National Assembly - 01 April 2003

TUESDAY, 1 APRIL 2003 __


The House met at 14:02.

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


                     CHANGES IN PARTY MEMBERSHIP


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, I have to announce the changes in party membership that have occurred in terms of Schedule 6(A) to the Constitution. Mr M N Ramodike had, on 27 March, left the UDM and formed a new party called the Alliance for Democracy and Prosperity. The following members left the DP and joined the DA: Mr P J Schalkwyk, on 27 March, Mr M C Lowe and Adv H C Schmidt, on 31 March and Mr N S Bruce, on 1 April. [Applause.] Order, hon members! The following members have left the UDM and joined the ANC: Mr L C Mothiba, on 31 March and on 1 April, Mr T Abrahams, Mr S Abram, Mr C T Frolick, Dr G W Koornhof, Mr G W Makanda, Mr L M Mbadi and Ms Annelizé van Wyk. [Applause.] Order! Order! Hon members!

                       CONGRATULATIONS TO SAA

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr J DURAND: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) notes that the South African Airways won three awards at the Association of South African Travel Agents (Asata) congress held at Sun City and that SAA was also voted the best airline in Africa for the third consecutive year by Skytrax, a British-based airline benchmarking company;

(2) further notes that SAA was voted by travel agents and tour operators the Best African Airline, Best Domestic Airline and Best International Airline flying to South Africa; and

(3) congratulates SAA with the outstanding achievement.

Agreed to.

                      DECISION TO JOIN THE ANC

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr S ABRAM (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, our decision to join the ANC was well considered and it is the result of intensive soul searching. It is the expression of our collective resolve and commitment to build a new South Africa and not to add further bricks onto the laager on the other side. [Applause.] Our country has a model Constitution that is underpinned by appropriate transforming pieces of legislation, reflecting its values. We realise, however, that as a country we have not yet fully achieved the objectives embodied in the Constitution. We are seized with the responsibility of reconciliation and nation-building. We recognise that this can best be achieved by hard work in the ANC. We believe that our humble gesture brings with it experience, skills, youthful vigour, ethnic and cultural diversity to reinforce the work already begun and not a whole lot of worms. [Applause.] Our move is testimony that a stage in history has now been reached when we must pool our resources and tackle the challenges that lie ahead. It is the most patriotic thing to do. Thank you. [Applause.]

                        DA's ECONOMIC POLICY

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr K M ANDREW (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, a job is often the difference between opportunity and hope, and poverty and despair. The DA’s overriding short-term goal is to stimulate faster economic growth and at the same time create jobs. South Africa must make a single-minded commitment to boost economic growth and reduce unemployment, otherwise all the other challenges we face will become insoluble. The DA’s economic policy, released yesterday, sets out how to improve our economic performance. Key elements include: making economic growth non-negotiable; simplifying labour laws to encourage job creation; providing support and opportunity for small and medium enterprises; establishing export processing zones to provide employment for unskilled workers; actively encouraging the immigration of skilled personnel; and introducing certainty and transparency to black economic empowerment.

Growth and opportunity are the keys. People need access to skills and opportunities. South Africa needs foreign direct investment, but we also need to set our people and businesses free to operate efficiently, profitably and responsibly. Only then can we beat the scourges of unemployment and poverty.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mr T E VEZI (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, it has emerged from media reports that members of medical aid schemes would in future have to be prepared to pay substantial sums in advance for admission to a hospital. They would in many cases also be asked to give up their traditional medical practitioner in favour of a doctor who is a member of a large group of general practitioners involved in the medical fund.

This is according to the Chief Executive Officer, N M G Levy, of a firm of actuaries which advises medical aid companies. We hope that this arrangement will not lower the standard of medical treatment and that it will not put patients and lives at risk should they fail to pay hospitals in advance for admission thereto.

The reports also stated that many state hospitals were already entering into public/private partnerships and some would be offering step-down facilities in future so that medical aid members could be treated more cheaply in a Government hospital’s private wards. I thank you.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mr F BHENGU (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker …

Ziyenziwa izinto. [Things are done] On Friday, 28 March 2003 the Minister of Safety and Security unveiled a recently renovated police station in Sajonisi [Port St Johns] in the O R Tambo District Municipality in the Eastern Cape. The renovations to this police station, which had been dilapidated for a long time, included the building of a holding cell, a trauma unit, a child protection unit, and a domestic violence unit.

Kha umamele ke. [Listen.]

This is R70 million worth of state of the art renovations will contribute positively to our stated objective of ensuring that there is peace and friendship amongst our people. This positive initiative is also in line with our view that the creation of a better life for all includes the safety and security of our citizens.

Nantsi into emnandi. [Here is something interesting.]

It is heartening to note that this investment to the safety and security of our people also makes a direct contribution to the fight against crime perpetrated against women and children, as well as to efforts aimed at consolidating and strengthening our victim empowerment system. This initiative will soon be extended to the Majola area and that is also most welcome. If it be remembered that Port St Johns is one of our tourist attractions, then these developments also carry with them the possibility of yielding positive economic rewards for the local communities in particular and South Africa in general. We call on both the South African … [Interjections.] [Time expired.] [Applause.]


                        (Member's Statement)

Mev M E OLCKERS (Nuwe NP): Adjunkspeaker, Suid-Afrikaanse skole het ‘n diepgewortelde godsdienstige karakter wat hulle nie sommer sal prysgee nie. Histories benadeelde gemeenskappe het veral sterk gevoelens hieroor. Die Nuwe NP glo elke skool moet die reg hê om sy eie etos te bepaal ten opsigte van godsdiensonderrig. Die beheerliggame moet dus kan besluit oor die godsdiensonderrig mits dit in ooreenstemming met die Grondwet van Suid- Afrika is en daar vir kinders wat nie die spesifieke geloof beoefen nie, ander reëlings getref word.

Die Nuwe NP glo ook in geval van ‘n vergelykende studie van godsdienste soos voorgeskryf deur die nuwe kurrikulum behoort sodanige vergelyking aangebied te word deur goed onderlegde onderwysers vanuit ‘n uitgangspunt wat die etos van die skool weerspieël. ‘n Vergelykende studie tussen godsdienste behoort voorts eers aangebied te word wanneer die leerders se eie godsdiensoortuigings gevestig is.

Onder alle omstandighede moet die godsdiensbeskouing van alle leerders, waar moontlik, eerbiedig word en mag daar teen geen leerder gediskrimineer word op sterkte van geloof nie. Skoolhoofde en onderwysers moet poog om elke kind se spesifieke omstandighede in ag te neem en aandag daaraan te gee op ‘n wyse wat vir die kind en sy ouers aanvaarbaar is. Sodoende sal die skole ‘n baie belangrike rol in die nasiebou van Suid-Afrika speel. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)

[Mrs M E OLCKERS (New NP): Deputy Speaker, South African schools have a deep-rooted religious character, which they will not easily give up. Historically disadvantaged communities, especially, have strong feelings about this. The New NP believes that every school should have the right to determine its own ethos with regard to religious instruction. The governing bodies should therefore be able to decide about religious instruction, provided that this in accordance with the Constitution of South Africa, and that other arrangements are made for children who do not practise the specific religion concerned.

The New NP also believes that in the case of a comparative study of religions, as prescribed by the new curriculum, such a comparison should be presented by well-equipped teachers from a perspective that reflects the ethos of the school. A comparative study of religions should moreover only be presented once the learners’ own religious beliefs have been established.

Under all circumstances the religious observances of all learners, where possible, should be honoured and no learner may be discriminated against on the basis of beliefs. School principals and teachers should attempt to take the specific circumstances of every child into consideration, and to deal with these in a manner that is acceptable to the child and his parents. In this way, schools will play a very important role in the nation-building of South Africa. Thank you.]

Rre J T MASEKA (UDM): Motlatsa Modulasetilo wa Palamente, go utlwisa botlhoko go bona madi a a kana ka dimileone di le R143 a sa dirisiwa mo Lefapheng la Bosiamisi le Tlhabololo ya Molaotheo mme a boela morago go ramatlotlo ntswa go na le mathata a madi mo lefapheng.

Go na le mathata a le mantsi mo Lefapheng la Bosiamisi le Tlhabololo ya Molaotheo mo diporofenseng di le dintsi. Batho ba tshwanelwa ke go tsamaya maeto a maleelo go ya kwa dikgotlatshekelo ka gonne di le kgakala le kwa ba nnang teng. Se se diegisa tsamaiso ya kgotlatshekelo ka gonne bangongoregi, dipaki, basekisiwa ba sa kgone go fitlha ka nako ka ntlha ya bokgakala jwa dikgotlatshekelo. Melato e mengwe e a tshololwa ka gonne dipaki di sa kgone go fitlha kwa dikgotlatshekelong ka ntlha ya bokgakala jwa tsona le go tlhokega ga madi a go ya kwa go tsona.

Gantsi ke batho ba kwa magaeng ba ba kopanang le mathata a bokgakala jwa dikgotlatshekelo tseo gantsi di bonwang mo ditoropong le metsesetoropong. Bontsi jwa batho ba ga ba dire fela ba tshwanelwa ke go dirisa dinamelwa tsa botlhe go bona ditirelo go tswa dikgotlatshekelong. Lefapha le tshwanela go dira ka maatla go ka aga dikgotlatshekelo kwa batho ba ka di fitlhelelang teng ntle le mathata. (Translation of Tswana speech follows.)

[Mr J T MASEKA (UDM): Deputy Chairperson, it is heartbreaking to see an amount of R143 million not being used in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and being returned to the Treasury when there are money problems in the department.

There are many problems in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development in many provinces. People are forced to undertake long trips to the courts because the courts are far from where they stay. This delays the running of the courts because the complainants, witnesses and the accused are not able to arrive on time because the courts are very far from them. Some cases are dismissed because witnesses are not able to arrive at the courts because the courts are very far from them and they lack funds to reach them.

Mostly it is the people from rural areas who are faced with the problem of the courts being far away and they are mostly situated in towns and townships. Most of the people are not employed but they are supposed to use public transport to access services from the courts. The department should work hard to build courts where the people can access them without difficulties.]

                       CONGOLESE PEACE ACCORD

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr O BAPELA (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, in my constituency in Gauteng, there are a lot of Congolese who fled their country because of war and poverty. These people have not known peace in the last four decades and more. Their latest peace developments give the Congolese hope.

The recent peace accord signed by the Congolese late last year and the recent developments around the restructuring of security forces give new hope for the people of that country. The agreement and the formation of the Government of National Unity by all the parties who took part in the negotiations is a single greatest gift to all the people of the DRC and Africa. This is the dream that Patrice Lumumba lived and died for. This is a tribute to him and all the Congolese who laid down their lives for the sake of freedom. It is in this context that Africa presents an example to the world on how to resolve wars and conflict through negotiations, respect of international law, multilateral institutions and political diplomacy. It goes contrary to the way some industrial countries are handling the Iraqi situation. [Applause.]

                            SARS DISEASE

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr S N SWART (ACDP): Madame Deputy Speaker, it is with regret that the ACDP notes that World Health Organisation official Carlo Embani, an expert in communicable diseases who identified the outbreak of the killer Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS, died of the disease last Saturday.

His death came as the WHO said 56 people worldwide had died from the disease. A total of 1500 people are now believed to be infected with it. Certain countries such as Singapore have taken drastic steps to contain the spread of the disease, including issuing new quarantine orders to airline passengers from Beijing, imposing mandatory home quarantine on more than 1500 people, and putting 600 000 schoolchildren on holiday.

Cases have also been reported in the United States and Canada. The question arises as to whether the South African Government is taking sufficient preventative steps to prevent the outbreak of this disease. The ACDP trust that stringent quarantine orders have been issued to travellers travelling from Southern China, where the illness is thought to have emanated from.

The ACDP is particularly concerned that, by all accounts, antibiotics and antiviral drugs have proved ineffective in combating the disease. Whilst South Africa is striving to deal with the ravages caused by HIV/Aids, we need to take every precaution possible to prevent the spread of this new killer disease. I thank you.

                         ROAD ACCIDENT FUND

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr J CRONIN (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, many of us in our constituencies, I think, encounter members of the public … [Interjections.]


Mr J CRONIN (ANC): …who have serious problems with the Road Accident Fund. The fund is often very inaccessible to them. When they put in claims, these often take a very long time to process, and awards often seem quite arbitrary. As a result of these complexities Government set up a Road Accident Fund Commission, headed by Judge Satchwell. That commission has now reported with a very substantial three-volume report.

It finds that the present Road Accident Fund dispensation receives some 2,7 billion rands’ worth from the fuel levy, but is not working well. The fund is not sustainable in its present form. Something like 40% of its budget seems to go to professional fees and does not go to the victims of road accidents. There also seem to be many inequities in the system.

The commission has now recommended that we change to a road accident benefit scheme as part of a wider and expanded social security system.

As the ANC, we now really look forward to Government responding expeditiously to the commission’s recommendations. We really hope that we can move with some legislation as soon as possible to enable a significant transformation of this important area that can result in a very significant redistribution of resources to those who most deserve them. Thank you.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mr W J SEREMANE (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, President Mbeki is the architect of Nepad, and he now runs the risk of becoming the architect of Nepad’s failure, because he has failed to back democracy in Zimbabwe. [Interjections.]

President Mbeki’s unimpressive inaction on Zimbabwe is fooling no-one. Ordinary Zimbabweans have again confirmed their opposition to the ZANU/PF government by voting overwhelmingly for the MDC in two by-elections yesterday, thereby denying President Mugabe’s quest for a two-thirds majority in Parliament. And the UK Minister for Africa, Valerie Amos, said bluntly:

Foreign investors fear that Nepad won’t work. They question that an African Peer Review Mechanism can really work if African pressure is so low-key, and so little heeded as appears to be the case in Zimbabwe. Africa’s economic recovery cannot be left to leaders whose first obligation is to preserving their positions rather than serving their people.

It is time, perhaps, for the ANC, to use the buzzword, to ``cross the floor’’ and join those fighting for true democracy in Africa. I thank you. [Applause.]

                            TAXI INDUSTRY

                        (Member's Statement)

PRINCE N E ZULU (IFP): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. It is welcome news that the Ndondakusuka Municipality in Mandeni, which is my constituency, has completed its plan, in collaboration with the iLembe District Council, to upgrade the taxi rank in Sundumbili township.

This development was initiated in the mid-80s, but because of financial implications it could not get off the ground until a new local government authority had been elected. The taxi industry is one of those initiatives black people of this country should pride themselves on as founders of the business.

It started as an illegal private business, but because of the unwavering support of the founding fathers it has survived many onslaughts by previous governments until this point in time. We believe that the upgrading of the Sundumbili taxi rank will be welcomed by Isithebe commuters, in particular, and the Mandeni community in general. Thank you, Madam.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mr M S MANIE (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, all domestic workers who work more than 24 hours per month are covered by the Unemployment Insurance Fund or UIF as from today, 1 April 2003. These workers have for years suffered the worst form of exploitation. For the first time domestic workers will enjoy the benefits of being covered by the UIF. They will be able to claim the following: unemployment benefits, illness benefits, maternity benefits, adoption benefits and dependent benefits.

The employer is responsible for forwarding the contributions to the UIF on a monthly basis. It is, however, possible to pay these contributions in a lump sum for the whole year. If more than one employer employs a domestic worker, they should all register separately with the UIF. The amount of the contribution is 1% by the employer and 1% by the employee of the employee’s monthly salary. All employers of domestic workers must remember that failure to register a domestic worker could make them liable to a fine not exceeding R5000, or five years in jail. The Department of Labour will be doing random checks to see whether people have registered their domestic workers, and whether they have written employment contracts with them.

Forms to register can be obtained from the various labour centres throughout the country, or can be taken off the Department’s website, which is All members are encouraged to set an example by having their domestic workers registered and they should also encourage their family and friends to do likewise. Thank you.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mr S SIMMONS (New NP): Adjunkspeaker, agb lede, die agb Doman het as Minister van Plaaslike Regering die volgende boodskap gehad vir DA-lede wat hom probeer werf het. Ek haal aan uit die Hansard van Dinsdag, 25 Junie 2002:

Ten slotte, mnr Theuns Botha was telefonies met my in verbinding. Ek het gedink die oproep gaan oor die saak, maar hy het my gevra of ek nie wil oorloop na die DA nie, en gesê dat ek sommer ‘n hoë pos sal kry. Ek het hom ongelukkig teleurgestel deur te sê dat ek nie kans sien daarvoor nie, en so ook vir die ander mense wat soortgelyke oproepe gemaak het. Ek het basies vir hom gesê: ``Ek leef eerder saam met die Nuwe NP as wat ek wil doodgaan saam met die DA.’’

Die Nuwe NP aanvaar dat die DA se boodskap nou vir die agb Doman as gewone parlementslid aanlokliker gelyk het. Die Nuwe NP wil die agb Doman daaraan herinner dat hy vir homself ‘n eenrigtingskaartjie gekoop het, en dat sy rituele selfmoord nou begin het. Dit gaan nie lank duur voordat die agb Kamikaze Doman se doodsverlange realiteit word in die DA nie. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)

[Mr S SIMMONS (New NP): Deputy Speaker, hon members, the hon Doman, as Minister of Local Government, had the following message for DA members who tried to recruit him. I quote from Hansard of 25 June 2002:

In conclusion, Mr Theuns Botha was in contact with me telephonically. I thought that the call was about this matter but he asked me whether I did not want to cross over to the DA and said that I would get a high ranking position. I unfortunately disappointed him by saying that I do not see myself doing that, and said the same to the people who made similar calls. I basically told him the following,I would rather live with the New NP than die with the DA’’.

The New NP accepts that the DA’s message to the hon Doman now as ordinary member of Parliament looked more attractive. The New NP wants to remind the hon Doman that he bought a one-way ticket for himself and that his ritual suicide has now begun. It won’t take long before the hon Kamikaze Doman’s death wish becomes a reality in the DA. Thank you.]

                         FIGHTING CORRUPTION

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr P J GOMOMO (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, tomorrow the Minister of Public Service and Administration will be tabling, in Parliament, the Country Corruption Assessment Report. This Report represent the views of the private sector, Government and institutions of civil society. The fight against corruption cannot only be left to Government. Business and, in particular, civil society have an important role to play in educating people about corruption and, most importantly, about what members of the community should do when they witness acts of corruption.

This Government has established the political and legal environment to fight corruption. There are laws that allow access to information for whistle-blowing, and the protection of whistle-blowers. State and constitutional structures, such as the Public Protector, the Scorpions and other Government institutions, are there to assist in the fight against corruption.

We are making major advances in building a society free of corruption. Fighting corruption needs shared responsibilities between important stakeholders. Government alone cannot succeed. Let’s work together to fight corruption.

                      TRANSFORMATION IN SA NAVY

                        (Member's Statement)

Mr S N SWART (ACDP): Madam Deputy Speaker, the ACDP is concerned about media reports regarding the fact that the SA Navy is making a potentially disastrous mistake in shedding many of its most experienced seamen just before the delivery of new corvettes, according to retired Admiral Chris Bennet.

It apparently takes more than seven years to train a captain of a Navy ship, and the captains of these new corvettes should at least have 14 to 15 years of experience. According to the report there is no way that personnel can be trained before the first corvette is delivered, and that the new ships are very sophisticated. The plan to man ships, with the technology of the 21st century, with personnel trained in 1960s technology is unacceptable, and the ACDP would like to voice its objection and complaints regarding this plan in transformation. I thank you.

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, could I address you on a point of order? Firstly, we want members to observe the decorum of the House in terms of the level of noise, commotion, in the House and that Mr Nigel Bruce must desist from reading a newspaper in the Chamber. So we accordingly ask that members observe the decorum of this House. Thank you.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you for that. Indeed, if there are any members who are reading newspapers, I would ask that they desist from doing so.


                        (Member's Statement)

Mnr L J MODISENYANE (ANC): Mevrou die Speaker, geslotebaankringtelevisie en addisionele sekuriteitspersoneel sal in die nabye toekoms by Mitchells Plain en Khayelitsha ontplooi word in ‘n poging om die heersende vlaag van misdaad in hierdie ekonomies ontwikkelende gebiede te bekamp. Hierdie kameras sal langs die belangrikste roetes, sowel as oor lyne en stasies ontplooi word. Dit sal deel vorm van die omvattende stedelike vernuwingstrategie wat hopelik die apartheidsgeskepte voorstede in ekonomiese middelpunte sal omskep.

Die geslotebaantelevisiekameras vorm deel van die ANC-Nuwe NP koalisie om misdaad in die townships te bekamp. Dit sluit ook die 150 vrywillige lede in wat vanaf 3 April 2003 by stasies ontplooi sal word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr L J MODISENYANE (ANC): Madam Speaker, closed circuit television and additional security staff will be deployed in the near future in Mitchells Plain and Khayelitsha in an attempt to combat the prevailing wave of crime in these economically developing areas. These cameras will be utilised along the most important routes, as well as over lines and stations. This will form part of the comprehensive urban renewal strategy which will hopefully transform the apartheid-created suburbs into economic hubs.

The closed circuit television cameras form part of the ANC-New NP coalition to combat crime in the townships. This also includes the 150 voluntary members who will be deployed at stations from 3 April 2003.]

Eli nyathelo lihle kangaka lokufakelwa kwezi khamera libonakalisa ukuzimisela kukaRhulumente wabantu ekulweni ubudlobongela nokwakha impilo engcono kubantu bonke bakweli. Siyalamkela eli nyathelo lihle kangaka. Sinethemba lokuba kuya kwenziwa ngolu hlobo nakwezinye iindawo. [Kwaqhwatywa] (Translation of Xhosa paragraph follows.) [This decision to install cameras by the Government proves the commitment of the Government of the people to fight violence and criminality, as well as to provide good living conditions for all the people in this country. We welcome this initiative from the Government. We hope that this will be done in other places as well. [Applause.]]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Does any Minister wish to respond to a statement directed at him or her, or concerning the Minister’s portfolio? [Interjection.] I call on the hon ``Eveready’’ Asmal. [Laughter.]


                        (Minister's response)

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Perhaps the light shines, but the batteries are pap [flat]. Deputy Speaker, I think the hon Martha Olckers should get her act together. Yesterday I learnt that the New NP had requested a meeting with the ANC to discuss this matter. Of course, I am pleased to be able to explain something that has been in the process of being worked out for three and a half years. But I ask hon Olckers not to use inflammatory language and words. Only the leader of the DP, not the DP, tried to use the language issue in Stellenbosch to say the Government is opposed to Afrikaans. The New NP tried to do that too. They looked into the collective soul also, not a very good idea, and a proposal was announced at the end of November. All the universities accepted that and there was no statement of regret but a leader of a party and a party itself was trying to inflame opinion.

In the same way this process has finally ended by being sent to the Standing Advisory Council on Religion in Education, made up of all faiths in South Africa and they are in support of this policy. But the intolerance associated with instruction, very badly done, which excludes often Jews, Moslems and Hindus and atheists, because they are not part of the framework, of the constitutional right to say we shall excuse ourselves from that assembly, or whatever ceremony it is, draws attention to the child and the attention which is being drawn to that child is a bad thing.

In the end the President’s Council or where the religious leaders meet accepted, first of all, that teachers cannot teach because they have no training in the matter of religious instruction. Secondly, in the national curriculum statement religion education is now part of the curriculum and examinable. On the contrary, this approach of trained teachers accepting learning materials will bring back the kind of spontaneous spiritual values that in the present system we miss in our school system.

So I ask the New NP to wait for that teaching lesson that you will have about the programme that has been very much in the public domain and not to raise last-minute issues. I think that this that this is a development that everyone in South Africa should embrace as part of the insertion of morality and the constitutional principles into the school system. Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

                      UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE

                              (Rulings) The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Members, I have to give a ruling. During the debate on the Social Development Vote in the House on 27 March the deputy Chief Whip of the majority party, on a point of order, requested the hon Southgate to withdraw an allegation that she had directed at the Minister of Social Development. I undertook to look at the Hansard and give a ruling at the earliest opportunity. According to the unrevised Hansard, the hon Mrs Southgate, referring to a function at which the Minister would be handing out food parcels, went on to state:

What I do know, and I have the facts, is that the ANC is giving food parcels to ANC people.

She also said:

They are using taxpayers’ money to go out there and give food to people where 1 190 families will be bused in.

The hon member clearly suggested that the hon Minister would be involving himself in an event at which state resources under his control were to be misused for party-political purposes. It is quite unacceptable for a member to make such an allegation in the House during the course of debate. Such an allegation can only be brought to this House by way of a properly motivated substantive motion.

I note that after further points of order Mrs Southgate did, in fact, withdraw the statement, but she then went on to repeat what she claimed were facts and her concerns. I am not satisfied that she withdrew the allegation against the Minister unconditionally. I must now ask her to do so. I now recognise the hon Mrs Southgate.

Mrs R M SOUTHGATE: Mr Chair, through you to the Minister, I withdraw that statement unconditionally. Thank you. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Thank you hon member. I would like to make another ruling. When the hon Minister of Social Development replied to the debate on his Vote on 27 March, a point of order was taken concerning a remark that he had directed at the hon Mrs Southgate. I undertook to give a ruling on that point of order as well as on an earlier point of order which had been raised against a remark made by the hon Mrs Southgate, after I had looked at Hansard.

The unrevised Hansard indicates that the hon Minister, responding to the hon Mrs Southgate’s speech, said:

The issue is not to show off the mini skirt here, but to speak directly on issues. I realise that the hon Minister made this remark in response to an allegation made against him by the hon Mrs Southgate. Nevertheless, I regard the hon Minister’s remark as sexist, derogatory and an attack on the hon member’s integrity. I must request the hon Minister to withdraw it. I now recognise the hon Minister.

The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Withdrawn, Your Excellency. Thank you. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon Minister.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

Debate on Vote No 26 - Agriculture:

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, my colleagues, the MECs of agriculture from different provinces, our guests who are here, our partners Nafu and AgriSA, as well as the beneficiaries of our land and agricultural reform, the packages of fruit in front of you that you received when you came in are not April fools’ tricks. For those of you who didn’t receive them, we will ask you when you go out at the end of the debate to take your parcels - it means you were late for the start of the Assembly. I must say that it is a token of appreciation from the agricultural sector to yourselves as members of the legislature, but also as consumers of our goods. It is also a gentle reminder of the wealth of diversity in products from the land.

A year ago we reported on the conclusion of a social compact between Government and farmers’ organisations in support of agricultural development. We also ensured that our budget and strategic plan as a department reflected the commitment that we had made in the agricultural sector plan. It is our view that for this social compact to remain, all the partners need to mobilise relevant resources that will support it.

The experience of the past year in moving from strategy to action, with respect to implementation of the sector strategy, has taught us a range of lessons. It is important for us to indicate that these lessons will serve as building blocks for enhancing agriculture’s contribution towards pushing back the frontiers of poverty and working for a better life for all.

At one level, we have some wonderful stories to tell about how people individually and collectively have responded to the call to work together for a better life for all. Today, in this Parliament, we have Mr and Mrs Ludidi from eLukholweni village at Mount Frere in the Eastern Cape. Could they stand up so that we can all see them. [Applause.] Thank you very much. This is a couple who felt that, as citizens of South Africa, they can contribute a little of what they have in order to plough back to the community that brought them up but also a community that supported them as a small business in that village. They chose to contribute to sustainable food security at local level by buying and donating two tractors to the village so that the community can plough the fields and provide food for themselves. [Applause.]

They did not end with that, they also built a school in order to ensure that the Government’s objective of improving the level of our human resource development is attained. Mr and Mrs Ludidi are like me and you. The challenge that they pose to all of us is to do something for the communities that have brought us where we are today.

Siyanibulela Mama Ludidi noTata Ludidi. Siyazidla ngani njengabeni baseMzantsi Afrika. Inene, nasebunzimeni lisoloko likhona ithemba. [We thank you Mr and Mrs Ludidi. We are proud of you as South African citizens. Indeed even during hardship there is always hope.]

You are a living example of what the President said in his state of the nation address last year that we all need to do something in order to push back the frontiers of poverty and underdevelopment. Thus we can say with confidence that, indeed, the tide has turned for the people of South Africa. The winds of change have prevailed as a result of the partnerships between Government and people. We now move steadily to new shores of hope and prosperity, confident that we will reach our goals.

I stand here before you today, during the Imbizo Focus Week. That’s why some of my colleagues are not here. I started my day by visiting the Khayelitsha urban gardens. These gardens have changed the lives of so many families.

Nabaya ooMama nooTata, abaphuma kwezo gadi zaseKhayelitsha, behleli apha namhlanje. [Seated over there are women and men who work in those gardens, from Khayelitsha.] In these projects there are dedicated men and women who decided that they would do something with their hands and not sit and wait for Government social security grants. They have been supported by a faith-based organisation, the Quaker Peace Centre, to start their small gardens. I wish to thank Mr Jeremy Routledge, whom some of you know as a spouse to Comrade Nozizwe Madlala - Deputy Minister of Defence, for his vision and passion of wanting to improve the lives of those who are vulnerable. His view is that we can never attain peace in our communities unless people have enough food to eat.

Today, I also invited a number of people to Parliament as part of the Imbizo Focus Week in order to listen to what we have to say about those issues that impact on their livelihood on a daily basis. It is my wish that they will have an appreciation of how this Parliament works to resolve their challenges, because it is through them and their mandate that we are here as public representatives. I will therefore like to acknowledge the presence in this House of all the stakeholders as well as beneficiaries of land and agricultural development.

Let us remind ourselves where we come from as this sector. In 1994 we inherited an agricultural sector that was not inclusive at all and did not reflect the demography of our society. It was also highly regulated with subsidies and financial concessions available to commercial farmers often at high costs to Government. Protectionist policies and barriers to entry helped distort the potential of agriculture in this country. Thus, at the outset, we were faced with the enormous challenge of addressing poverty, landlessness and a general skewed participation of black people, youth and women in this sector.

Government’s response has been to ensure that the right of access to sufficient food and water, health care and social security is made fundamental in the programmes that we have implemented in our democracy. It is within this context of implementation that it became clear that Government’s role, in terms of policy-making and appropriate allocation of resources, needed to be complemented by a commitment by beneficiaries of Government policy to a partnership which can result in innovation, creation of jobs and income opportunities.

The income received by farmers on their agricultural products continues to increase year by year. Gross income from all agricultural products for the year 2002 increased by 29% to at least R68 billion, with field crops contributing 38%, animal products 37% and horticultural products 25%. This was as a result of marked increase in producer prices of almost all primary agricultural products, in particular that of maize, flower seed, sorghum, wool and vegetables. In addition, production volumes of maize, grain sorghum and sunflower seed also increased.

Another exciting development is the increase in net farm income and cash flow of farmers which is resulting in the improvement of the debt position of our farmers. Indications at this very hour are that this has resulted in at least R2,6 billion decrease in the farm debt.

Nafu, the Department of Agriculture and AgriSA have established an institutional framework to oversee the process of the implementation of the sector plan. Through this mechanism we have been able to stimulate the emergence of mentorships which are intended to ensure that the beneficiaries of our land reform and agricultural development make good use of their land. The challenge remains to make the practice of sharing experience and expertise between black and white farmers become a norm rather than a sporadic or an expression of goodwill of specific individuals.

As a start, Government has put through R3,7 million which has been transferred to provinces for training as part of our comprehensive farmer support package. For this year’s budget, we have put aside R10 million to ensure that provinces can work with farmers so that, indeed, they can deliver a better life for all. The sector plan challenges us to work for public-private partnerships in the area of research and development. Our experience has shown that in order for us to succeed in building partnerships we require a clearly articulated vision which we now have for this sector. We also need to have an agreement on respective roles and responsibilities for each partner and, most importantly, we need to build trust among partners.

Mangisho nje kule Ndlu ukuthi ekusebenzisaneni kwethu nabalimi sibone kubalulekile ukuthi, mayelana nendlela esisebenzisana ngayo, sazi ukuthi ngabe umgomo wethu uyini nokuthi sifuna ukuzuzani. Kanti okunye esikubone kubalulekile ukuthi uma sisebenzisana, njengozakwethua kubalulekile ukuthi sethembane ngoba ngale kwalokho asiyukwazi ukuzuza lokho esikufunayo, ikakhulukazi kwezolimo. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[Let me mention to this House that in our dealings with farmers we realise that it is important to know what our policy is and what it is that we want to gain, regarding our co-operation. Another issue that we think is important is that if we co-operate, as colleagues, it is crucial that we should trust one another because without that we will never attain what we want to achieve, particularly in agriculture.]

As a Government we are committed to the implementation of actions to achieve the vision of a united and prosperous agricultural sector. To this end, we have ensured that our budget makes provision for the sector plan priorities. We are also proud to announce that already, as part of this partnership, we have launched the National Agricultural Research Forum. This is a consultative body wherein Government, various stakeholders and public entities are able to work together in aligning their work to bring about synergies so that we can optimise our capacities within agricultural research.

Hon members will recall that prior to 1994 the statistics on agriculture focused only on white commercial farmers and were not reliable particularly in the ex-homeland areas and black participation. The Department of Agriculture, working with Statistics SA, has put away R17 million which will ensure that at least by the end of this year we will have results on an agricultural census that is inclusive and takes into consideration work that happens also in communal areas. We have identified five communal areas to this effect, as a beginning of this process.

We have indicated that poverty is something that we have to deal with. Within Cabinet, last year in July we accepted that the integrated food security programme is critical if we have to deal with the situation of food insecurity. The vision of the integrated food security strategy is to attain universal physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food by all South Africans at all times to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. It is our goal that we need to eradicate hunger and malnutrition in South Africa by 2015, which is in line with the millennium goals of the United Nations.

Food security was of particular concern to us last year when food prices soared. That affected particularly the staples that the majority of our people consume. Government, in its response, decided to work in partnership with the private sector. Premier Foods, Afgri and Met-Cash came to the party, as well as Tiger Brands, Nedcor and Gifts for the Givers who also contributed. We also put aside an amount of R400 million, R170 million of which was for assisting in the SADC region and R230 million was going to be used locally for food emergencies. It is encouraging to see that, indeed, work has started in this area. The Minister of Social Development has been working with his team to ensure that we reach those vulnerable people among our society with the food parcels.

Our departments of agriculture will be working together with the department of social development to ensure that we give food starter packs that can assist people to produce their food. Today, we gave such starter packs to the groups that we visited. I will just give you an example of what they look like. This is a fertiliser pack which includes seed and also indicates what you need to do in order to plant. It might seem small, but it is important information as well as a resource that will assist those who need to provide food for themselves.

We also, in January this year, appointed a seven-member food-pricing monitoring committee. They have already started their work. They have already established that the Government’s interventions of last year, which are also continuing, have actually contributed towards reducing food prices at the shelves as we speak. It is our hope that our retailers will also encourage our efforts by ensuring that they reduce prices in order for our communities to be able to access affordable staples.

Last week, on Friday 28 March 2003, the Ministries of Agriculture, Social Development and Health held a joint Minmec with their MECs from the respective provinces - in which local government participated - in order to align their work and co-ordinate the implementation of the integrated food security programme. It was clear from the presentation of provinces that, indeed, Government has put aside resources even at a provincial level to deal with this problem. The national Departments of Social Development, Agriculture and Health will also augment those resources so that indeed we can work together collectively to deal with the challenge of food insecurity among our communities.

We are also continuing with our work of investigating the feasibility of longer-term measures such as comprehensive regional food security strategy, the strategic grain reserve and food stamps which, in our view, will help to improve our capacity to deliver as we are required. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the directors-general of the three departments and National Treasury for the work that they have done with their staff to ensure that we are able to come up with such comprehensive measures of dealing with this important challenge.

Within the context of the sector strategy, we have agreed to implement the vision of labour. My colleague, Minister Mdladlana, has made great strides in the past few years to deal with the complex and distressing plight of farmworkers. This has culminated in the determination of the minimum wage. The agreement on these levels was reached through a process of extensive consultation with a variety of groups, including farmers’ organisations. While it is true that there are some pockets of reluctance to move with implementation in this regard, I would actually want to plead with all of us, particularly those of us who work in this sector, to ensure that we implement this wage determination, because unless we improve the lot of those who work for us, we can never achieve better results for our economy, but also for our society.

We as Government will continue to work to improve the conditions of farmworkers as part of our overall approach in improving productivity and prosperity in this sector. This year we will also turn our attention to the even more complex yet critical issues of occupational health and safety of agricultural workers. The Government, through its wine industry trust, has been able to undertake programmes that impact on the lives of farmworkers. Included in some of those programmes is the Women on Farms Project in the Stellenbosch community. It focuses on educational programmes on substance abuse, HIV/Aids and violence against women. The other project is the Horizon Project which is in Upington, Northern Cape. Our ongoing joint initiatives with the Medical Research Council will continue, particularly within the Wellington community. These look at, in particular, nutritional challenges in communities surrounding farms. It is our belief that farmworkers are an important workforce in the agricultural industry and therefore they require all our support.

The National Agricultural Marketing Council continues to do important work in monitoring the agricultural marketing environment. In order to promote the existence of a more diverse and competitive sector, the outreach programme which empowers emerging farmers with information recently reached about 1 400 emerging farmers and succeeded in imparting marketing skills to them.

Animal production also plays an important role in the economic wellbeing and food security in South Africa. A strategic organisation like Onderstepoort Biological Products is critical for the maintenance of the animal health system that supports continued improvement performance of our livestock. OBP is the sole producer of eight vaccines for tropical diseases in the world. In the event of an outbreak, OBP is able to timeously supply vaccines to reduce the impact of outbreaks. This year, I am happy to report that the successful contract that OBP secured with Italy to supply blue- tongue vaccines will continue. The institution is now positioned to produce even more vaccines for diseases relevant to the African continent. A vaccine bank is also being established to assist in rapid response to disease outbreaks in the country and the region. This facility will be upgraded with an amount of R37 million during the coming financial year. Most of the funds for this upgrade have already been generated by the institution itself.

The financing of agriculture has been a concern to us since the advent of democracy. We continue to make strides in providing access to those who have not been able to gain access before in this institution. Our Land Bank has been able to come up with creative funding programmes and initiatives. Women in rural areas have been able to empower themselves and take charge of their lives. Today we have farmers who are women pioneers such as Mrs Elsie Matsunyane - a livestock farmer in Cradock, and Mrs Mbaba - an enthusiastic and enterprising farmer in Lichtenburg district in the North West. We are pleased that they have been able to grace us with their presence here today.

In 2002 the Land Bank developed some unique products, one of which was a step-up loan. I am happy to say that through this programme, about 120 000 black clients - including 14 000 clients who just got support through the Land Bank - as well as those 7 900 who have been supported through the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development programme have actually increased the loan book of the land and agricultural bank to reflect the demography of South Africa. I wish to thank the MD as well as his staff for this sterling work.

I am committed to ensuring that the benefits from technologies developed by the Agricultural Research Council reach more and more communities, especially those that have been historically disadvantaged. To increase to the baseline funding as provided to the ARC is meant to focus primarily on two areas: firstly, to stabilise the current core capacity through strategic and sustainable reward and recognition of ARC’s scientists; and, secondly, to enhance the training of young agricultural scientists whose members will create a gender and race balance within the ARC. I am sure that hon members, particularly those from the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture who were concerned about the level of funding, will be a little bit happy that we have tried to change and make an improved intervention in this regard. I know that this may not be enough, but we will continue to strive for the better.

I also wish to say that as part of our international relations we have been able to strengthen our bilateral as well as multilateral agreements. Our primary focus is and always will be on the SADC region and the African continent. It is for this reason that this Government has decided to work with the government of Zimbabwe to eradicate the foot-and-mouth disease in that area. We have contributed about R12 million towards the acquisition of vaccines to assist in that programme. We will be making the initial consignment to Zimbabwe very soon. But, it is also important to strengthen our own borders and ensure that we reduce the risk. I am therefore happy to indicate that R5 million will be put aside towards improving our dipping facilities in those areas, particularly around the borders of Limpopo, Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal as well as the North West. [Applause.]

Hon members, you will agree with me that this work can never be improved continuously unless we put some effort towards building our human capital. We have, as a department, initiated a bursary scheme which in the coming year, 2004, will see about 100 students getting into university and who will be supported by Government in order to help us deal with scarce skills in veterinary sciences, agricultural engineering and agricultural economics. We will also continuously improve our workplace skills development.

I wish to thank my MEC colleagues from the provinces who have worked with us in this year to ensure that, indeed, we improve the performance of agriculture and create a better life for all South Africans. Thanks to you, colleagues. [Applause.] I also want to thank the director-general, deputy directors-general and their teams without whom we would not be here today. I also want to thank our partners, Japie Grobler, Tata Ramutle, AgriSA as well as Nafu, for their continuous engagement and support in the work that we do. [Applause.] I would like to thank Neo Masithela, the chairperson of the portfolio committee, and the portfolio committee members for the work that they have continuously done to keep us on our toes.

In our quest for security, stability, enduring peace and deepening democracy for Africa’s people, especially African women and African children, we have gone and will go an extra mile to provide food to the hungry, land to the landless and empowerment to the disempowered. The South African people’s contract for a better tomorrow can only grow from strength to strength if we join hands in our efforts to push away the frontiers of poverty and underdevelopment in our country. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr N H MASITHELA: Mr Chairperson, according to Statistics SA, about 35% of the population or 14,3 million South Africans are currently vulnerable to food security. Amongst this are women, children and the elderly who are more particularly vulnerable to this situation.

Correctly, Government has set itself a target goal to reduce the number of food insecurity households by half by 2015. It had to do so: Firstly, because it is the right thing to do; secondly, for its citizens this Government is responsible, it does respect, cares and lastly, it is obliged to do so. Because of these reasons, it has allocated R400 million specifically for food security in the current programmes which are running today. This shows that this Government is prepared and ready to push back the frontiers of poverty.

While still on that point, let me call on all South African patriots to unite behind Government by assisting in working together for the success of these programmes and stop politicising the poverty and hunger of our people.

I am fully aware that the Department of Agriculture is the only department that is mandated and competent in the promotion of food and fibre production, food processing and food distribution. Food safety and affordability are critical to overall food security. But, all other issues are largely outside the competency and influence of the Department of Agriculture. For food security, this could be a problem.

Food security as a concept needs to be dealt with jointly in a team approach lest it fails.

While here, let me call on all departments that are responsible for the many factors that have a bearing on food security to join hands and work together in pushing back the frontiers of poverty, because to single out the Department of Agriculture for accounting for food production may be a proper thing to do, but to expect it to also explain why food prices are high in this country will be unfair.

Most of what is called food today as found in a supermarket or retailers bears little if any resemblance to agricultural products from the farms. It is largely these post-farm processes that impact on the price. In fact, only a quarter of the retail price of food goes back to the farms.

We congratulate the Minister on the appointment of the Food Price Monitoring Committee last year as part of Government’s response to the high food prices in this country. We appreciate this, and are particularly happy because this will enable us to address the poverty of our people.

But the issue that I want to raise is that, as we speak today, the price of mealie meal is still high on the shelves. And that suggests that our people have not yet benefited from these processes. It’s important that this committee pronounces itself on the issues that we are confronted with by these food prices.

Let me also go back to what I said about the obligations of Government. The right of access to sufficient food as enshrined in section 27 of the Constitution obliges the state to provide reasonable legislative and other supporting measures within its available resources to ensure that South African citizens are able to meet their basic needs.

By investing in its citizens, the South African Government, justifiably so, addresses many other issues. To mention but a few: Firstly, it reaffirms access to food as a basic need; secondly, it raises the issue of access to food to be the most important issue in the hierarchy of human rights; thirdly, it places in the hands of our citizens the power to claim the right to food security; and lastly, it also raises the issue that if the food security of our people is threatened, they can have the right to claim this particular privilege.

I am fully aware that this is a very tedious process. I think it’s important for the Minister to proceed with the instruction that was given by Cabinet to Government officials to proceed and investigate and come up with legislation that will enable our people to have food security.

We are also happy that food security is high on the agenda of our Government. Hence, I want to call upon both the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, Minister of Social Development, Minister of Health, Minister for Provincial and Local Government and provincial governments to ensure that the food parcels that are being distributed to our communities are not going down the drain. The reality of the situation is that some concern has been raised by members of our committee regarding the manner in which these food parcels are being distributed.

Its co-ordination needs to be looked into.

We congratulate the speedy way in which Government responded to the food crisis by launching the National Food Emergency Scheme to the tune of R230 million to alleviate the suffering that is experienced by the majority of our people, particularly the vulnerable ones. We request the Minister to pass on our heartfelt gratitude, also to the Minister of Social Development.

We note with some sadness that the President announced the National Food Emergency Scheme as consisting of food parcels and food garden starter packs, yet only R230 million has been allocated to the food parcels section itself. The issue of the agricultural starter packs as the Minister pronounced it I think is a critical issue to us for the Minister to ensure that co-ordination between the provincial government and local government is equally adhered to, because failure to have agricultural starter packs as a backup to food parcels may well be a problem.

We are raising this matter because two weeks ago we conducted a public hearing on food security as a committee without giving feedback about what came out of that hearing. The committee will be tabling its report with a very strong recommendation in due course in this august House.

Minister, in the light of our growing needs in the industry, there is a need to strengthen the ports of entry as we increase our volumes of imports and exports on agricultural products. We want to thank you for the role you played in dealing with the outbreak of foot-and-mouth in Zimbabwe. You ensured that South Africa’s interests are safeguarded for the next five years. We really appreciate that.

Let me also call on the scientific community to position itself in developing innovative ideas and funding solutions that will address the constraints we anticipate in the next five years. This includes challenges in biotechnology, impact on the climate changes, the use of information and communication technologies. Whilst still on that, let me also report that the Portfolio Committees on Agriculture and Land Affairs, Environmental Affairs, Health and Arts, Science, Culture and Technology will be hosting a conference on genetically modified organisms in two weeks’ time. So, these issues will be dealt with quite severely, and we will also give a report on what we think should happen regarding genetically modified organisms during the next session.

In the same vein, I also appreciate the significant increase for the Agricultural Research Council. There is a need to strengthen the human capacity of the ARC to ensure that we develop new research methodologies. A re-engineering of our research and technology development and technology transfer system is necessary if we are to give due prominence to the outputs and address household level, direct access to the production of and access to nutritious food.

Research for development of the poor can be as costly as research to support export and formal markets. Its application may not always yield changes that are quantifiable by today’s measures of the GDP. However, the recent challenge on food security and nutrition of our people has highlighted the national strategic importance of ensuring that appropriate agricultural technologies are dealt with. As an important factor to enable such quality of life in the then, current and forthcoming technological development, the Agricultural Research Council needs to ensure that it develops new challenges.

In conclusion, this increase for the Agricultural Research Council, amongst others, should look into the human resource development. It would not be enough to change top management without dealing with lower levels of African and new researchers in that ARC. It is important for us to have new entrants, particularly black people, in the ARC.

These are challenges we are putting forward. As the ANC we support the Budget Vote. [Applause.]

Mnr A J BOTHA: Agb Voorsitter, net ter opening moet ek verskoning maak vir die woordvoerder oor grondsake, mnr D K Maluleke van die DA, wat nie hier kan wees vandag nie. Hy is ongesteld. En ek moet ook bysê dat ek slegs twee ure gelede gehoor het dat die twee debatte geskei gaan word - Grondsake en Landbou - en met u verlof sal ek dus beide hanteer in een toespraak. Baie dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr A J BOTHA: Hon Chairperson, at the very beginning I must just apologise for the spokesperson on land affairs Mr D K Maluleke of the DA who cannot be here today. He is unwell. And I must add that I have heard only two hours ago that the two debates are to be separated - Land Affairs and Agriculture - and therefore, with your permission, I shall deal with both in one speech. Thank you very much.]

Hon Chair, the sector of the economy on which Parliament is voting today has much to be ``proudly South African’’ of. Having emerged from a dark age of dispossession, this Parliament has embarked on a dramatic programme of land restitution and the budgetary increases to bring this to a speedy conclusion is indeed admirable. We live in a country that is classified as water scarce and is in danger of becoming water poor. Yet we have been able to provide clean drinking water to more and more people every year.

This very same life blood can also be cruel, as the people of Montagu experienced most recently. We expressed our sympathy and must now open the public purse to assist them to return to their productive lives again. We can also proudly claim that, while we live in a region suffering from famine, we have not only maintained food security for ourselves, but we are even able to export food as well as assist our stricken neighbours.

That magnificent son of Africa, Dr Jacques Diouf, Director-General of the FAO or Food and Agriculture Organisation cautioned us that while we are talking, nothing is actually happening and that only when we get out into the fields do we actually start working. Let us therefore now pay a visit, symbolically, to the fields and find out what is going on there.

Soon after Minister Didiza took over the reigns at the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs, she announced a major policy shift with regard to land reform or land redistribution and new farmer settlement. A decision had been taken to establish sustainable commercial black farmers in preference to the previous emphasis on communal subsistence production of food and fibre.

This position, which the DA wholeheartedly supports, was re-emphasised during this year’s budget briefings. A crucial aspect of this policy from the start was public-private partnerships, as indeed reaffirmed by the Minister today. For partnerships to function efffectively all sides must be willing and committed and there are ample examples of farmers who are willing and committed to this programme, opinion to the contrary notwithstanding.

There are on average 10 000 rural land transactions in this country every year. There are also too many examples of land offered by commercial farmers for land redistribution which then fail because bureaucratic red tape extends the period of negotiations to more than two years, which often causes the potential seller to sell onto the open market in frustration. To then suggest, as it has been done in briefings and negotiations, that the market price is too high, is not only illogical, but also very dangerous. It is illogical, because the farmer must accept the price for his produce whether it is high or low, such as the maize price, which has dropped from R1 800 per ton a few months ago to R800 per ton now. The farmer is, likewise, entitled to the market price for his land at all times, whether it is high or whether it is low. It is dangerous, because it suggests differential nationalisation.

Agriculture is not the main capital base of the economy. It contributes less than 4% to the GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, and should obviously not be taxed more than the rest of the economy in order to achieve corrections for historic wrongsroles. An example of the disastrous results of such thinking is amply demonstrated by the chaos and famine caused thereby in Zimbabwe. Predictably there will be complaints from many at the mention of Zimbabwe. Their pavlovian reaction to this matter in itself says a lot, that they should rather take note of why it is necessary to refer to Zimbabwe in this context.

Minister Didiza paid a visit to that country earlier this year and is quoted in the official newsletter of the department as follows: ``Things in Zimbabwe are looking promising’’. This must surely be one of the most monstrous misstatements of reality that one can possibly imagine. [Interjections.] How the Minister, who normally displays rationality, could bring herself to say such a thing, as well as give material support to that disaster, defies belief. The only promise that the citizens of Zimbabwe can be certain of is poverty and the most monstrous human rights violations caused by a land destruction programme that has no element of reform in it whatsoever. It is also relevant to bear the Zimbabwean situation in mind when examining the Government projections for our own land reform programme.

It is still the stated objective to acquire 25 million hectares by 2015 for black farmer settlement. And, vicious as this may sound, it could be possible to acquire two million hectares per year for the next 12 years, if we budget the necessary funds. In this context, the budgetary provisions for the next three years fall short by at least R1.7 billion per year. If restitution can be completed by 2006, as envisioned, and that budgetary funding is diverted to land reform, the picture will improve considerably, but will still fall short by at least R800 million per annum in today’s values. It is therefore quite clear that either the budgetary provision for land reform must be dramatically increased or the target date for land reform must be drastically amended.

It is up to this Parliament to demonstrate the political will in choosing the one or the other of these options. The present pie in the sky is not attainable and will inevitably create tensions through unrealised expectations. It is as important, if indeed not more important, to realise the planning and managerial requirements of the land reform programme. Only those who have voluntarily exposed themselves to the risks of profit and loss can fully understand the intricacies of entrepreneurial exposure and the need for new entrants to be guided and nurtured by experienced operators in the field. These operators are the present commercial farmers, of whom there are 60 000 in the country at present.

The Minister refers in her strategic planning to the broadening of the pool of key partners in order to achieve key performance areas. These commercial farmers are the key partners and they must be fully mobilised to assist in planning and execution. The department is planning four pilot projects, still to be identified. The department must be complimented on their commitment in this regard, but equally they must be cautioned not to go ahead without practical inputs from commercial agriculture.

In the budget it is important that 260 000 hectares have been transferred to 26 000 people just during the last year. This is indeed commendable performance, but it should also be realised that this translates into a mere 10 hectares per person. When read together with the department’s belief that 20 hectares per family will enable sustainable commercial production, as was revealed during briefings, then we have a serious problem. The department defends their position by relying on foreign examples of successful small-scale farming and by concentrating on the capacity of irrigated agriculture.

I have already referred to the scarcity of water, the reality of which means that only 2% of agricultural land in this country can be irrigated. When we therefore look at the average 20 hectares per family, we must also look at the average potential of the whole country and not just the irrigated land or arable land only. We also have to include the arid Karoo, the dry Bushveld, as well as the high-yielding Highveld grassland areas. Let us, however, by way of illustration, accept that all 20 hectares are among the best in the maize triangle. At last year’s high prices and at a cost of R3 000 per hectare, a profit of R1 500 per hectare would have been realised last year. At present prices a loss of R1 000 would be realised. On average, the historical expectation would be a profit of between R300 and R500 per hectare. Multiplied by 20 hectares, that means a disposable income of between R6 000 and R10 000 per year or R500 to R800 per month per family, which is well below the minimum wage, and then we must understand what we are talking about, that we are not being real in this kind of approach.

The Government has engaged commercial agriculture and the plan has been accepted and published. It is now, however, time to implement these good intentions. Much is made of political collaboration, but little has come of it. Let us make much of sector law co-operation and much will come of it. With the publication of the agricultural wage regulations by the Minister of Labour, such collaboration was abjectly absent. Let us not confuse the issue with a liveable wage in this matter with inconsistent regulations.

The worker is indeed worthy of his or her wage and must be protected against exploitation by either the employer or the state. Not understanding the consequences of his actions, the Minister of Labour has made another major contribution to unemployment by exporting jobs. Just on the ground, in that industry alone, which depends heavily on casual labour at harvest, he has compelled farmers to mechanise by insisting on a full monthly wage after just 27 hours of labour, irrespective of how many hours of actual labour was transacted in that month.

Where was the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs when this folly was being committed? Will the Minister go to those areas and explain to families why the additional income they have come to rely upon is no longer forthcoming?

Hon Chair, Agriculture is high-risk business that does not need impediments to be put in its way. Disasters are endemic in agriculture and it is imperative that agreed assistance be forthcoming timeously. It is now just about 18 months ago that the Free State, KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga suffered severe stock losses from freak cold conditions. Many farmers, especially small emerging farmers suffered 100% loss. The damage was assessed and assistance was agreed upon. These hapless people are, however, still waiting for assistance and the Minister must please explain why this is so.

The Minister of Social Development recently admitted quite frankly to a lack of departmental capacity in meeting the needs of the needy. If this is the case in Agriculture, let it be known, and plan how these shortcomings will be corrected.

A new impediment has arisen in the form of municipal taxes on rural land. Some municipalities, such as Nketwana in the Free State, have already levied such high municipal rates on farmland that it will bankrupt the industry there. Where was the voice of the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs when this folly was committed?

Agriculture is a capital-intensive industry with such low returns on capital that start money avoids agriculture. Confidence is therefore of high importance for investment and the Government, unfortunately, falls short in its duty in this respect. The DA provided the Government with a list of South African agricultural investors in Zimbabwe who lost everything in the disaster there. The Minister of Foreign Affairs assured this House more than a year ago that she will engage the Zimbabwean government on this issue. This assurance was repeated by President Mbeki at the opening of Parliament this year. To date, however, there is no record of a single South African agricultural investor whose position has benefited in any way from this intervention and they and their tens of thousands of workers are destitute, in stark contrast to the position of other nationals whose governments intervened effectively on their behalf. Where was the voice of the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs when this was going on? [Interjections.]

Agb Voorsitter, die voorsitter van die portefeuljekomitee het ‘n oomblik gelede hier verwys na die ``food security’‘-debat wat ons gehad het in die portefeuljekomitee. Daar is een klein aspekkie wat ek vinnig wil aanraak in dié verband en dit is die kleinmeule-operateurs, veral in die tradisionele gebiede. Die vereistes van verrykte mieliemeel wat nou vereis gaan word, gaan beteken dat hierdie mense hulle besighede sal moet sluit. Ek vra die Minister en ek vra die departement om indringend na hierdie saak te kyk, want hierdie klein besighede is besighede wat kan groei, maar huidig sal hulle onmoontlik hulle meel kan verkoop aan staatsinstellings om hulle in staat te stel om te groei. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Hon Chairperson, the chairperson of the portfolio committee referred here a moment ago to the food security debate that we held in the portfolio committee. There is one minor aspect that I quickly want to touch on in this regard, and that is the small mill operators, particularly in the traditional areas. The requirements of fortified mealie meal that will soon be demanded are going to mean that these people will have to close down their businesses. I want to ask the Minister and the department to take an in-depth look into this matter, because these small businesses are businesses that can grow, but currently they will be unable to sell their flour to state institutions so as to enable them to grow.]

Let me conclude by repeating the exultation of Dr Diouf: Let us indeed go out into the fields and start working. Let us work smart by fully implementing the public-private partnerships and let us deliver another miracle to the world by successfully correcting the wrongs of the past in our redistribution of agricultural opportunity in this country. And, in final conclusion, Minister and Deputy Minister …

… dit is my besondere voorreg om vir julle te sê dat Landbou in Suid- Afrika en agb lede van hierdie Huis dit opreg waardeer dat julle oop deure het; al kan die probleem nie opgelos word nie; al moet die probleem vir ‘n lang tyd uitgerek word; en al sloer die oplossings, ons bedank julle vir julle oop deur en dat julle altyd bereid is om met ons te praat. Baie dankie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[… it is my specific privilege to tell you that agriculture in South Africa and hon members of this House truly appreciate that you have open doors; even if the problem cannot be solved; even if the problem is dragged out for a long time; and even if the solutions are delayed, we thank you for your open door and that you are always willing to speak to us. Thank you very much. [Applause.]]

Mr M V NGEMA: Chairperson, this being my first speech in this House, I wish to thank God, my maker, and my party, Inkatha Freedom Party, for affording me the opportunity to serve the people of South Africa at this level. It is really an honour that I do not take for granted.

The Minister in her address has referred to the crisis that we are facing with regard to food prices. She has also announced the seven-member committee that she established to deal with this situation. We, as the IFP, applaud this policy on food security aimed at alleviating the plight of the poor in South Africa and Southern Africa. We wish to urge the hon Minister to move further towards the provision of more job opportunities, as opposed to just moving in the direction of more handouts.

When the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture held its public hearings on food security in Parliament on 11 and 12 February this year, it was stressed by the officials of the department that poverty as experienced in this country in particular, and in some SADC countries in general, did not result from scarcity of food per se, but that it was rather a problem of affordability, otherwise referred to as lack of access to food. Food itself is plenty in South Africa but it costs more than poor communities can afford.

We must continue to deal with this contradiction. We also commend Government and the department for the Yiyo Lena Product that provides a lot of emotional and social reprieve to indigent families. We, however, implore the Department of Agriculture, being the lead department of the programme of this social subsector, and the Minister to watch out for the retailers who may be tempted to hoard this product and defeat Government aim by depriving poor families of access to this staple diet.

With regard to the Programme of the department on Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development, LRAD, we appreciate the statistics that show the good work that the department and Government has achieved in empowering emerging farmers with agricultural land, technical support and marketing support. However, it will be interesting in future to have insight into the qualitative measures indicating the impact the programme is having on both the lives of the emerging farmers and the economy. On the farmer support and development programme, we see a decrease of 11% which can be explained in terms of funds that have been transferred to the food relief scheme that the Minister referred to earlier. However, a steady increase in this particular programme would have been welcome since our focus is on developing policies to strengthen food security and rural development.

We further see phenomenal increase in the budget provision for the programme on the settlement of emerging farmers on distributed state-owned agricultural land in line with LRAD. Since 1999/2000 the expenditure on the farmers settlement subprogramme has risen almost tenfold. This is commendable. The budget estimates of 2003/2004 are up by more than 100% compared to the previous year. We also wish to emphasise the need to move our focus on impact of programmes beyond the budget expenditure, more towards improved quality of life on the ground.

We support this programme, hoping that it will also strengthen the emerging farmers to stand on their feet and contribute more to the economy. The emergent farmer should be helped to grow beyond subsistence agriculture to have a grip moving on towards agri business.

We believe that agri business should mentor small farmers through the ``adopt a small farmer’’ campaign, which we suggest should be closely monitored by the department. I think this is what the Minister referred to in her reference to the private/public partnership in her speech.

With regard to programme three on agricultural trade and business development, here transformation is still to reach its ideal level, and we recognise the effort towards the ideal goal. We would like to see emerging producers getting more and more access to the markets. Although these farmers may not yet be able to produce on a large scale, the products they manage to produce should and must gain access to markets. Thus gradually we will witness the scale tilting towards a balance, and then we can see sincere transformation taking place.

As regards programme four, which deals with agricultural research and economic analysis, we envisage a situation where the analysis carried out will point out, as a focus, why the African farmer cannot compare to his or her white counterpart in terms of agricultural contribution to the GDP, and how the small scale farmer sector can be assisted towards this goal. Emerging small scale farmers, mostly habitate the weather-hazardous areas and their production oftentimes falls prey to these natural and other disasters. In general, we wish to see more co-operation between the national Agricultural Research Council, the established agricultural sector and the department in a joint programme leading rural communities by the hand through technical and financial training, towards a massive campaign creating effective and sustainable rural communities, reversing urban migration in the hope of an improved quality of life. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Thank you, Mr Chairman. May I congratulate the previous speaker on his maiden speech. May it be the first of many constructive speeches in this Chamber.

Despite the present adverse weather conditions, South Africa is still fortunate enough to be experiencing national food security. Of course, our challenge remains to translate this into household food security. This is a daunting challenge which does not have a simplistic solution and will require foresight, resourcefulness and hard work to resolve.

The present political and economic volatility in the world is also impacting on our agricultural sector. Despite these many variables affecting agriculture, the positive role which our Minister and the department are playing, both in South Africa and in Nepad, is acknowledged and appreciated.

Elke denkende rolspeler in die landbou besef die noodsaaklikheid van die omvorming van hierdie sektor. Die huidige situasie waarin een bevolkingsgroep hierdie sektor oorheers, kan nie die toets van die tyd deurstaan nie. As blankes het ons die reg op grond as ‘n gegewe aanvaar. Selde of ooit is gevra of ons rykdom nie dalk in die voorgeskiedenis iemand anders se rykdom was nie, en hoe dit in ons en ons voorgeslagte se besit gekom het. Die onlangse onaanvaarbare gebeure en optredes noord van ons grense het die dringendheid van hierdie aangeleentheid beklemtoon. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Every right-minded role-player in agriculture realises the necessity of transformation of this sector. The current situation in which one population group dominates this sector cannot withstand the test of time. As whites we have accepted the right to land as a given. Seldom, if ever, has it been asked whether our wealth was not perhaps somewhere in ancient history someone else’s wealth and how it ended up in our or our predecessors’ possession. The recent unacceptable events and actions north of our borders have highlighted the urgency of this issue.]

The question I would like to pose is whether our popular focus on equitable landownership should not rather shift to the skewed share in the national agricultural economy. Unlike many other countries, agricultural potential differs radically as we move from west to east. Land percentage targets can, even within budgetary constraints, possibly be attained by acquiring low-production extensive land. Alternatively, if we should focus on the previously disadvantaged people’s share of the agricultural cake, and set targets accordingly, it would be both a sensible and a pragmatic approach.

This answer provides an imperative to enlarge this cake. Realistically, we must acknowledge that if agriculture is going to be instrumental in providing a livelihood for significant numbers of new farmers as well as providing many new employment opportunities, it is not going to occur in the low-potential arid areas. Intensification of agricultural practice provides the solution to the present disparity.

In order to achieve this, the utilisation of our three major resources - humans, soil and water - must be brought into equilibrium. To achieve this, a multidimensional approach is needed. The present utilisation of land and water for agriculture will have to be re-evaluated. The Departments of Agriculture and of Forestry both have crucial roles to play in this regard.

Ek verstout my om te sê dat die omvang van watervermorsing in landbou in hierdie waterarm land godskreiend is. Daarbenewens glo ek dat baie van die gewasse wat verbou word, allermins die mees geskikte of mees doeltreffende is vir volhoubare hulpbronbenutting en produksie. Moderne hulpmiddels soos satelliettegnologie kan van onskatbare waarde wees om optimale benutting te verseker.

Daar moet opnuut gekyk word na die benutting van die huidige staatsbesproeiingskemas. Baie van hierdie skemas kon destyds nie op ekonomiese gronde geregverdig word nie, maar is om sosiopolitieke redes gebou. In die nuwe Suid-Afrika het elkeen - élkeen! - die reg om voordeel te trek uit hierdie projekte wat met belastingbetalersgeld gebou is. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follow.)

[May I be so bold as to say that the extent to which water is wasted in agriculture in this water deprived country is horrific. Besides that, I believe that many of the crops that are being cultivated are the least suitable or effective for sustainable resource utilisation and production. Modern aids like satellite technology can be of immeasurable value to ensure optimal utilisation.

We must look afresh at the utilisation of the current state irrigation schemes. Many of these schemes could previously not be justified on economic grounds, but were built for socio-political reasons. In the new South Africa everyone - everyone! - has the right to benefit from these projects which were built with taxpayers’ money.]

It would be a worthwhile exercise to ascertain how the envisaged allocation of irrigable tracts of land matched the actual allocation and what the present situation is. It is totally unacceptable that some farmers are at present in possession of vast tracts of irrigable land. This land should be identified, re-allocated and utilised for new farmer settlement.

There are also numerous examples of irrigable tracts of land which are at present not benefiting from these Government schemes. In Groblersdal below the Loskop Dam, for example, canals transverse former so-called homeland areas in order to provide water to established white farmers. This situation is unacceptable and must be rectified.

Under the Gariep-Fish scheme, about 20 000 ha of irrigable land was identified in the Hofmeyr area. Similarly, a tunnel was envisaged through the Wapadsberg to provide the Sundays River with a permanent water supply. If this is brought to fruition, it would provide a livelihood for thousands of beneficiaries. A re-evaluation of this scheme is fundamentally important.

The hon Minister of Finance issued a challenge regarding suggestions for meaningful job creation. The Boegoeberg Dam was apparently built in the Depression years by so-called poor-whites. The present high unemployment rate justifies similar innovative schemes. An immense reservoir of skills exists amongst retrenched mineworkers and those formerly employed in the first phase of the Lesotho Highland Water Development Project. Let us utilise these skills by building new and larger canals, tunnels and other infrastructure. The time to think big has arrived, because it is the right thing to do.

Similar schemes within the previous so-called homeland areas are begging to be resuscitated. Two weeks ago, our portfolio committee chair and I were privileged to witness one such partial resuscitation at the Qumata irrigation scheme. Approximately 470 ha of maize have been planted and there is an expected yield of between 7 and 8 tonnes per hectare.

The special agricultural adviser in the office of the Premier of the Eastern Cape, Mr Marius Robertsen, who initiated this project, and all those who so ably assisted him must be congratulated. It is also laudable that the whole community has become involved and has made the project their own. Apart from immediate material benefits which they will receive, provision is being made not only to continue, but also to expand this project on an ongoing basis.

There are similar schemes, such as the Ncora scheme in the former Transkei, where about 3 000 ha are waiting to be utilised. In Graaff-Reinet approximately 2 000 ha near a place called Kendrew are available and ideally suitable for ostrich farming. Experts who have the know-how are eager to become involved.

Minister, I beseech you: Take the lead in providing the vehicle for those who so passionately want new farmer settlement to succeed. If provincial departments are either unwilling or lacking in the capacity to drive this vehicle, we as the legislative body must be bold enough to make the required adjustments.

Nuweboervestiging is nie ‘n nuwe konsep nie. Die destydse departement van landbou het ‘n boekereeks met die naam Hulpboek vir Boere uitgereik. Letterlik alles wat betrekking het op praktiese boerdery is in hierdie boeke uiteengesit. In die 1929-uitgawe is daar ‘n hoofstuk oor nuweboervestiging. Natuurlik het dit destyds gegaan oor blanke boere, maar hoe afkeurenswaardig dit ook al mag wees in die huidige konteks, kan ons die meganismes wat beskikbaar gestel is feitlik net so van toepassing maak op die huidige omstandighede. Natuurlik moet ons daarop verbeter.

Die klaarblyklike genoegdoening van Zimbabwiese grondeienaars oor hulle regering se onvermoë tot wesenlike grondhervorming sedert 1980 en die ongeneentheid om aktief daaraan mee te doen het ongetwyfeld tot die krisis bygedra. Ons in Suid-Afrika durf nie in dieselfde slagyster trap nie. Die tyd vir mooi woorde en retoriek is verby.

Ek wil vandag vir AgriSA en sy provinsiale filiale uitdaag om in elke kommersiële landboudistrik ‘n grondhervormingskomitee, bestaande uit die mees progressiewe en innoverende boere, saam te stel. Hierdie komitees moet grond vir nuweboervestiging help identifiseer; behulpsaam wees om potensiële toetreders te identifiseer; met die Departement van Landbou en Grondsake, die Landbank en ander finansiële instellings saamwerk, en as mentors optree. Natuurlik is daar reeds van ons boere wat dit doen en wat ons erkenning en lof verdien. Daar moet egter ‘n veel groter betrokkenheid wees as ons wil slaag. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[New farmer settlement is not a new concept. The former department of agriculture released a series of books called Hulpboek vir Boere. Literally everything that pertains to practical farming was explained in these books. In the 1929 edition there was a chapter on new farmer establishment. Of course, in those days it was about white farmers, but no matter how reprehensible it might be in today’s context, we can almost to the letter apply the mechanisms that were made available then to the current circumstances. Of course we must improve upon that.

The apparent satisfaction of the Zimbabwean land owners about their government’s incapability to achieve essential land reform since 1980 and the unwillingness to actively participate in it undoubtedly added to the crisis. We in South Africa dare not walk into the same trap. The time for fine words and rhetoric is over.

I want to challenge AgriSA and its provincial affiliates today to establish a land reform committee in every commercial agriculture district that comprises the most progressive and innovative farmers. These committees must help to identify land for new farmer settlement; assist with identifying potential entrants; co-operate with the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, the Land Bank and the other financial institutions and act as mentors. Of course, there are already farmers who are doing this and who deserve our acknowledgement and praise. There must, however, be far greater involvement if we want to succeed.]

I see my time has expired. This is an extremely serious subject. The future of all of us in this country is going to depend on our ability to resolve the crisis around equitable land redistribution. Let us accept the challenge, let us be unified across political party lines in our effort. Thank you very much. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Mr Chairman, thank you. I thought I would make this long afternoon easy for you and just address three small issues which are, to my mind, the big issues.

Let’s start with the one that is the worst at the moment and that’s the WTO situation. You know, it’s about agricultural liberalisation. I think it was just a little bit less than 18 months ago that the so-called Dohar round of negotiations started in that beautiful city. Now today that city of Dohar in Qatar is the headquarters of the military command of rather a restricted coalition waging a rather unjustified war in Iraq nearby.

To my mind this Dohar round of negotiations is in a deep crisis. I believe the agricultural negotiators missed the deadline on 31 March, two days ago, to get to some agreement. The word ``Dohar’’ carried the impression that it would give us a showcase, 18 months ago, of an enlightened international co- operation with regard to this matter. Now it seems to me that it has become a showcase of indecision. [Interjections.]

Ek is reg, Boy. [I am right, Boy.]

Why am I saying this trade round is important and why am I addressing it firstly? I believe it’s the most important benefit that can come to the poor of the world and in Africa and in South Africa, this whole matter of liberalising agricultural trade. It must succeed. We’ve now missed the setting of parameters for negotiations on liberalising agriculture. There’s a paralysis in the whole process. There’s an unwillingness to budge, just as we had with the Iraqi situation. This is even worse, to my mind. There’s no movement on the key issues. I think, and I know, our Minister is going to try her best to get this going. Because the whole overall accord on trade and industry in general hinges on what is going to happen in agriculture. And our department must play a leading role in this respect and, if it is necessary, do what is possible. This impasse on agriculture must be broken so that we can get the rapid elimination of export subsidies. This, I believe, is really important for Africa and for South Africa.

The second matter which I regard as important; perhaps it’s a problem, perhaps it’s a challenge, but perhaps there are opportunities in this, is what I regard as the problem with provincial co-ordination in agriculture. You know what happened in South Africa is that in 1994 we provincialised agriculture under pressure from your guys, Boy, and other friends we have.

Now I although we’ve got a huge majority and can amend the Constitution, I don’t know whether our own people will allow us to amend the provincial system. But, it created problems for agriculture, problems of co- ordination. Our Minister has taken an initiative to get this co-ordination on a better basis, because we have to live with it and we must work together and co-operate.

This problem shows itself especially as a problem when you look at the development of farmer support systems, which I think is of the utmost importance to develop in South Africa. If you just go and look at the results of apartheid with regard to this problem, and you look in Limpopo province, you will see that their department of agriculture has an excess of employees of exactly - according to the latest numbers I’ve got - of 4

  1. Those are employees in excess in that department. While, they’ve only got 329 vacancies.

That department will struggle to give services because its personnel is not right. If you go and look at a province which is not the result of the linking together of old bantustans, like the Western Cape, and ask them how many excess personnel they have here in the Western Cape province, they’ve got only one person. So they’re functional. And, in actual fact, the need is in Limpopo. This is a very advanced agricultural province that we’re sitting in here. We’re sitting with a problem here.

Now if you go and analyse this provincial problem and the provision of extension services, you will see that the department is making good headway. Under the LRAD programme there’s an extra R10 million in support that is coming out of this budget. To my mind, it is not enough. We’ll have to give more. And then we’ll also have to make up our minds as to what we are going to support. Are we only going to support emerging commercial farming or are we also going to look at subsistence areas, which are mostly communal areas? What support services are we going to deliver there? What more must we do? And I think we can do a lot more.

Let me give you one example, which is receiving attention at the highest level, that is tractors. Now it is understandable that, if we are developing under LRAD new emerging farmers, that general mechanisation is very important for them. But how are we going to revive agriculture activity and turn around the agricultural production situation in the traditional areas? What must we do? We can’t just go without any mechanisation support there. There are different models of mechanisation that you can follow in South Africa. I believe, and that is the position at the highest level, that there must also be support in those areas and it must developed.

So, what must we do? It has already been mentioned here that you can’t not have water in the deep rural areas and communal areas. We must not only revive irrigation schemes, but we must also sink boreholes and mechanise. So, we’ve given support. It must be developed further. What is the role of the ARC? You can see in this budget that there is a 20% growth of the budget support to the ARC this year and they must do their job. But what is the job of the ARC? What must they do?

I personally believe that job number one of the Agricultural Research Council is to do research, so they must be put in a position to do that research. But how are we going to use that link-up between the research and our extension services? I think that linkage between agricultural research and extension services is the most important development tool that we have in our situation.

In land care some brilliant work has been done by the department. Since 1998 the state has invested more than R140 million in promoting sustainable land management practices. Let me just mention one project that has been done under this land care facility. In Whittlesea in the Eastern Cape they’ve done a marvellous project in which they/we trained over 200 people to class wool and to grade wool. The result of that type of thing is yes, it was a very beautiful project that where previously a person could, for example, get R2 per kilogram for his wool because it was unclassed and not cleaned up, now he can get R25 for the same lamb’s wool. And that is improving the income to farmers, sometimes by 200% or 300%. That is the type of thing we need.

I can tell you that in this budget an allocation of R40 million has again been made to the land care programme, supporting some 140 projects all over the country.

The third matter I would like to refer to - because this is the heart of what the department of agriculture must do, it’s our core function and this is better news - is the regulatory services. It sounds like a boring subject sometimes. It involves seeing that the poisons that are being used are the right ones and not killing people rather than doing the job.

There’s R20 million added to this programme. Under these regulatory services also fall things like foot-and-mouth disease surveillance. I can’t tell you how successful we’ve really been with the foot-and-mouth programmes that have been put in place. Really, if you talk to the sector, like the meat sector, they can’t stop talking about how wonderful the work has been done that has been done by the department. Only R11,3 million has been added to do foot-and-mouth disease surveillance, as well as BSE, which we are compelled to check by our export pressures.

Another important one - these small things that are really the work of the department of agriculture - R8,7 million has been added to check up on our ports of entry, because there is the place where the diseases enter our country. And once you have an outbreak of a disease like foot-and-mouth you’re in deep trouble because then the money starts flowing and then it starts costing the state and the country a lot of money. In this regard, I think the most positive thing that has been done about this Zimbabwe thing that everyone is talking a lot of negativity all the time has been what the Minister has announced. The positive, the way how to handle these things is what our Minister has done. Putting aside R12 million, as she announced today, for vaccines. [Interjections.]

This is to protect ourselves as well.

Mr C G EGLIN: Of course, but why do we have to protect ourselves from such an incompetent …

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: No, man. No, that’s exactly the problem we have with people on this side.

No, we are doing the right things in the right manner. These vaccines are going to play an important role, not only in protecting us, but also raising the income possibilities in Zimbabwe. That’s the type of thing that we should do.

I just want to say this: If you look at the type of things that this department is doing - the examples can multiply; the Minister had to bring down her speech by about 20 pages here to cut out about good things she had to report. But if you go and look at for example, the R7,7 million that is going for the so-called Modus satellite date capture and archiving, that is a facility that makes it possible for us to look at even where veld fires are breaking are out and monitoring it on a day to day basis. It makes it possible for us to look at the national vegetation status and see where desertification is creeping in. We can get crop statistics assistance from this satellite facility. We can get real-time fire monitoring, as I said, carbon and water balance estimation. This is the advanced side, but although we are working with the most advanced technology in this regard - supporting it, making it available in South Africa - my point still remains. Our basic function is to say that agriculture is important. We saw it when the price of maize went sky-high. The effect on our people. We must maintain that agriculture is something different from making cars or making clothes. It is a category on its own.

I can only say that I’ve got full trust in the future of agriculture in this country. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mnr A S VAN DER MERWE: Voorsitter, ek het ook ‘n toespraak voorberei vir die twee debatte, maar ek sal maar aangaan tot my tyd om is en in die volgende debat sal ek weer wil aangaan.

Agb Minister, dis waar ja dat daar in landbou verskillende agtergronde is en u sê ons moet mekaar vertrou. Ek wil van my kant af as ‘n boer sê ja, ons vertrou, maar ook moet ons bona fides aanvaar word. U het baie sake aangekondig wat vir my gerusstelling bring, maar ek gaan voort om sekere aangeleenthede weer eens onder u aandag te bring. Die strategiese plan vir Suid-Afrika se landbou bly nog steeds die belangrikste en mees omvattende plan wat ek van weet. Die gevaarlikste ding is egter dat dit nooit op die grond gaan kom nie, maar u het ‘n paar goed daaroor gesê wat vir my hoop gee.

Agb Minister, die Regering sal die inisiatief moet neem om alle rolspelers betrokke te kry en sekere verantwoordelikhede te neem in die daarstel van die plan; met ander woorde die implementering van die plan.

Regdeur die strategiese plan word gepraat van die daarstel van volhoubare landbou vir huidige sowel as toekomstige deelnemers; kommersiële, klein en bestaansboere. Volhoubare landbou in Suid-Afrika is absoluut noodsaaklik om ‘n basis te skep vir volgehoue groei van ons land. Dit sal ook die basis moet vorm om Nepad te laat slaag in Afrika.

Ter wille van ons almal in Suid-Afrika se voorspoed moet ons die inisiatief vir ons Nepad-droom vir Afrika neem. Dis goed om ‘n droom te hê vir die vasteland Afrika - êrens moet hierdie droom begin en moet dit meehelp dat die moraal van baie meer van Afrika se mense gelig word. Indien jy hard werk aan jou droom, verskerp dit jou geestelike waardes. Agb Minister, hierdie idealisme kan net met sukses in landbou tot ‘n werklikheid omvorm word.

Laat ons kyk na die prioriteite van ons landbouplan. Die eerste een wat daar uitgelig word, is die implementering van die strategie vir veiligheid en sekuriteit. Terwyl veiligheid en sekuriteit ons eerste prioriteit is, verbaas dit my dat die afskaffing van kommando’s eensydig gedoen word, sonder om byvoorbeeld AgriSA vooraf in te lig, dit gesien in die lig van die rol wat AgriSA en Nafu gespeel het met die opstel van die strategiese plan.

‘n Paar jaar gelede is die veediefstaleenheid afgeskaf. Die gevolg is dat by minder as 20% sake daar skuldigbevindings is. Ondersoeke word so swak gedoen dat aanklaers min persone skuldig bevind kry. U moet my dus nie kwalik neem dat ek bekommerd is dat ons weer al ons kundigheid gaan verloor in hierdie proses nie. Dan begin ons klaar negatief met die nommer een- prioriteit wat die strategiese plan daargestel het.

Die verwysing na landdroste uit die vorige bedeling se partydigheid is ‘n aanklag teen ons regstelsel. Regters kontroleer mos landdroste se bevindings en strafoplegging. Indien dit ons erns is, betaam dit Ministers en lede nie om hierdie ongetoetse uitlatings te maak nie. Agb Minister, wat ek nou hier genoem het, is nie u portefeulje nie, en ek weet dit, maar u is ons landbouers se Ministers en ons moet dit aan u voorlê om in die Kabinet vir ons in die bres te tree.

Ek self was jare lank lid van Senekal-kommando, en ek het gedink ons doen baie goeie werk in belang van die gemeenskap en dit meestal kosteloos. Die kommandolede verdien nie klappe nie. Versoening word nie hierdeur bevorder nie. Volhoubare landbou loop soos ‘n goue draad deur die strategiese plan. Is dit ons erns? Ek vra nie ‘n Kanaän vir landbou nie, en in ‘n landbou-arm land kan jy in elk geval nie ‘n Kanaän hê nie.

Hoe gaan ons volhoubare landbou in Suid-Afrika skep indien die staat nie ophou om landbou verder te belas nie? Brandstofheffing en -begroting kos landbou ‘n verdere R20 miljoen. Grondbelasting word op Suid-Afrikaanse landbouers afgelaai. Niemand het dit aanbeveel nie, maar hierdie duiwel word op landbou losgelaat. Die foutiewe persepsie dat alle boere ryk is, help grondhonger aan en plaas onnodiglik druk op grondhervorming en beskikbare fondse. As gevolg van foutiewe persepsies word onkundige munisipale rade deur foutiewe wetgewing op landbouers losgelaat. Raadslede weet ook nie wat op plase aangaan nie. So het Nqutuwana-munisipaliteit se begroting ‘n tekort van R9 miljoen. Hulle hef toe grondbelasting van 2% om die tekort uit te wis. Die burgemeester het dit erken op televisie. Daar word geen dienste aan landbou gelewer nie, altans nie uit hierdie oord nie. Indien hierdie belasting nie gestop word nie, sal daardie boere hulle tot die howe moet wend. Is dit wat ons soek? Hulle voortbestaan word bedreig en hulle kan dan nie anders nie.

Agb Minister, nadat u ‘n versoek tot munisipaliteite gerig het, nadat ons President dringend ‘n ondersoek gelas het, gaan hierdie munisipaliteit maar net voort met sy belasting. Ek is uiters bekommerd dat daar geen koördinasie is tussen departemente nie.

Word die effek van hierdie optrede dan nie verreken nie? Is daar niemand wat toesien dat hierdie aanslag op landbou hokgeslaan word nie? Is daar geen kommunikasie tussen eerste- en derdevlakregering oor die ontwikkeling en implementering van doeltreffende risikobestuurstelsels, byvoorbeeld plant- en dieregesondheidstelsels, natuurrampe en kredietwaarborge nie?

Ek weet daar is baie werk hieroor gedoen. Ek wil aan die agb Ministers ‘n versoek rig dat hierdie saak bespoedig moet word. Dit moet landbou in die geheel tot diens wees. Die staat moet ‘n rol hierin speel. Streng dissipline moet deel van die skema wees. Die risikobestuurstelsel is noodsaaklik vir grondhervorming.

By die voorleggings oor voedselsekuriteit is daar ‘n baie goeie voorlegging gemaak van bestaansboerderye in en om stedelike gebiede. Dit is prysenswaardig. Wat ons moet bepaal, is hoeveel van die armoedevraagstuk hierdeur verlig kan word. Hoeveel is bereid om hulle posisie met hierdie insette te verbeter? (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr A S VAN DER MERWE: Chairperson, I also prepared a speech for the two debates, but I will simply go on until my time has expired and in the next debate I would like to continue again.

Hon Minister, yes, it is true that there are different backgrounds in agriculture and you say that we must trust one another. For my part as a farmer, I want to say yes, we trust, but our bona fides must also be accepted. You have announced many issues which bring me comfort, but I am going to proceed once again to bring certain matters to your attention.

The strategic plan for South Africa’s agriculture still remains the most important and most comprehensive plan I know about. However, the most dangerous thing is that it will never materialise on the ground, but you said a few things about it which gave me hope.

Hon Minister, the Government will have to take the initiative to get all the role-players involved and take certain responsibilities in the introduction of the plan; in other words, the implementation of the plan.

Right through the strategic plan, mention is made of the establishment of sustainable agriculture for current as well as future participants; commercial, small and subsistence farmers. Sustainable agriculture in South Africa is absolutely essential to create a basis for sustainable growth in our country. It will also have to form the basis for Nepad to succeed in Africa.

For the sake of the prosperity of all of us in South Africa, we must take the initiative for our Nepad dream for Africa. It is good to have a dream for the continent of Africa - somewhere that dream has to begin and it must assist in building the morale of many more of Africa’s people. If you work hard on your dream, it intensifies your spiritual values. Hon Minister, this idealism can only be transformed into a reality through success in agriculture.

Let us look at the priorities of our agricultural plan. The first one that is highlighted there is the implementation of the strategy for safety and security. While safety and security is our first priority, it surprises me that the abolition of commandos is being done unilaterally, without informing AgriSA, for example, beforehand; viewed in the light of the role which AgriSA and Nafu played in the drafting of the strategic plan.

A few years ago the stock theft unit was disbanded. The result is that there are convictions in less than 20% of cases. Investigations are so badly done that prosecutors get few people convicted. You should therefore not blame me if I am concerned that we are once again going to lose all our expertise in this process. We will then already have made a negative start with the number one priority which the strategic plan has established.

The reference to the partiality of magistrates from the former dispensation is an indictment of our justice system. Surely judges control magistrates’ findings and sentencing. If we are serious about this, it is not proper for Ministers and members to make these untested statements. Hon Minister, what I have now mentioned here, is not your portfolio, and I know that, but you are the Ministers for us farmers and we must submit this to you to take up the cudgels for us in the Cabinet.

I was a member of the Senekal commando for many years, and I thought that we were doing very good work in the interests of the community, and mostly free of charge. The commando members do not deserve insults. Reconciliation will not be promoted in this way. Sustainable agriculture runs like a golden thread through this strategic plan. Are we serious about this? I am not asking for a Canaan for agriculture, and in an agriculturally poor country one cannot have a Canaan anyway.

How are we going to create sustainable agriculture in South Africa if the state does not stop taxing agriculture further? Fuel levies and fuel budgeting cost agriculture a further R20 million. Land taxation is being unloaded on South African farmers. No one recommended this, but this devil is being let loose on agriculture. The faulty perception that all farmers are wealthy promotes land hunger and places unnecessary pressure on land reform and available funds.

As a result of faulty perceptions, ignorant municipal councils are let loose on farmers through faulty legislation. Councillors also do not know what is going on on farms. So, Nqutuwana municipality’s budget had a shortfall of R9 million. They then levied a land tax of 2% to cancel the shortfall. The mayor admitted it on television. No services are being rendered to agriculture, at least not from this source. If this taxation is not stopped, those farmers will have to resort to the courts. Is that what we want? Their continued existence is threatened and there is nothing else they can do. Hon Minister, after you addressed a request to municipalities, after our President urgently launched an investigation, this municipality simply continued with its taxation. I am extremely concerned that there is no co- ordination between departments.

Is the effect of this action not taken into account? Is there no one who sees to it that this attack on agriculture is stopped? Is there no communication between first and third-tier government on the development and implementation of effective risk management systems, for example, plant and animal health systems, natural disasters and credit guarantees?

I know that a lot of work on this has been done. I would like to address a request to the hon Ministers that this matter should be expedited. It should serve agriculture in its entirety. The state must play a role in this. Strict discipline must be part of the scheme. The risk management system is essential for land reform.

During the submissions on food security a very good submission was made regarding farming in and around urban areas. This is praiseworthy. What we must determine is how much of the poverty issue can be relieved in this way. How many are prepared to improve their position with these inputs?]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, your time has expired.

Mnr A S VAN DER MERWE: Ek sal by die volgende item aangaan daarmee. Die NNP ondersteun die landboubegroting. [Applous.] [I will continue with this during the next item. The NNP supports the agriculture Vote. [Applause.]]

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Geagte meneer die Voorsitter, in Oktober verlede jaar was die koerantopskrifte in Suid-Afrika baie duidelik: ‘n Kos-oorlog; Prysstygings laat Suid-Afrika steier.

In die media moes mense lees dat mieliemeel 76% duurder is as ‘n jaar gelede, brood 26% duurder, hoendervleis 18% duurder, vleis 20% duurder en groente 19% duurder. Die meulenaars sê aan die een kant hulle insetkoste het met 60% gestyg. Die persepsie is die boere is ryk en dit is lekker om ‘n boer te wees.

Wat is die werklikheid? Die werklikheid is dat die boere in een van die mees riskante bedrywe in Suid-Afrika is. Daar word nie gevra hoeveel het die boer se insetkoste gestyg nie. Daar word nie gevra wat is die netto winste van die boere nie.

In die landbou is daar sekere faktore waaroor niemand beheer het nie. Dit is soos die natuur in terme van reën, droogte of vloed. Daar is egter verskeie faktore wat ‘n direkte invloed het op die insetkoste van die boer en faktore waaroor die Regering direkte beheer het.

Kom ons begin by die brandstof. Die Regering bepaal die prys van diesel. Diesel styg nou weer met 20c tot 25c per liter. Binnekort moet die boere begin oes. Die prysverhoging het ‘n direkte verhoging tot gevolg in terme van sy insetkoste. Hoekom kan die Regering nie rebatte vir die landbou op brandstof toestaan soos in die geval van die visbedryf nie. Nuwe stropers se pryse het tot 80% gestyg. Sekerlik gaan dit ook nou meer kos vir ‘n boer om sy oes te laat stroop.

Die Regering stel ‘n minimumloon vir plaaswerkers in, wat verder bydra tot hoër insetkoste, maar die agb Minister van Arbeid sê hy wil nie met die boere praat nie.

Die Regering is besig met die wetsontwerp op eiendomsbelasting, waardeur landbougrond deur munisipaliteite belas gaan word - ‘n verdere las vir die boer wat hy moet betaal. Die Regering stel waterbronbestuurheffings in wat boere nou moet betaal. Die sentrum sal eers oor 15 jaar operasioneel wees, maar die boere moet nou reeds die heffings daarvoor betaal.

As die Regering sê dat hy ernstig is met die landbou kan hy bydra om insetkoste te verlaag. Net deur middel van hierdie aspekte wat ek so pas genoem het, kan hy ‘n direkte rol speel en sorg dat dit nie plaasvind nie.

‘n Ander werklikheid is dat die verbruiker nie die voordeel kry wanneer die boer se produkprys verlaag nie. ‘n Goeie voorbeeld is die nasionale rooivleisprodusente-organisasie wat nou bepaal het dat beesvleis al die afgelope paar weke met 30% gedaal het, maar die verbruiker betaal steeds die hoë pryse in die slaghuise en in die supermarkte.

Landbou voed die volk. Landbou moet gesien word as ‘n strategiese bedryf en moet daarvolgens gehanteer word deur die Regering. Die agb Adjunkminister het gekom en hy het vertel hoe belangrik is die landbou. Ek wil vir die agb Adjunkminister sê daar is ander kollegas van hulle, soos die Minister van Arbeid, wat nie dieselfde standpunt huldig as dié twee agb Ministers nie. Daar is die Minister van Waterwese wat sy heffings instel wat nie dieselfde standpunt huldig as hierdie agb Ministers nie.

Die Regering kan dadelik ‘n rol begin speel en hulle kan begin om ‘n bydrae te lewer om produksiekoste te help verseker. Orals in die wêreld dra regerings by tot daardie premies. Die Regering kan in Suid-Afrika ook ‘n voorbeeld stel en daardie bydrae begin lewer. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Mr Chairperson, in October last year the newspaper headlines in South Africa were very clear: A food war; Price increases make South Africa stagger.

In the press people had to read that maize meal is 76% more expensive, bread is 26% more expensive, chicken is 18% more expensive, meat is 20% more expensive and vegetables are 19% more expensive than a year ago. On the one hand the millers are saying that their input costs have increased with 60%. The perception is that farmers are rich and that it is nice to be a farmer.

What is the reality? The reality is that farmers are in one of the most risky industries in South Africa. It is not asked by how much the farmers input costs have increased. It is not asked what the net profit of farmers are.

In agriculture there are certain factors over which no one has control. It is like nature in terms of rain, drought or flooding. There are, however, various factors which have a direct influence on the input costs of the farmer and factors over which Government has direct control.

Let us start with fuel. Government determines the price of diesel. The price of diesel is now going to increase with 20c to 25c per litre. Shortly farmers will have to start harvesting. This price increase has as a result a direct increase in terms of his input costs. Why can Government not grant rebates for agriculture in terms of fuel as is the case with the fishing industry? The price of new harvesters has increased by up to 80%. It will now surely cost a farmer more to strip his own harvest.

Government sets a minimum wage for farm workers which further contributes to higher input costs, but the hon Minister of Labour says that he does not want to talk to farmers.

Government is busy with the Bill on property rates, through which agricultural land will now be taxed by municipalities - a further burden for the farmer that he has to pay. Government sets water resource management levies which farmers now have to pay. The centre will only be operational in 15 years, but farmers have to pay the levies for that now already.

If Government says that it is serious about agriculture, it can contribute by lowering input costs. By means of these aspects alone, which I have just mentioned, Government can play a direct role and ensure that this does not happen.

Another reality is that the consumer does not get the benefit when the farmer’s product price decreases. A good example is that the national red meat producers organisation has now determined that the price of beef has decreased with 30% over the past few weeks, but the consumer continues to pay high prices at butchers and at supermarkets.

Agriculture feeds the nation. Agriculture should be seen as a strategic industry and should be dealt with by Government accordingly. The hon Deputy Minister came and told us how important agriculture is. I want to tell the hon Deputy Minister that there are some of his other colleagues, such as the Minister of Labour, who do not hold the same point of view as these two hon Ministers. The Minister of Water Affairs introduces his levies and does not hold the same point of view as these hon Ministers.

Government can start playing a role immediately and they can start by making a contribution to help ensure production costs. Across the globe governments contribute to these premiums. The Government in South Africa can set an example by making that contribution. I thank you.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Chairperson, as we debate the finances of this department we are reminded of the challenges that face the Minister, the challenges that the Minister is faced with, particularly relating to converting the mission and objectives of the Department into reality. The department’s major task is to facilitate the promotion of agricultural development for growth, equality and social development.

We have in the past encouraged and pointed out to the Minister that the task of transformation in this sector requires consistency, as this forms the backbone of our economy in addressing the challenges of poverty and economic growth. It is because of the importance of these pressing challenges that adequate Government resources should be made available specifically for the programmes.

In as far as Government has set itself targets for economic growth, there should be targets for poverty relief for alleviation programmes.

We have seen how our poverty is affecting our communities in rural areas, and dying livestock because of a lack of rain. The situation is worse in the Limpopo province. We know, as a matter of fact, that the majority of people are unemployed, and those that are employed, are mainly working on farms. With the picture that we paint, it is clear that the bulk of the budget should be directed to the programmes that are sustainable to target poverty and create sustainable jobs. We have noted and acknowledged that there are programmes aimed at facilitating food security in this regard. Such a move by the department is welcome, but it has to be pointed out that the set-up kits that are given to communities mainly affected by poverty in this form, with its many agricultural tools and seeds to plant, should not be seen as the actual means of fighting poverty in the long term.

This year the special programme on the food security budget shows the much improved planning in terms of resources allocated for this purpose as compared to the previous year.

CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, your time has expired.

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: The UCDP will, however, support this vote.

Mrs B M NTULI: Chairperson, hon members, I support the budget. The ANC-led Government policies will transform South African society from the horrid legacy of apartheid to a society in which there is improved quality of life for all our people.

The overarching objective is to ensure sustainable development so that we can create employment opportunities for the people and push back the frontiers of poverty.

To enhance equitable access and sustained participation in the agricultural sector in order to eliminate skewed participation and inequality in the sector, we can and shall push back the frontiers of poverty and expand access to a better life.

Allow me to look at programme 2. Farmer support and development, farmer settlement, food security, rural development, growth and transformation are key in this programme. The 12.3% increase will go a long way, especially in the rural areas where the department wants to lead and support sustainable agriculture, promote development through ensuring access to safe and nutritious food.

You cannot achieve this without land. I am happy that the distribution of land is taking place faster and that the settlement of claims has dramatically increased. Transferring agricultural state-owned land is welcome, as well as the ownership of land, especially for women.

Omama abanikezwe ubunikazi bomhlaba [Women must be given land ownership rights.]

That is why we are talking about the female farmer competition. Given land, women can make a difference. Halala bomama! Halala! [Congratulations women! Congratulations!]

We also want to congratulate the Minister on giving people starter packs for agricultural development and food gardens to enable people to have diversity of food consumption by members of their households. Everybody agrees that having a garden or some produce does help a household to have food security. So agricultural production is important. We are happy that there is a 262.3% increase in this regard. It shows commitment. We will have more female farmer awards in the future.

I want to commend the commitment of all the farmers who continue to play a vital role by mentoring small and emerging farmers. We are talking about Afgri’s apple project, in which Petros Mokoena and Jonas Hadebe have jointly been named farmers of the year in Afgri’s Eastern Free State apple project.

Lokhu kuhle kuyabongeka emehlweni kaNkulunkulu kusho izwi. UNkulunkulu uthanda ukuthi abantu babe nokuphila, babe nakho kuchichime. [This is good and appreciated in God’s eyes, say the Scriptures. God wants people to have life, an abundance of it.]

People in communal areas depend mainly on subsistence farming for their livelihood. People should have self-help schemes, but hon Minister, this will not help if people do not have access to water. Irrigation! Irrigation! Irrigation! Water use and irrigation development is a resource that poor farmers need most. Efficient use of irrigation systems must be looked at. We cannot have a situation where farmers live in different countries in one area - a farmer irrigating on the other side of the river or dam, and a farmer on dry land on the other side of the river. Programme 6 is very important. It is about sustainable resource management. Research and training of new and existing small and subsistence farmers is important. To research, analyse and to advise, we welcome the increase of the ARC allocation. We are happy that the Minister and the department are giving an ear to our requests. But we are aware that the Grootfontein Agricultural Development Institute is receiving less this time. In order for us to empower black farmers we need training, hon Minister. Extension officers should come out of their offices and work in the field, training people. Commercial farmers are doing it, but let’s do more.

The department and the Ministry should also look into the possibility of reviving dipping services in the rural areas, maybe working with provinces.

Ukuze izinkomo zikaMaZondi nezikaMaMahlangu ziphile kahle zingabi nemikhaza kubalulekile lokhu ngoba sifuna bathuthuke. [In order for the cattle of MaZondi and MaMahlangu to live well and not have ticks, this is important, because we want them to develop.]

Our Constitution, in section 27(1), says everybody has the right to have access to sufficient food and water and that the state must take reasonable legislative measures and other measures within its available resources to avail the progressive realisation of each of these rights.

Promotion of subsistence farming in the rural areas will go a long way in addressing this by increasing household food production and reducing the number of hungry and malnourished people.

Phezu komkhono lifikile ihlobo bomama, nazo izingolovana, nanko amahalavu nembewu. Lokhu okwenzayo mhlonishwa kukhulu. [It is time to plough, women, the summer has arrived. Here are cocopans, shovels and seeds. What you are doing, hon Minster, is great.]

This is creating personal hope amongst the poorest of the poor, building household food security and rebuilding society.

Okungenzeki-ke kubantu kuNkulunkulu kuyenzeka. Siyabonga Mhlonishwa. Uma uNkulunkulu ayala amagwababa ukuba ondle u-Elija thina singobani ukuthi sime endleleni kaNkulunkulu. Ngisho kulabo abangafuni ukuba umuntu omnyama athuthuke. Izwi lithi labo abatshala ngezinyembezi bayovuna ngentokozo. Ngiyazi ukuthi ukube bekuya ngathi ngabe isabelo semali yezolimo sikhulu kunalokhu. Kodwa manje sinikwe yona lena asiyisebenzise ngokuhlakanipha. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[What cannot happen through people, does happen through God. Thank you, hon Minister for this. If God could advise the crow to feed Elijah, who are we to stand in God’s way. I am talking to those who do not want to see a black person improve. The Scriptures say that those who plough with tears will reap with happiness. I know that if things had gone according to our wishes, we would have a bigger agricultural budget than this. But we have been given only this, therefore let us use it wisely to ensure increased black economic empowerment.]

Sibonga kakhulu izinhlangano zabalimi ezilokhu zibonisana nomnyango okungu- NAFU no-Agri South Africa nabanye. Yibambeni bakwethu size sifike lapho siya khona. Ikati alisuke eziko. Kuyashiwo futhi nasezwini lenkosi ukuthi uJesu uqobo lwakhe ngenkathi ezokondla izinkulungwane ehlane kwakungenalutho. Kodwa wathi hambani niye kobheka ukuthi ninani. Bathi uma beyobheka bathola ukuthi banezinhlanzi ezimbili nezinkwa ezinhlanu. Wabe esethi: Kuletheni''. Wasebenzisa khona lokho. Nawe-ke Ngqongqoshe sebenzisa khona lokho okuyingcosana onakho ukuze wondle lesi sizwe sikababa. Ngibonga kakhulu Ngqongqoshe ukuthi uyamlalela uNkulunkulu, uyeziswisa uma abantu bethi balambile. Uyezwisisa ukuthi kufanele wenzeni. Phambili makhosikazi nina enihlezi lapho phambili. Sebenzani ngamandla ngoba ukuze sisuse ikati eziko kumele ukuthi kusukume thina bomama siyibambe ngoba isiSuthu sithi:Mma ngwana o tshwara thipa ka bohaleng’’. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[We would to thank the agricultural organisations like NAFU and Agri South Africa, which always work together with the department. Forward, fellow people, let us go where we are aiming to go. Let us fight poverty. It is also said in the Scriptures that when Jesus was about to feed the thousands in the forest, there was nothing. He said to people: Go and check if you have anything. When they went to check they found that they had two fish and five loaves of bread. He then said:Bring them here.’’ He then used those small things that they had. You too, hon Minister, should use that small thing that you have to feed the nation of our Father. I am thankful for the fact that you listen to God, hon Minister. You listened well when people said they were hungry. You listen as to what you should do. Forward, you women who are sitting on the public gallery, forward! You must really work, because if we want to fight poverty, we women should stand up and fight, because the Sotho saying goes: ``In times of difficulty a mother does not run away from her children.’’]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Agb Voorsitter en agb Minister, die jaar 2002 was ‘n goeie jaar vir die landbou met goeie pryse, goeie produksie en goeie markte. Dit het weer in 2003 na normaal terug gekeer met vloede en droogtes en met verhoogde produksiekoste. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Hon Chairperson and hon Minister, the year 2002 was a good year for agriculture with good prices, good production and good markets. It returned to normal in 2003 with floods and droughts and with increased production costs.]

The ability of the South African agricultural sector to continue to supply the nation with food and ensure food security is of critical importance for our economy. South African agriculture will do this as long as free market conditions prevail and unfair subsidised competition through imports are prevented.

Maar daar is vele uitdagings op baie terreine wat ons moet aanvaar en die hoof sal moet bied. Een van hulle is die kwessie rondom navorsing. [But there are many challenges in many areas that we must accept and will have to overcome. One of them is the question concerning research.]

I want to speak about research today, because I think it is important. The Agricultural Research Council is without equal in Africa, or has been without its equal, but it does not have the same status anymore.

Dit het in die termyn van hierdie Minister verswak. Navorsers het minder geword. Daar was 750 navorsers in 1994 waarvan net 400 oorgebly het - net 100 van hulle het doktorsgrade. In verlede jaar se debat het ek hierna verwys en die situasie het tot op hede nie verander nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[It declined during this Minister’s term. There are fewer researchers. There were 750 researchers in 1994, of whom only 400 remained - only 100 of them have doctorates. I referred to this in last year’s debate and the situation has still not changed.]

What are the reasons that dedicated researchers seek employment elsewhere? The researchers in the ARC have not received salary increases for the last two years. Researchers in the ARC are paid on a lower scale than those of the other councils. Funds available for research have increased and the funds for administrative duties and personnel are increased. No wonder people leave the ARC.

The base funding of the ARC in 1996-7 was R330 million. Even with the increase now, it is only 60% in real terms of what it was a few years ago. The importance of what is happening with the ARC is far-reaching for the Government of the day. In effect, a capacity essential to the success of Nepad has been reduced by 40% at a time when the President of South Africa has expressed the intention that support to agricultural research should be expanded from the present underinvestment of 1% of agricultural GDP to 3% thereof. This intention is neither to be seen in the midterm expenditure estimates for the ARC, nor elsewhere in Vote 26. There is a view on the Government’s side that the ARC is only involved in commercial farming. The ARC serves all of the agriculture sector. The Mpumelelo award for agricultural development was given on a number of occasions to the Department of Agriculture and the ARC. They trained both the small scale farmer of the year, as well as the female farmer of the year. But they are not really empowered to do this.

What is really happening in the Department of Agriculture and the ARC? Is the department developing its own research capacity and phasing out the ARC? There are signs of this in terms of the lack of communication between the ARC and the Department of Agriculture. If not, why then the difference in the budget that the ARC receives from the national department in this regard?

The stated target of the subprogrammes of scientific research and development of the national department is a restructured and re-orientated Agricultural Research Council by March 2004. According to the ARC Act, restructuring is a function of the ARC and not of the department.

Furthermore, the national department has usurped the right to present South Africa in regional and national research forums, where issues are often not of a policy nature and the national department does not have a research capacity. Why and where does the ARC come in this?

We understand that in order to ensure the survival of the ARC people are made redundant. In this respect, for instance, the experimental farms at Ficksburg, Langkloof, Citrusdal and the tobacco research at Nelspruit have all been terminated. No activity takes place. The people involved there get paid but do nothing. Is that true? Where are the funds to do so? R7 million a year goes to people who have no work to do. What will happen to these experimental stations?

Is the Minister aware of the fact that the nonresearch component of the ARC, the head office, is steadily increasing in relative numbers and research declines in relative numbers. Is the Minister aware that the directors of the institutes of the ARC are being stripped of their present powers and all decisions regarding contracts and research directions are drawn up to the administrative level? Is the Minister aware of the intentions to advertise the directors’ posts and that the present directors have no certainty that they will be reappointed, even in a lower position with scaled down powers? Should this happen, we can expect legal action against the ARC in this regard.

Another worrying fact is the interaction between the different departments involved in the ARC funding. The Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology has made budgetary provision to transfer R30 million to the ARC for the upkeep of the reference collections and gene banks which are of national importance to many other disciplines. But the Department of Agriculture does not do the same. Are you strangling the ARC for other reasons? We would like to know what is happening.

The national agriculture research forum which is now to be, I think, should be listened to in terms of research. The tenure of the ARC has been extended by three months. Why is it that the new council has not yet been appointed in time for the new financial year? This is the second time that the tenure of the ARC has been extended so as to appoint the new council. On the previous occasions the Minister even appointed an interim council and an interim chair, both of which the Act does not make provision for. The representivity of the board should also be more in accord with the national research forum. My time has expired. There are a number of things that I would still like to say, but one thing in general though.

Minister, verlede jaar het ons gaande geraak oor die strategiese plan vir die landbou. Waar staan ons daarmee? Ek bespeur al meer vraagtekens oor die werklike bedoeling en implementering daarvan in die praktyk. Dit kom nie van die grond af nie. Was dit net woorde en beloftes?

Die praktiese implementering van arbeidswetgewing en minimum lone is landbou-onvriendelik. Weet u dit? Die boere en arbeiders word nog steeds vermoor op die plase. Veediefstalle neem skrikwekkende afmetings aan. Deskundige personeel verlaat u departement, Minister. U het nie meer die kundigheid wat u gehad het nie. U is besig om u greep op die landbou te verloor en die burokrate en die praters en die vergaderingshouers en die werkswinkelhouers neem oor. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Minister, last year we became very excited about the strategic plan for agriculture. Where are we with that? I sense more and more question marks about the real intention and implementation of that in practice. It is just not coming off the ground. Was it only words and promises?

The practical implementation of labour legislation and minimum wages is agriculture-unfriendly. Do you know that? Farmers and farm workers are still being murdered on farms. Stock theft is taking on alarming proportions. Expert personnel are leaving your department, Minister. You no longer have the expertise you used to have. You are losing your grip on agriculture and the bureaucrats and the talkers and holders of meetings and those workshops holders are taking over. [Time expired.]]

Dr M S MOGOBA: Chairperson, agriculture and land are very important, because they deal with food. Food comes from the land, contrary to the simplistic view of many people in our urban areas who think that food comes from the supermarket, the shop and the greengrocer. Without food we would not survive a day or even a few days. We live because we eat. Food comes from the land and not from the air.

Our country and region have lately experienced severe drought and climatic changes. Temperatures averaging 30 degrees are common throughout our country and throughout summer. Crop failures are not caused by the likes of President Mugabe, as was often alleged in this House last year. If he caused drought and crop failure then it is the chance of Presidents Mbeki, Nujoma, Chissano and all the leaders of SADC to take the blame. We are going to face a bleak future in Southern Africa and we need to brace ourselves for acute food shortages. Crop failures mean more expensive food which will adversely affect the poorest of the poor. Food parcel programmes by the Department of Social Development are appreciated, but unless jobless people are given jobs and the subsidies for basic food supplies are increased, the one-off or occasional food supply would be most inadequate.

Farmers form a very important sector of our population. This current drought has hit them very severely and many will go under. The Government should be very generous in assisting them. The huge deserts of Africa are increasing in size and fast approaching our country. We will need to adapt quickly and adopt survival techniques to survive. Drought also affects stock farmers, poultry and piggery farmers. Many small farmers cannot afford the escalating costs of feed. They will need urgent intervention from the Government to survive. I recall a certain Mr Matsama who farms in Potchefstroom and I hope that the Government will do something to help people like him. A nation that cannot feed itself, cannot claim to be developed. [Time expired.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Chairperson. The agricultural sector plays an important role in the sustenance of all. It is sad, though, that the sector does not receive the attention and publicity it should.

The production of wheat, fruit and vegetables and many other products that are capable of being farmed, including livestock, is important to the survival of millions of people. Besides the sector playing a crucial role in the survival of all, it contributes greatly to the state revenue. Noted projects of export form one such contribution.

The MF notes that the sector has undergone major changes to bring it within its constitutional parameters. Much discriminatory legislation that previously curtailed the access to participation in the industry has been done away with. Many other projects have been initiated to liberate the sector. The MF applauds this. With the unemployment, the MF feels that the sector can do a great deal about job creation. Though the industry has grown into time and technology, tasks should be reserved for manual labour as, at the end of the day, the most flawless machine would be man himself.

The sector previously employed persons earning half salaries for the volume of work that he or she slogged for long hours. This is totally unacceptable. The MF is pleased that the minimum wage of farmworkers has been introduced to do away with this. We are working hard to overcome poverty and achieve sustainable development. How is this possible if we exploit our own people?

Our land is said not to be appropriate for crop production, however, with the ever-growing population we need to increase crop production to feed the mouths of South Africans. The MF feels that the budget allocated to the sector is appropriate and hopes that this shall be utilised to the benefit of all, especially the starving, the poor and the needy, most effectively and efficiently.

Thank you, Minister, for taking various initiatives in affording some relief to the most needy people of our country. The MF supports this budget Vote. [Time expired.][Applause.]

Mnr C AUCAMP: Mnr die Voorsitter en agb Minister, my bydrae tot hierdie debat geskied vanuit ‘n posisie van oor op die grond. [Tussenwerpsels.] Die lid sê ek moet oorkom, maar die NA is dan die mees senior van al die nuwe partye, so hoekom sal ek?

Oor die afgelope tyd het ons in die NA wyd gekonsulteer in die landbousektor. Ek het gepraat met mak boere en met wilde boere, met wit boere en met swart boere. Oor die algemeen is daar waardering vir die werk van u departement en vir die plek wat landbou op die nasionale agenda inneem, maar tog is daar in die laaste tyd toenemend kommer by ons boere. Daar is ‘n paar jakkalse wat besig is om die wingerd te verniel. Ek stip net drie van hulle kortliks aan.

Eerstens is daar die beoogde belasting op grond. Die saak word gesien as ‘n bedreiging vir die toekoms van landbou. Die NA is in geheel gekant teen enige vorm van belasting op landbougrond. Terwyl ander lande enorme bedrae in subsidies aan landbou gee, wil hierdie Regering landbou belas, wil hy op hierdie wyse die gans wat die goue eiers lê, nek omdraai.

Dis onbillik dat belastings gehef word van ‘n gemeenskap aan wie feitlik geen dienste gelewer word nie. In die praktyk blyk dit ook dat plaaslike owerhede ‘n houding wil inneem dat grondbelasting op boerdery-eiendom ‘n handige middel gaan wees om die tekorte wat deur swak bestuur en wanbetaling ontstaan het aan te vul. Koop maar ‘n R3 miljoen-huis vir die burgemeester, bou maar daardie luukse raadsaal teen miljoene rande, verskaf maar dienste waar rekenings maande agterstallig is, ons het mos ‘n derdeman op die grens; grondbelasting. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr C AUCAMP: Mr Chairman and hon Minister, my contribution to this debate takes place from a position of ear to the ground. [Interjections.] The member says I should cross over, but the NA is the most senior of all the new parties, so why should I?

We in the NA have recently consulted widely in the agricultural sector. I spoke to tame farmers and to wild farmers, to white farmers and to black farmers. In general there is appreciation for the work of your department and for the place that agriculture takes on the national agenda, but there has nevertheless in recent times been a growing concern among our farmers. There are a few little foxes that are spoiling the vines. I briefly want to highlight only three of them.

Firstly there is the envisaged tax on land. The matter is seen as a threat to the future of agriculture. The NA is entirely opposed to any form of taxation on agricultural land. While other countries give enormous amounts in subsidies to agriculture, this Government wants to tax agriculture, and in this way it wants to wring the neck of the goose that lays the golden eggs.

It is unfair to collect taxes from a community to whom virtually no services are rendered. In practice it also appears as if local authorities want to take the position that land taxation on farming property is going to be a handy source for replenishing the shortages that arise owing to poor management and mispayment. It is quite all right to buy a R3 million house for the mayor, to build that luxury council chamber at millions of rands, supply services where accounts are in arrears monthly, surely we have a third man on the line, land tax.]

Hon Minister, the NA would like to know from you what your input will be at the most important workshop on land tax to be held by Mr Mufamadi’s department on 7 and 8 April. Are you going to fight for your farmers or are you going to echo His Master’s Voice?

The second matter is the one of minimum wages for farmworkers. Let me state it clearly: the NA is in favour of a reasonable wage for any worker everywhere in South Africa.

Die Bybel sê mos die arbeider is sy loon werd. Dis egter die ``one-size- fits-all’‘-benadering van die wet wat nie ruimte laat vir die talle onmisbare determinante in die landboubedryf nie, wat hersien moet word. Geen voorsiening word gemaak vir meriete, vir geskooldheid en vir posverantwoordelikheid nie. Dit ondermyn produktiwiteit en ondernemingsgees by werkers. Die aftrekking van slegs 10% vir behuising en rantsoene gaan die standaard daarvan tot nadeel van die werkers laat daal.

Hierdie wetgewing begryp nie die verhoudings op ons plase nie, wat veel meer is as ‘n blote werkgewer-werknemer-verhouding en wat eerder ‘n omvattende sorg behels oor ‘n baie lang tyd. Die NA pleit daarom dat die agenda vir die werkswinkel van die Departement van Arbeid op 8 April uitgebrei moet word om meer as net die sektorale vasstelling vir die betrokke wet te bespreek, maar om werklik te luister na die opinies van lojale, welmenende Suid-Afrikaners oor hierdie uiters belangrike saak. Die derde saak het eintlik betrekking op netnou se debat oor grondsekuriteit. Die NA is verheug dat die Minister en, les bes, die President hulle duidelik uitgespreek het teen grondhervorming à la Zimbabwe. Dit moes lankal gebeur het. Die onverklaarbare stilswye het onnodige onstabiliteit geskep. Die staat se hantering van die bekende Modderklip-saak is egter uiters kommerwekkend. Die staat se aansoek om verlof tot appèl is in April 2003 geweier en nou nader hulle die Appèlhof direk om te appelleer. Dit stuur ‘n verkeerde sein uit. Intussen kon die eienaar, mnr Duvenhage, sedert Mei 2000 nie sy grond gebruik nie, en het hy nog geen vergoeding ontvang nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The Bible says that the labourer deserves his wage. However, it is the one- size-fits-all approach of the Act that leaves no room for the many indispensable determinants in the agricultural industry, which have to be reviewed. No provision is made for merit, skills level and for responsibility for position. This undermines productivity and entrepreneurship among workers. A deduction of only 10% for housing and rations is going to cause its standard to decline to the detriment of the workers.

This legislation does not understand the relationship on our farms, which is much more than a simple employer-employee relationship and instead entails comprehensive care over a very long time. The NA is therefore pleading that the agenda for the workshop of the Department of Labour on 8 April should be expanded to include more than just the sectoral determination for the relevant Act, but to really listen to the opinions of loyal, well-meaning South Africans on this extremely important matter.

The third matter is in fact relevant to the debate just now about land security. The NA is delighted that the Minister and, last but not least, the President, have eventually expressed themselves opposed to land reform á la Zimbabwe. This should have happened a long time ago. The inexplicable silence created unnecessary instability. The state’s handling of the well- known Modderklip matter is extremely disconcerting, however. The state’s application for leave to appeal was refused in April 2003 and now they are approaching the Court of Appeals directly to appeal. This sends out the wrong signal. In the meantime the owner, Mr Duvenhage, has been unable to use his land since May 2002 and he has not received any compensation yet.]

The NA calls on the Minister to accept the decision of the court and we call on the department to get its act together. This is indeed a test case for the credibility of Government’s promises and the guarantees of the Constitution concerning the security of ownership. The cost of failing this test will be far more than the cost of honouring the order of the court. I thank you.

Mr D M DLALI: Thank you, Chairperson. I think, firstly, we need to warn my hon colleague Van Niekerk that the days of darkness are over. You have argued the point that the labour laws are unfriendly to farmers. This was debated here and it is very clear that farmworkers are also human beings. They need to be treated as such. The ANC has declared this year as the year of united action to push back the frontiers of poverty. Therefore we need a united action against poverty. Let’s declare a war on poverty. We must remove hunger from our people. Now is the time to do just that. We need to work with other formations, mobilise resources and our people, in particular in the rural areas, and lead a popular campaign for rural development, including the formation and development of co-operatives, farmers and rural enterprises and associations.

In removing hunger, we need to accelerate the farmer support programmes, such as tractor support, as part of comprehensive farmer support services linked with water support services in needy communities, in particular the rural and village areas, so that our people should not depend on food parcels and agricultural packs, and be enabled to support themselves on the notion of the Vukuzenzele approach.

I want to join the Minister in also congratulating Mr and Mrs Ludidi, who are sitting up there, on seeing that the community needed their support, which they did indeed give.

The programme of pushing back the frontiers of poverty requires an integrated and comprehensive approach to poverty eradication. It also requires that all spheres of government, ie local government, provincial government, etc, should support one another and must be part of this integrated approach.

The eradication of poverty is fundamental to the restoration of the dignity of the majority of our people and a better life for all citizens. The President, in his state of the nation address for 2003, said:

The empowerment we speak of is an inclusive process and not an exclusive one. No economy can meet its potential if any part of its citizens is not fully integrated into all aspects of that economy.

The subsidisations should be looked at very carefully to enable us to remove hunger from our people and to perpetuate the process of growth and transformation in the agricultural sector in a sustainable way. It is also critical that the capacity-building human resources development needs to be accelerated. It’s also clear that the tractor support services cannot be seen in isolation from the other critical support services that small, subsistence or poor rural farmers need from Government. It’s also critical and important that the tractor support programme should be part of an integrated and comprehensive farmer support that would ensure the sustainability, affordability, availability and accessibility of support services that are brought closer to where farmers are or where the need is at a very local level. This will then assist the role of local government in terms of economic development.

It’s also clear and important to bear in mind that the Land Bank alone will not be able to deliver or perform said services referred to above. We can also question the availability and accessibility of the Land Bank to emerging farmers living in very remote villages or rural areas. Is the Land Bank informing the emerging farmers of the services that they are providing? Do these people know where the Land Bank is? These are the questions we need to answer.

Local government has a role to play here as one of the spheres of government to make sure that within their jurisdiction they assist the local farmers with whatever information they may need, so that they all participate in the local economic development as an inclusive part of economic development and also to ensure the sustainability of all programmes. The establishment and the involvement of community structures is also critical to make sure that whatever programme is coming up, these structures are able to take control if it is a community-based programme to manage and oversee the running of said programme or project. Again, in this case the local government, through its structures, can play a major role, like your ward committee systems, where necessary, to have support mechanisms which, in the long run, will help the economic growth of that area, and the poor people will be less dependent on food parcels or agricultural packs for survival and do things for themselves - Vukuzenzele

  • and be able to feed their children.

The accessibility of land for subsistence farmers is also critical to promote the stability within the agricultural sector. The change must go on at a faster pace. We must accelerate the service delivery at a faster pace with an integrated comprehensive partnership between all formations or stakeholders.

If we all agree, as I think we do, and share the same views that the Department of Agriculture’s programmes’ strategic objectives include facilitating the transfer of 30% of the country’s agricultural land over 15 years, improving the nutrition and income of the rural poor intending to farm, and expanding opportunities for women and youths in rural areas, we may also agree that the pace of land redistribution for this purpose has increased, but by how much?

Then, my question will remain: by how much? How far are we from reaching the goals that we have set ourselves? That is why I will agree with the view that we need to move at a faster pace, because our people are dying of hunger. Time is also running out. Poor people are losing patience. We need to understand that and therefore accelerate the service delivery to our people, as we have promised them that change will move at a faster pace.

I am raising these questions or matters of concern, because this Government cannot act alone or do all these things alone or deliver services in isolation of all other programmes, but the role of white commercial farmers is critical in this regard. These farmers need to be actively participating in partnership with the Government and with all spheres of government in delivering the land to the poor, and they should release some of their farms to the black people for farming purposes, and should also be seen to be assisting the emerging farmers with training, skilling, capacitating them for a better life for all, for competitiveness and to enable them to compete in the market like any other business or farmer.

We should not lose sight of the fact that these white farmers referred to above are what they are today because of the former regime’s focus of attention on them, using the Land Bank to fund them with a cheap and low interest rate to enable them to grow. They also received land for free from which the black people were forcefully removed for them to farm and exploit the black farm workers, paying them peanuts to enrich themselves through the sweat and blood of our people. This is history now, and we can forgive them, but we should not forget that history and where we are coming from, and we should remind them of what this history says to them.

Therefore I am calling upon all these commercial white farmers to assist this Government to deliver all kinds of services to the needy people who need these farms for farming purposes to feed the nation, in particular the poor rural areas and the poor people of their motherland. White commercial farmers, come on board with all spheres of government, to be counted, to rewrite history for yourselves, to build this nation and to better the lives of our people. Gone are the days of darkness. They are over. Please come on board and let’s all deliver these services to our people at a faster pace. Let’s all of us push back the frontiers of poverty. Let’s join hands and do the right thing because it is the right thing to do for a better life for all our people, especially the African people, the poor people in their motherland. This country is rich. This country can feed its citizens if we all participate in the economy of the country. [Interjections.] If we are all participating …


Mr D M DLALI: Thank you, Chairperson.

This country is rich. This country can feed its citizens if we all participate in the economy of the country. If we are all willing and prepared to share the wealth of this country, people will share the wealth of this country. We need all of us to be part of the economy of this country for the betterment of all citizens of South Africa. There are other white commercial farmers who gave land to their black people for farming purposes free of charge. We appreciate that and we need more of those who understand the needs of our people, and that they need a better life for their children.

Lastly, we should congratulate the Department of Agriculture on its achievements in the past financial year, and hope that this financial year they will do even better and accelerate delivery to the poor to better the lives of all our people. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Mr Chairperson, hon members, I wish to thank all the members who have participated in this debate, assure them that we have listened to the concerns that they have raised and some of the challenges that they challenged us to look at. But, I think, it is also necessary to make sure that we correct certain misconceptions.

Here I would like to respond to few hon members. The hon member Van Niekerk raised the issue about the Agricultural Research Council, which he called the exodus of scientists because of poor management of the institution. He raised some issues which he said indicates that there might be a deliberate scuttling of the ARC. Probably, that is gossip. If there are talebearers within the ARC who say such things, hon member, I think it is important for you to tell them to come out of the shadows and be known.

The truth of the matter, and I think it’s the matter that you yourself owe to this House to explain why the ARC is in such a situation today, is that we are dealing with the legacy of our past - a past that you know. When the ARC was removed from the department and created as a parastatal, certain things were done wrong. A lot of benefits were put, which then indebted the state to the point where it could not be affordable.

Certain contracts that were made, which were supposed to be of a short-term nature, were then made to be of a long-term nature where people were absorbed in the institution even when their projects which they were employed for had been terminated. It’s nothing of our doing. It’s the history we inherited. In dealing with that history there will be casualties. Indeed, there will be pain but we cannot sit back and say we cannot do right because some wrong was done.

The ARC is the one that has been responsible for restructuring, not the Minister for Agriculture, nor the department. [Applause.] We listened to the ARC because, indeed, what they were raising was rational. We could not sustain an institution that only pays salaries and cannot deliver on the mandate.

Yes, if you look at the ARC budget for last year - the previous year - the majority of that resource only went to pay for salaries. It was not even enough and we had to change. Reprioritisation can never come sweet. It will have some pain and some sweat. But those changes in the ARC, when we had to change its demographics and employ new scientists who are like me, it meant that some people had to exit.

Processes are being undertaken. You always, as the members of this House, challenge us to restructure and align departments. Even some members on the left have been talking about the lean and mean Public Service; what does that lean and mean'' mean? It means, obviously, that when you restructure and align according to your objectives, there are people, through natural attrition, who will leave. But, we cannot contain some people who want to leave to spite us. Yes, we will saythank you very much’’ and let them go. [Applause.]

We will be able to employ new people who will do the task and deliver on this mandate not to five million white people but to 40 million South Africans. [Applause.] This is the challenge of the ARC today. The Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, and that of Science and Technology under Minister Ngubane, have worked together to even show the improvement that we are seeing today.

The Department of Agriculture’s budget is not enough to be able to give R30 million to match what science and technology has given. But we have always given ARC the money, even at the toughest time when some of their money was taken as a result of the Saambou saga. It was the department of agriculture and Land Affairs which carried that burden. It can, therefore, not be true to say that the Department of Agriculture has never bothered about what is happening in the ARC. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

Debate on Vote No 30 - Land Affairs:

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, fellow South Africans, as I start this debate on Land Affairs, I would like to thank one of our beloved sons of the soil, Wallace Mguqi, for the work he has done restitution commission. He has now left us to join the Cape Town City Council. [Applause.] With the energy and zeal that he has displayed, it is our hope that he goes to the Municipality of Cape Town also as an ambassador for restitution, because indeed partnership between land affairs, the restitution commission and municipalities has to be strengthened, so that those people who are taken back to the land indeed can find support services that are necessary.

Lest we forget, land reform has and remains one of the most onerous challenges facing the post-apartheid South Africa. Yet, notwithstanding the potholes, as we tackle these mammothÿchallenges head on, we are proud about our achievements thus far. They are growing by the day. The Department of Land Affairs has, particularly over the past financial year, amassed every ounce of energy within its capacity to push back the frontiers of poverty through the orderly, systematic, sustainable and equitable redistribution of land.

This process has involved engaging with a variety of stakeholders to build on a broader buy-in on the noble vision of land reform in South Africa. I would like to thank the members of big business through the Business Trust, the South Africa Foundation and the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut, among others, who have been able to offer us an opportunity to engage with them so that all of us as South Africans can be ambassadors in internally and internationally in explaining South Africa’s land reform; not just to explain, but also being able to take part so that we can change South Africa’s landscape for the better.

During the past year alone, the Department of Land Affairs transferred a total of 295 024 hectares to about 140 227 beneficiaries. Let me highlight some of the key achievements of the past financial year, which would have been impossible to attain without the hard work and dedication of the men and women who work in the Department of Land Affairs and in the Land Claims Commission. I would like to thank these officials who are here in the House. I also want to thank my MECs of Agriculture who have given support to the provincial directors of land affairs, so that indeed we co-ordinate our efforts. Indeed, land and agriculture can never be separable. Enormous progress has been made in terms of delivery under LRAD. We have been able to transfer about 214 farms just last year, yielding 185 609 hectares to about 6 769 beneficiaries. Of the total hectares transferred, 8 139 of those were transferred to labour tenants in various provinces.

We can also highlight under LRAD delivery those that are situated in Enkomati, Mpumalanga.

Make Ntuli utawujabula kwati kutsi balimi baseNkomazi lesabaniketa imali lebalelwa ku R65 000 kulomnyaka lophelile, lamuhla sebayakwati kutsi bavune sivuno lesibaniketa imali levile ku R100 000. Ngalamanye emavi kuyabonakala kutsi loku lesikwentile kunemiphumela lemihle. [Tandla.]

Ngitsandza kusho futsi kutsi asikapheleli eMpumalanga kuphela, kepha naKwaZulu-Natal sikwatile kusita bantfu, ikakhulukati labo labahlala emapulazini. (Translation of Siswati paragraphs follows:)

[Mrs Ntuli will be happy to know that the Nkomazi farmers to whom we allocated about R65 000 last year, are today able to reap a harvest that gives them more than R100 000. In other words, it is clear to everybody that what we have done has borne good results. [Applause.]

I would also like to say that we shall not end up with Mpumalanga, but we are proceeding into KwaZulu-Natal where we have already helped some of our people, especially those that are farm dwellers.]

Shenge namalungu akho, ngiyacabanga ukuthi nizothokoza ukuzwa ukuthi endaweni yase-Glen Benna? e-Estcourt sesiyisizile imindeni ebalelwa ku-59 ngamahektha abalelwa ku-800. [Ihlombe.] Leyo mindeni isikwazile ukuthi manje izame ukuzithuthukisa ngakwezolimo kanye nakwezokungcebeleka.

Namhlanje siyaziqhenya ngalabo bantu ngoba izolo bekuthiwa ngabasebenzi bamapulazi, namhlanje sebengabalimi ngokwabo. [Ihlombe.] (ranslations of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[I think you and your members will be happy, Shenge, to hear that we have helped about 59 families in Glen Benna, Estcourt, by giving them about 800 hectares of land. [Applause.] These families have now developed themselves through farming and tourism.

Today we are very proud about these people because yesterday they were farmworkers but today they are farmers themselves. [Applause.]]

Ngitsandza kusho futsi kutsi, Babe Kotwal, utawukhumbula kutsi ngalomunye umnyaka wema lapha ePhalamende wasicela kutsi kuhle selekelele bantfu labahlala emapulazini, eVekhestromu kanye nase Langevati lowawunesikhalo sekutsi bahlukunyetwa balimi bakuleyo ndzawo.

Lamuhla nje ngifuna kusho kutsi labo balimi sesibasitile. Lamuhla nje nabo sebalimi labavelele, ngikhuluma nje sebafuye tinkhomo balima nemmbila. Akupheleli lapho kantsi nasePiteltifu banemklamo lekutsiwa ngukuBhedu. Lamuhla nje lapho sibona imindeni lengahle ibe ngema-58 nayo leseyikwati kutilimela itondle ibuye itsengise ummbila kanye nemabhontjisi labatilimela kona.

Ngalamanye emagama kusho kutsi loluhlelo lwaHulumende lwekuniketa imihlaba kulabo bantfu lababehluphekile ngaphambili luyasebenta. Sitawuchubeka njalo setsemba kutsi ngeke niyekele kusitsintsa nakunetinkinga nitabe seloku nisichweba nje nakukhona lokuvelako nitsi bomake phutfumani kunesidzingo ngala. (Translation of Siswati paragraphs follows)

[I would also like to say that Mr Kotwal will remember that in one of the past years he stood up here in Parliament and asked us to help the people who were farm dwellers that were being abused by farmers at Wakkerstroom and Langverwacht. You raised your concern about those people, that the farmers were abusing them.

Today I want to tell you that we did help those farm dwellers. Today those people are also independent cattle farmers and they produce their own maize and beans. It does not end there, even in Piet Retief they also have a project called kuBhedu where there are about 58 families who jointly harvest maize and beans to feed themselves and market their own products.

In other words, it means that the Government programme of distributing land to the people who were historically disadvantaged is working and continues smoothly. We will continue to do so with a hope that you will not stop advising us if there are any problems that come up, and you will keep us informed whenever there is a need.]

Our participation in urban renewal projects saw us completing projects in various provinces over the previous year. For example, land has been made available for urban renewal in areas such as Galeshewe in the Northern Cape, Braamfisherville in Gauteng, Ntuzuma in Kwazulu-Natal, Potsdam and Mdantsane in the Eastern Cape, so that indeed, those local municipalities can improve their lot and be able to give accommodation to the communities who otherwise were landless. In the past year, 25 farms were also transferred to about 1 096 beneficiaries, translating into 18 879 hectares. These were actually given to municipalities for commonages and it is our view that those beneficiaries will be able to utilise that land proactively so that they can feed themselves.

We have taken very seriously the plight of labour tenants, as well as the precarious circumstances under which farmworkers generally live. To this end we have undertaken to transfer 15 308 hectares to this group for this financial year. We will continue to do better not just for tomorrow, but forever. Since April 2000, about 235 626 hectares of state land have been disposed under the power of attorney issued to provincal MECs. Some of these have been bought outright and the hectares amount to 43 973. Others have been given through lease with an option to buy.

In terms of the Restitution Programme, we have pushed the total number of claims settled to date to about 36 488. This has involved 22 760 households over the past financial year, about 25% of which are female-headed households.

Ngiyetsemba kutsi Make Ntuli utawujablula kutsi bomake nabo siyababonelela kuloluhlelo lwekwabiwa kwemhlaba. (Translation of Siswati sentence follows.)

[I hope Mrs Ntuli will also be happy that women are also catered for in the programme of the land redustribution.]

Our focus has now shifted decisively to settling rural claims.

Shenge, ngiyathemba ukuthi uzojabula ukuzwa ukuthi ngendaba yaseMangethe esayisebenza nawe sibambisene, namhlanje asisakhulumi ngokubangwa komhlaba. [Ihlombe.] Kanjalo naseLadysmith endaweni yakwaKhumalo, kanjalo naseGauteng naseNorth West endaweni yeKoppies Kraal, koConcordia, koGolgaad, koKgauwe, koWalmansdaal, koMooiland, koZammekoop, ngingabala ngithini nje ziningi kakhulu. Ekoloni izindawo zakoLuswazi nakoMankunku ngaseKokstad, eNorthen Cape iKomaniesan nasePalmsfontein, eHeshele, ngingabala ngithini, Empumalanga kubaKoni Bapetla kubo kaThabang Makwetla eBochabelo naseLimpopo endaweni yaseDzwerani eGiyani, yizo zonke lezi zindawo namhlanje esithi imiphakathi yazo impela isiyathokoza ngomhlaba woyise mkhulu osubuyele kuyo. [Ihlombe.] Asikhathele-ke singamalungu omNyango wezoMhlaba nowokuBuyiselwa kweMihlaba kubanini bayo. Sizoqhubeka, sigijima ngesivinini ukuze kuthi njengoba uMongameli wayethe kule Ndlu masiluphothule lolu daba lwezokwabiwa komhlaba maduzane, sikwenze lokhu siphumelele ukuze niziqhenye ngathi ningabantu baseNingizimu Afrika. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Shenge, I hope you will be happy to hear about the Mangethe area where you and I worked together. Today we are not talking about fighting over land. [Applause.] It is so in kwaKhumalo, Ladysmith; Gauteng; Koppies Kraal, North West; Concordia, Golgaad, Kgauwe, Wolmansdaal, Mooiland, Zammekop, the list is endless.

In the Cape areas of Luswazi, Mankunku near Kokstad, Komaniesan, and Palmsfontein in the Northern Cape; Heshele, I have lost count. In the Eastern Cape, Thabang Makwetla’s area Bochabelo and Limpopo at Dzwerani, Giyani, these are all the places where people are happy because their land has been given back to them. [Applause.]

As members of the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs charged with restitution, we are not tired. We are going to continue. We are moving very fast because the President said that we should finalise this issue of land restitution. We want to do this job successfully so that you as the people of South Africa can be proud of us.]

Some of the challenges in processing the rural claims include the difficulties we face in getting relevant documentation and information. It also involves us reconstructing the family trees. It also involves resolving disputes amongst the various communities, but also there are challenges of unsurveyed land rights. I must say that we have tried, given these difficulties, to make a difference.

I am pleased to announce that all the claims settled to date, resonate very well with the main objective of our Government for a better life for all South Africans. But the restitution process is not going smoothly without challenges. There are challenges which we have recognised. In most instances the institutions that govern the land on behalf of communities after transfer are not always strong. We have cases, such as Mamatola in Limpopo and Bethany in the Free State, where we have had to act decisively to protect the interest of the majority and be able to take steps to reinforce the management capacity of the CPAs, so that indeed we cannot look back and be dismayed at what we have done.

I want to say that this is a challenge that you will have to work with us to resolve. The Land Claims Court has also dealt with some of the cases that were referred to it. One of those was the case of the Transvaal Agricultural Union, where they were challenging the process of restitution. I am indeed disappointed that they took this challenge. However, they failed in their quest with the Majeng judgement, where Mam Sperepere, who used to be a member of this Parliament, was settled successfully by the Land Claims Court. Comrade Derrick, I am sure that you are happy.

We have also noted the judgement handed down by the Supreme Court of Appeal on the matter of the Richtersveld Community claim. We are studying implications of that judgement to see what it will mean for restitution in South Africa today. However, we will be able to take into consideration those challenges that have been raised by this case as we deal with restitution, going forward.

As the Department of Land Affairs, while our task might seem much more locally focused, we have been able to discharge some of our responsibility with regard to Africa’s revival. In the past year, we have been able to assist Swaziland through the survey and mappings chief directorate. We have assisted their government to actually transfer their topographical maps from paper to digital computer.

We have also been able to participate in the global mapping project - which is an international project with the objective of collecting various spatial data sets such as roads and rail networks, rivers, land cover, settlement and administrative boundaries in a uniform manner. It is our view that working with these organisations, we will be able to support a number of countries who need such a service dearly.

The spatial data required by planners, scientists and decision makers in addressing environmental and developmental issues at regional, continental and international level is necessary. Therefore, it is in this context that we have been working with our neighbours Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland, to ensure that we support their system when it comes to survey and mapping.

I also wish to indicate that, as the Department of Land Affairs, we are aware of the challenges that you have raised with us, particularly the challenge of transformation within the Deeds Registry. We are working through bursary schemes to ensure that we can bring new people into the Deeds Registry who will indeed reflect the demographics of our country. We also want to indicate to you that we are aware of the problems, particularly within the sectional ownership, that while it has many advantages, it also has some challenges. It is for this reason that we are putting in place legislation which I hope will be able to come this Parliament this year, so that we can be able to assist those members who are adhering towards their responsibility and protect them against those who are not taking responsibility for their action.

I also want to say that indeed South Africa’s land reform cannot advance unless we, as this society, acknowledge that in doing so there will be pain, there will be a need for sacrifice. There are issues that were raised earlier in the early debate by hon Andries Botha. He said that there are many farms that come on the market and because of our bureaucratic challenges as departments, we have not been able to access that land. I challenge him to come forth with that information, so that indeed, we can move with speed in dealing with those farms. We also want to say that it is necessary for us to be consistent in what we say. It is also necessary for us to be truthful and honest, because if we don’t we may be able to mislead one another about the challenges that we face. In many instances, we have been told that price is not a hindrance, but at the same time, it is emphasised that market price is the market price.

The question that we need to ask ourselves at this august House is: What is the history that we seek to change? Isn’t it through legislation that some of our own were taken and their land was taken without compensation? Isn’t it true that some of us were made landless without just and equitable compensation? Isn’t therefore a challenge for all us that in dealing with land reform in South Africa we need to be aware of the fact that there are pains and sacrifices that need to be made? People always ask when you talk about introducing new farmers, which space will they come into because South Africa’s arable land is so small? If that was the question, would we be where we are today? If this was the consideration, even in the past regime, would we have moved away African farmers from where they were?

I am not saying that we must reverse apartheid today. What I am trying to say is that in dealing with challenges of land reform and equity in this country we need to appreciate the challenges of our past and the objectives of tomorrow so that we can work as partners to resolve this challenging task without apportioning blame and trying to score easy victories, but by understanding that this is a complex task.

I want to thank those farmers who have been able to come forward and work with us in resolving these challenges, appreciating that there may be times when they will lose what they have regarded as their own forever, but that in the interest of stability of the country it is a necessary thing to do. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr N H MASITHELA: Chair, in the Land Restitution Commission there is a term they use, that you are crying at a wrong funeral. So I hope Mr Botha was not crying at a wrong funeral.

Today I stand here again full of gratitude and great pleasure and serious pride, reporting on the excellent work so well done by the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land affairs in monitoring especially Government’s programme deliveries, as dictated by the RDP as the main Government policy direction. I am convinced that we are at one as members of this committee by saying yes, this Government, especially this department has done extremely well if we are to judge it against that policy direction.

Of course, as members of different political parties from different political backgrounds and different organisations, we are certainly going to differ on the emphasis on what we think should have happened. But today this debate should be an indication that as this committee we are a solid rock in terms of monitoring the Government processes against the RDP.

Let me just interrupt myself by saying that there was only one incident in this committee, that was last week, when three members of the portfolio committee marched out during a heated debate around land transformation and land redistribution. Let me say that it was not an advisable move to make, as it is an issue that warrants debate amongst that committee, rather than to run away from the debate.

Let me also invite all members of this House and the public out there, to be the judge and bear testimony to what we are saying today. As members of this committee, we are at one in terms of judging Government departments, particularly Land Affairs, on what has been delivered since 1994, going back to the RDP. Without boring members about the statistics and what happened, let me highlight three issues that the RDP spoke about, namely redistribution of land, restitution and land tenure reform. On redistribution, starting under the leadership of comrade Derek Hanekom …

THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Gogotja, could we please have your attention here? Hon Gogotja! Carry on, hon member.

Mr N H MASITHELA: Under the settlement land acquisition grant, which was known as ``SLAG the 16 000 grant’’ for land and so forth, many people benefited from that process. I dare challenge anybody who would say today South Africans did not benefit from that programme. And hon Minister, that was work well done. It may have some hiccups, but work was well done. On restitution, I want to say that in his state of the nation address the President reiterated the need to speed up the settlement of land claims by

  1. And this challenge need not be changed. By 2005 we really need to have finalised this process. However, we have some challenges, confronted by Government officials and Ministers on this particular matter. I am aware that R391 million was budgeted for last year. Today R854 million, is being budgeted. It is a significant increase. The issue is, will there be enough money for us to finalise this process? My reading is no! There is not going to be enough. This warrants the debate between the Department of Land Affairs or the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs and the Minister of Finance, particularly treasury, to discuss and engage on this particular matter because for me that is an instructive from the President, in this House. We dare not to fail that instruction.

There is a need for us to engage in this debate around allocation of this money on this particular matter. I would not go back into details about what needs to be allocated annually and so forth. The point I am trying to make is that there is a need for us to engage in this debate around the issues. I am challenging the Minister to facilitate that meeting between the portfolio committee, treasury and herself to discuss this particular matter and to resolve it as early as now.

On land tenure reform, under the same hon Minister we have passed some Acts on land reform, tenure reform and the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Act 62 of 1997. In my view, there were some flaws in the legislation, hence many people today are still being evicted in the communities by farmers.

The challenge for us is to ensure that by the end of this calendar year, the Department of Land Affairs should have a consolidation of the two pieces of legislation so as to enable us to protect vulnerable communities, particularly black people, who are being evicted in the communities. For me, the issue is not to say that they should actually be forced to stay on the land. I want to challenge the Government departments and the Ministry in particular. There is a need for us to come with better mechanisms of how we want to protect the security of our people. My challenge is that there is a need for us to come with agricultural villages. There may be problems with that, but there is an important factor to that issue. If we create a situation like what happened in Bothaville, where farmers created some accommodation for our people, in some places where they are safe. They then move from those places, but they go to the farm to go and work. Why can’t we do the same thing to secure the security of vulnerable black communities? And also, to secure the security of the people in the white communities. For me the security cuts across both colours. It is important that we look into that particular situation.

Government has promptly responded to what we wanted it to respond to. Today, on the same land tenure reform we have only one white farmer who has been convicted by court for evicting African people. The problem is not what is happening, but the problem is how best do we co-operate between black and white farmers in ensuring that our people benefit out of this process of land tenure reform? I dare challenge anybody, who will approach this podium today, to say yes this department has not delivered against the RDP programmes. I want anybody to say that. It is a challenge to anybody. On this particular matter I am convinced that we have delivered.

The only problem for me is that land reform, broadly as a process, is moving at a speed we are not anticipating it to move at. My personal opinion is that this land issue impacts on the economy of our society, impacts on the relationship between black farmers and black workers, impacts on white farmers and black workers. How best do we want to deal with that situation? The answer for me is co-operation between black farmers, white farmers and the rural communities.

In closing, the situation by which we are confronted today warrants the sensitivity it deserves. I am calling upon all public communities, Members of Parliament, not to recklessly deal with the land redistribution in the manner in which you are doing, because we are touching on the sensitive historical past. We don’t want to see what happened in Zimbabwe happening in this country. We don’t want to encourage black people of this country to just grab land of white farmers. We don’t want that thing to happen. We call upon white commercial farmers to co-operate, to hand over land which is not being utilised profitably for agricultural purposes. [Interjections.]

It is important. As Members of Parliament, hon member, we must desist from writing articles that would polarise the relationship between black and white in this organisation, in this country. [Interjections.] It is important for us to look into that matter. We must be sensitive, we must be creative in the manner in which we want to deal with co-operation among our people. This South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, as stipulated by the Freedom Charter in 1955. This Government has delivered to date. If you want to charge against the RDP, hon member, it is a challenge. It is a very unfortunate situation that you are not on the speakers list to address the issues that you are raising outside this Parliament. Unfortunately, you are not on the speakers list. [Interjections.]

In closing then, this this Government to date has delivered on land transformation for our people. The speed is not what we want it to move at. We want it to move at a high speed to resolve the land question. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr M V NGEMA: Chairperson, in his response to the President’s state of the nation address, the President of the IFP made a plea for us in this House, as well as South African society, to put our mistrust and suspicions of the past aside and focus on the great task of nation-building.

NgesiZulu kuthiwa ingane engakhali ifela embelekweni. Ezingxoxweni zalo mnyango neKomiti lePhalamende Elengamele Izindaba zezoLimo nezoMhlaba ngesonto eledlule, lo mnyango uzikhalele kakhulu ngokuthi usuzilungiselele ngokwanele ukufeza umsebenzi obhekwe yile Ndlu kuNgqongqoshe. Kodwa inkinga yalo mnyango enkulu ubuncane besabelo sezimali le Ndlu ebanika sona. Sincane kakhulu uma siqhathaniswa nobubanzi bomsebenzi obahlaleleyo, umphakathi owulindele ngamehlo abomvu. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[In isiZulu they say: The one who does not voice his or her grievance gets no redress. In the discussions that this department had with the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs last week, the department pleaded that it had done enough to fulfil the task that this House expects from the Minister. However, the main stumbling block faced by the department is the meagre budget that is allocated to it by this House. The allocation is too small, particularly when it is viewed against the huge task that the committee has to accomplish. The community eagerly awaits the results of that task.] Since the Public Finance Management Act, it is equally unacceptable for departments to either underspend or overspend. This means that departments have to be more precise in their budget requests. The department requires more than this House is allocating to it today.

The hon Minister referred to the issue of land reform and we wish to say that as … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order! You may carry on, hon member.

Mr M V NGEMA: Chairperson, the hon Minister referred to the issue of land reform, and we wish to say that as IFP we applaud the gains that the Minister has reported on in this respect. We are aware that the hon Minister and the department are going to introduce to this House the Communal Land Rights Bill later this year. We believe that this is a very sensitive issue affecting both Government and rural communities and that communication and mutual understanding are key requirements to achieve co- operation among all stakeholders in order to truly empower people to liberate themselves in this respect.

The land question in South Africa is the major symbol of colonial and apartheid dispossession and oppression of indigenous people. Before their colonisation, indigenous people in South Africa owned land under the communal land system. Lungisile Ntsebenza of the Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies at the University of Western Cape analysed papers written by S Moyo and Mafeje on the issue of land in South Africa. He has this to say about South Africa:

Unlike most countries in the region, the level of land dispossession in South Africa was drastic. Close to 90% of the land was forcibly taken away from the indigenous people. Later they were restricted to the reserves. Faced with the landlessness and poverty in the reserves, the indigenous people were compelled to sell their labour in the mines, farms and cities as migrant labourers.

It was prior to the land policy of the times that the indigenous kings and their communities allowed their newcomers to become incorporated as members of their communities, to become co-owners of land together with everybody who lived in it at that time.

This is how John Dunn in KwaZulu-Natal received both land and other gifts'' from King Cetshwayo. The fact that this land was labelled as reserves did nothing in the eyes of the people to change the fact that this was the only land that remained in their hands as indigenous people. This is the same principle of struggle which enabled our people to wage a fierce struggle to retain their original identity until their freedom in 1994. This remained the case in defiance of all the insulting names such as natives, plurals, etc’’ given to them by the past colonial and apartheid governments.

In embarking on the land reform programmes we, as Government, must be very cautious that such programmes are well understood by all the stakeholders both on the side of Government and the communities.

It is for this reason that I wish to plead with the hon Minister to honour the kind invitation by His Majesty the King of the Zulu nation and amakhosi to discuss with them the draft Communal Land Rights Bill to enable the Minister and the department on the one hand, and the people affected by the Bill on the other, to reach a common understanding regardless of whether in the final analysis they agree on this matter or not.

This is the only land in their understanding that was left in their hands at the time of their land dispossession. We need to appreciate this fact and encourage effective communication. We must not ignore them, and be understood by them as banking on our state power and force, thereby putting ourselves in the same position as they saw colonial and apartheid governments before us.

We support this Bill, as hon members are aware how I have tried to plead for more money to be given to the department. I thank you. [Applause.]

Nkzn A N SIGCAWU: Mhlalingaphambili, Baphathiswa namalungu ePalamente, namhlanje ndiza kuthetha ngokubuyiselwa komhlaba kubaniniwo. Xa ndithetha ngokubuyiselwa komhlaba ndikhumbula abafo ababephethe ngaphambili, ababecinezele oomama noomakhulu bethu ukuze bangakwazi ukuwafumana amalungelo omhlaba. Namhlanje lo Rhulumente wenze ukuba wonke umntu abe nelungelo lokusebenzisa umhlaba ngokweemfuno zakhe. [Kuyaqhwatywa.] Ndithetha nje bonke abantu balapha eMzantsi Afrika bayakwazi ukuqala iiprojekthi. Umzekelo, phaya eMount Ayliff kwilali yaseNzongiseni kudityaniswe amasimi ngamakhosikazi. Alima umbona wokuthintela indlala ekuhlaleni. Phaya kuNtabankulu kwenziwe enkulu iprojekthi yokutyala iminqathe, amakhaphetshu namathanga. Nalapho kuzanywa ukubulala indlala. Konke oko kungenxa yalo Rhulumente ulwele amalungelo abantu omhlaba otsho wabuyela kubo.

Lo Rhulumente we-ANC wenze ukuba abantu bakwazi ukucinga nokusebenzisa ingqondo nokuziphuhlisa ekuhlaleni. Ndiphinde ndenze umzekelo ngeFlagstaff, kuTsolo. Abantu bakhona baye bakwazi ukwenza iprojekthi enkulu yokwenza igraf stone, yona esetyenziswa nasekwakheni imigaqo, nto leyo urhulumente wengcinezelo angazange alivule ithuba layo ngaphambili. Namhlanje ngenxa yalo Rhulumente we-ANC kuhle; Abantu naba. Abantu boMzantsi Afrika bakhululekile baze kubukela ukuthethwa komhlaba kwiindawo abalima kuzo. [Kuyaqhwatywa.] Ndingatsho ndithi kubantu boMzantsi Afrika lo Rhulumente we- ANC walwa, walwa, walwa wade waphumelela ekunikezeleni ngomhlaba ebantwini. Sithi ke, `Halala Rhulumente we-ANC! Halala! [Kuyaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa speech follows.)

[Mrs A N SIGCAWU: Chairperson, Ministers and hon Members of Parliament, today I rise to speak about land redistribution. When I speak about land redistribution I remember the fellows that ruled before, who were oppressing our mothers and grandmothers and made it difficult for their own country. Today this Government has made it possible for everybody to have a right to use land in a way suitable for his or her needs. [Applause.]

As I speak all the people of South Africa are able to initiate projects. For an example, in Mount Ayliff, at Nzongiseni village women have combined ploughing fields. They plough mealies so as to drive away hunger and poverty. At Ntabankulu a big project of planting carrots, cabbages and pumpkins has been started. They are also trying to fight hunger and poverty there too. All that is happening because of this Government that has fought for a right of people to own land and has indeed been given it back to its rightful owners. The ANC-led Government has empowered people and has now enabled them to think for themselves and use their brains to develop themselves.

I would like to cite another example of Flagstaff, in Tsolo. People there started a stone project, which is used in roads, an opportunity which the previous government which oppressed people never afforded people before. Today, through the ANC-led Government, things are working well. People are doing things that can be seen. People of South Africa are free and they have come to listen when their land rights are being discussed. [Applause.] To the people of South Africa I could say that the ANC-led Government fought and fought and fought until it became successful in redistributing land to people which is rightfully theirs. We therefore say forward, to the ANC-led Government. Forward! [Applause.]]


If we talk about matters which this Department is concerned with, land reform, including restitution, I think of three basic considerations. The first consideration is what is your institutional capacity, because that determines what you can and cannot do. The second one is the policies that govern your actions. I think those are in place. The third one is pure politics. The hon the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs is in an unfortunate position in that she is receiving pressure from the left and from the right. On the left-hand side she has pressure which promotes radical approaches by militant activists to change the status quo, come hell or high water. On the right-hand side, like my hon Rhodesian friend here, we have ÿ.ÿ.ÿ. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Oliphant, will you please withdraw that? [Interjections.] Thank you.

Mr G B D McINTOSH: Mr Chairperson, the Deputy Minister has referred to me as ``My hon Rhodesian friend’’. Now you will be aware that in the ANC, to be called a Rhodesian is a perjorative term. It is an equivalent of ibhunu [Boer.] And I would like to …

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon Member! I hear your point and I think I will request the hon Deputy Minister to withdraw the reference to the Rhodesian.

DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: I withdraw it, hon Chairperson. It was a joke.

On the other side the hon the Minister is getting pressure from radical approaches being promoted by militant activists and on the right she is pressured to preserve the status quo, and she must find her way between these extremes and I think she is doing it very well and the Department is doing it very well.

The challenge which I foresee in the near future is to go ahead with the establishment of commercial black farmers as good as we are doing at the moment. The LRAD programme is so successful, it is almost running ahead of us. The second challenge is to have success with the communal land rights in South Africa. If we think back to 27 April 1994, there was no DLA, no Department of Land Affairs. All that we had in South Africa was the typical apartheid geography. We had 16.5 million people - and no one is really sure how many - squashed on to about 13% of the land of South Africa. They were living under severe conditions which are well known, with unequal service, unequal access to markets, and the worst one which I want to talk about today which was legal confusion.

Some people try to soften it by saying it was legal pluralism. Well, it was a confusion with respect to land rights. Land rights was a matter which differed according to different race groups. Different race groups had different rights. Most of the whites could attain ownership of land. Most of the black people in South Africa had to get permission to occupy land of the South African Development Trust or land consolidated in the homelands.

The big problem was that this was administered by multiple local and regional administrative systems. We had a whole host of them. We had tribal authorities, traditional authorities. We had magistrates who did administration, deeds offices, surveyor general’s offices and so on. The point was that before 1994 the whole function of public service land administration was to effectuate the system of discrimination. This was changed. The hon Hanekom had to start things in 1994 and I think the fault that was made at that stage was to try to hit the ground running. This pressure to do things quickly is almost the same thing which the stupid Americans want to do with their military campaign in Iraq, that of wanting to run through the deserts of Iraq like it is speedway from Washington to New York. Inevitably you crash when you do that type of thing.

I also think we must acknowledge that this department was often maligned. I think we all generally acknowledge that by 1997/1998 there was a great amount of confusion and decision-making became haphazard. There was frustration. Then when the hon Minister Didiza took over in 1999, she moved swiftly to create and consolidate things in this department and she was hugely successful. That must be acknowledged and it is acknowledged all over South Africa at the moment. In year 2000 she appointed a new Director- General, who has just been reappointed, and I think that now we can say with confidence that the DLA, Department of Land Affairs, has attained maturity. There is confidence in the department. There is directed delivery. Skills are present and I think success will be there. The only problem with success in this department is that it will require money. It will create financial pressure and there are still a lot of things that need to be done.

One of them is this problem of land administration and I would like to talk a bit about it. I know it is on the agenda of the hon the Minister and is part of the Director-General’s priorities as well. If you want to introduce land administration, especially of state land, capacity in terms of staff and skills is crucial. At the moment I think we are a bit under-supplied all over the country in that respect. Many agricultural projects, housing projects, ecological projects, tourism projects and all types of development projects depend on what kind of information basis you are working on. It can sometimes be bogged down for years because you cannot unlock the potential of the land and natural resources if your information basis is not right.

The reason is a historical one that I have talked talked about. We have nine provincial governments, two national departments, each with its own legislation, policies and procedures, which must manage and dispose of state land. The chaos is aggravated by the previous situation of apartheid, where we had four TBVC states, six self-governing territories - former homelands - and the four former provinces of the RSA as well as the previous national RSA government. In total 15 owners and 15 administrative institutions. The record files owners’ copies of title deeds are often lost and officials sometimes do not know where to begin the search. We have to put money into getting this right. You know there are cases where expropriation has been done years ago and the previous owners are still occupying that land due to lack of information on the part of the new government owner and because many expropriations were not registered. We have to get this right.

The problem is in the present Constitution, as it requires that where state land has vested in terms of the interim constitution on 27 April 1994, Schedule 6 of the new Constitution requires that that land can be only dealt with once the land has been confirmed to have vested in terms of the new Constitution. It is a so-called item 28 (1) certificate. In other words you cannot get any legal development on a piece of land - and that is at least 21 million hectares of land in South Africa, of which there are 12 million hectares in communal areas, traditional areas - without the vesting having been completed.

For instance, in the Eastern Cape there is about eight million hectares. If you have a piece of land there, sometimes it has not even been surveyed - so that has to be done - and there is a clinic and a school on it which must go the province and then you have grazing area which should fall under the new Communal Land Rights Act, some rights must be vested on that. You cannot deal with that work unless the section 28(1) certificate has been done.

Now the problem is that we need capacity and money to put into that. The present calculation is that it will take at least over 20 years if you continue with the present rate of performance in this regard. I know the department is regarding this as a priority. I wanted to bring it here to say that money will be needed on a lot of levels. It is not a question of just money being needed to buy land. We have to get administrative systems in place and the complexity of these matters is huge. To get rid of the legacies that we have to cope with is not an easy task and, given those circumstances, I think the department has done excellently. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Deputy Minister, you still have quite a lot of time. It is just that I am trying to get the House in order.

Hon members, you are conversing in a manner that is making it difficult for those who wish to follow the proceedings. May I please appeal to you and to the whips. I understand that you have a long session this afternoon, but even so attempt to converse in a manner that will not disrupt the speaker at the podium. Hon Deputy Minister, you may proceed.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: This huge challenge, Mr Deputy Chairman, must be faced because the situation which we have at present creates opportunities for misuse. The assets that are believed to fall under the DLA at the moment are supposed to be worth over R9 billion and that must be effectively managed. Now, I have never believed that the state is a good landlord. We must put this land to use. It must be leased. It must be disposed of.

As the situation is at the moment there are big chances of criminal conduct. For example, you get theft of state property, recently a pivot point of some R150 000 was stolen at Rust de Winter. You get illegal use of state land. You get occupation of state land. It is difficult to control. You have got unauthorised selling of state land. Recently a provincial government sold national Government property, land, which was worth - according to estimation - at least about R2.8 million and it was sold to a developer for R460 000. There is a case pending in this regard. This is serious stuff and we will have to work hard at this matter.

For an example, you can imagine that no auditor-general is going to be satisfied that we as the state spent money on land assets if we cannot prove that that land is managed, administered or owned on behalf of the national Government or it has vested in another level of government. This is part of this whole provincial problem or provincialisation of South Africa with which we are sitting. We need capacity-building. Some people say it will take longer than 20 years to do this vesting if we go on with the present state of affairs. I think that money must be put there.

This brings me to the whole point that the Department of Land Affairs is getting it right at the moment. There is no doubt about that. Procedures are in place. The leadership is running and I am very impressed with the Department of Land Affairs. But, the more successful they are, the more there will be pressures on how to hit the ground running, to move quickly from Basra to Baghdad, which is a terrible comparison, I do agree. For that purpose South Africa must be able to say that now we are putting our money where our mouths are and I think that is in the end the final matter. Are we prepared, or is this Parliament prepared, to put money there, which we need to run efficiently with these very big tasks that are ahead of us?

I thank you. [Applause.]

Mnr A S VAN DER MERWE: Adjunkvoorsitter, agb Minister en kollegas, toe ek laas opgehou het, het ek verwys na ‘n merkwaardige dame wat besig is met projekte in stedelike gebiede om die armoede te verlig. Wat ons moet bepaal, is: hoeveel van die armoedevraagstuk kan hierdeur verlig word? Hoeveel is bereid om hulle posisie met hierdie insette te verbeter? Waar staan ons nou en waar wil ons oor ‘n sekere aantal jare staan? Beskik ons oor die water en is dit goeie benutting van ons waterbronne?

Hierdie skemas is totaal afhanklik van navorsing en voorligting. Ons pleit jare lank vir die nodige insette om ons navorsers te behou en, noudat almal weg is, hulle weer terug te bring. Minister, ek is dankbaar vir die geld vir navorsing. Ons moet onthou dat baie geld uit die Landboubegroting bestee word om ander lande se tegnologie te ontwikkel. Dit wil ons tog nie hê nie. Ons moet op die voorpunt wees van tegnologie om ons boere mededingend te maak in die landbouwêreld met inagneming van ons swak landboupotensiaal.

Volhoubare landbou kan nie gebou word indien AgriSA en die Minister van Arbeid oorhoops is oor minimum lone nie. Ek het nie in hierdie toespraak tyd om te veel daaroor te sê nie, maar ek wil net sê: boere is nie teen minimum lone nie. Daar is misverstande omtrent die instelling van minimum lone wat ons wel om ‘n tafel kan uitpraat tot beide kante se bevrediging.

Die beste resep om nuwe boere te vestig is om vennootskapsboerderye te vestig tussen die boer en sy werkers. Die gemiddelde boer se omvang is te klein om op sy huidige grond sulke vennootskappe te vestig. Die staat sal ‘n plan in samewerking met AgriSA moet daarstel waarvolgens die staat grond moet aankoop en die boer kundigheid moet verskaf in die vennootskappe.

Daar kom genoeg grond beskikbaar in die vrye mark om aan so ‘n inisiatief van vennootskappe gestalte te gee. Dit kan ‘n wesenlike verskil aan grondhervorming tot gevolg hê. Dis nie nodig om grond te laat gaan deur boere nie - kundigheid en voorligtingdienste is baie skaarser as grond. Agb Minister, u moet asseblief kyk na die proses om grond aan te koop vir plaaswerkers. Ek ontvang klagtes van vooraanstaande boere dat hulle opsies verstryk voordat hulle toestemming van die staat kry. Ek kan nie vir u sê waar die foute is nie.

Ek is dankbaar vir die verhoging van R1,9 miljard vir grondhervorming, en as ons meer moet bewillig daarvoor, dan moet ons dit doen. Ek sal graag wil sien dat ons doelwitte stel. Hoeveel grond gaan ons byvoorbeeld daardeur beskikbaar kry? Het ons tydskedules vir die plasing van suksesvolle boere en beskik ons oor die planne en kundiges om die mense wat dit kry ‘n bogemiddelde kans op sukses te gee? Dis hoekom ek pleit vir navorsing.

Die wetgewing oor kommunale grondregte is noodsaaklik. Die vrugbaarste grond in Suid-Afrika lê in hierdie gebiede. Duisende kommersiële boere, kleinboere en bestaansboere kan hieruit voordeel trek. Het ons die nodige ondersteuningdienste beskikbaar? Gebruiksreg is hier belangriker as eiendomsreg. Indien hierdie wetgewing met die samewerking van tradisionele leiers reg bestuur word, kan hierdeur ‘n groot landboupotensiaal ontsluit word. Met die regte voorligting kan hierdeur ‘n verskil gemaak word aan armoede in daardie gebiede.

Kom ons kyk na die stand van landbou in Suid-Afrika. Agt en dertig sent van elke rand inkomste moet aan skuld betaal word. Kenners beweer dat as hierdie verhouding styg, bankrotskappe die hoogte gaan inskiet. Dit kan wel grond beskikbaar stel, maar kundigheid gaan verlore en voedselsekuriteit kom in gedrang. ‘n Tekort aan kos ken Suid-Afrika nie. Dit is dalk die rede hoekom dit met landbou nie goed gaan nie.

Die getal kommersiële boere het gedaal tot 50 000. Dis die laagste vlak in meer as ‘n eeu. Minder as 20% is jonger as 34 terwyl 40% ouer as 50 is. Sewentig persent van die boere se omset is minder as R1 miljoen. Let wel, ek sê omset. Meer as die helfte van die boere is betrokke by gemengde boerderyaktiwiteite. Dit word gedoen om risiko in ‘n wisselvallige mark en klimaat te beperk. Dit is die werklikheid in Suid-Afrika. Kan ons dan bekostig om tegnologie te verwaarloos?

Landbousubsidies in Suid-Afrika beloop minder as 4% teenoor Europa se 45% en Japan se 43%. In hierdie Raad pleit ek al jare lank dat Suid-Afrikaanse boere in ‘n posisie geplaas moet word om mededingend te kan wees. Indien kommersiële boere nie in staat gestel word om winsgewend te boer nie, is grondhervorming in Suid-Afrika nie suksesvol moontlik nie. Ons kan tog nie ons nuwe toetreders aan soveel druk onderwerp nie. Ek steun die begrotingspos. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.) [Mr A S VAN DER MERWE: Deputy Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues, when I last stopped, I referred to a remarkable lady who is involved in projects in urban areas to relieve poverty. What we have to determine is: How much of the poverty problem can be relieved hereby? How many are prepared to improve their position with these inputs? Where do we stand at the moment and where do we want to stand in a certain number of years? Do we have the water available and is it good utilisation of our water resources?

These schemes are totally reliant on research and education. We have been pleading for years for the necessary input to keep our researchers and, now that they have all left, to bring them back again. Minister, I am thankful for the money for research. We must remember that much money from the agriculture budget is spent to develop other countries’ technology. That we do not want. We must be at the forefront of technology to make our farmers competitive in the world of agriculture, taking our poor agricultural potential into account.

Sustainable agriculture cannot be built if AgriSA and the Minister of Labour are at loggerheads about minimum wages. I do not have time to say too much about it in this speech, but I just want to say: Farmers are not against minimum wages. There are misunderstandings about the introduction of minimum wages which we can solve around a table to the satisfaction of both parties.

The best recipe to establish new farmers is to establish partnership farms between the farmer and his workers. The average farmer’s scope is too small to establish such partnerships on his present land. The state would have to establish a plan in co-operation with AgriSA according to which the state must purchase land and the farmer must supply expertise in the partnerships.

Enough land becomes available in the free market to give form to such an initiative of partnerships. It can cause a fundamental change to land reform. It is not necessary for farmers to let go of their land - expertise and extension services are much scarcer than land. Hon Minister, you should please look at the process of the acquisition of land for farmworkers. I receive complaints from leading farmers that their options expire before they get approval from the state. I cannot tell you where the mistakes are.

I am thankful for the increase of R1,9 billion for land reform, and if we have to grant more for it, then we have to do it. I would like us to set goals. How much land are we, for example, going to get available that way? Do we have time schedules for the placing of successful farmers, and do we have plans and experts to enable the people who get it to have an above average chance of success? This is why I plead for research.

The legislation regarding communal land rights is essential. The most fertile land in South Africa lies in these areas. Thousands of commercial farmers, small farmers and subsistence farmers can benefit from this. Do we have the necessary support services available? Right of use is of more importance here than ownership. If this legislation is managed correctly with the co-operation of traditional leaders, a huge agricultural potential can be opened up by this. With the right information a difference can be made with regard to poverty in those areas.

Let us look at the state of agriculture in South Africa. Thirty-eight cents out of each rand of income must be paid out on debt. Experts submit that if this ratio increases, insolvencies will skyrocket. That might make land available, but expertise will be lost and food security will be in the balance. South Africa does not know a shortage of food. That might be the reason why all is not well with agriculture.

The number of commercial farmers has decreased to 50 000. This is the lowest level in more than a century. Less than 20% are younger than 34, while 40% are older than 50. Seventy percent of the farmers’ turnover is less than R1 million. Note, I said turnover. More than half of the farmers are involved in mixed farming activities. This is being done to limit risks in an uncertain market and climate. This is the reality in South Africa. Can we then afford to neglect technology?

Agricultural subsidies in South Africa amount to less than 4% compared to Europe’s 45% and Japan’s 43%. I have been pleading in this Council for years that South African farmers must be placed in a position to be competitive. If commercial farmers are not enabled to farm competitively, it is not possible for land reform in South Africa to be successful. We cannot subject new entrants to this much pressure.

I support the Vote. [Applause.]]

Ms C DUDLEY: Chairperson and hon Minister, the ACDP congratulates the departments on achieving almost a 100% spending of its budget last year and for a job well done in terms of preparations to meet the challenges of this exacting and critical task. But since the reality is that land reform targets will only be met if increased funds are made available, the allocation must be reassessed. R1,7 billion per annum, according to the D- G, will be needed for land transfer payments alone and presently this is the full annual land affairs budget, we are told.

At the end of last year more than 36 000 claims were settled, benefiting 437 000 claimants and the commission has spent R1,8 billion on restitution claims. However, with less that 2% of land having changed hands from white to black owners, Government falls far short of its goal to redistribute a third of white-owned agricultural land by 2015 and this has led to much criticism of Government and white farmers who are seen to be frustrating land reform.

Actually, in addition to state-owned land, more than 30% of farms are already available for sale. So, the question is not simply acquisition and availability, but how the land is used. Government has, in my opinion rightly, discerned the difference between the need people have for homes and the need emerging farmers have for farms. Emerging farmers need technical and marketing assistance, irrigation schemes and agricultural skills along with security of tenure and ownership of land, while the majority of people need to take ownership of homes with water, sanitation, education and other services important to support strong and healthy families. In the nature of things these services exist in towns and cities. What is not helpful, though, is the targeting and harassment of some productive farmers with false accusations, threats and layer after layer of add-on costs for services not rendered.

Farmers are one part of a chain producing and distributing food in and outside of South Africa. We are one of seven net food exporters in the world in spite of shallow soil and low rainfall, due to the tremendous skills accumulated agriculturally and industrially. This major source of foreign exchange is an asset which should be valued and protected. It is a major employer and sustainable.

Last year’s 3% increase in GDP was mainly due to growth in the value added by the agricultural and manufacturing sectors with a growth in real value added by the agricultural sector at 4% last year compared with negative growth of 1,5% in 2001. We must be doing something right.

The ACDP supports the department’s endeavours to find fair solutions to very difficult problems and will support both the Agriculture and Land Affairs budget Votes, but calls on the Treasury to urgently reassess the allocation for land reform in light of the necessary targets set and the progress to date.

Mdi M L NGWENYA: Basomi ka nna. Ke rata go leboga maiteko a lefapha la rena la tša naga, ga mmogo le mohlomphegi Minisitara wa rena ka go tšweletša lenaneo la kabo ya naga go thoma ka 1998 go fihla mo re lego gona re šetše re abile go feta milione wa dihekthara. Nepo ye kgolo ya mmušo wo wa rena ke go bona gore kua dinagamagaeng bomma le botate ba šušunyela tlala le motlhako ka lengopeng. Mohlomphegi Minisitara, seo se šetše se direga ka gore bomma ba ipopile ditlhopha ka go lema ka dijarateng tša bona le tša dikolo, le ka masengwaneng ao ba a betšwego ke ba tša Lefapha la Temo le ba ka mošate. Gomme ba Lefapha la Meetse le bona ba tlile ka meetse go re temo ya bona etle e kgone go fepa setšhaba.

Lenaneo le Minisitara, le kgonne go hlola mešomo. Kudu basadi bao ba emetšego malapa ka bo bona. Deputy Chairperson, ke rata go dira mohlala ka Thuthukani Womens Project, kua Stompo go la Moutse gaKgoši Mathebe. Bomme ba 17 ba na le dihoko tše 7, mo go tše 6 yengwe le ye ngwe ya tšona e swere dikgogo tše 400 mola yela ya bo 7 e swara 1 500. Seo se ra gore dikgogo tše tša bona ka moka ka 6 weeks ke tše 3 900. Gomme ba thoma go di rekiša ka beke ya boselela. Mmaraka wa bona o gona mo gae mo ebile ba a patlwa ka moo batho ba rekago dikgogo tša bona ka gona.

Seo se ra gore go sa hlokega dihoko tše dingwe tšeo di swanetšego go oketša tšeo ba nalego le tšona gona bjale. Kgogo e tee ba e rekiša ka R23.00. Fela, ge o tšea stock o thoma ka tše 5 o lefa R19 00 kgogo ka e le tee. Gape ba na le mehlare ya menamune ye 250 le meperekisi ye 250. Ba lema merogo gomme ba fepa naga ya ga bobona.

Mohlomphegi Minisitara, seo ke sešupo seo Mmušo wa rena o se dirago kua naga magaeng go re motlhako le bodiidi di re tšwele kgoro bjalo ka ge Mopresidente wa rena, mohlomphegi wa rena Thabo Mbeki a boletše le setšhaba malobeng. Ge re bolela ka Land Tenure Bill, ke se sengwe se bohlokwa go rena badudi ba magaeng ka Communal Land Tenure Rights Bill yeo e lego kgale re emetše. Ka yona maphelo a rena a tla fetoga motlhomphegi Minisitara ka gore, re tla be re tseba gore moo re agilego gona ke ga rena gomme ra dula ka potego re sa tšhabe gore ge re šoma re direla bana ba rena bohwa e sego go dula fela. Elego seo se diregago gona bjale ka di Permission Occupation tšeo re di swerego.

Rena basadi re opa diatla ka gore re tla ba beng ba malapa e sego bana ba ka lapeng [legofsi]. Minisitara, ka di 15 tša yona kgwedi yeo e fetilego ye, Dr Sipho Sibanda, o ile amogela kgopelo ya rena kua gaSekhukhune go tla go hlatholla wona molao wo wa Communal Land Tenure. Batho ba go feta 100 ba ile ba amogela Bill ye, gomme ba mo nea dipelaelo tšeo di tšweletšego ge a dutse a hlalosa. Re eme ka tetelo Minisitara go re molao wo o amogelwe ke batho ka moka gobane o fa ditokelo rena ba magaeng bjalo ka modudi wo mongwe le o mongwe wa mo South Afrika.Bašomi ka nna. Ke rata go leboga maiteko a lefapha la rena la tša naga, ga mmogo le mohlomphegi Minisitara wa rena ka go tšweletša lenaneo la kabo ya naga go thoma ka 1998 go fihla mo re lego gona re šetše re abile go feta milione wa dihekthara. Nepo ye kgolo ya mmušo wo wa rena ke go bona gore kua dinagamagaeng bomma le botate bašušunyela tlala le motlhako ka lengopeng. Mohlomphegi Minisitara, seo se šetše se direga ka gore bomma ba ipopile ditlhopha ka go lema ka dijarateng tša bona le tša dikolo, le ka mašengwaneng ao ba a betšwego ke ba tša Lefapha la Temo le ba ka mošate. Gomme ba Lefapha la Meetse le bona ba tlile ka meetse go re temo ya bona etle e kgone go fepa setšhaba.

Lenaneo le Minisitara, le kgonne go hlola mešomo. Kudu basadi bao ba emetšego malapa ka bo bona. Deputy Chairperson, ke rata go dira mohlala ka Thuthukani Womens Project, kua Stompo go la Moutse gaKgoši Mathebe. Bomme ba 17 ba na le dihoko tše 7, mo go tse 6 yengwe le ye ngwe ya tšona e swere dikgogo tše 400 mola yela ya bo 7 e swara 1 500. Seo se ra gore dikgogo tše tša bona ka moka ka 6 weeks ke tše 3 900. Gomme ba thoma go di rekiša ka beke ya boselela. Mmaraka wa bona o gona mo gae mo ebile ba a patlwa ka moo batho ba rekago dikgogo tša bona ka gona.

Seo se ra gore go sa hlokega dihoko tše dingwe tšeo di swanetšego go oketša tšeo ba nalego le tšona gona bjale. Kgogo e tee ba e rekiša ka R23.00. Fela, ge o tšea stock o thoma ka tše 5 o lefa R19 00 kgogo ka e le tee. Gape ba na le mehlare ya menamune ye 250 le meperekisi ye 250. Ba lema merogo gomme ba fepa naga ya ga bobona.

Mohlomphegi Minisitara, seo ke sešupo seo Mmušo wa rena o se dirago kua naga magaeng go re motlhako le bodiidi di re tšwele ka kgoro bjalo ka ge Mopresidente wa rena, mohlomphegi wa rena Thabo Mbeki a boletše le setšhaba malobeng. Ge re bolela ka Land Tenure Bill, ke se sengwe se bohlokwa go rena badudi ba magaeng ka Communal Land Tenure Rights Bill yeo e lego kgale re emetše. Ka yona maphelo a rena a tla fetoga motlhomphegi Minisitara ka gore, re tla be re tseba gore moo re agilego gona ke ga rena gomme ra dula ka potego re sa tšhabe gore ge re šoma re direla bana ba rena bohwa e sego go dula fela. Elego seo se diregago gona bjale ka di Permission Occupation tšeo re di swerego.

Rena basadi re opa diatla ka gore re tla ba beng ba malapa e sego bana ba ka lapeng [legofsi]. Minisitara, ka di 15 tša yona kgwedi yeo e fetilego ye, Dr Sipho Sibanda, o ile amogela kgopelo ya rena kua gaSekhukhuni go tla go hlatholla wona molao wo wa Communal Land Tenure. Batho ba go feta 100 ba ile ba amogela Bill ye, gomme ba mo nea dipelaelo tšeo di tšweletšego ge a dutše a hlaloša. Re eme ka tetelo Minisitara go re molao wo o amogelwe ke batho ka moka gobane o fa ditokelo rena ba magaeng bjalo ka modudi wo mongwe le o mongwe wa mo South Afrika. (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs M L NGWENYA: Deputy Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues. I would like to thank our Department of Land Affairs, together with our hon Minister, for promoting the land redistribution from 1998 up to where we are now. We have already allocated more than a million hectares. The main aim is to make sure that poverty encountered by our parents in rural areas is diminished.

This is already taking place because women have grouped themselves together and have started ploughing in their gardens, at school and in the fields allocated by the agricultural department. The water supply department has also lent a hand in order for the nation to be fed. This programme has created jobs, especially for independent women.

I would like to cite an example with regard to the Thuthukani Women’s Project in the Stompo Moutshe area in Kgoshi Mathebe’s area. Seventy women have seven businesses where in each, six women have 400 chickens whilst the seventh has 1500 chickens. This means that in 6 weeks there will be 3900 of these chickens, and then they will start selling them in the sixth week. Their market is local and very busy. There are still some hawks to be allocated, to add on to what they have now. Each chicken sells for R23 but when one takes stock, starting with five chickens one has to pay R19 each. Again, they have 250 orange and peach trees, they plough greens and feed their nation.

Hon Minister, this shows what our organisation is doing in our rural areas for poverty and starvation to be reduced, just as President Thabo Mbeki said in his state of the nation speech.

When we talk about the Extension of Security of Tenure Bill, it is important for people who live in rural areas to have the coming Communal Land Tenure Rights Bill, which we have long been awaiting. It is through this that our lives will be changed because we will know that the place where we have built our houses, belongs to us. Therefore, we will stay with confidence, and without any fear, in that as we are working we will be investing for our children, and not just staying for the sake of it, which is what is happening today with our permission of occupation. We women applaud this, because we will be occupiers of those houses, but not as children [Applause.] On 15 February, Dr Sipho Sibanda received our request to come and explain this coming Communal Land Tenure Rights Bill. More than one hundred people received this Bill, and grievances were given to him as he was explaining the Bill. We are waiting for this Bill to be approved, because it gives rights to the person in the rural areas, just like any other person in South Africa.]

When coming to security of farm workers, we all know about the problems of farm evictions, abuse and farm violence. One of the most troubled areas has always been Wakkerstroom in Mpumalanga as mentioned. This was an area where there were forced removals, violence on the farms and threats of land invasions. I have just heard that the evictions have significantly decreased and the situation is much more calm and stable. Yet, in the late 1990 it was a war zone between farmers and labour tenants, because I was actually an activist working in that area. There were allegations that farmers were using the commando system to terrorise farm workers.

The calm that has been achieved is the result of a combination of different efforts, Land Reform (Labour Tenants) not being one of them as well as the efforts of the Department of Land Affairs in helping landless people to acquire land, the efforts of SANDF in curbing the commandos in the area and in particular the efforts of the local councillors, farm dwellers, labour tenants and even the white farmers in finding ways of living with and having to come to terms with one another.

None of these interventions were perfect or easy. There is always room for improvement, but farm dwellers report that the situation has been transformed. There are still challenges, we agree, but activists in that area say that there has been an extraordinary improvement as compared to the past.

I appeal to my colleagues that instead of blaming one another and perpetually criticising the Government, let us all join hands in trying to solve the problems that face our society. [Time expired]

Rre P H K DITSHETELO: Mutlatla, therisano ka lefatshe ke sengwe se se tsayang maikutlo a motho. Batho ba sule ka bontsi ntlha ya lefatshe. Fa re gopola Zimbabwe re ka lemoga e thagaraga e ntseng go nna, motsetsi a ja ka letsogo, monna a sa robale mo tlong le ngwana a timelelwa ke e batsadi. Rona mo Afrika Borwa re tshwanela go nna malala a loatswe, re ratile go bona se Zimbabwe a se boneng.

Tona, a re itlhaganele re rarabolola mathata a lefatshe go sa ntse go ka kgonega, gonne re ka tloga ra di gama re sa di tlhapela. Mogologolo o rile tlogatloga e tloga kgale modisa wa di kgomo o tloga le tsona. (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)

[Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Deputy Speaker, negotiations about land is an emotional issue. Many people have died because of land. When we talk about Zimbabwe, the problems they encountered come to mind. It has been a tough journey, where men were not sleeping in their own homes and children could not track down their parents. We in South Africa should be careful not to go through what Zimbabweans experienced.

Minister, let us resolve these land issues while there is still time, lest we find ourselves in deep trouble. The Motswana of yesteryear said that we should make hay while the sun is still shining.]

Minister, it is time that the department cuts back on personnel and consultant costs, as the Government has now passed the stages of planning and capacity-building to the implementation of programme. If the Government is serious about development in this regard, it has to accelerate entrepreneurial development and black commercial farmer settlement programmes. In the heart of this transformation is the state’s ability and willingness to dispose of its agricultural land to the targeted beneficiaries.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Please carry on, hon member.

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: It is important that the department empowers women in the area of farming business. There is no doubt that women are equally as competent as their male counterparts. The female farmer of the year serves as a platform to showcase their managerial and farming skills. [Time Expired]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Hon Chairperson and Minister, in the previous debate on the Agricultural Research Council and its role in agriculture and land reform, I think we had a difference of opinion. All of us are entitled to our differences of opinion, but the facts remain the facts and we should agree on the facts. The facts are, that in the last four years the allocation to the ARC constantly declined in real and monetary terms. According to those facts I made my own conclusions and I did not listen to gossip. I have been in this game long enough to look at the facts and come to my own conclusions.

In terms of land reform, could I say that all of us agree that land reform is of essential importance in this country and should be accelerated. What has been done up to now has been done well, but there are also problems. I looked at some of these problems, not to negate what has happened but to give some input to create more success. If I look at what has happened in many of the instances of reform, some reform and restitution projects, hailed an initial successes, ended up in disaster and economic ruin for some of the participants. Why? When we can solve these problems, we can move further on the road to have successful reform, because I do not like to see a reform project which fails and there are a number of them. Let us look at the reasons for that, let us dissect that, let us do the right things to remedy and prevent that. That stretches from large farms, economic farms from Zebediela to the smallest settlements in many areas. We see them and you see them, Minister. Let us look at those conditions, let us analyse that and rectify that.

One of the reasons why that happens, is that there is not enough participation by people who know farming and who know the conditions. With all respect, the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs does not have the expertise anymore to continue with farmers and to give them the necessary … [Interjections.] It is outside the department, it is in the commercial sector and people who have already farmed … [Interjections.] You can disagree with me, but it is a fact. The farmers offer help and this help is sometimes declined in the commercial sector. There are a lot of actions going on, but in many cases the department is unwilling to really take up the hand outstretched from the commercial sector to participate and help good land reform to take full effect. I can give you many examples. With our LRAD scheme and the Landbank there are many commercial transactions which just fall off the table. I think that is the area that one should look at.

Dr M S MOGOBA: Chairperson, land and agriculture are closely related. We need to emphasise agricultural education, science and technology. When we refer to integration in the farming industry, we are clearly assuming that the new farmers will be fully trained to adopt and adapt and be able to compete favourably. Subsistence farmers, although important, are only a stopgap.

All people who have chosen agriculture as a career should not only be trained, but be given land and be assisted to acquire land, training and equipment. The 13% of the land allocated to the three quarters of the population reflects very badly on a country that claims to be a model of democracy.

Some people think that democracy refers to voting and occupying a seat in Parliament. This is not democracy at all. At best it is dummy democracy meant to lull the deprived masses into deep sleep. We need a speedy programme of land redistribution. That is why the PAC has called for a land summit and is busy with preparations to hold one if the Government does not heed our call to summon it.

Why a land summit? A land summit is necessary because there can be no future with full justice if land is not shared by all. We call on all true patriots and people with the stake in land to join us in working for a secure peaceful future for all of us, black and white Africans.

If you love your children, join us in working together for a just and equitable land distribution. Those who are not with us are not true patriots, and they are working for a bleak and disastrous future. Our land is large enough to accommodate all of us. Those who are greedy and want to occupy the whole land are a real danger to us all.

In conclusion, I just want to commend hon Schoeman for having emphasised that irrigation land must be shared, particularly with reference to the Loskop Dam valley. I also want to say to the ANC that they have now organised enough majority to make necessary amendments to the Constitution. You have the two-third majority, and if you doubt it we can give you two more votes to make sure that you get the two-third majority. [Applause.]

Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you Deputy Chair, I choose not to dwell on the injustice of the past, as the unequal distribution of land, the Group Areas Act, dompas, the saturation of land by the minority of advantaged persons and so forth contributes to the challenge that this department is constantly trying to correct and do away with through change.

With the introduction of our new Government, realisation of the democracy and constitutional supremacy we are able to make this reform possible. The equal distribution of land, compensation for the loss of property and basic land restitution has obviously not been easy, and the MF applauds the department for its efforts and success thus far.

The MF is especially supportive of the department’s Land and Tenure Reform Programme that holds a number of positive contributions to the South African citizenry, economy and democracy. An increase in sustainable land use is basically putting the dormant into action, becoming a major asset to us. Land administration was not previously as accessible and organised as the institution now has been transformed into.

Furthermore, setting targets to ensure land redistribution enables us to keep an eye on our progress and note the efficiency of our system with a transparent system. The programme will also help the public to become more involved and land more accessible and hence the increase in security of land tenure.

The MF finds the budgets for this sector appropriate and hopes that the funds may be utilised efficiently to increase efficient land reform and that redistribution is done effectively. The MF supports the budget.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Will all of the members in the aisles please be seated. Thank you.

Mr B A RADEBE: Thank you, hon Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members, first of all I would like to welcome our brothers and sisters from the UDM who came to the ANC today. [Applause.] The step they have taken is very revolutionary indeed, because they reflect the demographics of this country. It shows that the ANC is the only organisation which is embedded in the future of this country. Welcome home, comrades. [Applause.]

The ANC supports this budget. There are ten reasons why it supports the budget. Firstly, the department and the Ministry were able to spend up to 94% of the 2002-03 Budget. This shows the commitment of the ANC-led Government in pushing back frontiers of poverty and in compliance with sound financial management.

Secondly, the Ministry and the Department of Land Affairs were able to spend 98% of the budget on the Land Restitution Programmes which shows its commitment to restoring the dignity of the historically land-dispossessed individuals and communities.

Thirdly, the Ministry and the Department of Land Affairs is compensating the current land owners, of whom some obtained that land under dubious conditions. It shows that the ANC is committed to the nation-building of this country.

Fourthly, the Department of Land Affairs and the Ministry have opted to get to the root of the cause, where there are price disputes, instead of using legislation as a tool to expropriate land. It shows that the ANC Government is committed to the rule of law and social cohesion. The Ministry and the Department of Land Affairs funded more than 30 students at a tune of more than R1 000 000, so that the historically disadvantaged students can attain qualification in professions such as valuers and planners. It shows that the ANC is committed to the human resource development of this country.

Sixthly, when the Department of Land Affairs and the Ministry use the electronic deeds registry system, it shows that the ANC-led Government is committed to embracing new technology in improving its service to the South African public.

Seventhly, the Ministry and the Department of Land Affairs made a settlement of 6 402 claims in the year

2002-03, in which 22 760 households were involved, and 85 575 hectares of land was restored. It shows the commitment of the ANC-led Government in speeding up change and bringing about a better life for all.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I am just trying to get the House in order. Hon colleagues, I know that it is a long afternoon, but you can’t compete with the speaker who is at the podium. Please lower your voices. Hon member, you may proceed.

Mr B A RADEBE: The Ministry and the Department of Land Affairs helped the SADC countries with special planning, deeds registration, survey and mapping and cadastral survey, showing that the ANC-led Government is committed to Nepad. When the Department of Land Affairs provides the post settlement support for restitution claims and land distribution projects, together with the Departments of Agriculture, of Housing, of Water Affairs and municipalities, it shows the commitment of the ANC-led Government to the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy and Urban Renewal.

When the Department of Land Affairs and the Ministry table Communal Land Rights Bill later this year, after the discussion in the Land Tenure Conference held in Durban 2001, it will show the commitment of this Government to democracy and open dialogue.

But this department still faces a lot of challenges. The first challenge is the legacy of two nations in one country. I will quote the two laws which contributed to this sorry state of affairs. The first one was the Black Land Act of 1913, of which the thrust was to confine the natives of the country to scheduled native areas, ban land transactions between blacks and whites and noncompliance to this law led to heavy fines of up to 100 pounds. This led to the whites owning 87% of the land and blacks only 13%.

The other Act which also worsened the land hunger is the Group Areas Act of 1950 and 1966. This Act basically dealt with the black spots, and led to the forced removals of people from the land on which they had secure tenure because of the colour of their skin. The areas which were affected were areas like Sophiatown, District Six and Marantha in the Free State.

This Act led to the fragmented development and ethnic cleansing because blacks in the townships were zoned according to their ethnic groups. There was a Zulu section, Sotho section, Shangaan section etc. The Land Restitution Programme has effectively dealt with the claims from the urban areas through compensation. This led to the settlement of more than 33 000 claims which were settled last year.

The herculean challenge is still in the rural claims, because it involves the willing buyer, willing seller situation. This leads to the people like hon McIntosh in the doomed alliance inciting the people to resist restitution claims. He has done that through the Natal Witness on 30 January 2003, because the land which he owns falls under a certain restitution claim.

Hon McIntosh claimed that the farms that were restored to the black people were degraded and eroded. So he called all the farmers who had claims on their lands Gazetted to oppose these claims vigorously and in a co- ordinated way by ignoring the original land claims commissioner and going straight to the Land Claims Courts, so that the process could be long and protracted. In the process they would frustrate the programme of Government in restoring the dignity of the African people.

This fightback approach was confirmed by the Leader of the opposition on 21 March 2003, when he said that the people of South Africa will not eat human rights and they will not sleep under the Constitution, which implies that the DA was realising that the rise of the African people must be suspended so that the status quo can remain. During the Budget briefing on 25 March 2003, the portfolio committee raised the issue of the frustration of land ownership by property agents, in particular in rural towns, where the property agents would inform the neighbouring farms so that they could buy the farm which was supposed to be bought by blacks. What happened there is that the three hon members of the DA, hon McIntosh, hon Botha and hon Farrow all walked out of the meeting because we were dealing with the real issues which affect stagnation of the land reform. [Applause.]

This showed that the DA paid lip service to the property cause of the Constitution when it applied to blacks. The only member of the DA who remained in that meeting was hon Maluleke, because as an African man, he knew what the ANC was doing to the communities where he comes from. [Applause.] That is why the only thing that he has to do is to leave the DA. [Applause.]

Hon Minister, what you must do is provide resources to the Department of Land Affairs so that it can effectively deal with this property sharks and demagogues. [Interjections.]

The Deputy CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Yes, hon member, are you rising on a point of order.

An HON MEMBER: Is it parliamentary for hon Lee to say that hon Radebe is bloody racist?

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Lee, did you use those words? Mr T D LEE: Chairperson, I did not. I just said: ``That is racist.’’


Mr B A RADEBE: Chairperson, the hon Minister must provide resources to the DLA so that it can effectively deal with these property sharks and demagogues, because every South African has a right to buy property anywhere in the country.

The other challenge which is faced by the department is the redistribution of prime agricultural land, of which 83% still belongs to the 64 000 white farmers. The Freedon Charter provides that the land shall be shared among the people who work on it. We cannot allow the status quo to remain. If necessary, expropriation must be used. It is urgent, because some of the prime agricultural land is being converted into game farms. I wonder whether we will have food security in 20 years from now if these people do as they please with the limited arable agricultural land.

The second challenge that is faced by the department is in the deeds register. In 1994 the deeds register became nonracial. Basically, what it did is that the information can indicate to us how many blacks were being absorbed in the new system of nonracialism. So that is why we cannot tell where we are with this difference of 87% to 13%. This also led to the undesirable consequence whereby the foreign buyers started owning big chunks of land. This is unsustainable, because we have priced the land beyond the reach of the ordinary South Africans. Even in capitalist countries like Australia, Canada, Britain and America there are regulations which limit the foreign ownership of land. We cannot afford this wholesale of our land while so many black people are still landless. The option of the short-term and long-term lease for foreigners must be considered so that we can keep the land in South African hands.

The third challenge which we are faced with the DLA is the resources which must be provided to the department so that the state can attain the 30% transfer of land which is needed by 2015. Thank you. [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Mr Chairperson, hon members, indeed, hon Van Niekerk, as you said, facts are facts. With regard to the facts on the declining of the resources of the Agricultural Research Council we agree, we do not differ. Indeed, we differ on the other matters which you raised that I referred to as gossip. When you raised the issue of whether or not the department behaves in a particular way because it wants to undermine the ARC and take back the ARC to the department, that’s the issue that I said was gossip.

When you referred to the issue of ARC restructuring that is directed by the department as opposed to the council, that is the issue where we differ and I say it’s gossip because, indeed, it’s not true. Whoever said so is not telling the truth. Whoever the talebearer, he needs to come into the open so that he can understand the facts of the relationship between the ARC and the department. Two departments have an oversight on the ARC; Science and Technology is responsible for the budgets of all the science councils in the country, including the ARC.

All that we do when it comes to the budget of the ARC is to be a conduit through which it passes. We are responsible in terms of policy of the ARC, but the restructuring and administration is done by the council, which I appoint.

I think it is important that hon members understand those distinctions so that, when we are criticised, we are criticised for things that we do and not for those that are not our responsibility. So, I thought it was necessary to put those facts right, as you yourself said.

I also want to thank the members for participating in the debate. Indeed, I have noted some of the proposals that you made and we will take you up on those. But I also want to respond to some of the issues that have been raised by other hon members.

Unfortunately, Ms C Dudley is not here. I just wanted to indicate to her that, indeed, we as the ANC-led Government were aware even from the beginning that restitution alone was not going to deliver enormous land to black people. That’s why we opted for a combination of programmes, which include restitution and redistribution, because it was clear when those restitution claims were made that a majority of those were not going to translate land back into the hands of the majority. I think it is important for her to go back and read all the programmes of land reform in order to understand what it is that we are dealing with.

With regard to the Hon Van Der Merwe, I just want to say that indeed, I agree that it is important for us to deal with the issue of tenure reform as we are doing. But it is also necessary for us to appreciate that tenure reform is about correcting what is happening with regard to the administration of land in communal areas and the land that was actually where a majority of black people were put into. It’s not about redistributing new land. So, it is necessary for us to accept that the 16 million where people were actually put, which is regarded as 13% of land, is what we have to sort in terms of administrative procedure through the Communal Land Rights Bill. But we still have to continue with the redistribution so that we change the skewed nature of ownership in the country.

The hon member from the UCDP raised the issue about the need for the Department of Land Affairs to cut down on personnel. I wish to advise the hon member that the DLA doesn’t have excessive personnel. Actually, if were were to move closer to the people in terms of decentralisation, so that the cost of the distance and transport for our people is decreased, we would need more people than the numbers that we have. So, I don’t agree with the approach that we need to reduce the existing personnel that the DLA currently has.

Concerning Mrs Sigcawu I want to say …

… enkosi Mam’ uSigcawu ngokungenelela. Inene, kuyabonakala okokuba umsebenzi esiwenzayo wokuncedisa abantu ngemicimbi yomhlaba ibenze bakwazi ukuyisebenzisa ngendlela. Nto leyo ebonisa okokuba uRhulumente, xa ethetha ngokugxotha indlala kubantu bakuthi, sukuba enyanisile. Akathethi nje ngamazwi. (Translation of Xhosa paragraph follows.)

[… thank you, Mama Sigcau, for intervening. Really, one can see that our efforts to help people with matters relating to land assist them to use it properly. This shows that when Government talks about poverty alleviation, it means it. It is not just talk.]

I want to thank you, Mr Ngema, for your intervention in this debate and, indeed, for your plea for more resources. I hope that as a committee member you will be able to interact and ensure that next year we do better than we have done this year. But we will also try to spend the resources that we have been given accordingly.

Regarding the Communal Land Rights Bill, I want to assure you that Government does appreciate the sensitivity with regard to that matter and that I have accepted the invitation of His Majesty, the King. We are working on a suitable date when that meeting will take place.

It is important for me to share with this august House that even after the gazetting of the Bill, in August last year, we received inputs from various stakeholders. We had different consultations even as late as January and February this year. We, again, had meetings with the House of Traditional Leaders, Contralesa, Royal Bafokeng and many others, because our view is that when we handle this matter we must actually take into consideration the sensitivities and the fears that are there.

However, I want to assure members that the Communal Land Rights Bill neither takes away the land from the people nor does it take away their powers of administration. What we want to do with this Bill is actually to transfer the land that is regarded as owned by the state, even though nominally, back to its rightful owners. There is no dispute even with amakhosi on that matter.

We are also saying that that land must be given to the rightful people in title, so that if …

… ngibona sengathi ayikho iNkosi uHlengwa lapha - uma sithi sibuyisela umhlaba esizweni sakwaHlengwa … [Ubuwelewele.] INkosi uBiyela yona ikhona. Uma sithi sibuyisela umhlaba esizweni sakwaBiyela siyobhala itayitela elithi, Lo mhlaba usungowesizwe sakwaBiyela.'' Okusho ukuthi uyosuka ezandleni zikaHulumeni bese sithi umuzi ngomuzi nawo uzoba namalungelo kodwa okungawenzi ukuthi ukwazi ukuwudayisa lowo mhlaba ukuze kuthi uma uThoko ehleli esizweni sakwaBiyela uma esethi,Hhayi, mina sizwe sakwaBiyela sengifuna ukuhamba’’, abuyisele isiza esizweni sakwaBiyela. Isizwe sakwaBiyela-ke sona kube yiso esibonayo ukuthi ubani okufuneka simnikeze lowo mhlaba. [Ihlombe.]

Lapho singazwani khona kahle okwamanje ukuthi thina siwuHulumeni sithi masibe nesakhiwo laphaya esizweni sakwaBiyela, esibizwa njengekomidi elihlanganisa abahlali, okuyilona elizobhekana nezidingo zomphakathi mayelana nokuthi umhlaba lowo uzophathwa kanjani, ngubani ozokwabelwa umhlaba, ngubani ongeke abelwe umhlaba …

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZASEKHAYA: Bese senzani thina? [Ubuwelewele.]

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOLIMO NEZEMIHLABA: Baba, sithi amakhosi nawo azosebenzisana nomphakathi. Yikho ngithi nje ngifuna ukuchaza lapho mhlawumbe imibono ishayisana khona. Sithi amakhosi mawabe yingxenye yalezi zakhiwo. Amakhosi- ke wona aphakamisa umbono wokuthi, ``Yini singathathi lezi zakhiwo zama- tribal authorities ezivele zikhona njengamanje kube yizo ezenza lo msebenzi waleli komidi esilihlelayo?’’ Sisabonisana.

Sishilo-ke thina ukuthi, cha, khona asinanxa kangako kodwa okwamanje asekhona amanye amakhosi, hhayi wonke, athi, ``Ngeke bahlale abafazi enkundleni’’. Yingakho-ke ngithi amanye, hhayi wonke. [Ihlombe.] [Ubuwelewele.] Basekhona baba. Bakhona.

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZASEKHAYA: KwaZulu kukhona amakhosi esifazane.


UNGQONGQOSHE WEZASEKHAYA: Kwadalwa yinina lokho. Kukhona amakhosi KwaZulu …

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOLIMO NEZEMIHLABA: Ngiyawazi umsebenzi owawenza Baba kodwa bakhona abanye abangakaboni njengoba wena wabona, okuyikhona-ke okwenza ukuthi thina sithi siphakamisa lokho. Kuseyindaba exoxwayo leyo kodwa ngifuna ukubeka ngokusobala ukuthi, kulolu daba, asihlukene kakhulu ngemibono. Ukwenza nje mhlawumbe kokuthi sifinyelela kanjani esimeni okuyikhona esingakezwani kukho ngemibono. Uma abanye sebesihlanekezela baye bathi sithatha amandla emakhosini nakubantu abahlala ezindaweni ezingaphansi kwamakhosi. Ngifuna ukukusho ngikugcizelele ukuthi akunjalo.

Sisazoqhubeka futhi nezingxoxo ukuze silungisane futhi sivumelane ngokuyikhona kulokho esikwenzayo. Sengisho kuBaba uNgema ukuthi ngiyavumelana naye ukuthi kubalulekile ukuba lolu daba singalujahi, silubambe nje kahle. Kodwa okubalulekile ukuthi sikwenze lokhu ngoba uma singakwenzi, siba nenkinga yokuthola ukuthi kukhona abantu abafuna ukujikela ngale ngemuva bese bethatha imihlaba, basayinise abantu bangabe besakwazi abantu ukuthi babe nenzuzo kuleyo mihlaba engeyabo.

Ngibonge-ke kusihlalo kanye namalungu ePhalamende. Kodwa mhlawumbe kubalulekile ukuthi sonke siyile Ndlu, ikakhulukazi mina enginguNgqongqoshe, kule nkulumo-mpikiswano yanamuhla yezemiHlaba nezoLimo sihlale sazi ukuthi impela noma sisebenze kangaka singekhohlwe ukukhumbula elinye lamalungu ethu elalikule Ndlu, uBaba uMaphalala owayeyingxenye yaleli komidi futhi owenza umsebenzi omkhulu ukusikhuthaza ukuthi sikwazi ukusebenza ngendlela eyiyo. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[… I do not see Chief Hlengwa here - when we say we are giving back the land to the Hlengwa tribe … [Interjections.] Chief Biyela is present. When we say that we are giving back the land to the Biyela tribe, we will write a title deed which says, This land now belongs to the Biyela tribe.'' This means that it will be off Government's hands. We will then say that each household will have rights, but that those rights do not allow the selling of the land, so that when Thoko is living amongst the Biyela people and decides to say,Oh, the people of the Biyela tribe, I want to leave,’’ she should take the plot back to the Biyela tribe. The Biyela tribe can then decide to whom to give that plot.

The confusion for now is that we as Government say that we should have a structure within the Biyela tribe which will be a committee that unites people. It is this committee that will look after the needs of the community regarding the management of the land and the decision as to who will be and who won’t be allocated the land …

The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: And what will we be doing? [Interjections.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Baba, we are saying that chiefs are going to work together with the communities. That is why I am saying that I want to clarify conflicting ideas. We are saying that chiefs should be part of these structures. But chiefs have raised the following point: ``Why don’t we use the existing tribal authorities structures for this committee that we are organising?’’

We said that we did not have a problem with that but for now there are still some of the chiefs who say, ``There will be no women in the assemblies’’. That is why I say some of them, not all of them. [Applause.] [Interjections.] They still exist. They exist.

The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: In KwaZulu-Natal there are female chiefs.


The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: This was caused by you. There are chiefs in KwaZulu-Natal …

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: I know the magnitude of the job you have done, Baba. But there are those who do not see it in the same way as you do, which is the reason why we suggest this. This issue is still under discussion, but I want to clearly say that our ideas do not differ that much. Maybe the process of getting there differs. Some people who misinterpret us always say that we are taking the powers from the chiefs and their subjects. I would like to emphasise that it is not like that.

We are still going to continue with the discussions so that we can correct one another and agree with one another on what we are doing. I agree with Baba Ngema that it is important that we do not rush this issue. We should handle it carefully. But we should do this, because if we do not, there are people who cunningly want to take the land and make people sign without receiving any gains from their own land.

I would like to thank the Chairperson and the members of Parliament. Maybe it is important that we as this House, especially I as the Minister in today’s debate on Agriculture and Land Affairs, should always know that although we have worked very hard, we cannot fail to remember one of the members of Parliament, Baba Maphalala, who was a member of this committee and did a great job in encouraging us to work in a proper manner.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Minister, you have gone over your time limit but I will just give you a few seconds to wind up.

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOLIMO NEMIHLABA: Ngiyethemba-ke ukuthi umndeni wakhe kanye nalabo ayesondelene nabo bazowuthatha lo mbiko wokubonga kubo ngegalelo uMnu Maphalala alenza kule Ndlu, ikakhulukazi kuleli Komidi leZolimo nemiHlaba. Ngiyabonga kakhulu. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: I hope that his family and relatives will receive this message of thanks for the role that Mr Maphalala played in this House, especially in this Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs. Thank you. [Applause.]]

Debate concluded.

The House adjourned at 18:55. ____


                        FRIDAY, 28 MARCH 2003


National Assembly:

  1. The Speaker:
 Mr M N Ramodike had, in terms of Schedule 6A to the Constitution, on 27
 March 2003 left the United Democratic Movement and formed a new party,
 namely the Alliance for Democracy and Prosperity.

  Membership of Portfolio, Joint, Standing and House Committees:

 (1)    The following changes have been made to the membership of
     Committees, viz:

     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:

     Appointed: Jeebodh, T.

     Appointed: Jeebodh, T (Alt).

     Correctional Services:

     Appointed: Rwexana, S P.


     Discharged: Kgarimetsa, J J.


     Appointed: Tarr, M A; Turok, B (Alt).

     Foreign Affairs:

     Appointed: Luthuli, A N (Alt); Mabuza, D D.


     Appointed: Nxumalo, S N (Alt).

     Home Affairs:
     Appointed: Sibande, P M; Mahlawe, N (Alt).

     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Children, Youth and
     Disabled Persons:

     Appointed: Rwexana, S P (Alt); Tshwete, P.
     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women:

     Appointed: Rwexana, S P (Alt); Tshwete, P (Alt).

     Minerals and Energy:

     Appointed: Cindi, N V; Mabuza, D D (Alt); Mathibela, N F.
     Discharged: Duma, N M.

     Provincial and Local Government:

     Discharged: Mabuza, D D.

     Public Service and Administration:

     Appointed: Mentor, M P; September, C C (Alt); Sithole, D J (Alt).
     Public Works:

     Appointed: Nxumalo, S N; Ratsoma, M M (Alt).

     Social Development:
     Appointed: Mabena, D C (Alt).


     Appointed: Sibande, P M (Alt).

     Water Affairs and Forestry:

     Appointed: Mabuza, D D.

     Powers and Privileges:

     Appointed: Booi, M S (Alt); Holomisa, S P (Alt); Lekgoro, M K
     (Alt); Martins, B A D (Alt); Mbulawa-Hans, B G (Alt); Ngculu, L V


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces: Papers:

  1. The President of the Republic:
 Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, tabled in
 terms of section 44 of the Promotion of National Unity and
 Reconciliation Act, 1995 (Act No 34 of 1995).

 The report can be accessed from the parliamentary website:
  1. The Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:
 (a)    Strategic Plan of the Department of Arts and Culture for 2003-

 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of the National Archivist and
     the State Herald for 2000-2001.

                        MONDAY, 31 MARCH 2003


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

  1. Assent by President in respect of Bills:
(i)     Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal
       Bill [B 17 - 2003] - Act No 4 of 2003 (assented to and signed by
       President on 28 March 2003); and

(ii)    Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 16 - 2003] - Act
       No 5 of 2003 (assented to and signed by President on 28 March
  1. Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 27 March 2003 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill as a section 75

     (i)     Armaments Corporation of South Africa, Limited Bill [B 18
          - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).

National Assembly:

  1. The Speaker:
 (1)    Mr C M Lowe and Adv H C Schmidt, on 31 March 2003, left the
     Democratic Party and joined the Democratic Alliance.

 (2)    Mr L C Mothiba, on 31 March 2003, left the United Democratic
     Movement and joined the African National Congress.

                        TUESDAY, 1 APRIL 2003


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

  1. Introduction of Bills:
 (1)    The Minister of Trade and Industry:

     (i)     National Small Business Amendment Bill [B 20 - 2003]
          (National Assembly - sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
          prior notice of its introduction published in Government
          Gazette No 24628 of 27 March 2003.]

     Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and
     Industry of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the
     Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint
     Rule 160, on 2 April 2003.

     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of
     the Bill may be submitted to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM)
     within three parliamentary working days.
  1. Referrals to committees of tabled papers:
 (1)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Water Affairs and Forestry and to the Select Committee on Land and
     Environmental Affairs:

     Strategic Plan of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry for

 (2)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on

     Petition of the Treatment Action Campaign on the implementation of
     the National HIV/Aids Treatment Plan.

 (3)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation:

     Strategic Plan of the Department of Education for 2003-2005.

 (4)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology and to the Select Committee
     on Education and Recreation:

     (a)     Strategic Plan of the Department of Arts and Culture for

     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of the National Archivist
          and the State Herald for 2000-2001.
 (5)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Finance and to the Select Committee on Finance:

     Submission of the Financial and Fiscal Commission on the Division
     of Revenue Bill for 2003-2004, tabled in terms of section 9 of the
     Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act, 1997 (Act No 97 of 1997).

 (6)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Justice and Constitutional Development and to the Select Committee
     on Security and Constitutional Affairs:

     (a)     A notice to alter the area of jurisdiction for which a
          High Court has been established, in terms of section 2(2) of
          the Interim Rationalisation of Jurisdiction of High Courts
          Act, 2001 (Act No 41 of 2001).

     (b)     Report regarding the Alteration of the Areas of
          Jurisdiction for which High Courts have been established.
 (7)    The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
     Security and Constitutional Affairs for consideration and report:

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

     (b)     South African Development Community Protocol on Mutual
          Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, tabled in terms of
          section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.

     (c)     Explanatory memorandum to the Protocols.

 (8)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Public Works and to the Select Committee on Public Services. The
     Report of the Auditor-General is referred to the Standing
     Committee on Public Accounts for consideration and report:

     Report and Financial Statements of the Independent Development
     Trust for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2000-2001 [RP 154-2001].

National Assembly:

  1. Membership of Assembly:
 The following member has withdrawn his resignation announced on 7
 February 2003:

 Mothiba, Kgoshi L C.


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:


  1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:
 Report of the Public Service Commission on the Implementation of the
 Framework for the Evaluation of Heads of Department (HOD's) [RP 9-
  1. The Minister of Finance:
 (a)    Proclamation No 5 published in Government Gazette No 24349 dated
     31 January 2003: Commencement of certain sections, made in terms
     of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 2001 (Act No 38 of

 (b)    Regulation No R 302 published in Government Gazette No 24941
     dated 28 February 2003: Prescribing of conditions for the
     provision of scholarships, bursaries and awards for study,
     research and teaching, made in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962
     (Act No 58 of 1962).

 (c)    Government Notice No R 269 published in Government Gazette No
     24938 dated 28 February 2003: Appointment of members and alternate
     members of the Public Accountants' and Auditors' Board, made in
     terms of the Public Accountants' and Auditors' Act, 1991 (Act No
     80 of 1991).
  1. The Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:
 Strategic Plan of the Department of Science and Technology for 2003-
  1. The Minister of Health:
 Strategic Plan of the Department of Health for 2003-2006.
  1. The Minister of Sport and Recreation:
 Strategic Plan of the Department of Sport and Recreation for 2003-2006.


National Assembly:

  1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Division of Revenue Bill [B 9D - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 28 March 2003:

    The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the Division of Revenue Bill [B 9D - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), amended by the National Council of Provinces and referred to the Committee, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

 Report to be considered.