if the Minister and the President do not take a tough line, they will be squeezed out, because those resources would then not be directed to the needs of the really poor and disadvantaged in our country.

The Minister said there are no winners. I think there are winners. If the Government wins this round, then South Africa will be a winner, and I think the unions also. The unions have to be more responsible.

The other day I was in Port Elizabeth and I saw that the Mentone clothing factory - all of us have worn Mentone clothes at some stage in our lives - was closing down. It was started in 1940. Five hundred people have lost their jobs. These things are finely balanced.

The embattled company was on the verge of a turnaround, but for a nine-day strike. According to a spokesman, the company was, in July 2001, affected by industrial action and go-slows, thus losing nine days of production. What happened at the end of it all?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Order!

Mr K D S DURR: What happened was that 500 people lost their jobs.

I want to congratulate the hon the Minister on a job well done. She has our support. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Could I remind members that when I do call on them to indicate that their time has expired, they should stop speaking. It would allow the proceedings to continue in an orderly way.

Mr J O TLHAGALE: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members of this Council, we hail from a past of homelands and apartheid systems. The weaknesses of which systems have repeatedly been articulated in this Council. We also hail from a past of tricameral parliaments, the weaknesses of which systems have not often been articulated. During those eras, things were done for and not in consultation with the concerned groups. The operative words were ``It is good enough for them. Dit is goed genoeg vir hulle. E ba lekane.’’

The Minister’s statement this afternoon serves to prove how the present era differs from those of the past where we come from. We are not only being called, but we are in fact being begged, to come to the negotiating table and to continue the negotiation process regarding basic issues that affect our lives.

However, the unions are cautious and noncommittal. They suspect, or believe, that there is a built-in clause for restructuring in the agreement dealing with the restructuring measures. They are quick to flex their muscles and threaten to go on strike on the eve of the examination. It is unacceptable to resort to threats and blackmail of this nature.

The deadline has expired, but one needs to appeal to all parties involved in this issue to let reason prevail and work towards building mutual trust between the two negotiating parties. The Government, for its part, should continue to woo the unions in order to reach consensus in the future. [Applause.]

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues, the ANC notes that the Public Service is still in a transformation stage and thus tensions are likely to occur, especially when dealing with matters concerning service conditions. We further note that the deliberations are not a straightforward case, and that the performance of the Ministry and Government was well considered under the circumstances.

We further believe that the public servant of the 21st century is critically conscious of Government’s responsibility to the greater society, and not only to public service. The ANC, therefore, supports the Minister and Government for its innovative and consultative approach to the negotiations. The ANC is satisfied that a fair and equitable balance has been achieved in terms of its proposal of the limited resources of the state and the increased remuneration and terms of conditions of the Public Service sector.

We are convinced of the good faith of Government in the arduous and protracted negotiations, and in the approach the negotiations have been taking. In addition, we are also appreciative of the integrative approach to enhancing employment. The increment is also reasonable and above inflation. We also know that these offers have been very generous under the circumstances.

To respond to some noises from the other side, we wish to note that the Public Service is not treated as a homogenous entity, and therefore the agreement refers to detailed negotiations with the various sectors represented in the chamber. We should also note that collective bargaining requires a majority signature for its implementation of those packages that have been offered in the negotiating chamber. We are utterly confident that the ANC as Government will never be found wanting in a process that it pioneered from the start. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

PUBLIC WORKS AND INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT: A TOOL TO ADDRESS POVERTY

                      (Subject for Discussion)

THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Chairperson and hon members, I must say that I am really happy that this topic has been suggested by the NCOP for the simple reason that, at times, people know that there are Government programmes, but cannot really say what these programmes are all about. Also, in a number of statements that have been made at the level of Government, we actually put the question of poverty, not only as an issue that is there, but as an issue that we as the people of South Africa need to eradicate. And, as Government, too, we have set up an ambitious programme through which, as a collective of departments, we hope to do a fair amount in the eradication of poverty.

If one looks at the programme as we have it in the Department of Public Works, it was actually started as a specific job creation exercise, which targeted a number of rural areas. The aim of this was to create short-term employment opportunities wherein members of the various communities could construct public assets. Later on it was felt that the important thing was not just the construction of these assets, but also ensuring that they were sustainable in nature.

When we deal with these projects, we emphasise that local labour should be used. At least 30% of the labour from the projects should come from the local people. We also emphasise that women should be employed, and we put the figure at 50%. We also say that 15% of youth should be employed, especially because a number of them have left school and cannot find employment, and that consideration of 1,5% should also be given to the disabled.

Since its inception in 1994-95, the programme has actually undergone a lot of changes and improvements. We do want to believe that in order for hon members to understand, we have to give them a little background. Those who were here will remember that 1994 to 1996 was regarded as the pilot project phase. During this phase we had the RDP, and from the RDP funds R250 million was allocated for these projects, which are community-based. They were the ones that started the pilot projects.

Initially, the implementing agents were the various provincial departments of public works. We also initially made sure that some of the NGOs were involved, and that IDT, in terms of which we have the Ministry is entitled to the shareholding, was also involved. At the time a number of the people queried why IDT was involved, but the logical answer was that it had already been involved in the building of schools in a number of areas in the country.

Thereafter we graduated from that pilot project phase to the 1996 to 1999 phase, wherein we felt that there was a need to realign the projects themselves. First of all, we had an evaluation exercise carried out by what is known as the Community Agency for Social Enquiry, that is, Case, and also by the International Labour Organisation, known as the ILO. If hon members remember, Public Works then got the award for being the best-run exercise in Southern Africa.

This evaluation, which was undertaken, actually indicated that we needed to realign the strategic direction of the programme so that it could be more focused. Then we had to make some institutional arrangements and make sure that the focus was more on sustainability. This is because one can understand that when one builds a structure today, people get temporary jobs, but thereafter there are no sustainable jobs.

The issues that were dealt with then were put through what we called the preimplenting task team, which was given the mandate to plan and implement future programmes. What we realised was that one of the outcomes from such an exercise had to do with targeting. The recommendation there was that the focus be on rural women and youth, that a balance be created in those areas with poverty pockets and that if we were talking about development of areas, we should actually have economic nodes in those areas.

We also realised that development cannot be treated like a gumtree. A gumtree grows up on its own. The important thing was that we needed to cluster our projects and make sure that they talked to each other for effectiveness, because if hon members will remember, as the President said the other day, a clinic would be built, while there will be no road leading to it and no water for the clinic. But, the clustering has led to different Ministries coming together and providing an effective service. It also became important that there should be a monitoring of the projects, which we asked the provincial departments of Public Works to co-ordinate.

I am sure that hon members are exposed to some of the work that we are doing in their areas. One of the problems we have is that, apart from dealing directly with poverty, for example agricultural projects and community gardens, we also have to deal with issues around social cohesion. How many times have we had people in rural areas not even having a decent hall in which to have meetings? Even if halls are there, there are no kitchen or toilet facilities. And we felt that if we wanted to give dignity to a people, we also had to give them facilities that had a social impact. Hence, the start of the multipurpose halls that we have in a number of areas. Because these areas were rural, it became important that the implementing agent should change, as I have said, from the provincial departments to local government authorities, so that the district municipalities themselves could have the overall programme management of what we were doing, could be involved in training in various communities and be able to point out the local contractors to be used so that people could be trained to make sure that the projects themselves were sustainable. And, of course, the budget which covers project funding and support services came from the Department of Public Works itself.

I have said that this meant that there was a role change from what the provinces were doing by allowing the municipalities to be the implementing agents. All that the provinces had to do independently was to co-ordinate and monitor what was happening in these projects, something that was done very well in some of the provinces, but we still have a few problems with monitoring.

Through this monitoring, we want to capture and evaluate whether we have programmes for programmes’ sake and whether they have an impact on the people. This reminds me of when I was a teacher, and a question was put to Unicef: Was it going to have education for education’s sake or the type of education that would help the country to grow, gain skills, etc? The approach that we have followed with the projects is to make sure that there is an impact and difference to the lives of the people within the community.

We have some technical names for some of the techniques that we use for monitoring. Since hon members are going to get copies of the speech, and I am looking at the time factor, I will not be going too deeply into that. But one of the programmes and the systems that we are using for monitoring is called the management and information systems or MMIS. This system has been developed over the last two years and contains all the key performance indicators for successful implementation.

According to the monitoring and evaluation unit in the Presidency, the programme that we are dealing with, as Public Works, is one of only two programmes with a successful monitoring system. I am not trying to boast but I am stating a fact.

We also felt that we had to really align this programme because life has changed a lot and still changes even in South Africa, and we called it the new dimensions phase. This phase actually refers to the development of the Community-Based Public Works project, wherein we try and make sure that there is capacity, especially amongst the people who deal with some of our projects, so that they are able to deal with specific imperatives, and also make sure that we forge partnerships and co-ordination with a number of stakeholders so that the projects themselves are successful. The reason for that, as I said, is that if one is not a gumtree in a project, one can actually make the most impact. That is why, when Government introduced the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy, we felt that we had done part of the walking into the realisation of that strategy because of the 30 nodes, as pointed out by Government. We already have programmes in 11 of those nodes.

I want hon members to realise that in any government situation, the creation of capacity is necessary because it is what makes or breaks a project. Even in the day-to-day running of our individual departments, if capacity is not of the right type, for example if Public Works has engineers who just do a 9:00 to 4:30 job but do not go out into the field and make sure that things happen, we will not have a department that is on the move.

My director-general, who is here with us today, coined a new name for how we approach work and called it ``working smarter’’. Some of these changes that we are making are to actually say that we want to work smarter. I am deviating because if hon members had asked me to speak about Public Works, I would have had to tell them some of these things. I am halfway through. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon Minister, I think that you are very correct in saying that we must invite you more often. I am sure that the members would agree with that.

Ms B THOMSON: Chairperson, I believe that our role in Government is to look critically at how we implement the principles of transformation, which begins to give back to our impoverished communities both that which was forcibly removed from them and that which they were denied.

Currently in South Africa there is no end to what can be repaired, replaced, reconstructed or developed to ensure that the lives of our parents and colleagues are dramatically improved. Indeed, showing visible improvement in the lives of our people becomes the yardstick against which everything we do is measured.

We believe that the Department of Public Works is a strategic role-player in assisting all other departments in achieving this collective goal of quality delivery and improvement in conditions.

Kafishane, sizama ukuthi kucace kuthi bha ukuthi umnyango kaNgqongqoshe yiwona ongumgogodla wayo yonke eminye iminyango. Uma umnyango kaNgqongqoshe ubukeka sengathi unezikhinsi noma izigodi, kuyokwenza ukuthi kube lula ukuthi yonke eminye iminyango kahulumeni ikhalakathele lapho phakathi ngenxa yezikhinsi ezingadalwa umnyango - angithi owethu angingasho ukuthi okamhlonishwa. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[In short, we are trying to clarify that the department of the Minister is the backbone of all other departments. If there is a hole in it, it will be easy for other departments to fall into that hole. In fact I should say our department, not the department of the Minister.] By way of illustration, I want to share with members that a few weeks ago the Select Committee on Social Services demonstrated how vital this close interrelationship between sectors was. The committee was exploring what factors were directly or indirectly interfering with the processing of new applications for child support grants in the Western Cape, thereby preventing needy mothers from gaining access to this much-needed grant.

Three departments, that is Social Development, Health and Home Affairs, were invited to this meeting to demonstrate what each of the departments was doing to facilitate the smooth application and processing of the birth registration, followed by the grant application process.

What became apparent during the interaction was the fact that all these departments needed access to adequate facilities within easy reach of communities. These kinds of facilities, as is the case with most state- owned property, fall directly within the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works. The Department of Public Works held the key to access.

Each of the departments present, when questioned by the committee, complained in turn that they did not have adequate offices close to the people in order to provide easy access to these much-needed services. Unfortunately the Department of Public Works was not present to explain their role and what went wrong within their department in the provision of the vital childcare grant application service. But, clearly, the lack of adequate facilities for whatever reason led to unnecessary hardship, forcing desperate mothers and children to starve when government money was available. All that was needed to complete the process was access to facilities and people who cared.

Another example of the challenges facing the Department of Public Works and their capacity to deliver infrastructural development was demonstrated when the NCOP Select Committee on Public Works went to the Eastern Cape to assess the aftermath of the floods, which happened earlier this year.

The committee had expected to see how all the affected departments, including the Department of Public Works, were advancing in their endeavours to rebuild communities after such a terrible natural disaster. What we found were freshly appointed cleanup crews that had only just begun to clear the destruction and to add insult to injury, the cleanup crews informed the committee members that the cleanup had begun because a committee from Parliament was coming in order to hold an inspection.

Clearly, these kinds of responses to our people’s needs were not what the Minister meant when she launched her work smart'' transformation programme and our Community-Based Public Works Programme. Both of these programmes place an emphasis on strong work ethics. In fact, the Minister told us that she had given a brand new name to the programme, which is Letsima’’ or`` Ilima’’. We all know that this embraces the African work ethic of doing things together.

We know that those 981 community projects that the department helped to get off the ground last year and the 22 619 people that the department helped get jobs, as mentioned in the Minister’s Budget debate speech this year, represent only the tip of the iceberg with regard to delivery to the people. We know of the noble efforts made by the transformation-based policies that the department is currently engaged in, and we commend the Minister and her department for all her efforts. But we would be failing in our duty as public representatives if we did not outline to the Minister tangible proof of the failure of the transformation policy at its implementation stage.

I personally bear testimony to the absolute waste of government facilities in my province of KwaZulu-Natal. On the route to my constituency there are a number of examples of newly built multipurpose centres, clinics and other facilities that are locked up to the public or that stand in the middle of nowhere as white elephants, because Public Works and other departments did not consult with each other before construction began. This is an untenable situation.

Noma-ke mhlonishwa ngingeke ngiqiniseke ukuthi iphutha singalibeka kuHulumeni omkhulu noma kuhulumeni wesifunda kodwa nje besifuna ukuthi amehlo kaNgqongqoshe siwadonsele ngakulolu hlelo lokwenza izinto emnyangweni wakhe. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[Hon member, although I am sure we can blame the national Government or the provincial government, however, we would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the plan of working in his department.]

In our democracy today, we have to be vigilant in our plans of bringing about change in our communities. This is especially true after the local government elections. The new animal, local government, must not make the same mistakes we did nationally and provincially. Unless all spheres of government, all departments and all representatives of civil societies sit down together and create consolidated IDP plans, we are in danger of duplicating all the expensive lessons learnt in the past.

Intergovernmental co-operation and intersectoral support must become a mantra before each of the spheres of government begins to tackle new projects. All priorities should become aligned, so that collective resources can work in tandem towards the common good of improving the lives of our people.

Siyacabanga ukuthi umhlonishwa angeke ayithathe le nkulumo njengohlaselo, siyamqwashisa ngoba siyabona ukuthi uma singamqwashisi ngathi sizokonakalelwa. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[We think that the hon member will not take this speech as an attack on him. We would like to warn him, because if we do not do that, things will not go well. [Applause.]]

Dr P J C NEL: Voorsitter, dit is in belang van die land dat ons vandag in hierdie Huis debat voer oor die prestasies, al dan nie, van die Departement van Openbare Werke, na aanleiding van ‘n verslag wat opgestel is deur Kgoshi Mokoena ná ‘n afvaardiging van die Gekose Komitee oor Openbare Dienste die Oos-Kaap besoek het.

Vandag wil ek net kortliks na die bogenoemde verslag verwys deur te sê dat dit wat daarin staan, absoluut skokkend is. Dit getuig deurgaans van die onvermoë van die Departement van Openbare Werke om lewensbelangrike infrastruktuur soos paaie en staatsgeboue, byvoorbeeld hospitale en skole, in stand te hou, asook die versuim om deeglik toesig te hou oor dít wat die Departement van Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer in die bepaalde provinsie probeer doen met die minimale fondse tot hul beskikking. Dit blyk ook duidelik uit die verslag dat die Departement van Openbare Werke nie daarin kon slaag om die krisis wat ontstaan het, as gevolg van skade aangerig deur erge vloede sedert 1998, die hoof te bied nie.

Genadiglik was die Vrystaat nie so erg geteister deur vloedskade nie. Dit beteken egter nie dat die infrastruktuur, veral die padnetwerk in die Vrystaat, nie agteruitgegaan het die afgelope jare nie. Inteendeel, dit het met rasse skrede agteruitgegaan, soveel só dat die LUR nou bekend staan as die minister van slaggate. Die hoofoorsaak vir hierdie agteruitgang was deurgaans deur die agb LUR vir Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer aangegee as ‘n tekort aan fondse vir instandhouding. Dieselfde LUR het egter onlangs aangekondig dat méér geld nou hopelik vir padkonstruksie en die instandhouding daarvan beskikbaar gaan wees, weens die feit dat die agb LUR die nasionale departement, volgens hom, kon oorreed om die instandhouding van sekere provinsiale paaie oor te neem.

Dáárvoor wil my party die agb LUR komplimenteer. Ons wil ook ons dank en waardering teenoor hom uitspreek, veral omdat die SA Nasionale Padagentskap nou verantwoordelikheid aanvaar vir die meeste deurpaaie. Dit is goed, want die ergste skade aan hierdie paaie word aangerig deur swaarvoertuie van ander provinsies wat deur die Vrystaat ry.

Die genoemde blydskap het egter vervaag nadat ek ‘n persberig, betreffende die Ouditeur-Generaal se verslag oor die Vrystaatse Departement van Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer, gelees het. Ek haal aan uit Die Volksblad van 1 Oktober 2001:

Stawende bewyse vir uitgawes van miljoene rande deur die Departement van Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer van die Vrystaat kon nie voorgelê word nie. Die verhaalbaarheid van agterstallige skuld van miljoene rande aan dié departement is twyfelagtig. Dié departement met al sy staatsbates het nie ‘n volledige lys van verhuurbare eiendomme nie - sy huurinkomste kan dus nie gestaaf word nie.

Die staatsgarage self kon in 2000 nie ‘n volledige lys of register van voertuie voorlê nie. Vroeër vanjaar kon ‘n verskil van sowat R26 miljoen tussen inskrywings in die vastebateregister en die algemene grootboek nie verduidelik word nie.

Weens die aard en die omvang van die ernstige tekortkominge en onreëlmatighede in die geldsake van die Vrystaatse Departement van Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer, het die Ouditeur-Generaal homself daarvan weerhou om ‘n mening uit te spreek. Dit is ontstellend! Ek kan u verseker dat die aanhaling wat ek gelees het maar net die punt van die ysberg is. Daar is nog vele meer bevindinge in die verslag wat jou hart wil laat staan.

Ek sê hierdie verslag is onstellend, want al beweer die agb LUR in die Vrystaat dat daar nou meer geld beskikbaar gaan wees, wonder ‘n mens egter of hierdie fondse nie maar weer net op dieselfde wyse vermors en verduister gaan word nie. My party is veral bekommerd oor die feit dat, in ‘n antwoord op ‘n vraag aan hierdie LUR gestel, ons verneem het dat die Vrystaatse padnetwerk, bestaande uit 7000 km teerpaaie, 21 500 km gruispaaie, en 22 000 km tersiëre paaie, in ‘n swak toestand is.

Betreffende die primêre paaie, is 12% in ‘n uiters swak toestand, 32% in ‘n swak toestand, 35% in ‘n redelike toestand, en net 20% in ‘n goeie toestand. Betreffende gruispaaie in die platteland, is 20% in ‘n baie swak toestand, 33% in ‘n swak toestand, 23% in ‘n redelike toestand, en net 14% in ‘n goeie toestand. Volgens die agb LUR is daar ‘n tekort aan R1,7 miljard net vir die hergruis van gruispaaie en die herseël van teerpaaie.

Dit is dus nodig dat elke beskikbare sent op die regte wyse aangewend word. As ons nie ons infrastruktuur onderhou nie, gaan ons ekonomie skade ly en gaan armoede net vererger. Ek hoop dat die Departement van Openbare Werke nie net uit die foute van die verlede geleer het hoe om nuwe foute te maak nie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr P J C NEL: Chairperson, it is in the interests of the country that we debate in this House today the achievements, or not, of the Department of Public Works, following a report drafted by Chief Mokoena after a delegation from the Select Committee on Public Services visited the Eastern Cape.

Today I want to refer only briefly to the aforementioned report by saying that what is contained in it is absolutely shocking. It consistently attests to the inability of the Department of Public Works to maintain essential infrastructure, such as roads and Government buildings, for example hospitals and schools, as well as the failure to thoroughly supervise that which the department of public works, roads and transport, in the province in question tries to do with the minimal funds at its disposal. It is also clear from the report that the Department of Public Works could not succeed in solving the crisis which arose as a result of damage caused by serious flooding since 1998.

Mercifully, the Free State was not so seriously ravaged by flood damage. However, this does not mean that the infrastructure, particularly the road network in the Free State, has not deteriorated in the past years. On the contrary, it has deteriorated with rapid strides, so much so that the MEC is now known as the minister of potholes. The primary reason for this deterioration was consistently given by the hon MEC for public works, roads and transport, as a shortage of funds for maintenance. However, the same MEC recently announced that more money will now hopefully be available for road construction and maintenance, as a result of the fact that the hon MEC, according to him, was able to convince the national department to take over the maintenance of certain provincial roads.

My party would like to compliment the hon MEC on that. We also want to express our thanks and appreciation towards him, particularly because the SA National Roads Agency has now accepted responsibility for most through roads. This is good, because the most serious damage to these roads is caused by heavy vehicles from other provinces which drive through the Free State.

However, the aforementioned joy faded after I read a news report regarding the Auditor-General’s report on the Free State department of public works, roads and transport. I quote from Die Volksblad of 1 October 2001:

Stawende bewyse vir uitgawes van miljoene rande deur die Departement van Openbare Werke, Paaie en Vervoer van die Vrystaat kon nie voorgelê word nie. Die verhaalbaarheid van agterstallige skuld van miljoene rande aan dié departement is twyfelagtig. Dié departement met al sy staatsbates het nie ‘n volledige lys van verhuurbare eiendomme nie - sy huurinkomste kan dus nie gestaaf word nie.

Die staatsgarage self kon in 2000 nie ‘n volledige lys of register van voertuie voorlê nie. Vroeër vanjaar kon ‘n verskil van sowat R26 miljoen tussen inskrywings in die vastebateregister en die algemene grootboek nie verduidelik word nie.

As a result of the nature and extent of the serious shortcomings and irregularities in the financial matters of the department of public works, roads and transport, the Auditor-General refrained from expressing an opinion. This is upsetting! I can assure you that the quotation which I read is merely the tip of the iceberg. There are many more findings in the report which will make your heart miss a beat.

I say that this report is upsetting, because although the hon MEC in the Free State alleges that more money will now be available, one wonders whether these funds are not simply going to be wasted and embezzled in the same way. My party is particularly concerned about the fact that, in a reply to a question put to this MEC, we learnt that the Free State road network, consisting of 7 000 kilometres of tarred roads, 21 500 km of gravel roads and 22 000 km of tertiary roads, is in a poor condition.

Regarding the primary roads, 12% are in an extremely poor condition, 32% in a poor condition, 35% in a reasonable condition, and only 20% in a good condition. Regarding gravel roads in the rural areas, 20% are in a very poor condition, 33% in a poor condition, 23% in a reasonable condition and only 14% in a good condition. According to the hon MEC there is a shortage of R1,7 billion for the regravelling of gravel roads and the resealing of tarred roads alone.

It is therefore necessary that every available cent be utilised in the right way. If we do not maintain our infrastructure our economy is going to suffer and poverty will simply worsen. I hope that the Department of Public Works has not merely learnt from the mistakes of the past how to make new mistakes. [Applause.]]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, on 26 February this year the Select Committee on Public Service undertook a study tour to the Eastern Cape. The main aim of this visit was to find out how poverty-alleviation programmes were functioning. We also wanted to see the condition of roads in that part of the country.

Poverty is widely acknowledged as one of the serious problems facing post- apartheid South Africa. This department is right at the centre of some of these programmes, hence it is through it that the Government intends flushing poverty out of our people’s lives.

A recent study has shown that close to 70% of South Africa’s rural people, of whom a larger majority are blacks, are poverty-stricken. Poverty has a significant gender characteristic. The poverty rate amongst female-headed households was 60% in 1995, considerably higher than the 31% in male-headed households.

The Government could not take this scenario very lightly. The Government decided to confront this situation head-on and came up with a plan. For any plan to be implemented, one needs proper supervision and monitoring. For example, the national department has come up with some plans to construct roads in order to create jobs for our people.

Let us take the Eastern Cape, for example. During our visit we went to an area called Qhoboshianeng, where a bridge was being constructed, with 40 women employed there. Unfortunately, as I am speaking now, they have been told to pack and go because there are insufficient funds to continue with the construction. The families of those 40 women are now beggars, not knowing where their next slice of brown bread will come from.

The committee also visited Spundu access road in Mount Ayliff, that is roads T110 and T109. The two projects were aimed at creating jobs for our people. Unfortunately, as I am speaking to hon members, those projects have been stopped.

The committee was not impressed with the condition of some of the roads, for example road T115 from Mount Frere to Mount Fletcher, and road T100 from Mount Frere to Lugangeni. I know I am talking about the areas which the hon the Minister knows very well.

Roads such as T69 from Maluti to the Lesotho border, connecting Mpotseng village, road T77 in Mount Frere and road 56 to Lekgatlana are not in good condition. However, we were impressed because officials in that province informed us that something will be done to make sure that people are employed to work on those roads, local people that is. Unfortunately the condition of those roads was very, very bad. We could not believe what we saw at Thabachicha.

We were reliably informed that the roads were last graded in 1986. Officials from that province confirmed this information. For example, the committee took an hour travelling between roads T77 and T74, simply because there was no road to speak of. It was just dongas. The problem lies not with the national department, but with the provincial department. Why? There is no supervision or monitoring.

Yes, it is true, we find all those problems mostly in roads which are manned by provinces. In one camp a grader was parked beside the road for almost three months because of a flat tire.

We discovered that at Mzimvubu District Council, some officials said that it was normal for a grader to be parked for even two months, because there were no funds to put in the diesel. When we enquired as to whether the national department was aware of this, they said that one official was mandated to phone the department - not to write a letter to it, but to phone it.

At the Umzimkhulu District Council, at Embuzweni village, we discovered something very strange. There was this construction company, which was to repair the slates at the R56. The two slates in question were badly done by the same construction company. The road cracked and the gravel road was washed away or went flat. The provincial department rehired the same company to re-do the job for an extra, additional fee. I do not know what to call this.

At one camp, workers unashamedly informed us that they were clocking in at 12:00 and knocking off at 15:30. They were so surprised when we questioned that arrangement. They could not even understand why we queried one of their workers coming to work ``poep’’ drunk. [Interjections.] The cause of all this … [Laughter.]

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Madam Chair, on a point of order, and for the sake of the dignity of this House: The expression ``poep drunk’’ is not parliamentary. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! You are raising a point of order. Mr Mokoena, could you just make sure that your language is parliamentary? In the past we have made reference to us needing to use appropriate language and terminology in the House.

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, I want to thank you for your ruling, and I want to thank my loyal subject for advising me. [Laughter.]

As I said, the cause of all this is lack of supervision and monitoring. What we saw was, `Everybody for himself, but God for us all.’’ They are just like those people who are not ashamed to hand out their business cards at funerals, or see nothing wrong in putting salt in a sugar container.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I am afraid your time has expired.

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Oh, my God! [Applause.]

Mr N M RAJU: Chair, hon Minister, hon colleagues, the reduction of poverty and inequality remains the objective of not only the Government, but all South Africans. Access to quality employment is critical to achieving a sustainable livelihood. It is almost trite to say that high levels of poverty prevail in rural areas, especially among the agricultural workers who seem to be the worst hit.

In this context, unemployment is certainly a significant contributor to poverty. One of the many ways to address the unemployment situation would be to establish community-based public works programmes, and the hon the Minister, in her introductory remarks, spoke at length about these local community-based programmes that the department is engaged in.

There is no doubt that these programmes, if properly handled, play a very important role in the delivery of services and infrastructure to the disadvantaged communities. It is the disadvantaged communities that seem to bear the brunt of inadequate or poor roads, or inadequate facilities such as clinics, schools and community halls.

Once upon a time the main barrier to entry into the labour market in this country was direct discrimination on the basis of race and gender. Today, of course, nondiscriminatory labour practices are par for the course.

I wish to point out that, though poverty in South Africa is not confined to one race only, the unpalatable fact that we must face is that poverty is mainly concentrated among black South Africans. It is estimated that over 60% of Africans are in the poverty trap.

My friend Kgoshi Mokoena, on the other hand, spoke at length about the importance of roads as access to communities. He painted a rather dreary picture of the poor condition in which some of the roads are, especially in rural areas.

We cannot deny that if a community has been isolated and almost forgotten because of bad roads, or lack of access to roads, then that community is denied empowerment. In my view, having useful roads to communities that are isolated and away from the developed areas is important, because that gives them empowerment.

I do not have to go and sketch a picture about how our old people, and even young school children, in some cases, have to travel long distances, through dongas, narrow paths that have been made off the beaten track. It is important that these people are provided with, at least, a modicum of decent roads so that they can not only use these roads for walking to their destinations and so on, but so that taxis, buses and other forms of road transport can also be adequately used. I think that the hon the Minister set the tone when she said that in some of these construction exercises and the programmes, local content must be used. That is a very important factor, because too often we blame people or communities for expecting hand-outs from the Government, for not wanting to do anything of their own accord and for expecting the Government to be a charitable organisation or something.

When we realise that local people can be engaged in helping themselves, in involving themselves in any construction project, whether it be a road, community hall, or school, there is a sense of not only empowerment, but more importantly, pride and ownership. No more do we have things that are foisted on the communities.

I know that my colleague Barbara Thomson did refer to instances of some of these institutions, schools, halls or whatever being built and then remaining as white elephants which are not used by the people. I think that, in fairness to the Minister, the Government is now engaged in partnership projects, in getting to involve the communities in whatever projects they might have, so that whatever construction is being done there is a common partnership affair and there is a sense of belonging.

The hon the Minister also referred to the involvement of the youth, which is very important in job creation opportunities. The problem is that our youth show reluctance to get involved in development programmes at community level. That is because there is the unfortunate perception that some of these job creation programmes, especially in the rural areas, assault their dignity because the income is palpably low and not commensurate with that of their urban peers. That is an unfortunate situation. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues, if one looks at the principles embraced in our RDP and compares them to the reality of reconstruction and development on the ground, then one cannot help being discouraged. The Department of Public Works, it seems, has drastically moved away from the very purpose contained in the RDP which formed the very backbone of the constitution of the Community-Based Public Works Programmes.

I am saying this not because I want to be unduly critical, but because I was part of the delegation that went to the Eastern Cape earlier this year and observed, first-hand, the deplorable state of affairs in the Department of Public Works. I am reluctant to focus my attention on the Eastern Cape, because it is not an exclusively Eastern Cape problem. My province has such problems as well, and I have witnessed some of them.

When what we observed in the Eastern Cape is even duplicated in another province, then it is an untenable situation that cannot be allowed to continue unchanged. In some of the offices in this department, especially the road works department, there is no work ethic. Workers are like tourists, coming in and leaving whenever they feel the urge. Management is conspicuous in its absence and the needs of the people on the ground are often left entirely out of the equation. May I bring to the Minister’s attention my own province, Mpumalanga, and the role that Public Works has played in alleviating the plight of the poor. One must in fairness acknowledge that some work, some considerable work, has been seen to be and is being done right now. Some of the poverty alleviation projects gave rise to flourishing businesses that now are running on their own. I am not hearing any applause for the Minister here.

The standards of roads and other facilities are very high; so much so that people are all flocking to become part of this corridor. I have an example in mind, namely the Maputo Development Corridor. It has created so many other businesses and activities that now only the private sector is visible

• as if there was no government, no public representatives.

This, I am afraid, has gone in some ways that we did not expect. It has had some unintended consequences. I must admit that it is good and bad as well. On the one hand everyone has a real opportunity to participate in a viable project that encourages social upliftment and black economic empowerment. The disadvantage is that sometimes it only benefits those in close proximity to those projects, and is to the detriment of others. We would find, for example, that the quality of roads and other infrastructure outside of these preferred areas is substandard by comparison. Another disadvantage is that people are leaving their villages and towns and converging along those development corridors, in an effort to get in on this gravy.

Another disturbing trend in my province is the lack of attention that the Department of Public Works gives to the upgrading of national roads. For the last two years there have been signs all along the roads, warning motorists about dangerous potholes. I guess these signs warning about potholes remain there even after these roads have been fixed. This action by itself is commendable, but if one takes into account that nothing has been done for the past two years to improve the roads, then one has to wonder whether potholes in the roads, like farm animals wandering across the highways, are now to be considered the norm. The case of stray animals has more to do with the community at large. We as public representatives have a role to play there.

An area I would like the Minister to exercise caution in is the use of contractors and consultants. The reason for this caution is obvious, but my interaction in the province has brought into sharp focus the exorbitant fees that these consultants charge. This is detrimental to poverty-focused projects in at least two significant ways. It takes a large chunk of the money away from the real projects and it also stalls black empowerment and the transfer of skills. Linked to the aforementioned concern is the inability of people in charge of these projects to account for themselves. Accounting here to me does not only involve people. It also involves talking to the community well ahead of the project, during the project and after the project.

In one particular project I was sent from pillar to post with no one knowing for sure who was the financier of the project. This leaves the door wide open for unscrupulous contractors who firstly do not listen to the community and secondly do the job so badly that it requires refixing. Ironically, the refixing tender is often awarded to the same contractor who did the half-baked job in the first place.

By way of illustration, in my village contractors came to build a storm water drainage system. The villagers pointed out that the layout of the canals was faulty and could not work. No one listened and the result is that this drainage system is filled with silt and soil and is now totally nonfunctional. No one in my village has benefited in any way from this project.

I believe we should not continually quote figures of work done and money spent, but should rather be looking at real development on the ground. [Time expired.]

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Chairperson, I am ready to respond. As some members were debating I felt they should have asked me to invite MECs to be present, because they are all flogging me about something which is not my competency. They are also talking about the budget which is sent to provinces and is allocated and in which Public Works nationally has no say. As each member stood up, I became dismayed and asked myself why I had been called to this debate. In most cases it was a provincial debate. I have to explain to the House that Public Works nationally only deals with roads that go to our projects, period.

Local government deals with roads falling under local authorities. Most of the provincial roads are looked after by the provinces, using their own budgets. Major national roads are dealt with by the Department of Transport. I want to appeal to members of the NCOP to understand this. I will look at Hansard and send copies to the MECs so that they can understand what was said here.

The Council invited me to talk about poverty relief and I have explained at length what it is that we are doing. In order to deal with poverty relief, one of the things we do is to go back to projects that used to work well in some of the homelands where there was infrastructure. We then try to rehabilitate that infrastructure. Hence we have what we call community production centres which deal, together with the Department of Agriculture and sometimes the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, with these issues.

I think that in each of the three regions of the provinces which were formerly said to be the most poverty stricken, we have at least two of these community production centres. Provinces such as Mpumalanga were not even part of the equation. The national Department of Public Works knew, however, that if there is poverty in the Eastern Cape, there must be poverty in Mpumalanga.

We ourselves decided to allocate some money to deal with this issue. I want to request the select committee concerned to invite me to their meetings so that I can explain to them what kind of animal national Public Works is, because, clearly, they do not know what kind of animal national Public Works is.

Ngithola ezinye izibongo manje. Ngithola ezinye izithakazelo … [I am now receiving new praises. I am receiving new clan praises.]

… and they are not those. We do meet with the provinces and we have our Minmec, where we try, as national Public Works, to lay down policy guidelines which can assist them in developing their competence.

We come from a situation where, in some cases, people got used to putting on their coats and leaving work unfinished. I admit that we still have to work very hard to help provinces, even with monitoring.

Kgoshi Mokoena had a whole catalogue, which I will have to send to the Eastern Cape government, because it is not the national department’s competence. What we as national department do is deal with accommodation for national departments. We build infrastructure. If Correctional Services or the Department of Justice wants a new building, or one of the various other departments needs office space, that is what we deal with. It is called capital works.

Because some departments were not forthcoming with their requests, we asked the Department of Finance to devolve the budget, so that if a department does not spend on its budget, it is no longer reflected as underspending on the part of Public Works. It is now reflected on the budget of the department which did not come up with a plan on how they were going to spend the money.

Regarding the question of the first member who spoke, together with the GCIS we have what are called multipurpose centres, like the one the President will be opening at Sterkspruit. Here we look at the exact request made. Some people are far removed from the villages and towns. People in small towns like Mount Fletcher and Matatiele need Government services.

We have built multipurpose centres where pensions can be paid out at a point not far from the people and where issues concerning the police, health, welfare and similar things can be dealt with, depending on the area and its needs. We have more than 22 of these centres which have just started, because we saw the need to bring services to the people.

We also heard about all the white elephants Government has created because of the integrated strategy. As part of our programme we go back and ask how we can change these from white elephants into something viable.

I want to mention an example. As new Minister of Public Works this one struck me. A project had been built at Hlabisa for quite a large sum. I went to check on it. We found our structure, but no services were delivered from it. They were using it as a workshop and went back to using a structure which we had not built, but which was near the road.

We discovered that no proper consultation with the people had taken place. Together with the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology we decided to use the stalls, which we had envisaged would be used for selling products, as workshops for people to manufacture things. At the request of the people, we put up another structure next to the road, and anyone from KwaZulu-Natal will tell hon members that business is thriving there. We examined the situation and decided we wanted to go back and correct what had been done badly.

Members have rightly said that we should cut down on consultants. Members must invite us, not just to their portfolio meetings, but also to their study groups, I would even say across party lines, so that we can inform people first-hand of what sort of development is going to happen in their areas. It is important that hon members, as MPs, should know so that they can co-operate with us.

In my department I always say - and my DG will bear me out - that I do not understand why, if a request for a school comes from a community, we must employ somebody called a social facilitator and pay him 4% of the value of the project. Why? I want to believe that any local authority, any traditional leader, any MP, can ensure that that programme is implemented, that they can deal with all the problems around it, because that is what we have been voted to Parliament for.

I appeal to hon members, instead of being critical, to come up with solutions the next time I attend their meetings at portfolio level. Dealing with poverty and development in this country is a two-way project, and hon members should contribute their opinions on what they think will change the situation. I am not being funny, but coming here with a litany of what is wrong in the provinces without making any suggestions on how to solve these problems is rather problematic.

Public Works has decided at national level to cut down on consultants. I was shocked when I attended the launch of a beautiful project in KwaZulu- Natal. Upon enquiry I learnt that funding for the project was R19 million, but only R14 million had gone towards the work, I was told the other R5 million had gone to consultants. We went back to our department and we said we were not going to have any of that. We cut down on the national co-ordinating structure, into which we had been pumping a lot of money. With the help of the EU we got people within the department who are going to oversee some of the work to make sure that it happens.

Unfortunately, due to the new municipalities, and the bringing together of a number of municipalities to form the bigger structures, a lot of work still has to be done in creating capacity in those new structures.

As department we had to go back to the drawing board hoping that we would be able to boast, as we did last year, that we were dealing with three budgets and, by the end of 2001, would actually have spent all that money.

Khange bangxole kunyaka ophelileyo … [They were not so loud last year.]

… because we used some of the money that was allocated to public works for poverty-relief programmes that we thought were viable.

Members should also inform us first-hand if there are construction people who are building what we call winter roads. By winter roads, I mean those roads which will last just for a while.

Ngiye ngithi ngesintu: eyi, ishefiwe le migwaqo. [In my language I used to say: Hey, these roads have been graded.]

This is because they sort of look clean-shaven. They are supposed to be gravel roads, but one does not find a single stone. Then we say that if people take such short cuts we have no business dealing with them. We have also said that if there are companies which really give us shoddy work, we will not hesitate to blacklist those companies, although some hon members, as MPs, come back to us and say, ``Please can you give them another chance?’’ Niyasixakekisa. [You are causing us trouble.]

The hon member will criticise us for doing shoddy work, then he or she will still come back to us and say ``Please give this company work.’’ Then one wonders where the integrity of the hon member is. What we want to encourage is the rewarding of those emerging contractors who are doing good work.

Niza kuthi ke Owu! uMaSigcawu unika ubani noobani. [You are going to say: Ms Sigcawu is biased, she gives some and does not give others.]

It is because we are short of people to do the work, and in any situation a reward is always given to somebody who has proved him or herself.

The last thing I want to say is that we are trying our best. I will accept criticism where it is fair and due, but I have a lot of letters to write to the provinces, that is the Free State, the Eastern Cape and Mpumalanga, to say what it is that concerns members here. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                      COMPANIES AMENDMENT BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, I would like to thank you for the generosity in the time you have given me - ten minutes for such a short Bill. I will not take up all that time, not because I do not value the chance of speaking in the NCOP, but because I think it is a relatively short amendment.

Members of the House, this is a very small amendment. It would seem to be technical, but in some ways it is quite an exciting amendment. In essence, what it is designed to achieve is the facility to lodge documents electronically in the companies registration office. This is an important development. It will not replace the paper-based documentation that is in the companies registration office, but opens all the possibilities of being able to interact with this office from all over South Africa.

We are near the end of setting up our system, which will allow just for this. The next phase of our project would be to begin to allow electronic placement of documents for the companies registration office and intellectual properties office from a very wide range of input points across the country.

The amendment is technical in the main, dealing with this matter of allowing for electronic documentation to be lodged. It does also deal with certain small technical matters to make the Bill consistent in itself and with the current situation.

I would urge members to support what is a small amendment, but one that opens the way for the new electronic age. [Applause.]

Mr J L THERON: Chairperson, owing to the unanimous support of the Select Committee on Economic Affairs we decided to make brief statements on this amendment. Therefore I am speaking on behalf of the opposition parties. The opposition parties support the Companies Amendment Bill unconditionally. The Bill is a practical acknowledgement that our country is adapting to the information revolution and the globalisation of the world economies.

A lot of other legislation will also have to follow suit to keep up with the enhancement in worldwide information flow, and we will have to legalise the new world of e-commerce. The Companies Act of 1973 was written without any consideration for electronic processing of documentation mainly because, at that point in time, electronic documentation and any processing thereof was but a mere dream of the future.

This Bill needs to amend the Companies Act of 1973 to enable the lodgement of documents and disclosure of information in respect of companies by means of the electronic process.

The Bill seeks to introduce provisions enabling the following: the phasing in of electronic lodgement of corporate forms; the phasing in of electronic payment of prescribed fees and other fees for services rendered; and electronic disclosure of corporate information.

It needs to be clearly understood that this new system has been developed as an additional functionality and it will in no way replace the existing paper-based structures and procedures of lodgement of documents at the companies registration office. It may, however, in time become the main way of dealing with the companies registration office.

From the above-mentioned it is evident that this Bill is clearly needed to enhance the South African economic system, and therefore the opposition parties support the Companies Amendment Bill, B35 of 2001, unconditionally. [Applause.]

Mr S L E FENYANE: Chairperson, it is the reality of our times that the modern world is one driven by technology, and South Africa is part and parcel of that world.

In the 1996 Budget Vote the hon President Mr Mbeki said:

The revolution in modern technology has ensured that information is delivered at the next destination with speed that defies imagination.

Challenges brought about by this revolution place the responsibility on us of transforming and aligning ourselves to respond to challenges of the New World Order in which technology is our daily bread.

Because of the uneven development between urban and rural areas and between the provinces themselves, we need to give priority to electronic and information technology infrastructure, because that is where the people need these resources to improve the conditions of their lives and to enlighten themselves with information.

The need for the Government to create the necessary mechanisms to provide the people with information becomes imperative because of the evolution of our history. We therefore have to address this challenge if we are to promote economic growth and development and enable all to gain access to the best in human civilisation in our country. The Companies Amendment Bill of 2001 seeks to do that.

The Companies Act of 1973 was written without any consideration for the electronic processing of documentation, mainly because at that point in time electronic documentation and processing thereof were but a mere dream of the future, like flying space cars in our times. The Bill seeks to increase investment in electronic and information technology, without which we would not be able to bridge the digital divide.

It was only four years ago that the SA Companies Registration Office, in co- operation with Sars, various departments of state, other regulators and interested parties from the private sector, embarked on the development of a completely electronic and computerised system for the incorporation of companies and close corporations and the registration of corporate information, in respect of these entities.

The main purpose of this electronic system is to enable the companies registration office to decentralise its services as soon as possible to even the most remote areas. This is possible with a properly managed electronic central database, and it can, effectively, be achieved by utilising all available outlets of government offices, post offices, organisations, private businesses and by individual access to the Internet. The Bill therefore seeks to amend the Companies Act to enable lodgement of documents and disclosure of information in respect of companies by means of electronic processes.

One of the main attributes of introducing this electronic system is that it will enable the companies registration office to take its registration and disclosure services to the masses in the whole of South Africa, including remote areas and the global community.

Currently, there is only one national office in Pretoria providing these services, but with a proper database and electronic processing system, which would allow for remote electronic lodgement of documentation and requests for information, these services can be properly decentralised, as aforesaid.

In this regard, it is the intention to provide the majority of these services, not only via the Internet in order to make them readily available, but also through various public and other participating offices throughout the country. It is without doubt that in the times we live in technology constitutes an engine for economic development. It is my belief, therefore, that this initiative will have a directly positive impact on the lives of South Africa’s people.

I would like to thank the select committee for accepting the amendment of this Bill.

I would like to quote the hon Aziz Pahad’s words in his address on Africa Day from John Reader’s book, Africa: A Biography of the Continent, where he says:

South Africa preserves the flickering hope of transforming dreams into reality, affirming the value of integrity and ideals in an era where economic pragmatism is the dominant theme of world affairs.

Let us face the future with confidence and keep on being pragmatic to better the lives of our people.

I humbly urge the House to support this Bill. It is central to development and rapid economic growth. It is, indeed, a technical amending Bill, but its implications are broad. It prepares us today for the future that we have always dreamt of. It effectively tells us that we have embedded the past and the future in the present and that it is possible to visualise and live the future in the present. I therefore urge members to support this Bill. [Applause.]

Debate concluded. Bill, subject to proposed amendments, agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                  COUNTERFEIT GOODS AMENDMENT BILL

                   TRADE PRACTICES AMENDMENT BILL

           (Consideration of Bills and of Reports thereon)

The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, once again, the amendments that the hon members have before them, and there will be a subsequent one to come, are a linked set of amendments in these related Acts on trademarks. They are being amended through Trade Practices Amendment Bill and the Counterfeit Goods Amendment Bill.

There is an amendment which deals, specifically and most importantly, with the concept of a well-known mark. In terms of the Trips agreement, certain marks that are very well known do have a status. The case that we are familiar with in South Africa would be MacDonalds, as hon members may recall. The position, however, is that each national jurisdiction or judicial system makes decisions about what a well-known mark is or is not. We did not have that definition in the Counterfeit Goods Act and we proposed to introduce it.

There are other smaller amendments dealing with consistency matters in the main and also relate to copyright, prohibited marks and how they appear or should not appear.

The final amendment to the Counterfeit Goods Act deals with the question of searches. It is fairly obvious that in a matter like this, one needs to move quite quickly and decisively in order to prove that counterfeit goods exist. There was some degree of lack of clarity in the Act and we are thus proposing the amendments that have been put forward. I would like to thank the portfolio committees for the improvements which they have made in these amendments.

The next Act is the Trade Practices Act and the amendment that is being made there. This is something we needed to have done, but it is interesting that the impetus for doing it quickly was, in fact, the Cricket World Cup which comes up in 2003.

All hon members are probably familiar with this concept of ambush marketing, that basically one can get sponsors to a big event who will sponsor the event and put their own advertising there, and all of a sudden Minister Alec Erwin flies in with a big balloon that says ``Vote Alec Erwin’’, right over the cricket festival. That is called ambush marketing. Of course, that is a really extreme example. I do not think that there is really any need for me to ask hon members to vote for me. But that is what ambush marketing is. It is quite an important and crucial issue, and as I say, for a major event like World Cup Cricket, there was a need for the sponsors to have certainty about this.

One of the issues in this regard has been that people feel a bit nervous about whether this would prevent small and medium enterprises from coming in and showing their small logos or whatever. It certainly would not. Specifically in relation to the Cricket World Cup, it will be one of the biggest joint projects that we will do regarding any major events between DTI and the sponsors of these events, which will bring in small and medium enterprises across a wide range of activities in preparation for the cup. So what we are dealing with here are major sponsorships in which advertisers put their boards up, and someone who does not sponsor anything uses the prominence of that event to just come in and try to advertise their product.

This is what we have dealt with in the main with these amendments. Once again, I would suggest that these are important technical amendments which continually update and refine South Africa’s intellectual property laws and trademark laws, and I would urge that we support them. [Applause.]

Mr T S SETONA: Chairperson and hon Minister, I believe that the Minister has indeed covered every technical aspect of the amendment that I was going to talk about, and more so. Given the fact that there was a general consensus at the level of the select committee, therefore, with due respect, I would like to thank members of the opposition for their co- operation in the course of the deliberation on this Bill. [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! That was the shortest speech. It will definitely go into the Guinness Book of Records.

Dr E A CONROY: Chairperson, Minister Erwin and colleagues, counterfeit goods are described as goods which are the result of counterfeiting, which is in turn described as the active producing or manufacturing of goods without the permission of the persons who own the intellectual property rights existing in respect of those particular goods.

The original Counterfeit Goods Act, Act 37 of 1997, introduced measures aimed at, in the first instance, fighting against the trade in counterfeit goods so as to further protect the legitimate owners of trademarks, copyrights and certain marks under the Merchandise Marks Act. Secondly, it introduced measures aimed at addressing the unlawful application to goods of the subject matter of the respective intellectual property rights. Thirdly, it introduced measures aimed at fighting the release of counterfeit goods into the commercial market and channels. However, when this Act was promulgated in 1997, legal commentators were of the opinion that the term ``counterfeit goods’’ was too wide and that it ran the risk of treating genuine goods as counterfeit or pirated goods.

The purpose of this Bill is, therefore, to amend the definition of intellectual property rights so as to extend these rights to include rights in trademarks which are entitled to protection under the Paris Convention, whereby goods with marks which are well known in South Africa will also be protected under the Act. This will also allow the seizure and destruction of goods that infringe on such trademarks.

Die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Handelspraktyke het ten doel om die Wet op Handelspraktyke van 1976 te wysig ten einde praktyke bekend as hinderlaagbemarking'', of die sogenaamde ambush marketing’’, ten opsigte van geborgde geleenthede te verbied.

Hierdie wanpraktyk, wat tydens die promulgering van die wet nog onbekend was en dus nie in die wet opgeneem kon word nie, bestaan uit die opsetlike optrede deur ‘n persoon om ‘n misleidende of valse indruk te skep van ‘n kontraktuele of ander verbintenis met ‘n geborgde geleentheid, waar so ‘n verbintenis in der waarheid nie bestaan nie.

Hierdie twee wysigingswetsontwerpe, naamlik die eersgenoemde ten opsigte van ``counterfeit goods’’ en die laasgenoemde ten opsigte van handelspraktyke, loop in der waarheid hand aan hand, aangesien dit in die finale instansie om die beskerming van intellektuele eiendom gaan. Beide wetsontwerpe het nodig geword om die regverdige bedryf van gesonde handelspraktyke te verseker, en hou geen finansiële implikasies vir die staat in nie.

Ons steun beide die wetsontwerpe. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The objective of the Trademarks Amendment Bill is to amend the Trade Practices Act of 1976 in order to prohibit the practice known as ``ambush marketing’’ in respect of sponsored events.

This malpractice, which was still unknown during promulgation of the law and therefore could not be included in the law, consists of the deliberate actions by a person to create a false or misleading impression of a contractual or other relationship with a sponsored event, where such relationship in fact does not exist.

These two amending Bills, the first-mentioned in respect of counterfeit goods, and the latter in respect of trade practices in fact go hand in hand, as in the final analysis they concern intellectual goods. Both Bills have become necessary to ensure the just practice of sound trade practices, and do not have any financial implications for the state.

We support both these Bills.]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, as the Minister said, it is not the Bill, really, which is so important, though important it is, but the continuing trend, the family of Bills and the direction in which the Government is going that is really significant here. I want to congratulate the Minister and the department on these Bills. After years of isolation, it is wonderful to see.

The Bill brings us forcefully back into the mainstream of international conventions, as a consequence of our having ratified the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Convention. It allows us, thus, additional protection under the Paris Convention. I have to say that after a blip in which, I think, some unfortunate perceptions were created by the debate over the past few years on generic medicines, I believe the Bill will again confirm that South Africa is and remains squarely committed in a globalising world to the concept of the protection of intellectual property rights. Thus we support this Bill very strongly.

Of course, the problem remains that China is not yet a member of the World Trade Organisation, which creates problems for everybody, including us. But one hopes that China’s formal admission to the WTO, which now seems more than likely, will pave the way for her accession to all of these conventions that we are talking about.

With regard to the Trade Practices Amendment Bill, in seeking to prohibit certain practices such as ``ambush marketing’’ in respect of sponsored events, the Government is simply responding to the growing sophistication of our sponsored leisure/sport and art international industry, bringing us in line with international best practice. By creating a favourable environment for sponsors to sponsor sporting events and other events, including the arts, we make a contribution to stimulating those events themselves, making sponsorships possible and attractive. Thus, we are also able thereby to bring our populations that perhaps have not enjoyed many of these sports and events back into the mainstream of those events themselves. We support this measure. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Ms M P THEMBA: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, today we are addressing two crucial Bills, namely the Trade Practices Amendment Bill in conjunction with the Counterfeit Goods Amendment Bill. The amendments of these Bills are both necessary and important as they will strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights and also benefit the broader South African public and businesses.

Gone are the days when we were a pariah state isolated by the whole world owing to our notorious policies of the past. Today we are part of an interdependent world, which is often called the global village. Thanks to the struggles of our people, we are no longer living on an island.

I am quite sure that all of us here in our offices use computers that are made somewhere else. All of us take our children out for a meal to McDonald’s, and I know that all of us have bought Nike takkies. These are global brands and they are available right here in our country. Some of them are made locally.

Today South Africans own franchises of global brands right here in our own country. Some of these belong to what are called well-known trademarks. These play an important role in our economy, in particular, in job creation. For instance, Nike shops are found all over the country.

We are part of major games and events, for example the Olympic Games, world cups, and of a bodies such as Fifa, etc. Not so long ago we hosted the Rugby World Cup. Not only was it a success, but we also claimed the cup itself. We also hope to host more games, claim more cups and attract investments to boost our economy. The global sponsorship market is continuing to expand rapidly and rights fees are continuing to escalate. Hosting these games in our country brings and attracts investments. Those also create jobs.

The above-mentioned opportunities are examples of some of the things which we had no access to in the past, owing to our notorious policies. As a result, the previous Acts did not give clear-cut legislation to protect certain rights as they were alien and not so relevant to us. In particular, there are the well-known trademarks, and the combating of what is called ``ambush marketing,’’ as the Minister has said. These areas, therefore, require proper and specific legislation.

The amendments of these Bills are not only important but are also necessary. Some of the typical examples are unauthorised merchandise, unauthorised or unofficial publications, unauthorised sales promotion activity or public stunts, unauthorised broadcasts, virtual advertising, web advertising, unofficial corporate hospitality, etc. The list is endless. They may or may not involve any clear and direct breach of proprietary rights in an event, such as trademark infringement. Some of the most common consequences are the loss of revenue to sports bodies, the undermining of sponsor investment and the erosion of exclusive rights.

The question therefore is: How do we deal with this problem? The answer is simple: through legislation. This is exactly what we are doing today. It is even conceivable that the chances of succeeding in bids to host international events could be prejudiced by the failure of a nation and its sporting bodies to deal both practically and legally with ambush marketing. As I have stated before, we still have high ambitions - or should I say, convictions - of hosting more games and international events in our country.

In our committee we are also united. We have all agreed to the amendments of these two Bills. Democracy is within the committee. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, members of the House, I must say one thing that I find very important in these debates is that members do deal with the technicalities of the laws. I think this is very important. We are going to find that in the realm of intellectual property that more and more developments will be taking place in the coming years. Certainly in the WTO, some very complex and technical negotiations will be occurring on these matters. I think the fact that our committee members are familiar with the technicalities is really to be welcomed. I thank them.

I would like to make one or two very brief points. I would like to stress that in South Africa we are very committed to the protection of intellectual property within the framework that it is accepted currently in the world dispensation. I think one of the reasons for this is something that is often forgotten and that we lose sight of, and that is that, generally speaking, in the developing world, we have fallen far behind in protecting our own intellectual property. So we should see this as very much something that we can take advantage of in protecting intellectual property as our economies unfold, as we begin to bring in traditional knowledge, as we begin to expand our scientific endeavours in our own terrain and domains.

Let me say, too, that the hon Kent Durr raised the issue of China. This is one of the reasons why we in South Africa have been very strongly supportive of bringing China into the WTO. I think one cannot have major economies, China being far and away the largest, and also very big economies like Iran and others who are not in the WTO. I think we need a common trade system across the world, and we would support that very strongly.

I think many people may wonder -I received a note, to the effect that - what do we do with counterfeit goods. This quite a complex and difficult issue. Obviously if one takes them and just sells them again, one defeats the original purpose of seizing them, of taking them out of the market. But we have begun some interesting programmes and projects on counterfeit goods, namely to break up these goods and transform them into other products. Then they can be utilised to generate smaller businesses in products which do not compete with the original intention.

In the cases of products such as clothing, we do, from time to time - recently we did this - make these products available for emergency relief. But we do not let them into the market. In a general sense, we try and use them for crisis emergency relief. But there is a difficulty.

I would urge members to encourage people, everybody, including hawkers and flea markets, to obey the law. Most of us walk through a flea market, look at a product and say: I bet that is not a real Nike cap. It does not really help us to just walk past and ignore it. We should be telling hawkers and traders in flea markets that it is not in their interests to violate these laws, because, over time, what it means is that no one wants to come in and invest in our economy.

The hon member mentioned Nike. Now, we are beginning to manufacture products for Nike that will be sold all over the world, and they are an important part of our export trade. They are not going to invest and produce here if our own intellectual laws in the market are so bad, and no one is going to come here. So I think we must take a mature, far-sighted view that the better our regulatory environment, the more investment we will attract and the more decent jobs we will be able to provide to the people. Trying to take a short cut by breaking the law and getting into a flea market might sound good in the short term, but basically it keeps us underdeveloped. So we welcome the support that hon members have given these amendments, and I thank them for the work they have done on this matter. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Counterfeit Goods Amendment Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Trade Practices Amendment Bill agreed to in accordance with Section 75 of the Constitution.

                CORRECTIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL
            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Chairperson, hon members, one thing I have realised about visiting this House a little bit late is that one misses media attention. [Laughter.] But what is advantageous, at the same time, is that one will find people who are ready to go, who cannot fight anymore, who do not want to be detained but just want to go. So I will make it simple. [Laughter.]

I wish to present the Correctional Services Amendment Bill, 2001, for consideration by this honourable House. The Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, that is the principal Act, marked the beginning of the transformation process towards prison reform in South Africa. It was assented to by the President on 27 November 1998.

The drafting of a new Act, with the intention to repeal the Correctional Services Act of 1959, was necessitated by the democratic revolution which has been taking place in our country in the past decade. In order to grasp the fundamentals that formed the basis for the drafting of the principal Act, it is important to understand the context, which defines the history of the South African correctional system. The history of the South African prison system has been described as a history of a system that formed part of the state apparatus of a minority government then, which applied explicitly racial criteria. The main purpose then was to ``lock them up and throw away the key’’. Obviously, this was not a civilised way of treating human beings. It is against this background that we identified the need to change the policy.

In creating a completely new legal framework, the principal Act had to be underpinned by the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act of 1996. The principal Act also incorporated the requirements of the United Nations’ international conventions on the treatment of offenders.

It is often said that a nation is judged by the way it treats its own prisoners. I think I had that experience when I was in this House, when I was quizzed about terminally ill prisoners. I am still waiting for the questions.

The primary objective of the principal Act was therefore to create a new legal framework in conformity with the principles which underpin an open and democratic society. It is, therefore, only the beginning.

The actual transformation process is currently under way, which will culminate in the development of a White Paper on correctional services. The White Paper process will assist the department to generate interest and understanding amongst stakeholders of the challenges facing the correctional system in playing an effective role in crime prevention within the overall context of an integrated criminal justice system.

It has therefore become necessary to bring forward certain amendments to the principal Act to ensure that the transformation process remains on track and continues to deliver the desired outcomes. In the process of drafting subordinate legislation and implementing certain aspects of the Act, it became apparent, based on practical considerations, that certain amendments would be necessary in order to fully implement the principal Act and to be more compliant with the provisions of the Constitution and the international conventions to which we are signatories as a country.

Clause 9 of the Bill places a duty on the department to provide, as far as practicable, measures to accommodate prisoners with disabilities and to create an environment that is gender-sensitive.

Clause 12 puts in place certain procedural and substantive safeguards in disciplinary proceedings involving prisoners, such as the proper recording of the proceedings at an informal hearing before the head of prison and the right to legal representation at a formal hearing before a disciplinary official.

Clauses 17, 18 and 19 provide for the circumstances under which force may be used by a correctional official, including the procedures to be followed for the use of firearms and other nonlethal incapacitating devices. For instance, this will now be pertinent in the Act and not relegated to the regulations as suggested by the initial text of the principal Act. This also contributes to efficient checks and balances to prevent the abuse of physical power and to ensure the safety of prisoners.

Clause 20 entrenches the right of child offenders to education and training, and prohibits the utilisation of child offenders for labour other than work aimed at developing their skills.

The lack of community involvement in the parole system has been a matter of grave concern for many of us. In terms of the principal Act, the composition of the Parole Board will now include two permanent members from the community, and full-time ex-officio members from the Department of Correctional Services, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the SA Police Services. The board will be chaired by a member of the community. The new parole system also provides for representations to be made to the Parole Board, either by the victim in person or by his representative.

The inclusion of clause 30 is intended to assist the department and the Government in managing the scourge of overcrowding in our prisons. Part of this provision which deals with unsentenced prisoners was not included in the principal Act. Thus we had long consultations with the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, select committees and portfolio committees, because there was a concern that there might be a breach of the separation of powers. But I was informed that an agreement had been reached, and that is why we are bringing this amendment to this House.

To address challenges presented by overcrowding, the department is involved in a number of interdepartmental projects developed within the crime prevention, justice and safety cluster. These include the following. There is an awaiting trial-prisoner project, which is meant to reduce the detention cycle of awaiting-trial prisoners in an integrated manner. This system has been piloted at seven sites. The official launch of the national rollout took place on 17 August 2001, where a further 26 sites were identified, and it is envisaged that it will be implemented before July 2002.

The department is further involved in the Saturday courts project which was introduced in 99 courts countrywide. During February 2001, the number of awaiting-trial prisoners in custody at these prisons served by those specific courts declined by 12%, that is from 4 355 to about 36 300.

We intend also to dramatically increase the accommodation capacity of the prison system by as much as an additional 30 000 beds during the forthcoming MTEF. This will be achieved by building low-cost new-generation prisons for medium- and low-risk prisoner categories, who are the majority of the country’s prison population at the moment. These facilities will be situated strategically around the country in the areas most affected by overcrowding. This building programme will be supported by the development of construction norms and standards based on what is called new-generation design principles to achieve low life cycle facility costs. These construction norms and standards will be translated into facility design prototypes based on economical and practical designs and solutions.

Lastly, the department wishes to further increase its existing accommodation capacity, which means that approximately 8 000 beds will be added to the system, with the commissioning of several new prisons. At this stage, 33 prisons have been identified for repair and maintenance.

The Department of Correctional Services has decided to put rehabilitation and restorative justice at the centre of its operations. Concentration on rehabilitation is meant to strike a balance between rehabilitation and safe custody. This has subsequently brought the need for the reskilling of officials in rehabilitation techniques, thereby enhancing the goal of rehabilitation.

For rehabilitation to succeed, prisoners must be treated as individuals, with each prisoner having his or her own problem. The development of the individualised needs-based rehabilitation programmes entails specialised treatment and development programmes for prisoners in partnership with the communities and the offender. In other words, we are saying that unless we partner with the community, we will not succeed in our programmes of rehabilitation.

This is done by enhancing the personal and social functioning of all offenders in line with their individual needs, with a view to preparing them for reintegration as productive, well-adapted and law-abiding citizens. I am looking at the hon Kent Durr, who seems to be saying: ``That is a tall order, Minister!’’

The active engagement of the community in the rehabilitation process of the prisoner as a collective responsibility strengthens our partnership in the treatment of the prisoner. We shall continue to endeavour to promote and enhance community involvement in order to ensure a structured working relationship, and to regulate involvement between role-players.

The exercise of promoting restorative justice is meant to create a platform for dialogue between the offender, the victim and the community to facilitate the healing process. We believe that this process will heal more that it will hurt.

In conclusion, in relation to the Census 2001, the Department of Correctional Services is assisting Statistics South Africa in the process of managing the census in prisons. A working relationship with Statistics South Africa was established at both provincial and national levels, where we confirmed our commitment to the process. Correctional Services officials have been assisting with the completion of questionnaires within prisons on a voluntary basis. Some provincial commissioners have reported that the process is running smoothly at this stage and it is also envisaged that the process will be completed by the week ending on 19 October 2001, which is well ahead of the deadline set by Statistics South Africa.

It is now my sincere and fervent hope that all members will see their way clear to accepting the amending Bill which I have tabled before this House this afternoon. God bless. [Applause.]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson and hon members, on 27 August 2001, the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs visited some prisons in various provinces. Some shocking discoveries were made during those visits.

I would like to thank my colleagues in the committee for taking all the time to visit these prisons. This is precisely what is expected of us as the NCOP members - to play our oversight role and monitoring. To them I say, well done.

It is clear that we are following a concept which says, ``Every day is an election day. The devil always votes against you but, God votes for you. But, more importantly, you as a group, you cast the deciding vote’’.

Those visits enabled the select committee to carefully scrutinise this Bill. It amends a few sections of the principal Act. The Correctional Services Act has met with critical acclaim from many experts of correctional services as one of the best in this country and from ordinary South Africans as a fundamental break with our oppressive past.

The Act accurately reflects the values of respect for human dignity and other fundamental human rights in our Constitution. In many respects the Act accurately reflects these values. Yet it is is not enough for it to merely reflect them. It must also be able to provide for mechanisms which can practically implement these values.

It has since become clear that there are some shortcomings in the current Act, hence this amending Bill. Some of the amendments are of a technical nature, but there are some that will bring about fundamental changes to the principal Act.

If the Bill is passed, it will bring back the dignity of children who find themselves in prison with their mothers. It is also going to deal with the question of overcrowding. It also deals with corrupt officials within the department. Unlike in the past, when one could easily equate a prison with hell, the Bill makes it possible, for examples, for amenities to be made available to prisoners. The Bill also makes it possible for prisoners to access reading materials and recreational facilities.

Prisoners in most prisons are accommodated in the same cells, regardless of the crimes each prisoner has committed. That will be a thing of the past. The Bill allows the commissioner to restrict, suspend or separate the prisoners accordingly. Conditions in our prisons have not been friendly to prisoners with disabilities. In this Bill that has been taken care of. The Bill also makes it possible for prisoners, when attending disciplinary hearings, to be represented by a legal representative. Firearms or ammunition cannot be used against prisoners at random. The Bill regulates how and when it can be used. For example, a Correctional Services official can only use firearms as a last resort when his or her life is in danger or threatened, or even when a prisoner tries to escape.

During its visits to prisons, the committee was made aware that in one prison in the Western Cape there was a 14-year old boy who had been caught stealing grapes on Mr Potgieter’s farm. The value of the grapes was only R15. He was still awaiting trial. He could not raise the R200 bail. He had been in that prison for three months.

In one prison in Gauteng, there was a 12-year-old boy who had been arrested for stealing a packet of bananas to the value of R5 from a Mr Van Rensburg’s fruit market. He was still awaiting trial. Unfortunately he could not raise the R200 bail. He had been in that prison for four months. What about the 13-year-old boy in one of the prisons in Giyani in the Northern Province who had been caught stealing three avocados from Mr De Jager’s farm? The value of the three avocados was R6. He also could not raise the R300 bail. As I am speaking here, the boy is still in prison. He has been there for seven months. The two boys in Gauteng and the Western Cape are unfortunately accommodated in the same cells as prisoners charged with murder, car hijacking, robbery and housebreaking.

Now let us for a while imagine how much the department is spending on these young boys, considering the kinds of crimes they committed. Those who know better are saying that the department spends not less than R90 per person per day.

Having considered all these facts, the select committee under the capable leadership of my predecessor, the hon J L Mahlangu, postponed the passage of this Bill to enable stakeholders and the department to make some input as to how to correct these anomalies.

The select committee again, under the vibrant leadership of the hon Tsietsi Setona, who was the acting chair by then, also deferred the passage of this Bill to allow the Departments of Correctional Services and of Justice and Constitutional Development to sort out their differences and advise us accordingly.

For a third time the committee, under the wonderful, marvellous, cool and calculated leadership of yours truly … [Laughter.] … in addition to the two departments, asked the State Law Adviser to give his legal opinion. I am sure members are aware that I am now dealing with the famous clause 30 of the Bill, which proposes to amend section 81 of the principal Act. The gist of this clause is that unsentenced prisoners with minor offences should be released. But before they are released, certain things have to happen.

When the committee met on 2 October, the two departments, together with the State Law Adviser, informed us that they now agreed with the formulation brought by the State Law Adviser. They advised the committee to accept that formulation.

If one looks at all the steps taken by the committee, one will realise that we wanted to get an amicable solution which would try to rectify this mistake or the differences between the two departments. Our concern as a committee was to get a mechanism that would address the crisis in our prisons. Had the committee been advised that this crisis could best be handled by the Department Agriculture or the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, we would have accepted that. As long as it was going to be done lawfully and constitutionally, it did not matter much who was going to rectify it or come up with that legislation.

I would like to thank the Chief Whip for always being there to assist the committee, whenever there seemed to be some confusion. His willingness to assist us will not go unnoticed. It is with pride and joy that I humbly inform the House that I support the Bill.

Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, as appears from the opinions of the State Law Advisers, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the National Director of Public Prosecutions on the one hand, and those of the Department of Correctional Services and the Inspecting Judge on the other hand, there are differing viewpoints in respect of clause 30 of the Bill under discussion. This clause seeks to amend section 81 of the Correctional Services Act, Act No 111 of 1998.

In terms of the proposed new subsection (4) of section 81, the Minister of Correctional Services may, in the case of unsentenced prisoners, release any such prisoner or group of such prisoners subject to such conditions as may be determined by the Minister with the concurrence of the Minister of Justice.

The view of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is that clause 30 of the Bill is in conflict with the doctrine of separation of powers contemplated in the Constitution. It also referred the committee in its opinion to the comments by the National Director of Public Prosecutions. In those comments he expressed strong reservations regarding the effect of this clause should it become law. He mentioned that, for instance, the following unsentenced prisoners might be released: Prisoners who have been denied bail by the court or in respect of whom bail is still under consideration; prisoners who have committed serious crimes but who have been granted bail under strict conditions imposed by the court; and prisoners whose cases have been dealt with partly but in respect of whom bail has been refused.

He also referred to practical problems which may be created by the clause; for instance the provision does not provide for the case when a released prisoner fails to appear in court. Conflicting conditions might be imposed by the Minister and the court, which can create uncertainty. Prisoners not released might wish to appeal against the Minister’s decision, and that is not provided for.

He also objected to the provision on the ground that releasing unsentenced prisoners might bring the criminal justice system into disrepute. The denial and granting of bail and the setting of bail conditions are judicial decisions reached by a judicial officer. Presiding officers and prosecutors will experience the proposed provision negatively and this may lead to a negative attitude towards that.

Apart from practical problems foreseen by the National Director of Public Prosecutions, his main of objection, as well as that of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, hinges on the submission that clause 30 is in conflict with the doctrine of the separation of powers. The Chief State Law Advisers conclude that under the current circumstances - and this is after they deal extensively with the current problems, also mentioning the figures of the overpopulation in the provinces - they are not convinced that clause 30 violates the doctrine of the separation of powers, and that even if it were to violate the doctrine, they are of the view that addressing the plight of prisoners, rather than doctrinal reliance on the strict application of the separation of powers, should be given preference. They, however, propose a reworded clause 30 to address the practical problems foreseen by the National Director of Public Prosecutions and also state that as far as clause 30 might be perceived as authorising intrusion upon the powers of the judiciary, the reworded clause also addresses the issue.

I am pleased to say that the committee unanimously supported this reworded clause and it is, therefore, proposed that the current clause 30 be omitted and substituted by the reworded clause, which provides that certain prisoners - for instance, where the court has refused to grant bail - be excluded from this, and also prisoners who are being detained in respect of any offences related to those mentioned in Schedule 2 of the Correctional Services Act. As members know, this schedule refers to crimes like murder, rape and robbery, prisoners being detained in respect of domestic violence as defined in the Domestic Violence Act and, of course, additional offences as the Minister may prescribe by regulation. This reworded clause also addresses the practical problems referred to in the Act.

The overcrowding of prisons - and this is also stated by the Minister in his foreword to the annual report which we received just yesterday, remains the biggest challenge for this department, and it undermines all the attempts of the department to create circumstances and conditions for the humane treatment and rehabilitation of prisoners. It also affects the morale of personnel very negatively.

The problem, however, is that this is not the making of this department. This department receives prisoners from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the awaiting-trial prisoners from the Department of Safety and Security. We must realise that every time a court hour is lost unnecessarily, and a case is unnecessarily postponed because of the lack of properly trained and experienced investigating officers or prosecutors, or the shortage thereof, that brings about the problems that this department faces.

I think the time has come for us, especially in our committee, because we are in a position to look at all these departments, such as Correctional Services and Safety and Security, as well as Justice, to really sit down with them and get to the bottom of this, so that we can address this for the long term, because the situation as it is right now, unfortunately, and I think the Minister will agree with me, is intolerable and unacceptable. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Prince B Z ZULU: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, a lot has been said about the challenges we are facing in terms of our correctional services system. The focus has primarily been, and quite rightly so, on overcrowding, its consequences and possible solutions to alleviate it. I want to shift the focus to something that has not enjoyed the same level of attention in this debate, but which is also a very important challenge facing our correctional services system, namely rehabilitation.

Although my contribution will focus on rehabilitation, I must state that rehabilitation and overcrowding cannot really be seen in isolation from each other. The lack of rehabilitation can be linked directly to prison overcrowding, because many of the prisoners who are contributing to it are prisoners with previous convictions. Although I do not have exact figures, it is a known fact that the rate at which prisoners return to prison is unacceptably high. This high rate of recidivism means that there is a constant flow of people into our prisons which causes the overcrowding we are currently faced with.

Rehabilitation programmes have the potential to reduce the rate at which released prisoners return to prison and, if effectively implemented, may help to reduce prison overcrowding. Rehabilitation is defined as ``a process whereby a person’s life is restored to normality through training’’. The Correctional Services Act enjoins the department to provide prisoners with access to programmes and activities which will meet their educational and training needs and assist in their rehabilitation. In addition, the department must also provide social and psychological services in order to support the prisoners to promote their social functioning and mental health.

At the moment, the department has a number of programmes and services available to all sentenced prisoners. These include psychological services, social work services, religious care, education and training and other generic programmes. The psychological and social work services are aimed at both the individual groups and families of prisoners. The education and training programme involves Abet, correspondence studies, occupational skills training, vocational training and computer-based training. The generic programmes focus on life skills training, HIV/Aids, drugs and substance abuse and sexual behaviour.

A number of services are also available for training awaiting-trial prisoners such as religious care and administrative support regarding distance education. With the exception of social work and religious services, which are available at all prisons, other services such as psychology, education and training services are available at certain prisons only.

While one can understand that the quality and availability of service are determined by the availability of resources and the involvement of NGOs and infrastructure, every effort should be made to extend these services to as many prisons and prisoners as possible. Apart from making it available in all prisons, the effectiveness of these programmes must also be assessed, because it is of little use to have rehabilitation programmes that are not effective at all. [Applause.]

Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, the Correctional Services Amendment Bill deals with a number of technical issues relating to definitions in the Act, that is the principal Act, and to procedures in the Department of Correctional Services. Most of these amendments are not contentious or controversial and consequently, I will not deal with them. However, section 30 of the Bill does need to be debated.

This section provides that the Minister of Correctional Services in consultation with the Minister of Justice can release certain categories of awaiting-trial prisoners where conditions in prisons are of such a nature that they demand corrective measures.

At the outset, this needs to be placed in its proper perspective. There is a crisis in respect of the overpopulation in the prisons of the country. This is especially critical in respect of awaiting-trial prisoners. The extent of the crisis varies from prison to prison. In some prisons overpopulation is slightly more than 100%, and at other prisons it is as critical as 300%.

The committee visited prisons in different provinces to get first-hand information on the crisis. We saw clear evidence of the crisis in the prisons that we visited. We received reports from medical practitioners that the overcrowding carried with it certain health risks. A view was even reported in the media that there were potential health risks to communities outside the prisons.

The situation is such that I do not think anyone will deny that there is a crisis. We have to remember that we are only talking about awaiting-trial prisoners. We must also remember that a substantial portion of these awaiting-trial prisoners will ultimately be acquitted after a lengthy period in prison while their trials were being completed.

Many of these awaiting-trial prisoners had, in fact, been granted bail in amounts of less than R1 000, but the reality was that they simply could not afford to pay such bail. In these cases, a competent court has already found that such awaiting-trial prisoners do not constitute a threat to society. A court has also found that such awaiting trial-prisoners do not constitute an inordinate flight risk, and that they will consequently stand their trial.

Yet these people are imprisoned often for many months because they cannot afford to pay their bail. Hon members must further remember that it costs the state between R80 and R90 per day to maintain a single prisoner. The arithmetic is obvious. The state is simply on a losing wicket on this one for very little benefit in most instances.

The problem is complicated by the crime situation under which all communities suffer. For this and other reasons certain safeguards were incorporated into the proposed amendment. These safeguards include that no person who has been refused bail by a competent court will be released in terms of the section under discussion. No person who is alleged to have committed an offence involving violence should be released in terms of the section.

The committee has also made it clear to the Department of Correctional Services that this amendment should only be seen as a short-term safety valve, and that we are expecting the department to develop an integrated strategy as a long-term solution to the crisis. For many months, in fact, from the beginning of the year, we have been pressing the department to implement again the automated fingerprinting system, the so-called Afis system.

We also pressed the Department of Safety and Security, as well as Justice to implement the Afis system, together with an integrated docket management system.

We believe that these systems will streamline the management and administration of justice and provide a long-term solution to the crisis of overcrowding for awaiting-trial prisoners. We have seen certain steps, and the Minister indicated in his speech that there is progress in this regard. We wish the Minister every success in this process and we want to see it speedily implemented beyond simply the piloting test phase. [Applause.]

Mrs C NKUNA: Chairperson, I am just a bit disappointed because a lot of what I have prepared here has already been mentioned. Nonetheless, I will get to the nitty-gritty.

Muchaviseki mutshami wa xitulu, Holobye wa ta Vululamisi, nkulukumba tatana Skhosana, vatirhi-kulorhi lava humaka lomuya eka swifundhankulu, na lava mi nga kona eka Yindlu leyi, inkomu.

Hi ku landzelela Nawu wa Vululamisi, Ndzawulo ya Vululamisi yi fanele ku vona leswaku xiyimo xa vakhotsiwa hi lexi hloniphekaka no amukeleka ku ya hi Vumbiwa ra Afrika Dzonga. Xiyenge xa 35, xiyenge-ntsongo xa 2e xa Vumbiwa, xi vula leswaku mubohiwa un’wana ni un’wana u ni mfanelo ya ku va a nyikiwa vutshamo. Loko hi vulavula hi vutshamo, a hi vuli xitandzi, hi vula ndhawu kwalahaya khotsweni. Mubohiwa un’wana ni un’wana u fanele a tlhela a nyikiwa swakudya.

Loko hi ta va hi rhendzelekile na tikhotso leti, hi kume leswaku vabohiwa lava va dyaka va xurha, va hava swiphiqo loko va ya eku etleleni. Kutani Ndzawulo ya Vululamisi yi vona leswaku vabohiwa va xurha. Vabohiwa va fanele va nyikiwa swo hlaya, tibuku, timagazininyana leswaku va ta kota ku cinca mianakanyo ya vona. Va fanele ku tshunguriwa loko va vabya, hikuva xiyimo lexi loko xo ka xi nga cinceki, matshan’wini ya ku va vabohiwa lavaya va va vanhu lava va cincika, va vuya se va ri tinghunavalayi.

Ndzi pfumeleleni ku khensa no tlangela Ndzawulo ya ta Vululamisi eka ntirho lowukulu swonghasi lowu yi wu endlaka wa ku va yi hlayisa no dyondzisa lava va nga dyohela van’wanyana, hi ku va nyika dyondzo hi ku hambana-hambana ka yona, hi ku va nyika leswi vuriwaka tindhawu to hungasa leswaku va kota ku endla mintlangu yo karhi, hi ku va pfumelela ku va ni leswi vuriwaka ‘mpfuxelelo wa moya’-RDP of the soul. Leswi swi vula leswaku va kota ku cinca laha mimoyeni ya vona loko mpfuxelelo lowu wu endliwa hi un’wana wa lava va nga tshama va khomiwa, ivi a vuya a ya dyondzisa vamakwavo. Va dyondzisiwa hi ta rihanyu ni nhlayiseko, va nyikiwa swakudya leswi akaka miri ni miehleketo ya vona.

Ndza ha tlhela nakambe ndzi tlhelela eka swakudya leswi, Holobye, timhaka ta ku swekela vakhotsiwa ti teka nkarhi swinene. Va pfuka nimpundzu va sungula ku tseleka mapoto hi awara ya mune, leswaku loko awara ya tsevu yi fika, vabohiwa va va va xurhile na tivhene ti va yimerile ku va rhwala ti va yisa etihubyeni ta milawu. Leswi swi teka nkarhi wo tala. Hambiswiritano, swirhalanganyi swi kona eka ndzawulo leyi. Hi rhendzelekile na tijele to fana na Pollsmoor laha Western Cape, jele ya le Joni ni ya le Pitori eka provhinsi ya Gauteng.

eNorthern Province, ndzi vile un’wana wa lava nga hlawuriwa ku endzela tijele, hi yile eka tindhawu to fana na va Potgietersrust, Pietersburg, Thohoyandou, Malamulele, Tiyani, Tzaneen, Ritavi ni le ka hosi Muhlava, hi ya vona leswaku xana vona va swi endlisa ku yini? Xiyimo hi lexi xa njhani? Kutani hi hlanganile na ntlimbano na ku manyana ka vabohiwa, leswi endlaka leswaku va vumba leswi vuriwaka ‘tihuvo ta nyimpi kwale khotsweni, leswi vuriwaka gangsterism. Ka lwiwa le khotsweni. Ku lweriwa swilo swo tirhisiwa leswintsongo leswi nga kona. Kumbexana munhu a nga vutisa leswaku swilo swa kona hi swihi, va lwela swilo swo fana ni swiponci loko se va lava ku etlela. I ``survival of the fittest’’.

Eka timhaka ta milandzu leyintsongo leyi se ku vulavuriweke ha yona, mutshami wa xitulu, tatana Hosi Mokoena, u vulavurile hi milandzu leyi kutani ndzi nge ngheni eka yona.

Ku na mhaka leyi nga hi khumba swinene loko hi ta va hi ri le, leyi Holobye a yi yimeleke, ``the terminally ill ones’’. Loko hi ta va hi ri ekhotsweni ejoni, hi hlanganile na vavabyi lava va vabyaka swinene, lava va nga lo rindzela ku famba. Loko hi vutisa leswaku hikwalaho ka yini vanhu va muxaka lowu va ha hlayisiwile, va hi byele leswaku Nawu a wu pfumeeli lava nga se voniwaka nandzu ku va va famba va ya fa hi ku rhula emakaya. A va ri kwalaho mibedweni ya vona, hi va langutile, hi nga koti ku hlamulana na vona, kambe hi ri karhi hi swi vona leswaku eka nkarhi wihi kumbe wihi va nga tsemeka. Kutani a ndzi swi tivi leswaku nawu lowu wa 30b loko wu kota ku angharhela lava vabyelaka ku fa leswaku va nchunxeka, ku fana na lava se va voniweke nandzu va swi kotaka ku muka va ya fela ekaya.

Swo tala swi endliwile naswona swo tala swa ha ta endliwa. Mfumo wa ANC a wu tshamangi, wu yimile hi milenge ku vhakela tihuvo leti ta milawu ku vulavurisana na vabohiwa na maphorisa leswaku hi ta ta laha endzeni ka Yindlu leyi ku fana na nkarhi wa sweswi, hi ta nyika Holobye xiviko xa xiyimo lexi nga kona lomuya etikhotsweni, leswaku loko Holobye a huma na ndzawulo ya yena, va ta ya va ya lunghisa. (Translation of Tsonga paragraphs follows.)

[Hon Chairperson, Minister of Correctional Services Mr Skosana, hon members from provincial governments and hon members present in this House, I thank you. According to the Correctional Services Act, the Department of Correctional Services should see to it that conditions of prisoners respect their dignity and are acceptable in accordance with the South African Constitution.

Section 35(2a) of the Constitution stipulates that every prisoner has a right to be allocated accommodation. When we speak of accommodation we are not referring to a place to stay, but to accommodation in the prison. Every prisoner must be given food.

After going on a visiting tour of prisons, we found that prisoners who eat to their satisfaction did not experience any difficulties when going to sleep. The Department of Correctional Services sees to it that prisoners eat to their satisfaction. Prisoners must be given reading materials, books and magazines in order to change their state of mind. They must receive treatment when they fall ill, and all these things must be done because if their state of mind does not change, they will come back hardened criminals.

Allow me to thank them for and congratulate the Department of Correctional Services on its great task of looking after and seeing to the rehabilitation of those who committed offences in respect of other people. The department is doing its best to teach them in different spheres of education, and through the provision of recreational facilities so as to enable them to take part in different sporting activities, and to allow them to rejuvenate their souls. That causes them to change their spiritual state, especially if this is done by an ex-convict, who, after his/her release from prison, comes back to preach for prisoners in prisons. They are taught about health and social life, and given rich food in order to build their bodies and minds.

Hon Minister, I would like to go back and speak about food. The process of cooking food for prisoners takes quite some time. They wake up at 4 am and start cooking food for prisoners and by six o’clock in the morning prisoners must have finished eating and be satisfied. As soon as they have finished eating, vans are waiting to carry them to judicial courts. This takes an enormous amount of time.

However, problems still crop up in this department. We went on a prison tour and visited Pollsmoor prison in the Western Cape, the prisons in Johannesburg and Pretoria in Gauteng. In the Northern Province, I was one of the members who was delegated to visit prisons. We visited the following prisons: Potgietersrus, Pietersburg, Thohoyandou, Malamulele, Tiyani, Tzaneen, Ritavi and Chief Muhlava’s kraal, in order to see how administration of the law is done there and the type of conditions that prevailed.

We have realised that the overcrowding of prisons always gives rise to the forming of gangs and gangsterism. There are fights in prisons. They fight for the utilisation of scarce facilities. Perhaps one may ask which types of facilities they fight for. They fight for things like sponge mattresses to sleep on at sleeping time. It is always a case of survival of the fittest.

In regard to minor offences, which have been discussed already, the hon kgoshi Mokoena has already deliberated at length about that and I will therefore not speak about it.

There was one point on our visiting tour of prisons which touched our hearts and also that of the hon Minister, and this is prisoners suffering from terminal illness. When we visited the Johannesburg prison we came across prisoners suffering from terminal illness, who were just waiting to die. When we asked why such prisoners were not released from jail in order to go and die peacefully at home, the reply was that if a prisoner is still awaiting trial and has not been sentenced, the law does not allow such a prisoner to be released from jail. These prisoners were in their beds, we looked at them and could not manage to communicate with them, but we could see that they could die at any time. I do not know if section 30(b) of the Act can be amended to include prisoners awaiting trial to be released like those already sentenced, so that they can go and die peacefully at their homes.

Most things have been done and a lot is still to be done. The ANC Government is not resting on its laurels, but has taken it upon itself to undertake a tour, visiting prisons, in order to communicate with prisoners, prison warders and the police. By so doing it enabled us to report back to this House about what is taking place at this point in time. We are reporting back to the hon the Minister in regard to the conditions in our prisons. This will, in turn, enable the hon the Minister and the officials of his department to go and rectify some issues.]

In conclusion, gone are the days when the prison system in South Africa was internationally condemned for gross human rights violations; when prisoners were overcrowded in communal cells - youth and adults kept together and treated in the same way; when prisons were characterised by militaristic and racist officials; and when prisons were closed institutions with no media or outside inspection allowed.

Thanks to democracy, our correctional services system upholds the right to human dignity. Offenders are being rehabilitated because they are the future and the leaders of tomorrow.

Mr K D S DURR: Madam Chairperson, hon Minister, may I just say, before I start, that it was like music to my ears to hear the Minister singing the praises of the concept of restorative justice, because, I believe, that is the way that we should go and that is the most fertile field that we can plough in order to improve circumstances in our prison services.

I wish to focus upon the proposed new section 6(5)(b), where it is stated that:

As soon as possible after admission, every prisoner must:

 (b)    ... undergo a health  status  examination,  which  must  include
     testing for contagious and communicable diseases as defined in  the
     Health Act, 1977 (Act No. 63 of 1977), if in  the  opinion  of  the
     medical officer it is necessary to protect or maintain  the  health
     of the prisoners or other persons.

I have read the provisions of the Health Act carefully and - perhaps the Minister can help me - my understanding is that this may not cover Aids, and the Minister knows that Aids is one of the worst problems that we have in our prisons. I hope he is going to tell me that it does.

I want to give him just one example, in my own constituency, that occurred a few weeks ago. For obvious reasons I will not mention the place names or names of people involved. There was a well-known and middle aged lady in a village, in my constituency, who was recently raped by two youths. The two youths broke into her house and stole liquor and electrical appliances and then brutally raped her.

This person had a tremendous problem: an emotional problem, as well as a physical problem. There were some doubts as to whether the people who had raped her had Aids or not. Her reaction to the AZT which she had been advised to take was, for other medical reasons, so severe that there were doubts as to whether she would survive the AZT treatment. And so the doctors and the lawyers communicated with the police and prison authorities to see whether they could have the offenders that had been arrested tested for Aids.

However, the offenders refused to allow themselves to be tested. So this woman had this terrible choice of whether to go on or not. The medical opinion was that if they were negative, they would have stopped the AZT treatment in her particular case, although there is a window problem, I know.

It is not purely of academic interest; it is of tremendous interest that we clear this up if, indeed, there is any confusion.

My hon colleagues Matthee and Lever raised the question of releasing unsentenced prisoners that are simply clogging up the system. It is interesting, if one reads Judge Hannes Fagan’s report, that 17 500 suspects granted bail of as little as R100 could not afford it, and languished for up to 18 months in jail before their cases were heard. I believe that even now that can be alleviated by applications to the courts. But, as my hon colleague explained so well, there is an amendment on its way, I believe, which will put the matter beyond doubt.

That is the situation we have to deal with. There is absolutely no question that it is an untenable situation if a man or a woman can be put in prison for a minor offence and then find himself or herself raped by an Aids- infected prisoner, and then a minor sentence becomes a death sentence. That is an untenable situation.

There is also the question of the provisions which allow for the separation and testing of prisoners. I would hope that there would be some attempt - I believe the Bill allows for this - to separate people who have been tested for HIV.

But of course, there are great cost implications. I would like to hear the hon the Minister’s opinion on the testing side and on the administration of the whole process, apart from any legal aspects that I may have raised. I will separate any criticism of the Minister from the Minister himself because I have the highest personal admiration for him and I have known him for a long time. But the fact of the matter is that the hon the Minister said that a nation is judged by the way it treats its prisoners. I hope our nation is not going to be judged by the way we treat our prisoners.

I am not saying that people are not doing their best or that the hon the Minister is not doing his best. But, if one reads Dr Craven’s report, which was put before the Portfolio Committee, or other reports of the situation in Diepkloof, this is not something we can be proud of. I know that the hon the Minister is aware of it and that he is trying to do something about it. That is the difference, of course. But the fact of the matter is that Dr Craven, when he was briefing the Portfolio Committee in the Assembly on 2 October, said of the medical situation in Pollsmoor Prison that one was quite shocked at the alarming state of health, which could even become a danger to public health generally. We have noted that and I am quite sure that the hon the Minister and his department have noted that too. We wish him well.

This Bill represents a substantial movement forward. But there are matters that still need to be cleared up, as has been suggested by my colleagues in the Other Place in the committee and by my hon colleague Lever, on the question of awaiting-trial prisoners.

I think 60% of people in the prisons are, in fact, awaiting-trial prisoners, but they sit there for up to 18 months. It is an untenable situation, particularly when they are also exposed to health risks on top of the inconvenience and the problems of privation. I wish the Minister well. I know he means well. I know he is going to do his best. I know that there are improvements on the way.

We support the Bill. [Applause.]

Mr T S SETONA: Madam Chair, hon Minister, distinguished officials from the Department of Correctional Services, hon members of this august House, for us members of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Development, the tabling of this amending Bill this afternoon once more confirms the relevance of this House in the national legislative processes of our country.

It will have been noted by members of this House that this Bill has taken an unusually long period before tabling. I think the Minister and other speakers have referred to that, and why that particular situation occurred.

This was precipitated by the extraordinarily careful consideration the committee had to give to the Bill, through consultation with all relevant stakeholders and sharp contradictions between the Department of Correctional Services and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development on some aspects of the Bill, which relate to the concurrence of authority between the judiciary and the correctional services. It is worth mentioning that this was indeed not an easy process, but rather complex and at times riddled with tensions which the committee had to manage before finalising the Bill.

We are proud and confident to say that there were no major contentions pertaining to the objectives and the overall thrust of the Bill. We all agreed that something must be done to correct the appalling conditions of overcrowding in our prisons as a matter of urgency.

At the heart of the contention underpinning this Bill was the whole principle of the separation of powers between different branches of government in making interventions to address the inhuman overcrowding in our prisons. The Minister and the chairperson have referred to this point.

Clearly, the question of the conditions of prisoners is not something that we can take for granted, but it is a fundamental principle which is grounded within our Bill of Rights. In Chapter 2 section 35(2)(e) of our Constitution it is stipulated that:

Everyone who is detained, including every sentenced prisoner, has the right … to conditions of detention that are consistent with human dignity, including at least exercise and the provision, at state expense, of adequate accommodation, nutrition, reading material and medical treatment …

Given this, it is therefore clear that the Government has the duty, from time to time, to ensure that these conditions are adhered to and to provide a legislative framework to realise this. It is in this context that we welcome this Bill, with the hope that it will go a long way towards addressing the problems under discussion.

In enriching its grasp of the conditions of prisoners, the select committee has gone all out to visit flashpoint prisons in the Western Cape and Gauteng. I think some members have mentioned this a well. We did this to ensure that we did not rely on statistics that are hyped in the media, but saw for ourselves and also talked to prison management and prisoners about the conditions of prisons.

What transpired from this was not only shocking, but a gross violation of the supreme law of our country. We witnessed a situation where the cells were overpopulated to almost 250-300% levels. The striking feature of this overpopulation is that it only affects the awaiting-trial prisoners, amongst whom some have already spent more than a year in prison.

These appalling levels of overcrowding expose prisoners to health hazards, thus increasing the spread of diseases amongst the prisoners. They also allow acts of sodomy to go undetected by prison officials, thereby escalating the spread of the scourge of HIV/Aids, which is already spreading at an alarming rate in prisons.

Indeed as a nation and country, we dare not fail to address this problem. It is our problem, and not the problem of prisoners who are regarded as having caused untold misery to our people and therefore should be subjected to inhuman conditions, as some may view it.

It is worth mentioning that the correctional system in our country was never geared to serve the purpose of rehabilitation. It was a system in which all forms of dehumanisation were meted out against our people.

With the 1994 post-apartheid era, we ought to unite in vision, purpose and deeds to transform this system. The Bill before us this afternoon is doing precisely that.

Some concerns were raised in the course of public hearings cautioning that we may not create a situation through this Bill in which dangerous criminals and those that have committed serious crimes get released.

We can assure this House that the Bill is straightforward against the following category of awaiting-trial prisoners: those detained for murder, rape, robbery where the wielding of a firearm was involved, assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, assault of a sexual nature, and offences under any law relating to the illicit conveyance or supply of dependence-producing drugs or any conspiracy, incitement or attempt to commit any offence referred to in this schedule.

This Bill goes further to include domestic violence as defined in the Domestic Violence Act of 1998, and such offences as the Minister may prescribe by regulation.

On the question of the separation of powers, we are confident that there is no infringement by any branch of Government on another’s jurisdiction, as the principle of concurrence between the two Ministers, that is the Minister of Correctional Services and the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development, is being addressed in the amendment.

The committee is proud to report that regulation, subsequent to this Bill, will address the questions of terminally ill awaiting-trial prisoners who are currently not allowed to die a decent death at home. I think that this will address the concerns raised by Mrs Nkuna.

Relating to this is the issue of allowing awaiting-trial prisoners to attend funerals of their parents and loved ones. Thinking in terms of the African culture, we are bound to ensure from time to time that our laws are consistent with African traditions, norms and customs. We were told that if an awaiting-trial prisoner’s mother dies, he is not allowed to go and observe that ritual. It was our resolution at committee level, together with officials from the department, that as we map out the regulation, we need to address that particular concern as well.

Allow me to thank members of the opposition for their display of maturity in relation to this Bill. This has signified … [Time expired.] [Applause.] [Laughter.]

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Madam Chair, first, I would like to congratulate Kgoshi Mokoena on being appointed or elected as the chairperson of the select committee. I think, like his predecessors, he is doing as he said earlier on.

I also agree with him that we are trying to run one of the best correctional systems in the region, including some parts of the world. I must also admit that the Government’s policies of transparency have also been used against us, because some of the things we talk about and are dealing with now, like corruption and mismanagement, are presumed never to have happened in the past. Instead of being used as points in favour of the Government policies and the way they are going, these phenomena are sometimes exploited as points of weakness. We are trying to deal with corruption, and therefore we are labelled as corrupt. Those who did not want to deal with it were not corrupt, apparently. We ought to be careful lest we fall into the trap of simply using the spear against ourselves.

Yes, I agree with Kgoshi that the Bill is of a technical nature and it is up to us as politicians, managers and administrators to try and implement those provisions. We will try to implement them.

I remember at some point I used to be lambasted on the question of overcrowding and its consequences. After members had visited prisons or seen them in newspapers or on television, they would say that I was running five-star hotels. They have moved from this to the other extreme and are now claiming that I am ill-treating offenders. So where do I stand with hon members?

I am glad that members have shown an interest by visiting prisons to see what is happening. Maybe we should also make provision for the heads of prisons, as Mrs Nkuna has suggested, to appear before the select committee so that they can inform members why they are doing some of these things. We have about 240 prisons around the country. Sometimes, having seen the conditions of one, we tend to generalise. But we should try to be systematic about this and get to those who fall within that bracket that members have raised questions about. There are many prisons which are well managed and not overcrowded. There are those which are extremely overcrowded.

The question of overcrowding and awaiting-trial prisoners is an issue that magistrates and judges are being conscientised about. This is not a problem of Correctional Services. It has to do with the sentencing policies and also the attitudes of the magistrates. A member spoke about a 14-year-old fellow who had stolen grapes. If the magistrate had co-operated with the head of the prison, he would not have sent this fellow to prison, but sent him for correctional supervision. So we need this co-operation between these two institutions. I agree with the hon Mr Matthee that we have dealt with the separation of powers and I believe that the provisions in the Bill are sufficient to tackle some of the problems which might flow from these provisions. This would then make the Bill unconstitutional. I am satisfied that the select committee has dealt with this, as the hon member has suggested. I believe that some of the problems could also be dealt with in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977.

Prince Zulu was right about the consequences of overcrowding. We cannot run smooth programmes in rehabilitation once we are overcrowded. As I mentioned earlier, this is very difficult to do. I also agree with the hon member when he links rehabilitation with overcrowding. But the matter of which causes which becomes a major question. We should also move on and state that the high rate of recidivism, that is repeat offenders, is also due to the attitude of the public.

The public asks us to rehabilitate prisoners, and when they leave, having been rehabilitated and equipped with skills, they are not accepted by society; they are stigmatised and cannot find employment. One finds that society is also hostile towards former prisoners. They hunt around for employment and when they do not get employed, they remember that they used to get R5 000 hijacking cars but now they are not getting anything. They also remember that they used to get three meals a day in prison, so they ask themselves: Why am I staying here within this hostile society?

This is not only a prison problem, but a societal problem as well. If we do not accept them, they will land in prison again.

The hon Mr Lever was simply emphasising the question of the consultation of Ministers. We were satisfied and we will deal with that as Ministers and we will abide by those provisions in trying to deal with question of overcrowding. I think the issue of finger printing is now being dealt with, within the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the police, so it will be coming down to the Correctional Services. We need to have a systematic type of process there.

The hon member Nkuna reiterated the point about prisoners’ rights. They need to be treated humanely. The accommodation ought to be clean, there ought to be rehabilitation, recreation and church services. I think we have that in place.

The issue of the terminally ill prisoners has become a monkey on my shoulder now that I have said that I will deal with it. I think I need to deal with it in a more detailed way, because it also depends on who certified the person terminally ill.

Doctors come from the Department of Health. Whether the doctor has certified that person terminally ill, that is another question. If the doctor has, then we have to take it from there ourselves and use certain processes to relieve the situation. It is like the question of private hospitals. We do not say that a person or prisoner who is sick should go to a private hospital, but when a doctor says that a person is sick and she or he must go a certain hospital, that hospital which is a private hospital, then we have no choice. They do that. We need to deal with that situation. I think it is a very touchy point that has been raised about terminally ill prisoners.

I have come across one or two myself where applications were made. I think that we have relieved that stress. We need also the assistance and co- operation of doctors. Sometimes prisoners can be very devious. In many cases some of them would be sick. There are regulations, again according to which one takes the person to hospital. There must be some security measures that one applies. If one, say, removes the shackles or handcuffs in hospital, then the doctor should give that instruction, so that he can take responsibility.

If doctors do not say that, officials are also afraid just to take the shackles off the prisoners, because it has happened many a time that they have done that and the prisoner has escaped. All of a sudden he is fit and healthy, and he goes. [Laughter.] They are not dealing with ordinary people, but with people who are trying to leave the system. For 24 hours a day they are also thinking of how to leave the system.

We have prisoners who know constitutional law better than the prison officials. I have letters coming to me in which prisoners quote the Constitution from A to Z, saying that in terms of this or that section they ought to be paroled because of this or that provision. They quote the criminal law, and they read it because they do not want to be there. They want to leave the system. At times they use various devious methods to try to leave the system.

We are moving on with the programme of restorative justice. As I said, we believe that this is part of the healing process and the rehabilitation process, where a victim can also meet with the perpetrator and try to find out why this happened to her or to him. At times when we consider placing a person on parole we think that he or she needs to see the victim and somehow explain why some of these things happened to her. Whether it was rape or assault that took place, the person who wants to be placed on parole should also be courageous enough to say that he did certain thing to the victim and is sorry and admits that he should have not done it. Why did he do this to her?

At some point we know that when they are in prison they have graduated. When they are working in a workshop they do get money put aside for them. Others can even say, ``Look, I have been in prison for so many years and I have saved so much. Now I need to redress the situation by paying the school fees for the victim’s child for a year.’’ It depends on the cases, but we want to do things like this so that people can reconcile and restore faith and confidence in each other. [Time expired.]

Debate concluded.

Bill, subject to proposed amendments, agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AMENDMENT BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, the role of any legislature is to oversee executive action and not to participate in executive action.

This is the fundamental principle upon which the doctrine of the separation of powers rests. In South Africa, we have incorporated this principle in our Constitution, and have made it a requirement for open, democratic and accountable government. Section 9 of the Agricultural Research Act of 1990 has created a situation in which this principle is fundamentally compromised. It has involved the legislative arm in the appointment of members of the Agricultural Research Council, which is exclusively an executive function.

This amendment is therefore necessary to bring the procedure for the appointment of members to the Agricultural Research Council in line with the Constitution, and in particular with the principle of the separation of powers. Apart from the Constitutional argument, there is another reason why I think this amendment should be welcomed.

The Agricultural Research Council plays a very powerful role in terms of agricultural research. The council determines the policy and objectives of the ARC. It has control over its functions, the exercise of its powers and the execution of its duties.

Given the powers of the council in setting the agricultural research agenda, how do we ensure that its policy and objectives are aligned to the national agricultural policy and objectives of our democratic government? This question is of particular importance.

Given the fact that the private farming sector in South Africa plays a dominant and critical role in funding agricultural research, how do we ensure that the agricultural agenda is not manipulated by these private financing concerns for their own benefit, but is aimed at the development of our agricultural sector to the benefit of all South Africans, especially the poor and the previously disadvantaged?

This amendment somewhat allays fears, because the Minister is given the power to appoint members to the council who can ensure that the agriculture research agenda is not dominated by anybody seeking fulfilment of their own commercial needs, but is rather set by those who will ensure that agricultural research benefits the whole country.

Therefore the select committee supports this amending Bill. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Declaration of vote:

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, die Nuwe NP steun die wysigingswetsontwerp. [Chairperson, the New NP supports the amending Bill.]

We support the Bill. We want to state the fact that, although the parliamentary process has not been sidelined but changed through this, it is still important for the department to see to it that the committees be informed about the decisions and process in due time so that we can oversee where we have to.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON LAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL
         AFFAIRS - SADC REGION SHARED WATERCOURSES PROTOCOL

Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, in 1970 the United Nations General Assembly advised its International Law Commission to devise legislation that would govern the management of non-navigable waters.

This legislation would particularly concern shared watercourses. Drafting was started in 1974 and by 1997 the convention on the law on non-navigable uses of international watercourses was completed.

South Africa ratified this convention in 1998. Because two thirds of member states have yet to ratify it, this convention cannot be implemented. Due to the high demand for and scarcity of water in the SADC region, the countries of this region also sought to manage their shared watercourses. This gave birth to the protocol on shared watercourse systems in the SADC, and it was subsequently signed by member states in August 1995.

This protocol then called for an alignment with the UN convention, hence the birth of the revised protocol. The revised protocol aligns the protocol with the UN convention, embracing the principle thereof and paying particular attention to the environmental protection of water resources and current ecological concerns while, at the same time, ensuring that the revised protocol remains a genuine SADC instrument which articulates the region’s needs.

The protocol was adopted by the Ministers’ summit on 7 August 2000.

All the countries of SADC, with the exception of the Democratic Republic of Congo, signed the revised protocol, because the late president of the DRC, Laurent Kabila, failed to attend the heads of state meeting at which the signing took place. However, the DRC had been part of all the discussions leading to the protocol. The overall objective of this protocol is to foster closer co-operation for the judicious, sustainable and co-ordinated management, protection and utilisation of shared watercourses and to advance the SADC agenda of regional integration and poverty alleviation.

In order to achieve this objective, the protocol seeks to promote and facilitate the establishment of shared watercourse agreements and shared watercourse institutions for the management of shared watercourses; to advance a sustainable, equitable and reasonable utilisation of the shared watercourses; to promote the co-ordinated and integrated environmentally sound development and management of shared watercourses; to promote the harmonisation and monitoring of legislation and policies for planning the development, conservation and protection of shared watercourses and the allocation of the resources thereof; and to promote research and technology development information and exchange capacity-building in the application of appropriate technologies in shared watercourse management. All of these objectives are in line with the New Africa Initiative.

The utilisation of a shared watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner requires taking into account all the relevant factors and circumstances, including geographical, hydrological, climatical, ecological and other forces of a natural character, and the social, economical and environmental needs of the watercourse states concerned.

The population depends on the shared watercourse in each watercourse state, the effects of the use or uses of the shared watercourse, existing and potential uses of the watercourse, the conservation, protection, development and economy of use of the shared watercourse and the cost of measures taken to that effect, and the availability of alternatives of comparable value to a particular planned or existing use.

The protocol was of importance to South Africa. It sought to establish a management system for 60% of the water resources that we are sharing with other countries in the region. At present, South Africa is sharing four waterbasins, namely the Orange, Limpopo, Inkomati and Maputo Rivers, with our neighbouring countries. These four rivers represent the most developed transboundary watercourses in the region, and in several cases the demand exceeds the availability of water.

We shall also benefit from the protocol in that we shall exchange valuable information and data regarding the hydrological and hydrogeological water quality and the meteorological and ecological conditions of shared watercourses.

A number of joint commissions and technical committees have already been established to discuss and negotiate issues of common interest and to manage the water resources of the different places.

In conclusion, as the text of the revised protocol originates, substantially, from other international instruments that South Africa has already signed, there should be no objection to its ratification. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Report adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                  ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:

That the Council, subject to the concurrence of the National Assembly, establishes a joint committee in terms of Joint Rule 111 to consider the Revenue Laws Second Amendment Bill, 2001.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                 BIRTHDAY WISHES TO ARCHBISHOP TUTU

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr N M RAJU: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes that, on Sunday 7 October 2001 -

   *    a great South African;
   *    a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize;
   *    a lover of the human race;
   *    a former caddie;
   *    a great humorist;
   *    an opponent of Bantu Education;
   *    a flickering light in the darkness of apartheid;
   *    a stepper on toes of those who preached racial discrimination as
       a political philosophy;
   *    a preacher of truth and reconciliation;
   *    a paragon of virtue;
   *    a messenger of Christ and the Word of God;
   *    a lover of cricket, and vetkoek,  samoosas,  marshmallows,  Milo
       and Yogi Sip;
   *    a great but simple fellow compatriot; and
   *    in short, a lovable and adorable man, turned 70  years  of  age;
       and

(2) joins all South Africans and the world community …

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Your time has expired. [Interjections.] [Applause.] Order! Is there any objection to the motion? [Interjections.]

I must remind members that we have agreed time limits for motions, yet members consistently prepare motions that exceed the time that we have agreed. That is unacceptable. In fact, members have gone so far as to continue to read a motion even when the Chair indicates that their time has ended. I find that unacceptable and I am really not prepared to agree that we conduct ourselves in this way. Could members ensure that they prepare their motions in accordance with the time provisions on which we have agreed?

We will, Mr Raju, print the motion in full. Members can deduce from what was read that it is a motion of congratulation on the occasion of the 70th birthday of Archbishop Tutu. I was able to deduce that, and therefore I am sure that hon members would deduce that. Is there any objection to that motion? There is no objection.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                 BIRTHDAY WISHES TO ARCHBISHOP TUTU

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M V MOOSA: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council congratulates Archbishop Desmond Tutu on his 70th birthday in accordance with his virtues as set out in the kind words of the hon member Mr Raju.

[Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Mr Moosa, I am not quite sure what it is that you are attempting to do. We cannot move a motion on the same subject as a motion that has been agreed to by the House. I would expect you, as a person who has written many of the Rules that we utilise, to be fully aware of that. We will therefore not even consider what you said a few moments ago.

                 MANGAUNG AFRICAN CULTURAL FESTIVAL

                         (Draft Resolution)

Dr P J C NEL: Voorsitter, ek stel sonder kennisgewing voor:

Dat die Raad -

(1) kennis neem - (a) van Mangaung (die groter Bloemfontein) se eie kultuur- en kunstefees wat jaarliks plaasvind en vanjaar, vanaf 10 Oktober tot 14 Oktober, vir die vierde jaar aangebied word; en

   (b)  dat die ``Mangaung African  Cultural  Festival''  (MACUFE  2001)
       gisteraand in Bloemfontein deur  die  LUR  van  Sport,  Kuns  en
       Kultuur geopen is en feestelik afgeskop het;

(2) die LUR en sy Departement gelukwens met die inisiatief wat hulle neem;

(3) erken dat alle inheemse taalgemeenskappe hiervan moet kennis neem en die kultuur en geestesgoedere wat hulle geniet ook aan andere bekend moet stel en daardeur brûe bou wat kan meehelp om ‘n verenigde Suid- Afrika te bou; en

(4) verder kennis neem -

   (a)  dat  die  Vrystaat  almal  uitnooi  om  deel  te  neem  aan  die
       feestelike vermaak wat daar aangebied word by  die  groot  hart-
       fees wat poog om al  die  kulture  van  oor  die  hele  land  te
       verteenwoordig; en


   (b)  dat 109 produksies aangebied gaan word wat 'n totaal van  2  245
       kunstenaars, van wie  80  uit  die  buiteland,  se  talente  sal
       tentoonstel. (Translation of Afrikaans draft resolution follows.)

[Dr P J C NEL: Chairperson, I move without notice::

That the Council -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  Mangaung (greater Bloemfontein) has its  own  arts  and  culture
       festival that takes place annually and is presented  this  year,
       from 10 October until 14 October, for the fourth year; and
   (b)  the "Mangaung  African  Cultural  Festival"  (MACUFE  2001)  was
       opened last night in Bloemfontein by the MEC for Sport, Arts and
       Culture and that it commenced festively;

(2) congratulates the MEC and his Department on the initiative taken by them;

(3) recognises that all indigenous linguistic communities should take note of this and should make the culture and spiritual heritage that they enjoy known to others, thereby building bridges that may contribute to building a united South Africa; and

(4) further notes that -

   (a)  the Free State invites everyone to  take  part  in  the  festive
       entertainment offered at the great heart festival that seeks  to
       represent all the cultures from all over the country; and


   (b)  109 productions will be presented, showcasing the talents  of  a
       total of 2 245 artists, 80 of whom are from abroad.]

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

          FOREIGN INVOLVEMENT IN PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, ek stel sonder kennisgewing voor:

Dat die Raad -

(1) kennis neem dat -

   (a)   Suid-Afrika  'n  reputasie  het  as  'n  land  wat  buitelandse
       beleggings verwelkom en dat vryemarkaktiwiteite bevorder word;


   (b)  die ANC-regering hierdie  reputasie  in  stand  gehou  het  deur
       betyds die vroeëre besluit om buitelandse betrokkenheid in Suid-
       Afrika se privaatsekuriteitsbedryf te verban, te herroep;

(2) Minister Tshwete bedank dat hy die versoek en voorstelle hieroor aanvaar het;

(3) ook die Ministers van Handel en Nywerheid en van Finansies versoek om in die toekoms betrokke te raak wanneer besluite geneem word wat Suid- Afrika se handelsbetrekkinge kan bedreig en selfs kan vernietig; en

(4) van mening is dat hierdie ommeswaai illustreer dat opposisiepartye in ‘n werklike demokrasie nie as vyand ervaar hoef te word nie, maar as een van die bene waarop so ‘n demokrasie staan. (Translation of Afrikaans draft resolution follows.)

[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  South Africa  has  a  reputation  as  a  country  where  foreign
       investments are welcomed and where free  market  activities  are
       promoted; and


   (b)  the ANC Government has lived up to this reputation by  timeously
       revoking the previous decision to  ban  foreign  involvement  in
       South Africa's private security industry;

(2) thanks Minister Tshwete for accepting the request and the proposals in this regard;

(3) also requests the Ministers of Trade and Industry and of Finance to become involved in future when decisions are made that could threaten and even destroy South Africa’s trade relations; and

(4) is of the opinion that this about-turn illustrates that in a real democracy opposition parties need not be experienced as the enemy, but as one of the legs on which such a democracy stands.]

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

The Council adjourned at 18:04. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                     WEDNESDAY, 10 OCTOBER 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 9 October 2001 in terms  of
     Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill as  a  section  75
     Bill:


     (i)     Immigration Bill [B 79 - 2001]  (National  Assembly  -  sec
          75).


 (2)     The  Minister  of  Education  submitted  the   Wetsontwerp   op
     Gehalteversekering vir Algemene en Verdere  Onderwys  en  Opleiding
     [W 57 - 2001] (National Council of  Provinces  -  sec  76)  to  the
     Speaker and  the  Chairperson  on  9  October  2001.  This  is  the
     official translation of  the  General  and  Further  Education  and
     Training Quality Assurance Bill [B 57 - 2001] (National Council  of
     Provinces - sec 76), which was introduced in the  National  Council
     of Provinces by the Select Committee on  Education  and  Recreation
     at the request of the Minister of Education on 30 August 2001.


 (3)     The  Minister  for  Justice  and   Constitutional   Development
     submitted the Wysigingswetsontwerp  op  Geregtelike  Aangeleenthede
     [W 43 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) to the Speaker  and  the
     Chairperson on 10 October 2001. This is  the  official  translation
     of the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill  [B  43  -  2001]  (National
     Assembly - sec 75), which was introduced in the  National  Assembly
     by the Minister on 20 August 2001.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The President of the Republic:

 Report and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Presidency  for  2000-2001,
 including the Report of the Auditor-General on Financial Statements  of
 Vote 1 - Presidency for 2000-2001 [RP 168-2001].

1. The Minister of Finance:

 (a)    Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Development  Bank  of
     Southern Africa Limited for 2000-2001.


 (b)    Report of the Executive Officer of the Financial Services  Board
     on the Road Accident Fund for 1999-2000.

1. The Minister of Minerals and Energy:

 Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Department  of  Minerals  and
 Energy for 2000-2001, including the Report of  the  Auditor-General  on
 the Financial Statements of Vote 29 - Minerals and Energy for 2000-2001
 [RP 172-2001].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Alexkor Limited Amendment Bill [B 29 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 10 October 2001:

   The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Alexkor Limited Amendment Bill [B 29

   • 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

2. Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 63B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 10 October 2001:

   The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 63B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

3. Report of the Select Committee on Public Services on Provincial Visit to the Eastern Cape, dated 26 March 2001:

 The Select Committee on Public Services, having visited the Province of
 the Eastern Cape, reports as follows:


 A.     Introduction


     The Committee undertook the visit to deal with  matters  pertaining
     to rural  roads,  poverty  alleviation  projects  and  RDP  housing
     projects. The objective was to  obtain  first-hand  information  on
     progress with provincial roads and houses  engulfed  by  continuous
     floods and tornadoes, and the impact of disaster relief  programmes
     intended to reverse the catastrophe. This in turn  would  help  the
     Committee  to  recommend  what  should  be  done  to   remedy   the
     situation. The decision to undertake the visit, came  as  a  result
     of numerous calls from the different role-players  and  communities
     whose roads  and  houses  had  been  affected  by  the  floods  and
     tornadoes. The visit took place from 26 February to 1 March 2001.


 B.     Eastern Cape


     1. Delegation


          The delegation consisted of Chief M L Mokoena (leader  of  the
          delegation), Messrs M A Sulliman, B J Mkhaliphi and L Suka and
          Ms N D Ntwanambi. Mr M Nguqu (Committee Secretary)  and  Ms  K
          Pasiya (Committee Assistant) accompanied the delegation.


     2. Meeting with EG-Kei District Municipality


          Before the delegation visited communities and  undertook  site
          inspections, they had a meeting with members  of  the  Mayoral
          Committee  of  the  EG-Kei  District  Municipality  under  the
          leadership of Mr M Sogoni. After outlining the purpose of  the
          visit in the region to the  Municipality,  the  following  was
          conveyed to the Committee:


            The Municipality is funded by the  equitable  share  of  the
            national fiscus and other grants  to  construct  new  access
            roads and upgrade existing access roads, and the  proclaimed
            roads become the competency of the provincial Department  of
            Public Works. The Municipality  is  able  to  intervene  and
            construct the proclaimed district roads per arrangement with
            the Department. Since 1998, the EG-Kei Region has  been  hit
            hard  by  floods  every  year,  which   has   caused   rapid
            deterioration of  the  road  infrastructure  throughout  the
            region.


            The provincial Department of Public Works funded  the  roads
            hit by floods in the Mt Ayliff and Tabankulu  area  in  1999
            (an amount of R2,7 million). The Department arranged a plant
            unit with the Drakensberg District Municipality  to  upgrade
            the badly affected roads. The roads included the following:


            * T102 (Mt Ayliff) - 14 km
            * Sipundu Access Road (Mt Ayliff) - 2,5 km
            * Goso Access Road (Mt Ayliff) - 1,3 km
            * T110 (Tabankulu) - 11 km


            The Municipality is involved with site inspections  and  the
            certification of payments to the Drakensberg Plant Unit. The
            work started in August 2000 and is due for completion on  31
            March 2001.


            The national  Department  of  Public  Works  introduced  the
            Emergency  Reconstruction  Programme,   pioneered   by   the
            provincial Department of Public Works, and R12 312  630  was
            made available to  cover  the  former  Wild  Coast  District
            Council Area roads, including:


            * R56 Harding/Umzimkhulu Slip - Umzimkhulu
            * T77 Bridge Approach - Maluti/Mt Fletcher
            * T77 Road to Maluti
            * T005 - Bizana Slip
           * T017 from N2 (Mt Frere) to Cederville
            * T70 to Maluti
            * T11 Rietvlei to KZN (from R56 - T063)
            The  Department  appointed  Boonzaaier  Dotwana   Consulting
            Engineers to manage this allocation  and  monitor  progress.
            The Municipality is involved in monitoring the  progress  of
            these projects.


 C.     Group (on-site) visits


     1. Disaster Housing (27 February 2001)


          Damage assessment was done by  the  Provincial  Department  of
          Housing and Local Government, together with the  Municipality.
          Totally damaged and partially damaged houses were  identified.
          349 houses were totally damaged.  R3,5  million  was  received
          from the Department  of  Housing  and  Local  Government.  The
          balance at the time of the visit was R470 489,76. These  funds
          were transferred to the account of the Municipality.


          The funds for the partially damaged house  were  allocated  to
          the IDT. Of the 349 houses, the IDT built 50  houses.  All  in
          all, 263 houses were complete and 36 under construction.


          During the visit, the delegation managed to cover the Dutyini,
          Spundu and Mnceba areas in the district. The following data is
          based on the areas assessed by the Department of  Housing  and
          Local Government, jointly with the Municipality:


          AFFECTED VILLAGES    HOUSES COMPLETED


          Dutyini  98
          Siphundu 50
          Mnceba   50
          Goso      7
          Luxwesa   4
          Lwandlana       9
          Ngxabaxha      13
          Mbodleni  5
          Shenxa   13
          Lubhalasi       9
          Colana    5


     2. Findings


          The houses were not built up to standard. There was a lack  of
          supervision and monitoring. Builders were only trained  for  a
          period of  four  months  by  the  Department  of  Labour,  and
          thereafter contracted to  build  houses,  without  any  expert
          supervision on  site,  for  the  duration  of  and  after  the
          project. The houses are now dilapidated,  with  sinking  roofs
          and wall cracks.


     3. Disaster Roads (27 February 2001)


          (a) Spundu Access Road (Mt Ayliff): The road was completed  in
              November 2000, and is still in good condition.


          (b) T110 (Mt Ayliff): The road is under  construction  by  the
              Drakensberg District Council. On the other end,  the  road
              joins T109 - also affected by flood  disaster.  A  request
              was made  to  the  Drakensberg  District  Council  by  the
              Public Works Department to  extend  construction  work  to
              this road (T109).


          (c) T15 (from Mt Frere to Mt Fletcher): The road is bladed and
              not attended to. The Public Works Department  only  reacts
              when there  is  a  crisis  and  do  the  necessary  gravel
              patching  to  make  the  road  travellable.  Nevertheless,
              there is no consistency in maintaining the road properly.


          (d) T100 (Mt Frere) - Lugangeni Amabaca Great Place: The  road
              is in a very bad condition and the causeway  structure  is
              badly worn out. The  Royal  Family  of  the  Lugangeni  is
              located in the  vicinity  of  the  road,  and  failure  to
              attend the road has earned the Municipality the  wrath  of
              all traditional leaders, apparently  not  being  sensitive
              enough and caring enough about the plight  of  the  people
              living in the area. The road leads to the  largest  school
              in the district,  Makhawula  School,  which  has  a  state
              hostel. During heavy rainfall, it is difficult for  people
              to cross the road and access subsistence products, as  the
              bridge that links people with providers, is broken.  As  a
              result, the community remains stranded  for  a  couple  of
              days until the floods begin to  disappear.  The  road  was
              classified and prioritised  in  terms  of  the  Community-
              Based Public Works Programme, but  nothing  has  yet  been
              done.


          (e) T17 from N2 (Mt Frere) to Cedarville:  The  road  is  only
              halfway under construction (31 km). It is very bad on  the
              other side, and additional funding is  required  for  that
              portion (25 km).


          (f) T454 (Mt Frere), from T017 to Nomkholokotho: The  road  is
              in a state of disrepair, and bridge approaches  are  being
              washed  out  because  of  soil  erosion  from  both   ends
              (floods). Urgent attention is needed.


          (g) T98 Mt Ayliff/Mt Frere to Kokstad  -  (Umzimvubu  District
              Council): The road is the worst in the  area;  the  EG-Kei
              District  Municipality  is  doing   patch-gravelling   and
              repairs. However,  the  interventions  are  not  adequate,
              despite  the  road  being  prioritised  under  the   Floor
              Disaster Damage Programme.  The  Ndarala  (Mt  Frere)  and
              Gogela (Mt Ayliff)  communities  are  separated,  on  both
              sides of the road, by a fast-running river.  There  is  no
              bridge for the communities to  cross  over.  Students  and
              teachers from one side (Gogela) have to  cross  the  river
              on drums pulled along by  home-made  cables  in  order  to
              reach school on the  other  side  (Ndarala).  People  from
              Ndarala do the same to  reach  Gogela  when  traveling  to
              town. This  arrangement  (known  as  Gankankile)  is  very
              hazardous and dangerous.
     4. Disaster Roads (28 February 2001)


          (a) Maluti Department of Public Works Camp Site Machinery: The
              machinery is in a state of disrepair in the camp.  It  had
              not  been  utilised  for  some  time   (consequential   to
              personnel having nothing to do  on  a  daily  basis  since
              1994).


          (b) T69 from Maluti to Lesotho borders: The  Mpotseng  Village
              is located on this road. The road is  badly  damaged,  but
              still accessible. Reconstruction of  the  road  is  needed
              from T12 to  T646.  Continuous  grading  of  the  road  is
              insufficient because of water retention.


          (c)  T70:  The  Queensmercy  Village,  home  of  Chief  Jeremy
              Moshoeshoe, is located adjacent to this road. Through  the
              Disaster  Flood  Damage  Fund,  the  road  is   undergoing
              construction, and is about to be finished.


          (d) T77 (Mt Frere) from R56 to Lekgatlana: The bridge is under
              construction, but the road is  not  accessible  from  both
              ends. At present there is no plan to  construct  the  road
              on both  ends.  A  A  stream  has  been  opened  to  allow
              passengers to pass through,  but  this  is  hazardous  and
              dangerous, and people risk their lives.


          (e) T74 (Mt Fletcher) from R56  to  Tabachi-Cha  Village:  The
              road is badly  damaged  and  the  bridge  washed  away  by
              floods. At the moment the road is not attended to  despite
              being on tender and despite funds made  available  by  the
              Public Works Department.


          (f) T415 (Shepherds Hope) between T77 and  T74:  It  does  not
              resemble a road anymore; there are  only  dongas,  and  it
              needs urgent reconstruction. There is  no  plan  for  this
              road in the current financial year.  The  road  ("dongas")
              is supposed to serve as a link  between  Mt  Fletcher  and
              Maluti.


     5. Disaster Roads (1 March 2001)


          (a) R56 Slip  at  Embuzweni  Village  -  (Umzimkhulu  District
              Council):  Two  major  slips   are   under   construction.
              Progress is very slow due to a lack of adequate funds.  In
              respect of one of the slips, huge amounts  of  tax-payers'
              money was wasted because the  construction  work  was  not
              primarily performed properly and the same  contractor  was
              hired again by the provincial Department of  Public  Works
              to rework the project at extra costs.


     6. Findings


          There  are  three  Construction  Units  of  the  Public  Works
          Department in the province - Bambisana, Port Alfred and Graaff-
          Reinet -  with  lot  of  good  machinery.  The  Committee  was
          informed that the MEC  responsible  for  transport  and  roads
          committed himself to relocate these units to areas where  they
          are needed most, but up to now nothing has materialised.


          Labour production  is  very  low.  There  is  lack  of  proper
          supervision and monitoring of the  Public  Works  Department's
          personnel. The Committee was informed that the staff clock  in
          late, at 12:00, and knock off at 15:30. Working hours are from
          08:00 to 16:00. During the visit, some of the  employees  were
          found intoxicated during working hours.


          The Public Works Department's machines are  normally  standing
          still, either along the roads or at the house of the Mayor  of
          the Umzimvubu  District  Council,  and  are  not  utilised  as
          intended, on a daily basis. It takes from three weeks  to  one
          month to fix (pump) one single tyre of  a  Grader.  Mechanical
          parts are  removed  at  random  and  transferred  without  any
          supervision and/or audit from senior managers.


     7. Poverty Alleviation Projects (1 March 2001)


          RDP Housing


          (a) Ibisi Pilot Project (30 houses): An amount of R450 000 was
              received   for   the   construction   of   this   project.
              Construction started on 15 November 2000 - 15  houses  are
              completed, the  remaining  15  still  under  construction.
              Workmanship is up to an acceptable standard. The  trainees
              are  the  beneficiaries,  and  one  person   (expert)   is
              employed to look after them.  The  completion  date  aimed
              for was 31 March 2001.  Of  the  R450  000  state  subsidy
              grant, R315 000 is used for the  material.  The  remaining
              R135  000  is  meant  for  infrastructure.  An  amount  of
              R60 000   was   requested   from   the   EG-Kei   District
              Municipality to pay for labour. The Department of  Housing
              approved R15 000 for this project. R10 500  goes  straight
              to the top structure and  the  remaining  R4  500  to  the
              basic infrastructure.  There  is  no  electricity,  water,
              sanitation and/or drainage system in  place.  There  is  a
              lack of a social service infrastructure - schools,  sports
              grounds,  health  and  welfare  facilities  and  capacity-
              building programmes, aimed to lift the standard of  living
              of the community.


              Nevertheless, the size of the houses is 40 square metres.


          (b)  Clysdale  Cluster  (at  Umzimkhulu):  The   project   was
              completed in November 2000. It consists of  a  taxi  rank,
              washing  bay,  tyre  repairs,  rental  market  stands  and
              ablution facilities. The project  is  a  complete  fiasco,
              and is not utilised. The chances of  it  being  a  success
              are minimal. There is neither water nor  electricity,  and
              fencing is needed. Consultation between the  Public  Works
              Department  and  the  local  community  was  not  properly
              conducted.


          (c) Umzimkhulu Feedlot (at Ebutha Farm): The project has  just
              started, and is undergoing operational stages.


 D.     Recommendations
     1.  The  Committee  recommends  that  the  national  Department  of
          Transport adopt some of these  provincial  (proclaimed)  roads
          while  the  capacity  of  the  newly   restructured   District
          Municipality is built and/or moulded, in order  to  ultimately
          transfer the function of maintaining the infrastructure  roads
          to the District Municipality and channel funds to the District
          Municipality for implementation.


     2. Resources (be it machinery, personnel  or  finances)  should  be
          transferred to locations where there is  a  greater  need  for
          their utilisation, in order to enhance service delivery.


     3.  There  should  be  proper  planning  in  respect   of   project
          implementation amongst  the  various  cluster  departments  to
          integrate  the  delivery  of  services  (in  line   with   the
          Integrated Development Planning Process).
     4.  There  needs  to  be   proper   departmental   monitoring   and
          supervision of projects in respect of which  Public  Works  is
          expending state resources.


     5.  There  should  be  proper   consultation   between   government
          departments (particularly  Public  Works),  and  beneficiaries
          (whether as individuals or grouped as communities),  and  this
          should form the backbone that influences service  delivery  to
          our people.


 E.     Conclusion


     The visit was a complete success, and it became  evident  that  the
     roads in the region are turning into dongas and that  bridges  were
     being washed away. This  therefore  means  that  urgent  and  quick
     attention is necessary to restore roads in  order  to  improve  the
     lives of our people, particularly the rural and the poorest of  the
     poor.


     Nevertheless, the Committee is satisfied that it had attained  most
     of the objectives of its visit to the Eastern Cape.

                      THURSDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Minister for Provincial and Local  Government  withdrew  the
     following Bill on 11 October 2001:


     (i)     Disaster Management Bill [B 58 - 2001]  (National  Assembly
          - sec 76).


 (2)    The Minister for Agriculture  and  Land  Affairs  submitted  the
     Wetsontwerp  op  die  Herroeping  van  die  Wet  op   die   KwaZulu
     Suikerrietkwekersvereniging [W 48 - 2001] (National Assembly -  sec
     75) to the Speaker and the Chairperson on 11 October 2001. This  is
     the official translation of the KwaZulu Cane  Growers'  Association
     Act Repeal Bill [B 48 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec  75),  which
     was introduced in the National  Assembly  by  the  Minister  on  23
     August 2001.


 (3)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 11 October 2001 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(2), classified the following Bill as a  constitution
     amendment Bill (section 74):
     (i)      Constitution  of  the  Republic  of  South  Africa  Second
          Amendment Bill [B 78 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 74).

National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson: Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 11 October 2001: To be submitted to President of the Republic for assent:

 (i)    Counterfeit  Goods  Amendment  Bill  [B  27  -  2001]  (National
     Assembly - sec 75).


 (ii)Trade Practices Amendment Bill [B 34 - 2001] (National  Assembly  -
     sec 75).


 (iii)Agricultural Research Amendment Bill  [B  25B  -  2001  (Reprint)]
     (National Assembly - sec 75).

1. The Chairperson:

 Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces:


 Bills passed by National Assembly on 11 October  2001  and  transmitted
 for concurrence:


 (a)    Financial Intelligence Centre  Bill  [B  1B  -  2001]  (National
     Assembly - sec 75).
     The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee  on  Finance  of
     the National Council of Provinces.


 (b)    Repeal of Volkstaat  Council  Provisions  Bill  [B  59  -  2001]
     (National Assembly - sec 75).


     The Bill has  been  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Local
     Government  and  Administration  of   the   National   Council   of
     Provinces.

1. The Chairperson:

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


 (1)    The following paper is referred  to  the  Select  Commmittee  on
     Labour and Public Enterprises:


     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial  Statements  of  the
     South African Telecommunications Regulatory Authority for  1  April
     2000 to 30 June 2000 [RP 109-2001].


 (2)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Education and Recreation:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the High School Vorentoe Disaster Fund for the  year  ended
          31 March 2001 [RP 87-2001].


     (b)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the Foundation for Education, Science  and  Technology  for
          the year ended 31 March 2000 [RP 116-2001].


 (3)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Public Services:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the National Supplies Procurement Fund for the  year  ended
          31 March 2000 [RP 114-2001].


     (b)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the Urban Transport Fund for the year ended 31  March  2000
          [RP 90-2001].


 (4)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Security and Constitutional Affairs:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the Special Review of  the
          Deposit Account Administered by the Department of Justice  and
          Constitutional Development and Related Matters [RP 100-2001].


     (b)     Report and the Financial Statements of  the  Department  of
          Correctional Services for 2000-2001, including the  Report  of
          the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of  Vote  6  -
          Correctional Services for 2000-2001 [RP 148-2001].
 (5)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Finance:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the President's Fund for the year ended 31 March  2001  [RP
          99-2001].


     (b)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the State President's Fund for the financial year ended  31
          March 2001 [RP 97-2001].


     (c)     Report and Financial Statements of the Development Bank  of
          Southern Africa Limited for 2000-2001.


     (d)     Report of the Executive Officer of the  Financial  Services
          Board on the Road Accident Fund for 1999-2000.


 (6)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Social Service:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the Health Donations Fund for the year ended 31 March  2001
          [RP 96-2001].


     (b Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial  Statements  of
          the Social Relief Fund for year ended 31 March  2000  [RP  95-
          2001].


     (c)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the Refugee Relief Fund for the year ended  31  March  2001
          [RP 94-2001].


 (7)    The following papers are referred to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Economic Affairs:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements
          of the Independent Development Trust (Main Fund) for the  year
          ended 31 March 2000 [RP 76-2001].


     (b)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of
          Minerals and Energy for 2000-2001, including the Report of the
          Auditor-General on the  Financial  Statements  of  Vote  29  -
          Minerals and Energy for 2000-2001 [RP 172-2001].


 (8)    The following paper is  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Finance and  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Local  Government  and
     Administration:


     The Intergovernmental Fiscal Review for 2001 [RP 174-2001].


 (9)    The following paper is  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on
     Finance, the Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement  of  Quality
     of Life and Status of Women and to the Joint  Monitoring  Committee
     on Improvement of Quality of Life and  Status  of  Children,  Youth
     and Disabled Persons:


     Report and Financial Statements of the  Presidency  for  2000-2001,
     including  the  Report  of   the   Auditor-General   on   Financial
     Statements of Vote 1 - Presidency for 2000-2001 [RP 168-2001].


 (10)The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on  Local
     Government and Administration:


     (a)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of
          Public Service and Administration for 2000-2001, including the
          Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial  Statements  of
          Vote 24 - Public Service and Administration for 2000-2001  [RP
          15-2001].


     (b)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  South  African
          Management Development Institute for 2000-2001, including  the
          Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for
          2000-2001.


      (c)     Report and Financial Satements of the Public Service
          Commission for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements for 2000-2001 [RP 128-
          2001].