National Assembly - 25 November 2003
TUESDAY, 25 NOVEMBER 2003 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 10:02.
The Deputy Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers and meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
INTERNATIONAL DISABILITY RIGHTS DAY
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that 3 December is International Disability Rights Day;
(2) further notes that -
(a) for many years disability was treated merely as a health and
welfare issue;
(b) disability was not included in the human rights and development
agenda of societies; and
(c) in this regard, disabled people were treated as dependent
objects of pity;
(3) believes that the formation of the disablity rights movement in South Africa began the process of change towards a positive approach to disability;
(4) further believes that since 1994 the new democratic Government has, through legislation and other policies, begun the process of creating a climate within which disability rights are respected and upheld, and on 1 January 1999 the Africa Decade for Disabled Persons was declared; and
(5) calls on -
(a) all South Africans to actively transform their attitude towards
people with disabilities so that disabled people can take their
rightful place in classrooms, jobs and society in general; and
(b) all Government departments to continue the work of
transformation to enable people living with disabilities to have
access to buildings, transport, justice, education, health and
welfare.
Agreed to.
SUSPENSION OF RULE 253(1) IN ORDER TO CONDUCT SECOND READING DEBATE ON PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION BILL
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That Rule 253(1) be suspended for the purposes of conducting the Second Reading debate on the Prevention of Corruption Bill [B 19 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75).
Agreed to.
RATIFICATION OF DECISION OF JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE TO FAST-TRACK PROCEEDINGS ON ELECTORAL LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper as follows:
That the House ratifies the decision the Joint Subcommittee of the Joint Programme Committee adopted on 20 November 2003 in accordance with Joint Rule 216(2), namely that the proceedings on the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 73 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75) be fast-tracked by, where necessary, shortening any period within which any step in the legislative process relating to the Bill must be completed, in order to make it possible for the Bill to be passed by the adjournment of the current parliamentary session (see Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 20 November 2003, p 1503).
Agreed to.
SIXTEEN DAYS OF ACTIVISM FOR NO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN
(Member's Statement)
Ms A VAN WYK (ANC): Today we South Africans join millions around the world in marking the start of Sixteen Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children. The 16 days of activism will run from today, 25 November, to 10 December. During this period, Government, community-based organisations, NGOs and other sectors of civil society will be campaigning for greater awareness about violence directed at women and children. This year’s campaign focuses on strategic partnerships between Government, the private sector, civil society, organised labour and the diplomatic community to spread the message to combat this inhumane crime.
All South Africans are asked to show their support for this campaign by wearing white ribbons for the duration of the 16 days campaign. Let us all contribute to the national effort to eradicate the scourge of violence against women and children. Let us build a humane society that values, loves and nurtures itself. [Applause.]
RACIST FREEDOM FRONT
(Member's Statement) The CHIEF WHIP OF THE LARGEST MINORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, the hand-licking lapdog FF we see in Parliament is quite different outside. A by-election occurs tomorrow in Randfontein, the constituency of Mr Boy Geldenhuys, but which is known as ``Mulderwêreld''. The New NP has surrendered and is supporting the ANC. The FF is fighting a vicious racist campaign.
In contrast to the ANC, which accuses us of being far too white, the FF pamphlet states that there is a simple difference between the DA and the FF. They say, correctly, that DA membership is now more than 60% black and the DA youth is about 90% black. They say that, in contrast, their party stands for Afrikaners and ``ons eie wyse’’. They also say the following: What has the black ANC done for you and what can the black DA do for you? Here are the pamphlets, I’m going to pass them around.
South Africa needs to know the racist face of the FF since being taken over by the Conservative Party and the AWB. They’re your favourite opposition, you must rethink it. The FF needs to know that the overwhelming majority of South Africans, including Afrikaans speakers who, in droves, vote for the DA, have chosen South Africa above Orania and have chosen to live together in peace and to reject racism. And, tomorrow Randfontein will reject the racist FF. [Applause.]
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN
(Member's Statement)
Dr U ROOPNARAIN (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, today is the beginning of the Sixteen Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children. This is meant to highlight the plight of women and children who are subjected to all forms of abuse on a daily basis in our country.
We appreciate the efforts of our Government in trying to highlight the seriousness of this matter. The reality is that we are still inundated with cases of violence and abuse against women and children, which is clearly unacceptable. Freedom will only be attained once all forms of abuse are totally eliminated in our society.
We therefore urge that these 16 days of activism must not be a symbolic gesture, and, therefore, we call on all men and women to unite against this violence and say ``no’’ to violence against women and children. Thank you.
NATIONAL FEMALE FARMER OF THE YEAR
(Member's Statement)
Mrs T J TSHIVASE (ANC): Deputy Speaker, we say Halala! Tendani Sinwamadi on being crowned National Female Farmer of the Year. In a ceremony held at the Grand Hotel, Mrs Tendani Sinwamadi from Venda in Limpopo, this weekend, won the National Female Farmer of the Year Award. The competition, which was established in 1999 by the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, recognised the role played by rural women in contributing towards food security and economic growth.
Mrs Sinwamaḓi obtained the award through her skills in farming with export bananas. The ANC congratulates her and takes pride in the progress we continue to make in the struggle to empower women so that they can claim their rightful place in the economic life of the country.
Ri khou ṱuṱuwedza vhafumakadzi vha mahayani uri vha dzhenele kha u takusa ikonomi ya shango sa zwe vho Tendani Sinwamaḓi vha ita. Sa ANC, ri khou fhululedza mishumo nga maanḓa nahone sa Muvhuso, ri a i hulisa. Kha vha ise phanḓa u fhirisa afha. Ndi a livhuwa. [U Vhanda Zwanḓa.] (Translation of Tshivenḓa paragraph follows.)
[We encourage rural women to take part in uplifting the economy of the country, just as Mrs Tendani Sinwamadi did. As the ANC, we highly applaud the good work done by her and as the Government, we cherish it. Keep up the good work. I thank you. [Applause.]]
NEW NP'S CONTRIBUTION TO NEW SOUTH AFRICA
(Member's Statement)
Dr B L GELDENHUYS (Nuwe NP): Mevrou die Adjunkspeaker, as ‘n gebaar van erkenning het president Mbeki tydens die prysuitdeling van die Presidentsgholftoernooi oud-president F W de Klerk geprys vir sy bydrae in die oorgang tot en die geboorte van ‘n nuwe Suid-Afrika. Hy het hom geprys as ‘n voorloper om apartheid af te skaf.
Hierdie erkenning onderstreep opnuut die dikwels vergete rol wat die destydse NP gespeel het in die totstandkoming van ‘n nuwe Suid-Afrika. In plaas daarvan om die land in vlamme te laat opgaan het die destydse ANC- leiers en NP-leiers besluit om in vrede te onderhandel oor die toekoms, en dit was die regte ding om te doen in belang van Suid-Afrika en al sy mense.
Net so is die jongste besluit van die ANC en die huidige Nuwe NP om konstruktief saam te werk, in plaas van om net op mekaar te skree vanuit hulle politieke loopgrawe, weer eens die regte ding om te doen en dit is in die beste belang van Suid-Afrika en al sy mense. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Dr B L GELDENHUYS (New NP): Madam Deputy Speaker, during the prize-giving ceremony of the President’s golf tournament, President Mbeki, as a gesture of recognition, praised former President F W de Klerk for his contribution to the transition to and the birth of a new South Africa. He praised him as a frontrunner in the process of abolishing apartheid.
This recognition again underlines the often overlooked role played by the erstwhile NP in the establishment of the new South Africa. Instead of allowing the country to go up in flames, the then ANC and NP leaders decided to negotiate in peace about the future, and this was the right thing to do in the interests of South Africa and all its people.
Similarly, the latest decision of the ANC and the current New NP to work together in a constructive manner instead of merely shouting at one another from within their political trenches, is, once again, the right thing to do and it is in the interests of South Africa and all its people. [Interjections.][Applause.]]
UNSPENT DONOR FUNDS
(Member's Statement)
Rev K R J MESHOE (ACDP): Deputy Speaker, the ACDP welcomes the announcement that the Irish Foreign Minister, Mr Brian Cowen, has pledged millions of rands to the South African Government after touring poor communities in Johannesburg and Pretoria. About R264 million will be made available over three years to assist the Government’s development projects.
However, we were shocked to hear earlier this month that donations of nearly R1 billion are sitting idle in the Government’s Reconstruction and Development Fund and that about R40 million of this money has been returned to donors in Europe because of a lack of capacity to spend sait. There are many poor and homeless South Africans desperately waiting for help from Government. By not spending aid money to help the poor, the Government is sending the message that it does not care about them, particularly when they allow millions of rands to be sent back to donors.
Not being able to distribute the funds due to a lack of capacity after nine years of governing is inexcusable. Capacity-building must be a priority so that all our needy individuals and communities will benefit from generous donors who are pledging millions of rands to our Government. If the Government has capacity problems, as it surely does, then the unspent money should be directed to the non-governmental organisations, such as churches and others at grass-roots level, to use it to help the poor. Thank you.
FARM DWELLERS ABUSED BY FARM OWNERS
(Member's Statement)
Nkst D G NHLENGETHWA (ANC): Sekela laSomlomo, lamuhla liSekela laMengameli libeka ngalokusemtsetfweni umkhankhaso wemaLanga lali-16 Ekulwa Nekuhlukunyetwa Kwebantfwana Nabomake eKhimbali. Kepha kusekhona bontsambo tilukhuni labasahlukumeta bomake nebantfwana.
EMpumalanga eSifundzeni saseKgaNsibande, kumasiphala uMsukaligwa kunelipulazi lelibitwa ngekutsi “Waaihoek”, Sheepmore. Umnikati welipulazi nguMeyer uhlukumete wabuye wacosha make Alvina Sikhosana kanye nemndeni wakhe ngaphadle kwekugunyatwa yincwadzi yenkantolo.
Utsite angakwenta loko, kwavulwa licala lekushaya, nekuhlukumeta nekucekela phansi timphahla. Inombolo yelicala ngu- 36/10/2003. Lihhovisi laka- khonstituensi lililandzele lelicala ekutseni kungabe liyaphenywa yini? Nekutsi umsolwa yena uyaboshwa yini. Imphendvula lebuya kuKhomishane wesindzawo itsi: Luphenyo lusachubeka futsi kusafuneka kutsatfwe bufakazi besitatimende kulomunye fakazi losasele. Lidokethe litabe selitfunyelwa kumShushisi. Umnikati welipulazi yena utsi akamshayi make Alvina umane nje wametfusa ngekumcosha wabhidlita lihhoko letinkhukhu kwafa emacandza etinkhukhu langabita R300 kwephuka nefenishali, ekugcineni wabacindzetela kutsi basayine incwadzi yekutsi baphume baphele kulelipulazi lakhe.
Lomndeni bese usifakile … [Saphela sikhatsi.] [Lihlombe.] (Translation of Siswati member’s statement follows.)
[Mrs D G NHLENGETHWA (ANC): Deputy Speaker, today the Deputy President is officially launching the sixteen Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children campaign at Kimberley. However, there are still farmers that are stiff-necked and who still continue to abuse women and children.
In the Mpumalanga province there is a farm called ``Waaihoek’’ in the Gert Sibande Region of the Msukaligwa municipality, Sheepmore. The farm owner is Mr M Meyer. He assaulted and evicted Mrs Alvina Sikhosana and her family without the authority of a court order. Thereafter, the matter was reported to the police and a docket of assault, abuse and destruction of property was opened. The case number is 36/10/2003. The constituency office followed up that case to establish whether the suspect had been arrested or not. The reply from the district commissioner was that the matter was being investigated and that they still had to obtain another statement from a certain witness. The office was assured that the docket would then be forwarded to the Public Prosecutor.
The farm owner denied having beaten Mrs Alvina Sikhosana, but claimed that he had merely scared her by chasing her. In actual fact, he destroyed her chicken coop, and eggs worth R300 were crushed together with the shed. He also destroyed her furniture and, to crown it all, he forced the family to sign a letter saying that they were to vacate the farm with immediate effect.
The family had already submitted their … [Time expired.] [Applause.]]
AWARDS FOR NELSON MANDELA AND FRENE GINWALA
(Member's Statement)
Dr G W KOORNHOF (ANC): During their recent visit to South Africa, the Brazilian delegation, led by President Lula da Silva, handed to President Thabo Mbeki a certificate conferring on former President Nelson Mandela the freedom of the Brazilian town of Sao Bernardo do Campo and yesterday, on 24 November, Comrade Frene Ginwala, the Speaker of this House, was awarded the North-South Prize, an annual award that recognises outstanding achievement in the protection of human rights.
These recent awards to South Africans are a further demonstration of the honoured role that we as a country and people continue to play in the advancement of the struggle for a just and humane world. That these awards have been conferred on members of the African National Congress, is a clear demonstration of the trust and confidence that the world and the people of our country have in the ANC. This is further proof and acknowledgement that the ANC remains at the forefront of the struggle for the creation of a better life for all.
We salute and congratulate u’Tata u’Madiba. We share the pleasure with Comrade Ginwala. Together we will continue to work for our common good until we defeat poverty, the legacy of racism and sexism. I thank you. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
RESTRICTION OF ACCESS OF VEHICLES TO COASTAL ZONE
(Member's Statement)
Mr V C GORE (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism has restricted the access of vehicles to the coastal zone. These regulations are aimed at protecting the environment from uncaring and irresponsible drivers on South African beaches.
However, the Minister has also prevented access to our wonderful beaches by disabled people. Of all the disabled persons who have applied for exemption from the ban, not one has received the go-ahead from Minister Moosa to gain access to beaches. It is simply ludicrous to believe that a small handful of disabled people, spread along the entire South African coastline, could cause such disastrous damage that the hon Minister sees fit to restrict their constitutionally enshrined right to freedom of movement.
The DA implores the Minister to come to his senses. He must stop what clearly amounts to unfair discrimination against a significant sector of our society who cannot simply walk onto the beaches. Think again, hon Minister, and allow disabled people to enjoy the splendours and wonders of South African beaches. I thank you. [Applause.]
BEACH FATALITIES OVER THE FESTIVE SEASON
(Member's Statement)
Mr T E VEZI (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, with the sunny summer weather and the festive season fast approaching, there is bound to be an increase in the number of people on our beaches. This is supposed to be a time of celebration and fun, but this could just as easily be a tragic time for many people. During this period there are, usually, cases of people drowning or children getting lost.
This past weekend, there were already a number of reported cases of people almost drowning at beaches here in the Western Cape. There was also the case of a 15-year-old boy who disappeared while swimming in the ocean, and who has not been found yet. He is feared to have drowned.
We therefore urge all beach-goers, especially over the festive season, to exercise extreme caution and only swim where there are lifeguards. They should also obey and heed the warnings of the lifeguards and observe the rules of the various beaches, as they are there for our own protection.
We should do everything in our power to enjoy the festive season and avoid the unnecessary loss of lives. I thank you. [Applause.]
LANDSLIDE VICTORIES BY SASCO AT UNIVERSITIES
(Member's Statement)
Mr K M MOEKETSE (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, recently, students at the University of the Western Cape and the University of Zululand held their annual student representative council elections at their respective campuses. Students turned up in their numbers to vote for the student political organisations of their choice. In these elections which were keenly contested by different student political organisations, the South African Students’ Congress, Sasco, won all the seats on both campuses, that is the Universities of the Western Cape and Zululand.
Bearing in mind that the student population constitutes a significant percentage of young people who will be voting for the first time during next year’s elections, these landslide victories by Sasco are a clear signal of our young people’s confidence in the ANC, and demonstrate the continued relevance of our policies and programmes. We congratulate Sasco on its decisive victories. We take pride in the slogan they used for their campaign, which said and I quote: ``A vote for Sasco is a vote for ANC!’’
We also take pride in the fact that democratic processes are becoming a way of life in South Africa, with all sections of our population learning to rely on democratic practices and principles to regulate their affairs. Thank you. [Applause.]
WOMEN AND CHILD ABUSE IN SOUTH AFRICA
(Member's Statement)
Mr J DURAND (New NP): Madam Speaker, during the 16 days of activism everyone is encouraged to take a stand against violence and against abuse of women and children. The New NP supports this campaign. But, what about the other 349 days? South Africa is moving toward its tenth anniversary of democracy. And, still women and children are being victimised! What is the use of a gender-sensitive Constitution if women and children are being raped and murdered?
South Africa’s rape statistics are amongst the highest in the world. And, with HIV/Aids, rape has become the equivalent of a death sentence. Abuse of women and children in South Africa has reached shocking proportions, and these figures are escalating. Government has expressed its concern during Child Protection Week, Women’s Day and will, again, do so during the 16 days of activism. But, this is not enough.
Even though the Deputy President made it clear that there will be no change in the Government’s policy with regard to the death penalty, there is still a public outcry for justice. In the absence of the death penalty, other means of discouraging criminal behaviour must be found.
The New NP would like to urge all men to take a stand against violence directed at women and children and support the men’s march in Cape Town, today. Let this period of activism not only last for 16 days. I thank you.
CORRUPTION AND MALPRACTICES AMONGST PUBLIC SERVANTS
(Member's Statement)
Mnr A BLAAS (ACDP): Agb Adjunkspeaker, alle regeringsfere is blootgestel aan korrupsie en wanpraktyke van amptenare. Daar is gevalle bekend waar boukontrakteurs in Gauteng betaal is vir huise wat hulle gebou het, maar nie een baksteen gelê het nie, en nou bou hulle huise in die Vrystaat.
Daar is amptenare wat weens korrupsie aangekla en ontslaan is in Gauteng, wat nou in senior posisies aangestel is in KwaZulu-Natal. Gauteng beoog nou om ‘n stelsel te implementeer waarvolgens hierdie mense op ‘n lys geplaas gaan word en dié inligting sal versprei word na ander provinsies om te voorkom dat die amptenare of kontrakteurs weer ‘n geleentheid kry.
Enige maatreël om korrupsie of die herhaling daarvan te voorkom kan net voordeel inhou. Die gedagte behoort uitgebrei te word na alle provinsies en ook na nasionale vlak sodat ‘n sinvolle databasis bygehou kan word en mense daarvan verhoed kan word om die regering twee keer te benadeel. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Mr A BLAAS (ACDP): Hon Deputy Speaker, all the spheres of government are exposed to corruption and malpractices of officials. There are known cases of building contractors in Gauteng who were paid for houses that they had built, whereas they had not laid a single brick for these houses and these same contractors are now building houses in the Free State.
There are officials, who were charged with corruption and dismissed in Gauteng, who have now been appointed in senior positions in KwaZulu-Natal. Gauteng now intends to implement a system whereby these people will be put on a list and this information will be disseminated to other provinces to prevent these officials or contractors from getting another opportunity.
Any measure to prevent corruption or its recurrence can only be to our advantage. This idea should be extended to all provinces and the national level so that a meaningful database can be maintained to prevent people from doing Government an injustice twice. Thank you.]
ACKNOWLEDGING AND PRESERVING OUR HISTORY IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING SOUTH AFRICA
(Member's Statement)
Mr L M KGWELE (ANC): The Atlantic Sea Board is rich in history. Throughout South African history, the Atlantic Sea Board was a refuge to those who were on the fringes of mainstream society. Slaves and nonconformists, those suffering from diseases brought here by the colonialists, and Jews and Muslims who came to South Africa, then all settled there in what was a thoroughly integrated society. In many ways it was a small cosmos of our country’s history. The discovery of skeletons in July served as a stark reminder of our history and of the history of the Atlantic Sea Board.
The symbolic appearance of these skeletons in a free South Africa reminds us that, in building our future, we need to acknowledge and preserve our history for the generations of tomorrow. The voices of the past are now asking us whether we are going to allow the development of De Waterkant, near Greenpoint and the Waterfront, to continue without acknowledging the rich history that lies within the streets and is hidden underneath buildings. We need to remember and adequately commemorate this very real part of our history. In their long-term planning and development strategy for the area, the city council and private developers need to take this rich history into consideration and it should form an integral part of future development in the area.
The communities need to be involved and they must be consulted in finding an inclusive and respectable way in which this part of our unwritten history can be told and preserved for the future. I call on the relevant government departments to ensure that they consult widely. I would also like to commend the Hands-off Prestwich group for the commendable work they are doing in ensuring a more inclusive and consultative process. The ANC branch in Sea Point offers its full support. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are there any Ministers who would like to respond to the statements? The Ministers are not in the mood today. Clearly there was nothing the Ministers want to respond to. After scratching his head, the hon Alec Erwin.
PRESIDENT'S CUP AT GEORGE
(Minister's Response)
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek protection for the nature and structure of my head from these very rude colleagues, please.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You are protected. [Laughter.]
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: I would just like to say that I think that the events at George over the weekend were really very exciting for our country. Not only because we showcased exactly what we can do, but also how people participated, our excellent crowds and mixed representatives of our people.
My scores at golf were far better than Minister Manuel’s, but that is what you would expect. But I think the final event, where President Mbeki showed what we have achieved in South Africa by taking former President F W de Klerk’s hand, did indicate what we have done as a nation. And I was struck, as I think all of us there were, by the comments of visiting people. The Americans were saying to me: We feel so relaxed and comfortable in this country. I think this is a great achievement. Thank you. [Applause.]
EU GRANTS
(Minister's Response)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I would like to respond to the statement made by the hon leader of the ACDP. The money that was returned to the EU was returned in very specific cirmcumstances. The negotiations between the EU and provinces and sometimes between cities and towns were done individually rather than at the national level. The EU, for its part, had tightened up the conditions of these grants over a period of time, and some of these were negotiated as early as 1994 and the circumstances for which the grants were requested had changed. In each of those instances it wasn’t possible to renegotiate the use of the grant.
Right now the EU has tightened up even further on the conditions of grants. I think we will see across the world that the EU will recall grants from countries. They call it not decommissioning, but decommitting moneys. And so in circumstances where allocations have been made over a number of years, they are suddenly terminating programmes. We have unfortunately also seen this in respect of the UK, where they now need to fund enormous commitments in respect of the war in Iraq and so on and are decommitting resources that had been properly negotiated with South Africa.
These are the circumstances and I think it’s quite important that we understand that in each of the instances there would be a very tightly structured contract, the terms of which are tightened even as you proceed so it is not possible to comply with circumstances that would see the transfer of those grant moneys to NGOs. The RDP fund is merely a mechanism. It is a mechanism into which moneys are received and then reallocated. It’s just a street through which money passes. It doesn’t have any say over their allocations or over their contracts. The RDP fund was established in 1996 merely to act as a conduit and we report to Parliament annually on what has travelled through it. Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
ELECTORAL LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Deputy Speaker, subsequent to the passing of the Electoral Laws Amendment Act, Act 34 of 2003; by Parliament, representations were made to the President and the Deputy President. Reportedly, a key promoter of such representations was our colleague, the hon MP, Dr C Mulder, who reportedly made them on behalf of South African citizens living abroad, arguing that the Electoral Laws Amendment Act, as it stood, infringed upon their constitutional right to vote.
When I spoke to this House during the debate on my department’s budget, I had committed myself to making provision to enable South Africans abroad to vote. Accordingly, in the Electoral Laws Amendment Bill which I brought to Cabinet, provision was made for all South Africans abroad to vote, irrespective of their reasons for being abroad. However, Cabinet chose not to adopt my proposal and I am bound as a member of Cabinet to abide by that.
During its parliamentary process, the Electoral Laws Amendment Bill was amended by the portfolio committee to make provisions similar to those now contained in the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill, which is now before us. However, such provisions were then dropped.
After considering representations submitted to him, His Excellency, the President, instructed that urgent amendments be prepared to provide for the casting of votes by South Africans who are registered on the voters’ roll and are temporarily absent from the Republic during the election, elsewhere than the voting district where they reside.
I am pleased, Madam Deputy Speaker, that what I had originally proposed, as the responsible line function Minister, has now been partially accepted and is before us for approval.
I would like to state for the record that I have made many other proposals within my line function’s responsibilites and as the leader of a minority party in Cabinet. These proposals - which have not been embraced even in this House - ranged from civic affairs matters to HIV/Aids, crime and unemployment. Because he seems to carry more credence than I do, I should perhaps have considered asking the hon Dr Mulder to champion them.
I do not believe that the Electoral Laws Amendment Act, as it stands, is unconstitutional, because the right of citizens abroad to vote may be limited, as it is limited in many established democracies. However, I felt that as a matter of policy it was essential to allow all South Africans an opportunity to participate in its electoral process, when I made the original suggestion.
However, what in my opinion was not constitutionally problematic may become so, as the Bill before us now only allows certain citizens who are abroad for certain temporary purposes to vote, while depriving others who are in a similar situation from doing so. For instance, a citizen who is abroad working on a temporary basis as an employee will not be able to take advantage of this opportunity. The same will apply to all South Africans who have been living abroad for an extended period of time. It may be problematic to justify such differentiated treatment. It may also be problematic to administer this Bill as it may be difficult to judge whether somebody is, indeed, abroad on a temporary basis and to give meaning to the expression ``temporary’’ under the various real-life circumstances.
As I have always spoken with candour to my colleagues in this House and in the Cabinet, I felt that I should share these concerns. Yesterday, as I was coming here, I saw the headline for the KwaZulu-Natal newspaper, the Daily News, was ``Lieu of sterling jobs: Nurses, teachers double their pay’’. There was also a report which stated how many of our nurses and teachers who are low earners in South Africa can earn up to double their salaries abroad while enjoying unrivalled packages and attractive allowances. Nurses are paid around R220 000 a year in the UK. Teachers are paid up to R350
- Locum radiographers, in short supply both locally and internationally, can earn a whopping R550 000 a year, etc. It just crossed my mind in the plane whether such people have the right to vote or not.
However, objections were also raised against the use of the phrase
assistance to handicapped voters'' in the long title of the Act.
Therefore, the amendments substitute the phraseassistance to handicapped
voters’’ in the long title of the Act with ``assistance to voters with
disabilities’’.
I hope these amendments may be in the best interests of our fledging democracy and may avert threats of legal action, which could have the effect of disrupting our preparations for next year’s elections. I urge that this House accept the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill. I thank you, hon Madam Deputy Speaker, and the House.
Mr H P CHAUKE: Thank you very much Deputy Speaker, Ministers and MPs, today, as we meet to debate this Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill, there are a number of areas that I want to raise.
During the deliberations in the portfolio committee, it was very clear that there were other organisations and individuals who were not happy with the manner in which we had concluded clause 33. Hence the engagement that then took place between other opposition parties and ordinary members with the President and ourselves. We then considered the position that the Minister has just alluded to, that this clause needed to be amended, and we have done that accordingly.
What is currently contained in the clause is that only South Africans who have registered will be allowed to cast their votes, but by notifying the IEC within 15 days after the proclamation of election day. So, it’s very clear, Mr Minister, that we are quite flexible, and we take into account free and fair elections and we are making sure that we don’t infringe on anyone’s rights. Even those who will be going for their holidays and those who are studying overseas, I think, are catered for as the Bill currently stands.
I think there are a number of areas, as we deal with this Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill, that we should not forget. The ID campaign is still continuing. The allocation that was given to the department, currently R30 million, really emphasises the point that the department has been trying very hard, in fact, together with other stakeholders, to make sure that we provide the bar-coded ID books to the people so that they are able to vote.
I still want to make the call that, as we are beginning to shape our electoral system and all that, we should bear in mind that voter registration is still continuing. The IEC has announced again that, in January, they will allocate another two days for voter registration, which is a call that all South Africans should be sure to take very seriously.
On that note, I just want to thank the Minister for the leadership that he has given on these issues, particularly on the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill. I know that, at some point, it was very tense, Mr Minister, but we really appreciate the support that you have given us.
Again, I thank the Deputy Minister for making sure that she is in touch with the portfolio committee and for making sure that these issues do come to us. This Bill came to the portfolio committee on Thursday, but by Friday, we had passed these amendments. So, it then shows you the commitment that we get from all the parties, that is, the DA, FF Plus, New NP, ACDP and all the parties that are participating in this portfolio committee. They were very supportive, and we really appreciate the support and the leadership that you have given in this particular area.
I also want to thank the department and specifically the Director-General, regarding the role that he played with his staff - Malatji, Tshabalala, Mmabulo and others - in ensuring that they prepared these amendments in time. We were very worried at the beginning, Minister. As you know, we had been saying that the delay would affect the preparations of the IEC for the elections. But we are very happy.
Obviously, other issues will come, but we are an open democracy. We will listen to them as they come and take everybody’s view into account as we prepare these electoral amendments and systems in the country.
On that note, I would like to thank all the MPs, the Minister, Deputy Minister and everybody who made sure to support this portfolio committee and its functions. I really thank you very much, hon members. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mnr I J PRETORIUS: Agb Adjunkspeaker, die DA sal die wetsontwerp slegs steun indien daar geen twyfel daaroor bestaan dat Suid-Afrikaners wat ingevolge ‘n tweejaar-werkpermit tydelik in die buiteland werk of studeer, daarop geregtig sal wees om te kan stem nie. ‘n Verdere vereiste is natuurlik dat hulle as kiesers geregistreer moet wees.
Alvorens die DA sy steun aan die wetsontwerp kan toesê, moet die Minister dan ondubbelsinnig die versekering gee dat die DA se interpretasie van die wetsontwerp korrek is. Nou, ons het so pas na die Minister geluister en gehoor dat daar twyfel by hom bestaan of die wetsontwerp inderdaad korrek is. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Die Minister het dit hier baie duidelik gestel, en dit het met die koalisie niks te doen nie, mnr Durand. [Tussenwerpsels.] In alle geval, ek wil verder gaan deur te sê die DA sal in dié omstandighede buite stemming bly en ons sal in die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies ‘n amendement voorstel om die saak bo alle twyfel op te klaar. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr I J PRETORIUS: Hon Deputy Speaker, the DA will only support the Bill if there is no doubt that South Africans who are working or studying abroad temporarily in accordance with a two-year work permit will be entitled to vote. A further requirement is, of course, that they must be registered as voters.
Before the DA can support the Bill, the Minister has to give an unequivocal assurance that the DA’s interpretation of the Bill is correct. Well, we have just listened to the Minister and heard that he doubted whether the Bill is, in fact, correct. [Interjections.]
The Minister stated this here very clearly, and it has nothing to do with the coalition, Mr Durand. [Interjections.] In any event, I want to go further and say that under these circumstances the DA will abstain from voting and we shall propose an amendment in the National Council of Provinces to resolve the matter beyond all doubt.]
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, while interjections are allowed, I seriously can’t hear. I’m struggling with the translation, and I really can’t hear. It’s drowned out by the noise.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, please do interject, but do it in such a manner that the Minister can hear. Proceed, hon member.
Mnr I J PRETORIUS: Adjunkspeaker, ek wil voorts redeneer dat die DA se interpretasie inderdaad korrek is. As ‘n mens egter die situasie in oënskou neem, is dit inderdaad ‘n onnodige stuk wetgewing, nie omdat die DA nie wil hê Suid-Afrikaners wat tydelik in die buiteland is en geregistreer is, moet kan stem nie, maar omdat die ANC by ‘n vorige geleentheid die voorgestelde wetgewing nek omgedraai het. Dit was nie ons nie; dit was die ANC! Die ANC se optrede tydens die bespreking van die Kieswet op 26 September vanjaar was inderdaad skandalig.
Dit is elke Suid-Afrikaanse burger van 18 jaar en ouer se onvervreembare reg om sy of haar stem te mag uitbring. Die meerderheidsparty speel eintlik speletjies met die stemreg van alle Suid-Afrikaners. Algemene stemreg is ná ‘n lang en bloedige stryd in 1994 verkry. [Tussenwerpsels.] Daarom rus daar op hierdie Regering ‘n dure plig om toe te sien dat die reg om te stem op ‘n verantwoordelike wyse gereël word. Die Kieswet is ná die ommeswaai deur die ANC in September vanjaar in omstredenheid gehul. ‘n Demokratiese land se kieswet behoort sover moontlik nie omstrede bepalings te bevat nie.
Nou sê die ANC twee kleinerige opposisiepartye se sogenaamde konstruktiewe onderhandelings het die Regering oortuig om die wet weer eens te wysig sodat Suid-Afrikaners wat tydelik in die buiteland is, nou sal kan stem. Die VF Plus en die Nuwe NP is tevrede met die krummels wat van die koning se tafel val. Die DA is nie so naïef nie. Dis mos pure bog! As dit die reël in Suid-Afrika word dat opposisiepartye oor ‘n grondwetlike reg die ANC- regering moet soebat om dit toe te staan, is dit laat in die dag.
Stemreg is ‘n fundamentele reg en daarom is dit nie nodig dat daaroor onderhandel word nie. Die ANC is inderdaad besig met ‘n rampspoedige benadering. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek is nie bereid om vrae te beantwoord nie. Die DA, as die amptelike opposisie in die Raad, het die reg om hierdie beginselsaak in ‘n openbare debat aan te spreek. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr I J PRETORIUS: Deputy Speaker, furthermore I want to argue that the DA’s interpretation is, in fact, correct. However, if one examines the situation, one sees that it is, in fact, an unnecessary piece of legislation, not because the DA does not want South Africans who are temporarily abroad and who are registered voters, to be able to vote, but because the ANC squashed the proposed legislation on a previous occasion. It was not us; it was the ANC! The actions of the ANC during the discussion of the Electoral Act on 26 September this year were indeed scandalous.
It is the inalienable right of every South African citizen of 18 years of age and older to be allowed to cast his or her vote. The majority party are actually playing games with the right to vote of all South Africans. Universal suffrage was obtained in 1994 after a long and bloody struggle. [Interjections.] For this reason this Government is duty bound to see to it that the right to vote is regulated in a responsible way. The Electoral Act has been controversial since the about-face by the ANC in September this year. A democratic country’s Electoral Act should, as far as possible, not contain controversial clauses.
Now the ANC says the so-called constructive negotiations of two fairly small opposition parties convinced the Government to amend the Act once again so that South Africans who are temporarily abroad will now be able to vote. The FF Plus and the New NP are satisfied with the crumbs from the king’s table. The DA is not that naïve. Surely it is utter nonsense! If it becomes the rule in South Africa that opposition parties should beg the ANC Government to grant a constitutional right, it is late in the day.
The right to vote is a fundamental right and for this reason it is not necessary to negotiate about it. The ANC is in fact adopting a disastrous approach. [Interjections.] I am not prepared to answer questions. The DA, as the official opposition in the House, has the right to address this matter of principle in a public debate.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon Pretorius, will you please just stop for a while.
Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Is the hon member prepared to answer a question now?
Mr I J PRETORIUS: Nee! [No!]
Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Is jy bang? [Are you afraid?]
Mr I J PRETORIUS: Dit is mos nie nodig om in privaatheid te onderhandel oor so ‘n belangrike saak nie. [Surely it is not necessary to negotiate in private about such an important matter.]
It’s not necessary to discuss this matter in private. Let’s discuss it in the open as we did then.
Dit is die President se parlementêre raadgewer se plig om hom oor verwikkelings in die Nasionale Vergadering op die hoogte te hou. Die agb Sue van der Merwe is klaarblyklik besig om haar plig te versuim. Dit is nie die opposisie se plig om mooi broodjies by die President oor so ‘n kardinale saak te bak nie. Die riglyne oor wie mag stem staan mos in die Grondwet. Daar kan mos nie elke keer as daar ‘n krisis ontstaan eers met die President onderhandel word nie. Ek weet van geen ander demokrasie waar dit die gebruik is nie. Daarom het die Kabinet uiteindelik ‘n besluit geneem; nie oor daardie ANC-vriendjies se bemiddeling nie, maar omdat hulle besef het hulle het ‘n fout gemaak. Dit is die DA se onvervreembare reg om so ‘n saak namens die kiesers aan te spreek. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[It is the duty of the President’s parliamentary adviser to keep him abreast of developments in the National Assembly. Apparently the hon Sue van der Merwe is neglecting her duty. It is not the duty of the opposition to curry favour with the President about such a cardinal matter. Surely the guidelines about who are allowed to vote are in our Constitution. Surely there cannot be negotiations with the President every time a crisis arises. I know of no other democracy where this is the practice. For this reason the Cabinet eventually took a decision; not as a result of the mediation of those little ANC friends, but because they realised that they had made a mistake. It is the inalienable right of the DA to address such a matter on behalf of the voters. I thank you.]
Prince N E ZULU: Deputy Speaker, hon Minister of Home Affairs, Ndabezitha, and colleagues, any law that ushers in a country’s elections is, indeed, a piece of cornerstone legislation, as no meaningful democracy can be realised without holding a valid, free and fair election.
Any electoral law should undergo a well-considered and synthesised legislative process, and be given a sound mandate by political parties and the electorate during public inputs at the time of public hearings.
The Bill before the House is an attempt to panelbeat the Electoral Laws Amendment Act, 2003, passed recently by this Parliament. The IFP registered a strong objection to that Bill, where it excluded a large section of South African citizens, who will temporarily be abroad, from voting during the 2004 elections. This was viewed in a serious light, as it violates one of a person’s fundamental rights, the right to vote.
A new democracy such as ours could not afford to disenfranchise any section of its electorate. Thanks go to those who sounded the alarm bells, Dr Mulder, as mentioned by the Minister. In trying to correct this anomaly, it is said that the ANC component of the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs was summoned by its principals to be given a directive on how to deal with the amendment.
I believe this Parliament has not forgotten that, last year, the Department of Home Affairs presented to the nation a Bill on immigration which ended up, not only a patchwork from the ANC, but a complete redraft. That was a very unpleasant experience, and it caused a lot of consternation for many political quarrels.
Today, we are dealing with another Bill from Home Affairs, which has gone through a process of incomprehensive panelbeating. The definition of temporary absence from the Republic is a cause for concern, and one hopes it is not going to arouse a constitutional challenge from some of the citizens who may wrongfully be affected by such a definition.
Thank you. The IFP supports the amendment.
Mr S PILLAY: Madam Speaker, it is the constitutional right of every South African to register as a voter and to vote. Therefore, the New NP supports the provision of the Bill that is before us.
Much debate took place within Parliament and in many parts of the country, and the common goal was established regarding how to ensure that all South Africans who are outside the country on a temporary basis would have their right to vote protected and enabled. The acceptance of this Bill by the House ensures that.
The Independent Electoral Commission now has the difficult task to implement this piece of legislation, and will have to ensure that the integrity of all procedures, including transportation of ballot papers, remains intact. It is an excellent example of what can be achieved when all parties work together to achieve a common goal that benefits the country.
This was achieved because specific political parties, such as the New NP, engaged constructively with the ruling party and the Government. It clearly indicates that much more can be achieved when we have a common vision. The one test that is still to come is: How to deal with all the millions of people in the country who have not registered to vote? We must not forget that there are still a huge number of people living in the country that do not have identity documents and will, therefore, not be able to vote if this matter is not remedied. I hope that the zeal, energy and effort that some parties, including the New NP, put into ensuring that people outside of the country on a temporary basis are able to vote, will be applied in equal measure to ensure that people inside the country are also empowered to vote. Are we expecting too much in that regard? If that does not happen, it will be a tragedy - a tragedy that history will remember to our discredit. However, we will not be surprised if some parties choose to ignore the will of the people in the country …
… ngoba kukhona abantu abathi uma bekuleli zwe bakhulume lokhu kodwa uma bephesheya bakhuluma okunye, baphikise lokhu akade bekusho lapha ekhaya. Ngalokho-ke, bangamashayakhothe. Kuyasimangaza ukuthi yini inhloso yamashayakhothe. Lapho engakhulela khona, uma sibona umuntu oyishayakhothe sasimhlalisa phansi simbuze umbuzo owodwa vo. Umbuzo uthi: Sawubona fishi; uphume nini ethinini? Ngiyabonga. [Uhleko.] (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)
[… because there are people who say one thing when they are in this country but then contradict themselves when they speak abroad. When they do that they show that they are two-faced. We just wonder what the aim of two- faced people is. In the village of my childhood whenever we encountered such people we would sit them down and say: Hello there, where on earth do you hail from? Thank you.] [Laughter.]
Mr S N SWART: Madam Deputy Speaker, the ACDP has been one of the parties at the forefront of the campaign to allow overseas citizens to vote. It has been the first party to raise the issue in the portfolio committee, and elicited petitions from South African citizens in 27 countries in supporting their right to vote.
We also engaged legal counsel to advise us as to the constitutionality of the exclusion of the overseas voters. We, consequently, support the latest amendment to the Electoral Act to allow persons who are temporarily overseas to vote in next year’s elections. South Africans are operating in a global environment and there’s no reason why those temporarily overseas should be denied the opportunity to vote. We also, however, share concerns as to the exact definition as to who is covered by the phrase ``temporarily abroad’’.
In conclusion, we support the majority party in its stand against allowing convicted prisoners the right to vote. It will be unacceptable that thousands of South Africans, law-abiding citizens overseas who do not fall within the categories contained in today’s amendment, will not be permitted to vote whilst convicted prisoners will be allowed to do so. I thank you.
Dr C P MULDER: Deputy Speaker, failure is a stepchild but success has many fathers. Today we saw how many fathers tried to claim the success, even the DA.
The legislative provisions that stipulate the rules for the election are central to the question: Is it a true democracy or not? Remember, the right to vote is the most basic and fundamental right that lies at the heart of any democracy.
For more than two years now, the FF has been championing the cause of South African citizens who are temporarily outside the borders of the Republic. Many young South Africans from all communities are temporarily abroad. Many of them are on two-year Commonwealth working holiday visas. They pay their taxes in South Africa and they are determined to return home as soon as possible.
We have had petitions signed, we made representations to the authorities, we argued in the portfolio committee, and we made personal and public appeals. Sometimes we succeeded and sometimes we failed. The fact is, we kept on even after many others, like the DA, abandoned this cause as hopeless. Even after the Bill was signed by President Mbeki, we kept on. We never gave up. We did this because we believed that our cause was just and that the Bill was unconstitutional. In the end, common sense and logic did prevail.
Two months ago, we passed the rules for our election in 2004 in this House. Those rules stipulated that those South Africans would not have been able to vote. Today we are changing those provisions to allow them to participate in the 2004 election. When it became clear that we were going to succeed, many tried to claim this as their victory - once again, the poor DA.
Today I would like to thank the hon Minister of Home Affairs who was prepared to speak the truth. He said in this House and I quote: ``It is not because of the DA, it is because of the constructive intervention of the FF Plus.’’
We will support this Bill and we will follow the regulations and implementation of these provisions very closely. We are not out of the woods yet. There are certain uncertainties and we have to look at the wording in that respect.
Oops! I almost forgot - there is one more thing. Exactly two months ago, on 26 September, we debated the issue of the constitutionality of the Electoral Laws Amendment Bill in this very House. I then argued that the Bill was unconstitutional because, for all practical purposes, it disenfranchised South African citizens who would be abroad on polling day. I gave my motivation for this in my speech.
The honour, on behalf of the ANC, to respond to the debate went to the hon Piet Mathebe. In one of the worst speeches I’ve ever heard in this Parliament, he dealt with mine and other arguments. His response to my claim of unconstitutionality was the following, and I quote:
Now, Chairperson, coming to the hon Dr Mulder, really, after listening to what he was saying here, one is obliged to think that he can only be a doctor of animals.
Maybe, just maybe, hon Mathebe could have been saved from the embarrassment if someone from the ANC had informed him that I am not a doctor of animals but a doctor of constitutional law. Thank you. Mr I S MFUNDISI: Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UCDP will support the Bill as it answers to our objection thereto in September. We, however, call on the ANC not to be obsessed with their majority, in this House and in the committee, and overturn agreements arrived at. Were it not for the airs of the ANC, there would be no need for this debate as the amendment was proposed by the IEC at the committee stage and was agreed to, only for the ANC to make an about-face later and then use their numbers to lead the nation in a merry-go-round.
In the words of the President, legislators must legislate and leave execution to the executive. Members of Parliament must be on the lookout and not let the President do their work. It is something which we shall regret, if it persists. We are grateful that the President, after persuasion, though, showed his mettle and put a stop to the disenfranchisement of South Africans abroad. The UCDP supports the Bill.
Dr M S MOGOBA: Madam Deputy Speaker, the PAC supports this amendment. The
substitution of the words handicapped voters'' with the words voters
with disabilities’’ is a clear improvement and should be supported by all.
The amendment of section 33 of the Electoral Act to allow South Africans on holiday, and other categories of South Africans who are abroad, to vote is also accepted by the PAC. Our only comment is that the amendment does not go far enough. It ought to be extended to all legitimate South Africans who hold South African passports and live abroad.
There are South Africans, for instance, who became refugees and who were employed abroad and cannot return to this country without forfeiting their pensions and investments. Such people feel that they are part of this country and also feel that to be excluded from voting is a painful blow from their country. We have nothing to lose or fear by enfranchising them. Thank you.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Deputy Speaker, the MF has no objection to the
amendments made in the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill, and agrees
that the phrase handicapped voters'' is politically insensitive and
totally inappropriate to use. The proposed substitution for this phrase,
namely,voters with disabilities’’ is both respectable and appropriate in
use.
The MF has concerns about citizens abroad and their right to vote. We have no objection to this provision being extended only to those who are temporarily absent and yet who are registered to vote. The duty placed upon such citizens to inform the electoral commission of their voting intentions should be a Government duty too, so as to ensure that such people are in some way notified or made aware of such a process concerning their votes. The MF supports the Bill. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
Ms ANNALIZé VAN WYK: Madam Deputy Speaker, in many debates in this House our opposition is trying to create the impression, especially when it is TV time, that the ANC uses its majority in order to steamroll decisions through. This House and the voters are told that the ANC does not listen to others’ arguments. We are subjected to continuous criticism, but few if any alternatives are suggested. We see political parties, the size of the DA, acting the size of their inflated egos.
Throughout its 10 years of government the ANC has tried to encourage political parties to engage constructively instead of blowing hot air. Today we have seen more of the same. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: Is u op die ANC se lys vir die verkiesing? [Are you on the ANC’s list for the election?]
Ms A VAN WYK: I need to respond to a few issues. The first is that it is not true that teachers and nurses who are not here will not be able to vote. The truth is that no South African who is temporarily abroad will be disenfranchised. There are only two requirements: that they are abroad for a limited period of time and that they have been registered and have alerted the IEC.
In the case of those who are living abroad permanently, their rights are indeed limited, which is in line with our Constitution. They have no interest in South Africa, nor are they planning to come back. They are not paying taxes here either. [Interjections.] Why should they be allowed to vote? We need to focus our resources and we will not deviate from our priorities.
Its amazing that some political parties seem to know more than the ANC does about what’s happening within the ANC. We were not summoned to any meeting. We were not whipped, as Mr Pretorius put it in certain media releases, by party authorities to make this change. The only whipping that seems to have taken place seems to have happened in the DA, because on Friday he supported this amendment in the committee. [Applause.]
It’s also important that the FF Plus notes that this Bill is not unconstitutional. It was tested before, to see whether it would be unconstitutional to limit the rights of South Africans abroad and the Constitutional Court made a clear decision in that regard, and we believe that this Bill provides for that. Despite having a Constitutional Court ruling in our back pockets, which says it’s not unconstitutional not to allow South Africans abroad to vote, the ANC proposed the amendment as set out before the House.
There were basically three reasons why we introduced the amendments. Firstly, yes, some constructive discussions did take place between the ANC, the FF Plus and the New NP. The ANC listened and decided that there was merit in the request that was put before it. A political party that ceases to reconsider its opinion is a menace to a democratic community.
Secondly, the ANC is serious about nation-building and reconciliation. We believe that by allowing as many South Africans as possible to participate in an election, each and every South African is provided with the opportunity to constructively participate in the democratic processes. There is therefore no need for anyone to be alienated or to find themselves on the fringes of society. As long as they subscribe to the principles of democracy, they have the opportunity to participate in decisions affecting the country, none of which is more important than participating in deciding who must govern our country for the next five years.
Thirdly, there is the question of free and fair elections. Free and fair elections are one of the cornerstones of democracy, and in one as young as ours we need to nurture it by widening the democratic process and ensuring maximum participation. By allowing those South Africans abroad to participate in elections, we are doing exactly that. The ANC brought this amendment because we believe that it was the right thing to do for our country, its people and democracy.
What needs to happen now is for South Africans who qualify to make use of this opportunity to inform the IEC of their intention to vote abroad. The ANC also calls on its many supporters abroad to celebrate with us our 10 years of freedom and to ensure that they vote in their thousands. I would also like to make use of the opportunity to repeat the call to those who still do not have bar-coded IDs to go and apply for them as soon as possible.
While for parties such as the DA the need for identity documents is limited to the elections every five years, it is important that all people realise that their identity as South Africans gives them access to indiscriminate Government services. There can be no daily democracy without daily citizenship. You won’t be able to understand me, in any case, in an instance such as this.
Anybody who cares about the livelihood of people should assist as volunteers, as facilitators and communicators to ensure that people apply for their identity documents. Those political parties that make themselves guilty of hindering access to services by those they believe are not supporting them politically should stop doing so as we will come down on them with all the might of the law.
The ANC would also like to urge people to continue to register, if they have not done so yet. Those who have not registered and who have moved since the last elections should go and do so at municipal offices without delay. Even if you are not sure who you want to support at this stage, do not disenfranchise yourself by not registering. With this, the ANC supports the amending Bill before the House.
I cannot but respond to the continuous screaming as to whether I am on the ANC list or not. The fact of the matter is: when I moved to the ANC I did so out of a principled decision, and that is not something I expect the DA to understand because ``principle’’ is not in their vocabulary. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank all the hon members who have actually participated in this debate on this electoral amendment.
An HON MEMBER: Except the DA.
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Well, I’m not your puppet. When I’m here I’m speaking for myself. I don’t need your wisdom. [Applause.] I would like to thank all the members. [Laughter.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I just wish to clarify that this Bill amends the Electoral Laws Amendment Bill which was passed earlier this year.
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance abstaining).
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF SOUTHERN AFRICAN CUSTOMS UNION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE REPUBLIC OF BOTSWANA, THE KINGDOM OF LESOTHO, THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA, THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE KINGDOM OF SWAZILAND
Mr R H DAVIES: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Southern African Customs Union is an arrangement that had its origins in colonial economic relations. It took shape at the end of the 19th century, and was first formalised in 1910 when the Union of South Africa was part of the British Empire and Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland were administered from South Africa by the British High Commissioner.
The 1910 SACU arrangement encapsulated both the integration into and the subordination within an emerging Southern African region or political economy of the so-called high commission territories. These territories were drawn into a South African dominated regional political economy; fundamentally as labour reserves to supply cheap migrant labour for the mining industry, but also as captive markets for South African goods.
The 1910 arrangement provided both for the duty free movement of goods within the common customs area and for the extension of tariffs in force in South Africa, and set by South Africa alone, to Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland. Namibia was incorporated on the same basis after that territory was seized from the Germans in the First World War.
It is worth recording that the architect of the apartheid grand design, Dr Verwoerd, had ambitions to formally incorporate Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland into South Africa. Verwoerd’s basic idea was premised on the absurd proposition that if the Kalahari Desert was incorporated into South Africa, the proportion of land allocated to black people under the apartheid grand design would appear - even if it would not in reality be - more equitable than the well-known 13:87% division of the territory.
Fortunately, this ambition was thwarted and Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, BLS, became independent in the late sixties. After their independence BLS negotiated an essentially pragmatic arrangement with South Africa which came into force in 1969. It retained a customs union and a common external tariff.
The 1969 agreement extended the arrangement under which the tariffs in force in South Africa, and set by South Africa, applied throughout the customs union. In return for the loss of sovereignty that this implied, and also the price raising effects that resulted from being drawn behind South Africa’s highly protective tariff walls, Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland were guaranteed a disproportionate share of common customs and excise revenue.
The deal was essentially one in which South Africa secured a small, but significant, captive market for its domestic industries, and in return provided a guaranteed revenue stream - which was of significant importance for the fiscuses of those countries.
There was enough in this agreement for it to survive, but it was not an arrangement that really satisfied either side, as evidenced both by the complaints from Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland about South Africa’s predatory trade practices, and the previous South African government’s complaints about revenue transfers. Nor did the 1969 agreement provide any basis for the promotion of the kind of equitable development focused integration that has repeatedly been identified as fundamental for African development.
The agreement before us today is the product of nearly eight years of negotiation, beginning after our own democratic transition in 1994, that has sought to address itself precisely to such questions. While the new agreement retains a number of key elements of the 1969 arrangement, notably a customs union and a revenue sharing arrangement asymmetrically tilted in favour of smaller economies, it also revolutionises the way the customs union is operated, and creates the basis for SACU to become a vehicle for equitable integration. The 2002 agreement we are asked to ratify today, provides for joint decision-making on tariffs and related matters in common SACU institutions.
When this Parliament adopted the International Trade Administration Act last year, we reiterated that the principle of mutually beneficial joint decision-making must also apply to our relations with SACU. At that time, the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry reported to the House that in public hearings on that Bill, both business and labour had expressed concerns about procedures for joint decision-making in connection with trade remedies, anti-dumping, safeguards and implementation of provisional remedies.
At the time we said these concerns, while legitimate, would have to be accomodated within a framework of joint decision-making. In the hearings for ratification of the present agreement, our committee was presented with two proposed annexures to the SACU agreement on the role of the tariff board and national bodies. We were informed that there was a high level of agreement among Nedlac partners on these, and also that they have been positively received amongst SACU partners.
We believe that this offers a basis for us to proceed with the ratification today, and I have pleasure in commending this agreement to the House. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr C M LOWE: Madam Speaker, although the Southern African Customs Union agreement originated in 1910 as a trade agreement between the then Union of South Africa and the so-called high commission territories of Bechuanaland, Basutoland and Swaziland, as we have heard, it was only in 1994, with the transition to a democratic South Africa, that serious negotiations around a customs union for these countries, which all share in an integrated regional economy, could begin.
In October 2001, the respective SACU Ministers of Botswana, Lesotho, the Republic of South Africa, Swaziland and Namibia, which joined the customs union in 1990, agreed on a new agreement, which was then approved, in principle, by the heads of state in October 2002.
How unfortunate that South Africa’s rebirth as a free and democratic state, paving the way for a new SACU agreement, has not been accompanied by a similar path to democracy in human rights for the people of Swaziland. That journey to democracy for Swaziland must now begin, and the DA believes that it must be one of SACU’s most important priorities, especially, Minister, for the Republic of South Africa. This new agreement is an important step forward in the improving of the customs union and establishing a means to integrate member states’ economies into the global economy.
Today’s debate takes place against the background of other important trade negotiations. Submissions to the portfolio committee at its public hearings indicated that the new agreement has important innovations and improvements. It establishes regional institutions and creates a rules- based system to effectively carry out trade and assimilation amongst member states.
It is important to note that this agreement is only a framework agreement, and that subsequent annexures and other legal instruments will be drawn up and added to it from time to time. This will enable us to take account of the fact that the SACU is presently also engaged in negotiations for free trade agreements with the United States, Efta and Mercosur, and intends opening negotiations with India and China in the near future.
It may also be necessary because the present SACU agreement does not have jurisdiction over matters like trade, services and investment, which could complicate matters should the agreement be cast in stone, and perhaps even impact on SACU’s own regional integration agenda. Therefore, the approval of the agreement by the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa, together with its ratification by the member states, is necessary, if we are to achieve the objectives that will allow for a new basis of co- operation amongst these countries, in line with their constitutional and democratical ideals.
No objective is more important than extending those democratic ideals to Swaziland as well - as one of the original SACU member states from 1910. It alone has rebuffed the freedoms and democratic principles that have swept across this continent and region.
We cannot ignore this anachronism any longer. It is simply unacceptable that the Swazi people, particularly women and girls, remain enslaved in feudal servitude without human rights or recourse to the rule of law under an absolute mornachy without any parliamentary democracy; let alone parliamentary opposition and institutions which we now take for granted in South Africa.
This is a trade agreement, and I acknowledge that. But SACU offers great hope and promise for trade in the region. I believe it offers great hope to the people of Swaziland as well. Thank you.
Dr U ROOPNARAIN: Madam Speaker and hon members, at the outset I would just like to say that I am filling in for the hon Mr Ngiba who is a member of the Trade and Industry Portfolio Committee and is unable to participate in this debate. The hon Davies has given us an eloquent historical account of the Southern African Customs Union and I am not going to repeat what he has said.
The IFP expresses its support for the SACU and realises that South Africa needs a more competitive and effective customs union which the new agreement favours. We believe that regional economic integration is vital for free trade, as well as to address unfair trade practices and provide for improved customs and tariffs. We also realise that growth and development are not enough. There has to be investment. So, we will support cross-border free trade and we would endorse the report. However, hon Minister, we would like you to address some of Sacob’s concerns. I believe that Sacob graced the committee with their presence and elucidated some of the problems or grey areas. Perhaps the Minister can allay their fears. Some of these areas include protectionism, the complex web of restrictions, protection of infant industries and other lacunae in agreements such as duplication.
With these few words the IFP voices its support for the report. We believe it is a step in the right direction and it is something that we have to support and it is all part of co-operative governance.
Ms C C SEPTEMBER: Madam Deputy Speaker, allow me first of all, on behalf of the ANC, to wish all Muslims a joyous Eid Mubarak today. As stated already, the present SACU can be traced back to the 1889 Customs Union Convention between the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope and the Orange Free State. Lesotho, that was then called Basutoland, joined the union on 1 July 1891 and Botswana, that was then called Bechuanaland on 1 July 1893. Swaziland acceded to the union on 11 October 1904.
We need to place the SACU Agreement in its political context. By the mid- 90s SACU members recognised that the agreement did not encourage great economic integration. During the period from 1969 to 1994 the SACU Agreement provided a framework for trade but not for regional integration.
The new agreement aims to make SACU democratic and it creates a framework to develop common sectorial policies to further harmonise trade policies and to address the needs of all members. There were six central problems with the 1969 agreement, namely: It was undemocratic in decision-making; there was a resultant loss of fiscal discretion by the BLNS countries; there were price-raising effects; there was industrial polarisation; there was a decline in the share of revenue for South Africa; and, lastly, there were time lags in the dispersing of revenue to the BLNS countries.
Whereas import duties were intended to protect Southern African producers from non-SACU competition, these duties could raise the price of imports from the BLNS. Industrial polarisation resulted from the fact that industries serving the customs union market were located primarily in South Africa. In order to address the problem relating to the time lag in payments, initially estimated amounts were calculated and remitted in the year that the payment was due and were revised when final data was made available two years later.
The new SACU Agreement seeks to address all the shortcomings of the 1969 Agreement. It provides for democratic decision-making through a council of Ministers. It reconfigures what was essentially a colonial, apartheid and undemocratic arrangement. It further furnishes it with democratic decision- making and consultation and establishes new institutions of governance. There is a sound basis for revenue-sharing and it creates a platform for deeper integration, common policies in the industry, agriculture, competition and anticompetitive practices.
The agreement sets out a framework or guidelines that are largely nonprescriptive but a basis for further elaboration including through the annexures. The new revenue formula provides a better basis for South Africa. The shares are now established for all members, with South Africa receiving about 50% of the pool, somewhat greater than under the old formula.
Under the new formula South Africa will get R13,5 billion in 2004-05 and in 2005-06 it will get about 55%. Under the new agreement South Africa will receive a share which in our projected calculations should stabilise around 55% of the total pool of about R23,8 billion. South Africa should be better off under the new formula.
In conclusion, it is important to understand that the objective of renegotiating the SACU Agreement is to restore the integrity of the Customs Union in recognition of the fact that, taken together, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, Swaziland and South Africa constitute a single market.
The ANC supports this agreement. [Applause.]
Dr R T RHODA: Madam Deputy Speaker, as the hon member Connie September has just stated, the SACU Agreement dates back to 1910. This new agreement is an important development for enhancing and creating a framework for integrating the economies of the member states into the global economy, globally changing the old landscape and levelling the playing fields so to speak.
The new agreement also contains very important innovations in comparison with the SACU Agreement of 1969. It will establish regional institutions and will allow for a rule-based system to conduct trade and further integration amongst member states.
The main implications of the new agreement are, amongst others, and I do not know if I have time to discuss them all, South Africa will relinquish its dominant position in SACU. The council of Ministers which represent all the SACU member states will make final decisions on all matters related to SACU in a democratic manner.
A more equitable and sustainable revenue-sharing formula will replace the destabilisation of South Africa’s SACU partners. The rather loose relationship that, at present, exists between SACU members will be replaced by a coherent organisation with appropriate democratic institutions and a secretariate to administer and co-ordinate the operations of the new SACU.
The large difference in economic development between South Africa and the other member states is recognised and certain provisions in the agreement represent an effort to address the problem. There is thus a movement towards policy harmonisation and co-ordination that was not part of the 1969 agreement.
The New NNP supports the agreement. [Applause.] Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Deputy Speaker, being eager to build better relations throughout Africa, the MF approves the Southern African Customs Union Agreement between the governments of Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland. We especially support it in terms of the approval of section 231(2) of our National Constitution which we respect and uphold as the supreme law.
We have confidence in our departments and Portfolio Commitee on Trade and Industry in guiding South Africa to greater success and growth in the sector. A stronger relationship with Africa would make for a stronger Africa on the global market. Africa has an affluent supply that will enable stronger markets. The MF supports the Southern African Customs Union Agreement. Thank you. [Applause.]
Prof B TUROK: Deputy Speaker, as we listen to colleagues from the ANC giving the historical background to this particular agreement, one cannot but be struck by the difference between the conditions when this agreement was put in place and the conditions that exist across the whole of Africa today.
One is really fascinated by the difference historically between the conditions in which we operate and in which this agreement is being discussed, and the conditions that obtained in the period of colonialism and the birth of apartheid when these neighbouring countries were treated as countries where certain interests in South Africa could operate for their own benefit.
Today Sacu is being discussed in the context of African integration, and in the period of Nepad, when the harmonisation and co-ordination of all our economic activities right across the continent is a priority. This process fits in with the discussions that are now taking place in the African Union and in the context of the creation of the Pan-African Parliament, when we ourselves will have a say as Parliament in the discussions around integration, co-ordination and harmonisation across the whole continent.
It is therefore appropriate that this agreement should make provision for the new conditions in which co-operation in the region will take place at ministerial level, rather than at the level of officials only. We certainly need new political mechanisms for discussions. We need a new democratic approach to the whole question of trade, customs agreements, excise agreements and also the development aspect which is built into this particular agreement.
We also understand that we need a new sound basis for revenue sharing. Revenues for the neighbouring countries, which are based only on tariffs or primarily on tariffs, cannot fly in the new world environment of globalisation. We must discuss with our neighbours new methods of raising revenue and not only tariffs alone.
We also consider the question of capacity. Certainly, there are different levels of capacity between South Africa and some of our neighbours, and we are taking action to address that. For example, the SA Revenue Service has been visiting our neighbours to advise them on mechanisms for improving revenue collection. Our Competition Commission, similarly, has been visiting our neighbours and there have been discussions about how they can improve their own functioning. So, in general, the whole process incorporates methods and procedures which will streamline the way our neighbours and ourselves process the mechanisms of revenue collection, and this is very important.
This also includes timeframes to ensure that these discussions do not go on forever. They have been dragging on. We have been told that this agreement has been in progress for eight years. That must now be speeded up. We need efficiency in this area, and South African business, particularly, was concerned about that aspect. We trust that the new agreement will take care of that.
We must also create the proper foundation for regional integration. There has been some concern expressed through the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry that with the opening up of the whole region, there may be a movement of some firms from high-labour-cost areas to low-labour-cost areas.
However, we have the view that anyone who invests in industries, and manufacturing industries in particular, in our neighbouring countries for labour-cost reasons alone, is taking a very narrow view. In fact, industrialisation and the birth of manufacturing capacity in the region as a whole depend not simply on low labour costs, but on all sorts of considerations including the capacity of a particular country to support a particular industry, the question of demand in a particular country, and it’s not labour costs alone which matter.
Therefore we feel fairly confident that this agreement will indeed create a basis for regional integration of a more sophisticated kind than existed in the period of colonialism and in the days of apartheid, that it will be equitable, that it will be democratic and, above all, that it will help the building blocks upon which the new African Union is based and the conditions in which Nepad can flourish. I thank you. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking my colleagues in the portfolio committee for the detailed and very accurate descriptions they have given, of the history of the agreement, the contents of the recent agreement and the process of negotiation. I would also like to thank all the parties that have supported this agreement - and all parties have indeed supported it. I think this is a very strong and positive statement too, about our commitment to Africa and particularly our commitment to our closest neighbours, the Southern African Customs Union.
I would agree with all speakers: This is, I believe, a very significant agreement indeed. It is, if you look at it, a very advanced and sophisticated form of economic integration. The fact that we have been able to set this up does bode very well, I believe, for future economic integration in Africa, which is inevitable. One of the main reasons we took so long to renegotiate the agreement is precisely because of the fiscal and budgetary implications that the agreement has for our neighbours. Quite clearly, all of our neighbours were concerned that the revenue flows from the agreement would be stable. I believe in working with the National Treasury and the Minister of Finance, Trevor Manuel. We were able to fashion a formula on revenue sharing, which embodies two very important principles.
One is that the formula would not destabilise any of the fiscal positions of any country - and South Africa has in recent years had considerable aspects of instability introduced into its planning - but at the same time would ensure that the smaller economies effectively have a developmental transfer to stabilise their revenue shares. I believe this is a very important aspect and was the most difficult of the aspects to negotiate.
The structures of co-operative decision-making were somewhat easier to negotiate, but I believe are very profound indeed in bringing together the various council structures that will now jointly administer and make decisions in regard to SACU.
I would like, in this House, also to extend particular thanks to the Minister of Finance, Minister Gaolathe from Botswana. He and his team from the national treasury in Botswana played a very, very important role in facilitating the final stages of this negotiation, and actually piloted it through.
I believe this also indicated, to all of us in the customs union, that the capacity to participate is indeed growing. Business has expressed concerns about whether such a large structure would be able to make decisions relatively quickly. I believe that we will be able to do so. The transformation of the International Trade Administration Commission was precisely designed to give us the room and the space to make decisions more effectively, within the customs union.
Speakers have also pointed to the fact that we now negotiate as a bloc. The Southern African Customs Union is a common negotiating bloc, and we have now embarked on some extremely large and important negotiations. Jointly with United States, we embarked on negotiations with Microsoft, and the customs union Ministers and the cabinets of the different countries are considering proposed negotiations with India and China. So there is no question that the degree of integration and common action is rising very rapidly in the customs union.
Let me conclude by also saying that a careful look at the agreement, as has been pointed out by the hon member Lowe and others, shows that this is a framework agreement. If you look at it, you will see that it actually points the way to deeper economic integration through the harmonising of various policies: competition policy, agricultural policy, industrial policy. And it is inevitable that this will take us along the path of something approximating a full-fledged economic union between our countries.
I would like, once again, to thank the portfolio committee for piloting this through, for holding the hearings, and thank all parties for supporting what I believe is a very historic agreement indeed, on the path towards economic integration in Africa. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Southern African Customs Union Agreement between the Governments of the Republic of Botswana, the Kingdom of Lesotho, the Republic of Namibia, The Republic of South Africa and the Kingdom of Swaziland approved.
CONSIDERATION OF LIQUOR BILL
Bill agreed to without debate.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I request that Order No 4 on the Order Paper stand over.
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF INTERNATIONAL
AGREEMENTS ON DOUBLE TAXATION AND TAX EVASION
CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Orders number five to nine on the Order Paper are for the request for the approval by Parliament of certain international agreements and conventions, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution. By agreement the orders will be dealt with together and thereafter, I will put each instrument separately.
Ms B A HOGAN: Chairperson, these are agreements that relate to our double taxation agreements which we have with a number of countries. One would be aware that during the apartheid era, we were not in a position to finalise double taxation agreements with a large number of countries. Since then, we have been doing a lot of catching up. So, regularly every year, this committee and Parliament approves a whole number of double taxation agreements.
They run to a standard formula, which is internationally accepted. Occasionally, there are one or two changes to that formula, depending on the particular characteristics of a particular agreement and our trading relations with that country. But, generally, they are very standard formula agreements. This year we are placing before this House, the agreement with the Republic of Rwanda, the Republic of Botswana, the Sultanate of Oman, the Republic of Belarus, the Federative Republic of Brazil, and then the Convention on Temporary Admission for the Istanbul Convention. I move that we approve these agreements. Thank you very much.
Debate concluded.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the government of the Republic of Rwanda for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in respect of taxes on income approved.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the government of the Republic of Botswana for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in respect of taxes on income approved.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the government of the Sultanate of Oman for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in respect of taxes on income approved.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the government of the Republic of Belarus for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in respect of taxes on income and on capital property approved.
Convention between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the government of the Federative Republic of Brazil for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in respect of taxes on income approved.
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF ACCESSION TO THE PROTOCOL OF AMENDMENT TO THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE SIMPLIFICATION AND HARMONIZATION OF CUSTOMS PROCEDURES
There was no debate. Accession to the Protocol of Amendments to the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures approved.
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF ACCESSION TO THE CONVENTION ON TEMPORARY ADMISSION: INSTANBUL CONVENTION
There was no debate.
Accession to the Convention on Temporary Admission: Istanbul Convention approved.
REPORTS OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND MEMBERS' INTERESTS
Mr L T LANDERS: Chairperson, it is my privilege to present to this House the findings and recommendations of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on its consideration of three complaints received by the Registrar of Members’ Interests. These are: The complaint against the hon Deputy President Zuma, the complaint against the hon D A A Olifant and the complaint against the hon Mr M A Maziya.
The committee’s reports on each of these matters speak for themselves and do not require further elucidation by me. However, I do wish to address you on one or two issues arising from these enquiries. The first one relates to the criticism by certain sections of the media that the joint committee, in considering complaints against members, needs to be transparent. I assume this to mean that the registrar’s investigations and the committee’s considerations of the reports of those investigations should be thrown open to the media and by extension to the public.
Presently, these enquiries take place behind closed doors because in our view, both the registrar and the committee need that space in which to conduct the enquiry and to consider the facts and evidence pertaining to such an enquiry. We must be mindful of the fact that as politicians and elected representatives, we easily succumb to the need to grandstand and to adopt political positions on most matters. I have no doubt that if the enquiries of the committee were thrown open, as demanded by these critics, it would be to the detriment of us all and certainly to that of due process.
We must guard against these enquires being conducted in the media, by the media and for the media. However, if this criticism is aimed at my ham- handed, amateurish interaction with the media, then I will readily concede my guilt. I assure this House that I will make every effort at improving this, provided that in doing so, we do not impinge upon due process.
The second issue I wish to raise relates to the procedure for the investigation of complaints and, in particular, the provision relating to the holding of hearings. The rule states as follows, and I quote:
Hearings must be held when the facts are in dispute. The committee may decide to call a hearing if the investigation by the registrar is inconclusive or if the registrar is unable to make a recommendation or if the committee decides that a hearing should be held.
In the matter of the complaint against Deputy President Zuma, the committee decided that a hearing should not be held. The committee took this decision for the following reason: It accepted the registrar’s finding that the case against the hon Deputy President should be dismissed. The registrar’s findings were conclusive. The facts were not in dispute.
The committee reached the conclusion that the facts were not in dispute, based on information that the registrar had obtained the previous day from the National Prosecuting Authority and from one of the witnesses, Ms Norah Fakude-Nkuna; information which until then had been kept from the committee for whatever reason. What was this information?
Firstly, that Ms Fakude-Nkuna is a business partner of the hon Deputy President’s nephew, Mr Ray Zuma. This fact explains the relationship and puts into clear perspective the financial arrangements between herself and Mr Ray Zuma.
Secondly, the NPA admitted that they had not taken sworn affidavits from Ms Fakude-Nkuna, but, instead, had conducted extensive interviews with her. Morever, the National Prosecuting Authority had not taped these interviews, nor did they have transcripts of these interviews with Ms Fakude-Nkuna because they had been lost. Indeed, the investigator who conducted these interviews had since left the service of the National Prosecuting Authority.
Given these facts, the committee could come to no other conclusion than to accept and uphold the recommendation by the registrar, which was that the Deputy President did not have a case to answer. I wish to take this opportunity to correct one or two things. The report does not make this particular matter clear. In my interaction with the media, again in my ham- handed way, I might have overlooked this or given the wrong impression.
In the complaint against the hon Mr Maziya, an amount of R70 000 was added to a list of other figures which he allegedly received. Now the amount of R70 000 is the subject of abitration between Mr Maziya and his business partners. Therefore, the amount of R70 000 does not form part of our report and the finding of the joint committee. So what is it that we have found Mr Maziya guilty of? We found him guilty of having received the following sums of money: R30 000 in cash, a cheque for R5 000, a cheque for R2 500, cash of R2 500, another cheque for R5 000, cash of R2 000, cash of R4 000. In my very humble mathematics, that comes to a total of R51 000.
These are sums of money that the hon Mr Maziya did not declare and which he has since admitted to. On a lighter note, while dealing with Mr Maziya, at the meeting of 19 November, the committee was privileged to have in its midst, joining us for the first time, the hon Mr Lever - a member of the NCOP. We welcomed Mr Lever and we are sure that he will make a valuable contribution to the committee.
I make this point because it took us less than half an hour to deal with this matter on 19 November. In that half an hour, I want to put it to you, the hon Mr Lever could not have applied his mind to the matters before us, particularly with regard to the hon Deputy President. However, the hon Mr Lever exercised his right to vote against the registrar’s recommendations, despite not having applied his mind to the matter.
When we had concluded the matter of the Deputy President, we then moved on to deal with the matter of the complaint against the hon Mr Maziya. Members of the DA had left by then. One of the people who had also voted against the registrar’s recommendation, was the hon Mr Aucamp. When it got to the matter of Mr Maziya, Mr Aucamp then adopted a very noble position and wanted it placed on record that he had not applied his mind to the matter of the complaint against the hon Mr Maziya, and therefore he was abstaining. Yet, he had applied his mind in the time span of less than half an hour to the matter pertaining to the hon Deputy President. I raise this point merely to make hon members a little aware of what took place in the committee. We are confident of what is contained in the reports before this House and we accordingly commend them to you. [Applause.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move:
That the reports be adopted.
Declarations of vote:
Adv H C SCHMIDT: Mr Chair, the purpose of the code of conduct in the ethics laws is to prevent unethical conduct by imposing regulations which are implemented to prevent infractions rather than to punish offenders. In a report recently compiled by the Political Information and Monitoring Service - South Africa, titled: ``Government Ethics in Postapartheid South Africa’’, it has been stated that the principles of ethics laws are prevention, simplicity, relevance and protection.
It is ironic that Idasa’s political information and monitoring service is today holding a one day seminar on this very relevant topic, namely, debating ethics in postapartheid South Africa, as we speak.
The DA concurs with the reports of the Ethics Committee on Mr A M Maziya and Mr D A A Olifant. With regard to Mr Olifant, we would like to note that although Mr Olifant’s explanation was found to be acceptable, his name appearing on an advertising brochure, indicating him as a director of the business, without his in fact being so, indicates the extent to which care and caution have to be displayed by members in conducting their affairs.
The DA, however, strongly rejects the majority view of the Ethics Committee that the hon Deputy President Zuma be cleared of all charges with regard to the alleged nondeclaration of benefits. The loans and financial agreements constitute substantial benefits which in our view the Deputy President failed to declare. He is, therefore, in contravention of the Parliamentary Code of Ethics - according to us.
The documents with which the committee dealt, reflected a most unusual set of circumstances, and I think it was at some point in time a common point of departure that they were an unusual set of financial circumstances, which raised serious questions of credibility. There were, for example, serious contradictions which called for further investigation.
The minority view was that it was essential for the affected parties to be required to give evidence before the committee to explain these contradictions. This was rejected by the majority, led by the ANC ruling party. Various disputes of facts arose in respect of the allegations. The code is clear on what should happen when disputes arise, viz, that hearings must be held. To deny this basic requirement, as happened, is to render the code and the committee redundant.
The Ethics Committee, by claiming to clear the hon Deputy President, Mr Zuma, when so many questions remain unanswered, has shown little concern for the ethical standards which the public expects of their elected representatives. The political bias shown by individual members of the committee, especially the ANC, when they ought to remain neutral, was shocking. Statements by individual members that the purpose of the committee is to protect members, is clearly not true. Members have to function independently and with fairness in coming to a fair and considered decision, whether it be guilty or not guilty or contravening the Code of Ethics.
It was furthermore clear that whatever the issues were to be in respect of the hon Deputy President, Mr Jacob Zuma, however incriminating the evidence, the individual ANC members of the committee had predetermined their decision, quite clearly: total exoneration. This proved true, when during committee session, decisions were taken without me being given the opportunity to state my view. Decisions had to be, or were purported to be, rescinded at one stage in respect of whether or not Mr Zuma had breached the Code of Ethics. In the light thereof, and in particular in the light of the bias displayed by ANC members of the committee, we cannot agree to the committee’s report on the hon Deputy President. [Applause.]
Mrs S A SEATON: Chairperson, I do not have very much time. So, unfortunately, I cannot deal with it to the extent that others are going to or have dealt with this matter. I just wanted to place on record, firstly, that I believe that I have shown over the past 10 years in this Parliament that I have tried to be unbiased and principled on issues that I deal with.
I cannot agree with the chairperson of this committee that this report was acceptable to all. Dealing with the report on the Deputy President, let me state at the outset: I do not support the report, and I specifically requested that my objection be recorded against that report on the basis that incorrect and unsatisfactory procedure had been followed in the matter.
There were facts in dispute and there should, therefore, have been hearings held in terms of clause 3.1 of the procedure for the investigation of complaints. It is said that where there are disputes, there shall be hearings. There were disputes. The fact that a section of the committee was opposed, indicates that there were disputes.
In addition, on numerous occasions during the deliberations, there were accusations from members of the majority party that opposition parties had come together and taken a decision to adopt a particular stand. I had not even discussed this within my own party, how could I have discussed it with opposition parties?
I took points of order on several occasions, and sadly the chairman chose not to deal with the issue. He even allowed a member who had not been present at the time I put my proposal to vote against me. He proceeded with a full disciplinary hearing while the person was not present. She walked in, hearing that my proposal was being discussed - those four had already been done - she put her hand up, and was allowed to proceed - notwithstanding the fact that she was not even in the room at the time.
The sad thing is that as far as this matter is concerned, in my heart, I will never know if the Deputy President was guilty or not guilty, because the matters have not been fully placed before us.
With regard to the matter of Mr Maziya, I concur with the decision with regard to his conduct. However, again, I cannot accept the report for procedural reasons. Procedures were not followed. So, I reject that report.
On the matter of Mr Daniel Olifant, I wholeheartedly support the report. Notwithstanding that, the points made by Mr Schmidt are very clear, there are problems. Members have to take cognisance of what they do and how they operate their business matters, and ensure that Parliament is always seen in a good light. I thank you. [Applause.]
Ms C DUDLEY: Chair, the ruling by the Ethics Committee, made up of a majority of ANC and New NP members is, in my opinion, premature, as this investigation cannot be concluded when evidence before the committee contains contradictions which have not been adequately explained.
It is my opinion, and that of the ACDP, that key role-players and the Public Prosecutor should have been asked to give oral evidence before the committee before any conclusions were drawn. Even then, this finding should merely have been an interim one, pending the outcome of the Shaik court proceedings which are inextricably linked to the issues discussed by the Ethics Committee.
The strong likelihood that evidence will emerge during this trial, which will impact on the Ethics Committee findings, has been ignored. The ACDP disagrees with the Ethics Committee’s opinion that the question of whether or not the loan agreement compromised or impaired the judgment of the hon Deputy President Jacob Zuma is not relevant.
The purpose of disclosure to Parliament is to guard against situations where office-bearers abuse or compromise their positions, and this question is surely, therefore, relevant. The committee has set a dangerous precedent, as anyone who has been found to have received money can produce loan agreements after the fact to support nondisclosure of funds.
It appears that Ministers are clearly off-limits, and this prevents Parliament from performing any real oversight function. Members of Parliament are strictly dealt with and punished, while in matters involving the executive, Parliament treads lightly and MPs apparently feel obliged to defend their leaders.
The Ethics Committee is, therefore, not a suitable structure to deal with allegations against any executive member of the Government, and an independent inquiry should have been set up to investigate these allegations. Findings in respect of Mr Maziya and Mr Olifant are supported by the ACDP.
Mr J P CRONIN: Chairperson, I think the first thing to bear in mind is to understand what the Ethics Committee is all about. I think there is a tendency to understand the Ethics Committee as Atlas holding up the whole burden of ethics in South Africa. It is one component of a broad panoply of institutions and structures that this ANC-majority Government has brought into being in South Africa: the Public Protector, ethics committees - both at national and provincial level. There is the independent media, which is a whole lot more independent than it was before. There is robust opposition from political parties. All of those are components of upholding ethics in public life in our country. I think that is the first point.
For instance the ACDP speaker just said that the Ethics Committee is inappropriate to look at executive members. The Ethics Committee has looked at executive members, including, for instance, recently the Minister of Defence. The Minister of Defence co-operated fully with the Ethics Committee. We came to a certain finding. However, there are additional requirements on executive members, which is why there is an executive members’ code of conduct and a Public Protector, who looked into this matter by the way, and into the matter of the Deputy President.
So I think it is very important to understand the role of the Ethics Committee. We are not holding up the whole burden of ethics in South Africa and if we fail to punish or introduce capital punishment for offenders, somehow, ethics is going to crumble in South Africa.
A second key point, is that this Ethics Committee with its limited resources, with its perhaps limited powers and so on has done an amazing amount of work. The Chief Whip of the Majority Party has been involved with this Ethics Committee. A Defence Minister has been involved. A former president of the ANC Women’s League was involved and now we have dealt with the Deputy President and that Deputy President and his office has co- operated fully with this Ethics Committee. So it is not some limp-wristed entity incapable of addressing the challenges in front of us. Let me address the key issue which is coming up a great deal. According to members of the opposition, there is a dispute in terms of the facts before us regarding the issue of the Deputy President. As far as we are concerned there is no dispute and there was no evidence countering it. What we have is hearsay allegations from the Scorpions saying that, in their investigation, certain things have been said. We asked them for documentation, for the sworn statements that they have taken from these members of the public. They said to us that they had actually not taken sworn statements. They had, in fact, lost the documentation and the official involved in that investigation had since left the Scorpions.
Up against that we have five sworn statements, five affidavits in front of us from the two individuals involved in that particular set of circumstances. There is no dispute, nor contrary information. If there is further information that will emerge later on, at some future date, so be it, and we, as the Ethics Committee, may or may not have to address that matter, should it arise. But to suggest that there was some huge contradiction and that we just chose to sweep that contradiction under the carpet is absolutely and completely wrong. It is simply without any factual basis.
These committee reports have the full support of the ANC, especially the recommendations of the committee in respect of all three matters, not least that in regard to the Deputy President. There is an allegation that we came in as the ANC, with a predetermined agenda to find the Deputy President innocent. The predetermined agenda was the headline in newspapers. One newspaper had to apologise twice over for a headline in which the facts were manipulated in order to suggest that this had happened. Twice over that newspaper had to back down: Headline on the front page the one day; the next day, a tiny little microscopic apology on page two.
You think we came in with a predetermined agenda but we can equally allege that members of the opposition came in with another predetermined agenda. Firstly, to find the Deputy President guilty at all costs and, failing that, at least to prolong this matter until April next year. We completely reject what the minority of the members of the committee have suggested. We feel that we have done justice to the matters in front of us. [Time expired.]
Mr J DURAND: Chairperson, I think that it is very important to understand the scope and role of the Ethics Committee. The hon Cronin referred to it. We are neither a court of law, nor are we an investigating authority. We need to assess whether or not the member has breached the code of conduct.
In terms of that, the New National Party agrees to the recommendations of the committee. Today should have been a celebration for this Parliament, it should have been the celebration of a democracy that is 10 years old. Where in the world would you find a democracy where three of the members of the ruling party with a two-third majority, are charged?
We looked at this with the ruling party, with opposition parties very carefully, very thoroughly. One member was reprimanded, another member was cautioned. When we looked at the Deputy President, what was the essence of his case at the end of the day? He had received loans. We had letters, statements from both parties, that all three loans were interest-bearing loans. What was there to moan and shout about?
How can we celebrate today that we are a fair democracy? When this Parliament sits as a jury of our peers, we look at each other justly and very fairly. If that has not happened, do we want to destroy the lives of three people for politics?
Question put: That the Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on Alleged Receipt of Benefits by Deputy President J G Zuma be adopted.
Question agreed to (Democratic Alliance, Inkatha Freedom Party, African Christian Democratic Party and Independent African Movement dissenting). Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on Alleged Breach of Code of Conduct by Mr M A Maziya be adopted.
Question agreed to (Inkatha Freedom Party dissenting).
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on Alleged breach of Code of Conduct by Mr D A A Olifant be adopted.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Business suspended at 12:08 and resumed at 14:02.
AFTERNOON SITTING
MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET POLICY STATEMENT
Mr N M NENE: Deputy Speaker, it is my singular pleasure to participate in today’s debate on the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, that was tabled by the Minister of Finance on 12 November this year. In the foreword to the statement the Minister says and I quote:
This Statement sets the tone that will guide the 2004 Budget and help steer our course through a second decade of democratic development in South Africa.
He continues:
It affirms Government’s commitment to supporting growth and development through higher levels of investment in our people and our infrastructure.
This statement we are debating today is the outcome of a considered scrutiny that emanates from the publication titled, ``Towards a 10-year review’’, which is a frank and honest assessment of the ANC-led Government’s performance over the past nine and a half years.
This document measures our Government’s performance against the five objectives that were outlined in the Reconstruction and Development Programme. These objectives are: The meeting of basic needs, building the economy, democratising the state and society, developing human resources and nation-building.
The Reconstruction and Development Programme was an integrated, coherent socioeconomic policy framework. It sought to mobilise all our people and our country’s resources towards the final eradication of apartheid and the building of a democratic, nonracial and nonsexist society.
The statement is also built on the solid foundation of growth and development summit commitments. Census 2001 was also an important yardstick to refocus the Government on policy priorities for improving growth and broadening participation in the economy. The document, ``Towards a 10-year review’’, which I have referred to, tracks the challenges faced by this country since the attainment of our democracy. The challenges identified relate to institutional transformation and the introduction of new policies in line with the democratic Constitution.
The ANC Government was also confronted with the legacy of apartheid, whilst at the same time facing new challenges of integrating the country in a rapidly changing global environment. It is in response to these challenges that the ANC Government is pursuing an expansionary fiscal framework that aims to support growth in both the medium and long-term, increase Government spending on social services and infrastructure development needs in the medium-term, while also contributing towards human and physical capital formation required for long-term sustainable growth.
The policy priorities for the 2004 Budget, which I will speak about later, seek to reduce dependence on social welfare by increasing the number of people that rely on normal participation in the economy for their livelihood. The Joint Budget Committee, as mandated by our terms of reference, held hearings on the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement from 14 to 20 November this year, with a number of Government departments, business, labour and civil society organisations making submissions to the committee.
The departments that appeared before the committee demonstrated a relatively high level of readiness to meet the obligations of the MTEF with the limited resources that are available to them. The committee also took a dramatic approach in its hearings with the following themes: Firstly, rural development and urban renewal, which one of my colleagues will be speaking about; secondly, economic growth and employment; thirdly, social security and health; fourthly, justice and protection; and lastly, international relations. My other colleagues will be speaking about rural development and urban renewal and also social security and health.
Allow me to say a few words on economic growth and employment as well as international relations. Under this theme the committee heard submissions from eight national departments, categorised into two type: Firstly, the implementing departments, which were Public Works, Water Affairs, Agriculture and Transport; and, secondly, regulating departments, which were Trade and Industry, Environmental Affairs and Tourism and Labour.
These departments were invited to make presentations because of their key roles in implementing Government’s development policy, including job creation and black economic empowerment, in a stable microeconomic environment. Except for a few concerns expressed by the committee and reflected in the report, the departments are well-prepared for the challenges ahead. Portfolio committees are also urged to monitor the performance of these departments in their oversight.
Under the theme of international relations, Foreign Affairs and Defence made submissions to the committee, the central element of which was South Africa’s role in the continent and abroad. The country’s achievements in this regard are tremendous and we have every reason to celebrate and share our experiences more particularly with the continent.
According to this statement, overall spending on policy priorities, including social and economic infrastructure, human capital and administrative services will grow by an annual average of 4,4% in real terms over the MTEF period. According to the statement, this will sustain the growth of infrastructure and capital spending established since the 2001 Budget.
The Joint Budget Committee agrees that the underlying processes have been improved tremendously to ensure better outputs and outcomes. However, we have conceded that the link between strategic planning, budgeting and reporting needs to be further strengthened. National and provincial departments are now basing their spending plans on strategic plans that have been informed by sound policies and reporting formats are improving.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, please can we lower our voices. Remember the attendance is very good so we might think that we are whispering but then we end up really doing more than that.
Mr N M NENE: These policies are entrenching accountability and good governance. This is an integral part of the Public Finance Management Act.
The key spending priorities as outlined in the statement are as follows: Renewed focus on employment creation through the expanding Public Works programme - which my colleagues will be speaking about; increased infrastructure spending; scaling up of the Aids treatment programme; the extension of social grants through the child support grant and other grants targeting vulnerable groups; the provision of learner support material for schools; the continued roll-out of free basic services and investment in municipal infrastructure; strengthening the safety and security sector through the sector policing structure strategy and a new protection and security services division that has been established, while the child justice centres have also been taken care of; improving core Home Affairs services to citizens, including a roll-out to rural areas; the promotion of peace in the continent and regional trade and development; and promoting broad-based black economic empowerment, which is a new budgetary priority.
These priorities are confirmation of a continued commitment by the ANC Government to better the lives of all South Africans and restore the dignity of South Africans and Africans at large. Let me take this opportunity to invite members to read the committee’s report in the ATC’s of 24 November. The ANC supports this statement.
Dr P J RABIE: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon Minister and hon members, the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement is in essence a pre-election statement.
The DA welcomes the announcement in the MTBPS that the tax amnesty deadline, regarding exchange control, will be extended to the end of February 2004. The fact that the deadline falls on the same date as the end of the tax year will enable South Africans to repatriate much needed offshore funds back into South Africa.
What is of concern, however, is that the absence of another tax overrun may result in limited tax relief for the middle and lower income groups. The hon Minister mentioned that the revenue shortfall is expected to be some R4,6 billion due to the strength …
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, please lower your voices.
Dr P J RABIE: … of the rand and the decline in exports, especially in the manufacturing sector.
The DA is the official opposition - we play a constructive role, we criticise when necessary, and we will give credit to the Government when it is due. The excellent reduction in the budget deficit, public debt and better tax collection is noteworthy, but of concern is the fact that a number of state, provincial and municipal budgets are still underspent. This is clearly not acceptable.
It is estimated that more than one million jobs were lost in the past decade, forcing millions of middle and lower income South Africans to adjust their personal budgets. The cost of security, transport toll roads, education and other expenses have escalated dramatically in the past year which has made it extremely difficult for millions of South Africans to make ends meet.
The announcement by the hon Minister that taxation on retirement funds is to be reduced from 25% to 18%, in his Budget Speech this year, is very significant.
Die DA versoek dat hierdie belasting tot minder as 10% in die volgende belastingjaar verminder word. Die huidige stelsel van belasting op pensioenfondse is ‘n vorm van dubbele belasting. Etlike pensioenfondse bevind hulle vandag in ‘n finansiële oorlewingstryd. Die DA beskou pensioenfondse en ander welsynsinstansies as ‘n bate wat die maatskaplike las en verpligting van die staat verminder. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[The DA requests that this tax be reduced to less than 10% in the next tax year. The current system of tax on pension funds is a form of double taxation. Several pension funds at present find themselves in a financial battle for survival. The DA regards pension funds and other welfare organisations as an asset which decreases the social burden and responsibility that rests on the state.]
Due to the incidence of HIV/Aids, South Africa may experience zero population growth by 2011. The South African population is ageing, and we are experiencing an alarming exodus of highly skilled predominantly young people. Time is of the essence, and the DA urges the Minister to request the task team, which has been set up, to investigate taxation on retirement funds, to finalise their report in order to alleviate the plight of some members of pension funds.
The following forecasts of Treasury are noteworthy. Growth in GDP is estimated at 2,2% for 2003; 3,3% for 2004 and 3,5% for 2005. Our CPIX, metro and urban, is projected at 6,9% for 2003, 4,9% for 2004 and 5,4% for
- This is well within our inflation target band and should encourage investor and consumer confidence.
The continued global economic downturn, coupled with a relatively strong rand, resulted in the Treasury adjusting the estimated growth from 3,3% to 2,2%. A positive development is that South Africa’s foreign reserves had increased. By the end of September 2003, gross gold and foreign reserves had risen to US$20,2 billion - up almost 30% from March 2003.
The fact that the Net Open Forward Position was eliminated by 2003 is also significant, and the Net Open Forward Position strengthening to a positive US$1,8 billion at the end of September may also be a factor which contributed to the strengthening of the rand.
Policy measures announced, and given effect in the Revenue Laws Amendment Act of 2003, relate to incentives for urban renewal, reduction in the tax on retirement funds, allowances to encourage business investment and adjustments to foreign business taxation.
The key spending priorities for the 2004 Budget are: A focus on employment creation through the Expanded Public Works Programme; increased infrastructure spending; and R12 billion apportioned for HIV/Aids and antiretroviral rollout over four years.
Another priority is the extension of social security grants through the child support grant and other grants, targeting school textbooks for the poor; further assistance in respect of free basic services and investment in municipal infrastructure; further assistance to the safety and security sector; improving core Home Affairs services to citizens - there is a particular need in rural areas for ID documents, etc; and promoting broad- based black empowerment.
Adjunkspeaker, die DA het besondere waardering vir al die lede van die Suid- Afrikaanse Weermag en vir wat hulle op grondvlak - in Suid-Afrika doen. Verder is dit gebiedend noodsaaklik dat die Weermag toegerus word om ons marienebronne en grense te beskerm. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Deputy Speaker, the DA has special appreciation for all the members of the SA Defence Force and for what they are doing at grass-roots level in South Africa. Furthermore, it is of the utmost importance that the Defence Force is equipped to protect our marine resources and our borders.]
In the adjusted estimate, an unforeseeable and unavoidable expenditure of R500 million for Defence is mentioned. South Africa has committed the SANDF to a number of peace support operations in Africa. There are currently 10 members deployed in Ethiopia, 4 in Eritrea, 1 418 in the DRC and a further 1 512 in Burundi. The troops stationed in Burundi differ from other United Nations deployments in as far as they are a part of the African Mission in Burundi. South Africa thus has to pay for its own troops in Burundi.
The initial deployment in Burundi was responsible for VIP protection. The current mission, however, has been extended to include the supervision of two demobilisation centres. According to figures handed to me by the spokesperson for Defence of the DA, the expected cost of our troops in Burundi will be about R679 million in 2003. It could cost a further R564 million in 2004, R577 million in 2005, and R600 million in 2006. There are no timeframes in Burundi, and South Africa has, therefore, become involved in an open-ended process with no apparent exit criteria in place.
Besides the astronomical costs and the apparent lack of exit criteria, huge logistical problems exist due to long distances, the lack of political planning and risk assessment. Troops on the ground endure inadequate accommodation and medical facilities. It is reported that the low serviceability of vehicles has also become a constraint.
Die bekende nyweraar en sakeman, Dr Anton Rupert, het by geleentheid gemeld dat indien jou buurman honger is, is dit moeilik om rustig te slaap. Ons buurland noord van die Limpopo, Zimbabwe, staar ‘n ernstige hongersnood in die gesig. Daar word bereken dat bykans 60% van ‘n bevolking van 11 miljoen deur ‘n voedseltekort bedreig word. Die inflasiekoers in Zimbabwe is tans in die orde van 400%.
Daar vind tans ernstige skending van basiese menseregte plaas. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[The well-known industrialist and businessman, Dr Anton Rupert, once said that if your neighbour is hungry, it is difficult to sleep peacefully. Our neighbouring country, north of the Limpompo, Zimbabwe, is facing a serious famine. It has been calculated that nearly 60% of a population of 11 million is being threatened by a food shortage. The inflation rate in Zimbabwe is currently of the order of over 400%. Serious infringements of basic human rights are currently taking place there.]
Chances are that the entire Zimbabwean economy, or what is left of it, may implode in the foreseeable future. Charity begins at home. It is important that we take proactive steps to guard our borders. South Africa has an important role to play in Africa. The role, however, must be weighed up against domestic needs. All indications are that at present the South African Defence Force has overstretched its capacity in terms of peace support.
The substantial additional allocation of R1,9 billion to HIV and Aids is welcomed but long overdue, and is a victory for democracy. This announcement is good news for five million South Africans who are HIV positive. Thousands of doctors and medical nursing personnel will have to be trained in order to administer the antiretroviral drugs in the proper manner.
Aids is posing an alarming threat to the South African society. Eleven thousand South Africans, many of them in their prime, die daily. The emotional trauma for their next of kin, especially the children orphaned because of Aids, is a human tragedy of grave proportion.
Drie bekende Suid-Afrikaanse ekonome het die Gesamentlike Begrotingskomitee toegespreek en ‘n aantal aspekte gemeld wat verdere toeligting verdien. Naamlik, eerstens, die herstrukturering van staatsbates is nie voldoende in die agbare Minister se voorligting aangespreek nie. Tweedens, klein- tot medium sake-ondernemings en volhoubare werkskepping vir die hande- aarbeidkomponent van die arbeidsektor is van sleutelbelang en moet in detail aangespreek word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Three well-known South African economists addressed the Joint Budget Committee and mentioned a number of aspects that deserve further elucidation. Namely, firstly, the restructuring of state assets has not been adequately addressed in the hon Minister’s briefing. Secondly, small to medium business enterprises and sustainable job creation for the manual component of the labour sector are of vital importance and must be addressed in detail.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, the DA supports the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement. I thank you. [Applause.]
Dr G G WOODS: Madam Deputy Speaker, patterns within the budget numbers had become so consistent over recent years that it did come as something of a surprise to see certain trends suddenly coming to an end in the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement.
These, of course, are not so much on the expenditure side, where it seems social spending trends and an expansionary tendency are being maintained, but rather on the financing side. Here, in summary, we are presented with assumptions from which predictions of slowing tax revenue growth and lower privatisation proceeds are made and in view of which a higher deficit will be run in order to sustain the expenditure side. So this constitutes a changing arithmetical permutation of the Budget for at least a few years ahead.
Now these shifts seem to have excited some interesting analysis and comment from relevant public quarters - some of which is worth musing over. There was that which saw Maggie Manual, or was it Trevor Thatcher, edging away from a neo-liberalism and towards some dated social democracy model. Others saw the shifts as less ideologically inspired but more situationally demanded.
The Minister’s fans, of whom there are many, claim that the movements represent the masterful and strategic thinking of a pragmatist. The cynics cut through all this to explain it essentially as an attempt to sustain and even boost social and welfare type spending as a pre-election tactic. And there have been the prophets of doom arguing that, in response to slowing income, increasing the deficit is an act of desperation which amounts to a gamble which will have serious medium-term economic consequences for the country.
Then there is a less dramatic, but more conspiratorial interpretation of shifts mentioned earlier, which I have found myself pondering over, that concerns the revenue to GDP percentage - which we know to be a starting consideration of potential foreign direct investors, ie those investors who we desperately need to come and give impetus to our economic growth.
The Minister, the Governor of the South African Reserve Bank, the IMF and most emerging economies place serious effort on keeping the national revenue as a percentage of the GDP at below 25%, and the lower the better. We note that our percentage is on the high side, and has been under upward pressure for some years now. So the conspiracy question is whether the 24,8% shown in the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement for the next three years is more pivotal to the budget arithmetic, and indeed the increased deficit, than meets the eye.
Is it possible that, notwithstanding this year’s tax revenue performance, the policy statement is being unduly pessimistic about tax collection in order to bring the percentage in question under the 25% mark - but of course to do that the deficit has to be boosted in order to provide the full financing required by the expenditure levels.
An observation which adds intrigue to this theory is that, notwithstanding the Minister’s correct claims that our income tax rates are competitive with most developing countries, the overall tax burden as depicted by the tax to GDP percentage tells a different story. It suggests that the many other taxes, duties, fees and obligations are cautioning investors in this regard, and underneath it all they see a shift towards a social democratic order which is characterised by high levels of social spending financed by correspondingly high levels of taxation. Moving to the expenditure side which, as indicated earlier, showed little change other than a modestly increased emphasis on poverty, job creation and Aids spending, again there has been some interesting reaction, especially the analysis which saw the growth of the so-called ``social wage’’ as a direct response to the failure to achieve reasonable economic growth and job creation. Others, while acknowledging the growing welfare spending as a percentage of total spending, applaud the latest spending plans concerning the Public Works programme, skills development programmes and capital spending - all directed towards renewed efforts to stimulate job growth.
Forgive us for pointing out that these are simply the latest ideas in a very long list of past ideas introduced in the hope of raising economic growth and creating jobs. It seems that Government continues to throw new and modified plans at problems which are not going away. I think as an opposition party which has supported many of these plans and has acknowledged their potential, there comes a time when we must ask why so many serious problems still exist, notwithstanding the good plans we seem to introduce.
We offer an observation. Firstly, our plans, especially regarding the economy and sustainable job creation, excluding the Public Works programme, place too much emphasis on trying to create conducive environments and nurture inviting conditions and refrain from considered interventions which actually kick-start and drive the activities we are seeking. In other words, the intervention which will ``make it happen’’ as opposed to the trickle down that is not really happening.
The same observation of poor problem solving can be seen right across the Government. The ability to put together good and creative plans is constantly negated by the inability to make these plans work and to demand a reasonable return for the money and effort invested in these plans. If you glance back to the national departments’ budgets and annual reports over the past number of years you might be surprised to see how many good plans with important intentions have just never delivered. Again it seems to be about the inability to go beyond policy contained plans and ideas, and to make those ideas realise what they should. If even half of those plans had been successful, economic growth, job creation, education standards, skills development, crime prevention, etc would have progressed considerably further than they have.
So it tells us that for the promise of successive budgets and their policy parameters to be more than just the latest Government plan pursuing the same old problems, there has to be greater commitment, ability and accountability for results. [Applause.]
Ms B A HOGAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, managing an economy always involves balancing contradictions and, indeed, this Budget demonstrates remarkably how well this Government has been managing contradictions which are always inherent in economic policy.
On the one hand, we are faced with a world economy that is on the decline. That has had an impact. Our manufacturing exporting sector has been impacted on, and that in turn has affected growth and we have revised our figures downward. Remarkably, we still maintain a resilient growth, regardless of the downturn, and our growth still exceeds many of our trading partners.
So, that is one side of the equation. The other side of the equation is that, because the rand has been affected by the slowdown in economic growth, that in turn has had an effect on our being able to bring down interest rates, and that in turn has had an effect on stimulating investment production.
So, whilst our manufacturing export sector has been affected by the worldwide global slowdown, our domestic manufacturing sector has been stimulated and we have seen it, in the last six months or so, at 8% growth of investment. That too has been assisted by Government’s investment in infrastructure and, particularly, by the public corporations’ very vigourous investment policies.
Contrary to what my DA colleague said, there has been substantial tax relief given to poor and middle-income groups. Government’s policy of reducing and giving tax relief has eased the costs of an increasing interest rate in the last year and the previous year, and has managed, thereby, to maintain consumer spending at a robust level.
So, whilst we have the negatives of a downturn and how that’s impacted on a sector of our economy, we have the positives of Government-led economic investment fiscal growth managing to counterbalance those negatives.
What I would like to put to you is that, if we are looking at South Africa, not as a developed economy and not as a less developed one, but as a developing economy, this judicious balancing of the good with the bad and forging a way even between the good and the bad is what is going to be required of us in the years to come.
When I hear opposition colleagues saying that this isn’t fast enough, unemployment hasn’t been dealt with quickly enough and that there are still substantial problems in our society, I say to myself that we are only 10 years down the line. We do not have, as European countries had after the Second World War, a huge Marshall Plan to deliver us out of economic recession.
We have what we have at our disposal, and that is resources, yes, to attack poverty. We are not a country that does not have resources. We have considerable resources to attack poverty and we are using them, I would say, in a very judicious and balanced way.
It is seen that we have, in an accumulating way, been able to improve the housing stock of our people. We’ve seen it in the way that water has been delivered. We’ve seen it in the way that more and more matriculants are coming through the matriculation schooling systems successfully, and we’ve seen it in the roll-out of electricity.
We are talking about steady and accumulative growth that is sustainable in the future. Yes, there are those amongst us who would have said, when we came into Government in 1994, let us invest, let us spend and let us ratchet-up the budget deficit because we have to deliver.
We said no, that is going to be unsustainable in the long term. Let us look at the sustainability question first, and then see how we can, within a sustainability framework, start to develop even more.
The fact that even in downturn and economic recession, we are able to deliver R37 billion more over a three-year period than was originally anticipated, because we have brought the costs of debt down and because we are able to spend more, shows the judicious path between reckless spending in order to get short-term rewards and a more judicious path of reducing debt and looking at other mechanisms for the way in which we can get sustainable growth.
I would suggest that other countries such as ourselves, countries such as Brazil and India, are increasingly starting to look at a steady growth rather than volatile growth and volatile policy interventions that can have detrimental effects in the long term. I would suspect that, in South Africa, we are beginning to see a large range of very creative options.
I take, for instance, the social welfare grant. We are aware, in the developed world, that pension pay-outs and the cost of carrying those pensions are crippling many economies. Just look at the state of Germany.
We are, I think, the only developing country in the world that provides a social grant. It’s a social welfare net. It has been proved by the World Bank to be one of the most effective poverty relief programmes. It is not a great amount of money, but it does keep hunger from the door.
That is what I mean when I talk about a road of judicious steadiness. So, we cannot provide a full social welfare net, but we can look at the essentials of that welfare net. We can look at ways in which we can start improving the conditions of our people within the resources that we have available, in a sustainable way.
I think this has been the remarkable achievement of this Government and its management of the economy. Let me say that few countries, faced with a worldwide economic downturn, faced with revising their GDP figures downwards and, in the same instance, faced with declining revenue figures, have been able to increase spending at the same time merely because they have been able to bring their debt costs down. It’s been a remarkable fiscal achievement, and it’s indicative of the creative and judicious way in which we have been managing our economy.
I believe that in the next five years, now that we are maturing as a government and now that we have experienced civil servants and experienced policy-makers, we will start to see a maturing of a kind of creativeness which our country is well-known for.
I believe that in the interventions around the Public Works programmes, for instance, much as one recognises that there are short-term interventions, we will start to see creative partnerships with the private sector around Public Works programmes that will be far more sustainable than just a three to six months duration.
We saw that with the Working for Water Programme that started off simply as a job creation programme. That is no longer simply a job creation programme. Its benefits are being recognised and the spending on that programme has been integrated into the mainline Budget. That programme will go on.
Similarly, when you look at our tax laws and the interventions around the urban development zones, that is not just going to be a once-off or three- year programme, but is going to be an ongoing programme to rehabilitate the inner cities, and I could go on.
However, what I would like to say is that, as an ANC member, I’m proud to support this last Budget of this present session of Parliament, and I would like to congratulate all concerned for the judicious, creative and skilful way in which they have managed our economy and enabled us as a society to withstand the ravages of a negative downturn in the global economy. Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Madam Deputy Speaker, the underperformance of small, medium and micro enterprises with regard to economic growth and job creation in South Africa, compared to other developing countries, has to be blamed on the red tape of an overregulated labour environment forced upon the informal sector by big business and organised labour.
The determination, however, of Government and the private sector, in partnership, to stimulate the role of small business in the economy is demonstrated by the decisions taken during the Growth and Development Summit, the resolutions incorporated into the Financial Sector Charter and the goals set for the Expanded Public Works Programme.
A major portion of this medium-term Budget is dedicated to accelerated growth in the small business sector. The New NP supports the drive to strengthen small business and wishes to propose a plan to intensify this acceleration process. The concept is to strive towards full employment. We suggest that Government consider an employment grant that would enable emerging entrepreneurs to employ more and more people from the ranks of the unemployed. Everybody in South Africa must work.
The production factors in business are management, capital and labour. Only the employed are recognised as part of the economic structure. The unemployed looking for work are perceived as outcasts. We need to change this and accept the unemployed as the potential workforce of the future and part of the economic goal. We should start treating them with dignity and the respect they deserve. The mechanics of the Jobs-For-All Programme is to establish and run an employment fund in partnership between Government and the private sector. Grants from this fund will be allocated to emerging entrepreneurs to encourage and enable them to employ as many registered unemployed people as possible. The grant will assist the emerging employer to pay the salaries of his or her employees for the first few months until the embryo business can afford the total remuneration package of the staff.
Financial institutions must help to administer the programme at grass-roots level. Emerging entrepreneurs have to be assisted with business plans and financial management. Experienced local business people, through a mentorship programme, should be involved in guiding emerging entrepreneurs towards success. The key to the success of the employment grant programme lies in the deregulation of the labour market for the informal small business sector.
The proposed New NP employment grant programme will spawn many benefits: It will expand the economic base for accelerated growth in the GDP to reduce unemployment; it will serve as an incubator for entrepreneurship and private initiative; it will restore dignity to the breadwinner by empowering him or her to care for his or her own family; it will reverse the growing culture of dependence on social grants in our society and restore the principles of self-help and responsibility in the individual; and, it will serve as a safety net to prevent many new entrepreneurs and skilled labourers emerging from the Extended Public Works Programme from being lost because of the lack of job opportunities.
The only question that remains is to determine whether we can master the testosterone and the oestrogen to bite the bullet and do what we have to do.
Mr A BLAAS: Deputy Speaker, the policy framework promotes growth within macroeconomic constraints by focusing on specific actions to stimulate growth, although slower than anticipated, but still positive. The success of achieving the growth objectives, however, relies heavily on the capacity to translate these policies into action.
There is general consensus on the macroeconomic forecast and the alignment of the Medium-Term Budget Policy Framework in terms of these indicators. The main focus on job creation through direct and indirect measures is welcome. The focused approach to assist the vulnerable and poor through social support measures will help the most needy in our communities. May the time arrive when people will become less dependent on the state by having the opportunity to be self-sufficient. The contribution to nation- building by citizens who can retain their dignity should not be underestimated.
With regard to their concerns, success in achieving the objectives of the policies depends on the capacity to give effect to the supporting programmes underpinning the policies. This capacity at this stage is under suspicion.
A further concern is the reduction in the Defence budget to 1,3% of the GDP in the outside year compared to an international norm of 1,8% to 2% for countries similar to South Africa. International commitments without the necessary financial support resulted in the landward capabilities of the SA National Defence Force being severely compromised. This must be rebuilt and sufficient funding must be made available to support international commitments.
The Safety and Security allocation is also questioned. The SA National Defence Force supports the police services, and this support must be taken over by them. Considering the scope of the existing support, the required allocation to the SAPS is not reflected in the policy framework.
The policy framework gives consistency for future economic expectation, as well as the confidence that has manifested itself in the market reactions that were experienced after the announcements. Defence and Safety and Security budgets must, however, be revisited. [Applause.] Mr I S MFUNDISI: Deputy Speaker, while we know that Government thrives on taxes paid by citizens, it is also worth noting or taken into account what Government does in its efforts to assist citizens.
The Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement envisages the reform of taxation of retirement savings. This measure will assist in having the pensions of senior citizens not being bled through taxation. Tax relief to support business investment will go a long way towards alleviating joblessness and poverty, as investors will have no difficulty in putting up factories in deprived areas or even using factories that just stand vacant and deserted because of high taxation currently.
The R37 billion set aside in the budget framework will go a long way towards contributing to the creation of jobs and the reinforcement of higher education, transformation and skills. We hope that the promise made by His Excellency the President that a million jobs will be created will not remain hollow, as has been the slogan of the ANC in 1999 that, if voted for, they would create jobs. Five years down the line, more jobs, regardless of how menial they were, have been lost.
Like we said in our response to the state of the nation address earlier this year, Government will introduce labour-intensive construction methods. Each person, according to us, has to live by the sweat of their brow. The doling out of food packages should cease. The money used for grants in respect of able-bodied individuals should be used for job creation so that those people can earn a living.
We learnt only this morning from the Minister of Finance that large sums of money had to be returned to donor countries because provinces were unable to utilize the money as prescribed. This should not be allowed to continue as this was in the very provinces where poverty and joblessness abound.
Finally, we appreciate the good intentions laid down in the statement, but remain sceptical whether the envisaged skills development programmes will be realised as at present 21 000 public servants have been identified as surplus to their establishments, and two months have passed with no training programmes, as promised, to ensure their retention in the Government service. However, we shall support the statement.
Mr G D SCHNEEMANN: Madam Deputy Speaker, Comrade Minister, comrades and hon members, today as we debate the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, the first decade of democracy and freedom is just a few months away, a decade during which our country has changed into what is today a vastly different country to the one which existed prior to 1994.
The 2003 Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement continues along the path of change through an expansionary fiscal stance, fighting poverty and reducing unemployment, raising the level of public and private investment and building sustainable communities.
Some of the key programmes in attaining the above include the integrated sustainable rural development programme, the urban renewal programme, the expanded public works programme, and the skills development programme. The 13 rural development and eight urban renewal programmes focus on reducing poverty and underdevelopment. In the 13 rural nodes, 155 anchor projects have been identified that will help to create viable and sustainable communities in the long term.
The development and the urban and rural nodes are creating employment opportunities, improving and expanding existing infrastructure, providing housing opportunities and releasing land for agricultural purposes, amongst others. The urban renewal and rural development programmes are not about dictating where people should live and work, but rather about giving people the choice to decide where they would like to live and work.
The housing delivery programme is playing an important role through the provision of housing opportunities. Between 1994 and 2003, 1 985 545 subsidies were approved while at the same time 481 373 houses built in the apartheid era were transferred to the occupants through the discount benefits scheme. This amounts to almost R48 billion worth of housing assets which have been transferred to South African citizens. The housing delivery programme has impacted positively on the living conditions of over six million people.
Whilst these are highly impressive achievements, still more work will have to be undertaken to reduce the housing backlog. The national housing summit held last week is expected to strengthen the housing delivery programme, with role-players in housing joining together with Government in a united effort to speed up housing delivery.
At this point I would like to say to the hon Semple that there is no crisis in housing, as she indicated in her statement in this House on 13 November this year. [Interjections.] Perhaps if she had taken the time to attend the housing summit in her capacity as the DA spokesperson on housing, she could have made a meaningful contribution towards the strengthening of the housing delivery programme. [Interjections.] By not attending, the hon Semple has sent out a very clear message, namely that the DA is not concerned about improving the living conditions of the poor.
The development of our rural areas will assist in stemming migration to urban areas and will hopefully see a reversed trend taking place with people going back to their homes. In Brazil, the development of rural areas has seen such a trend taking place. The benefits of growth and tourism need to be harnessed to impact on rural towns. Rural towns need to be assisted in identifying opportunities that will attract tourists to their towns and in turn stimulate local economic growth.
The renewal of urban areas is not restricted to the eight nodes. In a number of cities, improvement areas have been identified. In Johannesburg, for example, initiatives such as the Nelson Mandela Bridge, the Newtown Precinct, and the newly announced provincial government precinct, are all playing an important role in rejuvenating the city.
The expanded Public Works programme will play a significant role in creating employment opportunities. The programme is expected to employ one million people over the next five years. During this time, people will be trained whilst being employed. Once they exit the programme, the skills they have gained will assist them in increasing their capacity to earn an income. The three spheres of Government will have to ensure that they work in a co-ordinated manner so that this programme achieves its desired outcomes.
The various sector education training authorities, together with business, will play an important role in the training of 72 000 unemployed learners, as agreed at the growth and development summit. To date, more than 26 000 learners have been registered.
Critical to the success of this expanded Public Works programme and the learnership programme will be the involvement of all stakeholders at local level. This includes business, civil society, and the religious sector. All South Africans should see this as an opportunity to lend a helping hand in pushing back the frontiers of poverty. This is an opportunity for businesspeople across the country to come forward and volunteer to mentor those who have gained new skills as they seek to find ways of using those skills to sustain themselves economically in the long term.
Economic growth will be stimulated through increased spending on infrastructures such as roads, the provision and upgrading of water services, the maintenance and building of schools, clinics and hospitals, the maintenance and upgrading of rail services and ports and the building of new prisons.
One of the decisions taken at the growth and development summit was to support local procurement and intensify support for the Proudly South African campaign. These are areas in which all South Africans can actively participate, in particular by purchasing locally made goods, employment opportunities can be increased and South African companies need to produce goods and services to meet the demand of domestic consumers.
The Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement is in line with the key programmes of the RDP, namely, meeting basic needs, building the economy, developing human resources, and democratising the state and society. The focus of the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement is on creating communities, households and livelihoods that will be self-sustainable in the long term.
In conclusion, I wish to refer to the speech of Mr Gary Player, the captain of the international team at the President’s Cup, when he said that under the leadership of President Thabo Mbeki, South Africa was becoming a great nation. He further called on all South Africans to join and help in making South Africa an even greater nation.
We need more people like Mr Player, who recognise that South Africa is indeed a great place to be in. If we all adopted the attitude of Mr Player, the nation would become an even greater nation. We have made much progress in rebuilding our country and we will have to continue to do more.
The Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement clearly defines the road ahead. The map is clear, we know where we are going and where our destination is. We know and understand that there will be challenges that we will encounter. We are under no false illusions that the road ahead will be easy, but we are confident that the ANC will take us there. We are confident that this ANC-led Government, and the one after next year’s elections, will take us to our destination.
Together with the ANC, we will continue to make it happen where we live. We will continue to push back the frontiers of poverty, and we will continue to improve the quality of life of the peoples of South Africa. As the ANC, we support the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement. [Applause.]
Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement has not moved social policy from rhetoric to reality. The PAC believes that the budget has not met the demands of the urgent social agenda in this country.
For instance, how far are people’s homes from clinics and police stations in the rural areas? What about medicines and beds in hospitals? Why are there not enough doctors in our medical institutions? How many ambulances are there? Why are there still children who cannot learn in a decent classroom and some learn under the trees?
Sixty percent of matric students have dropped out of class because they could not afford the school fees. Many university students are unable to complete their degrees. Why is this so in a nation of gold, diamonds and platinum? Our platinum fetches as high a price as over US $761 per ounce, this is over R5 000 per ounce.
Why has our country become the biggest exporter of teachers while we lack teachers here, and some are injudiciously retrenched as if this country does not need education? Is losing over 4 700 teachers to other countries not a sign that our teachers are not properly rewarded, and the teaching profession not given the respect it deserves?
The Budget has not made adequate services available to all. The Government has consistently spent a maximum of 0,5% of the national budget to broaden the availability of basic water supply services as opposed to the minimum 3% of the national budget regarded as an international standard.
At the current rate, it will take 20 to 25 years before basic services are available to the majority of people in this country. We need a national budget which is geared at removing the two nations syndrome of the rich and the poor, a budget which addresses the fundamental objectives for which the liberation struggle was fought in this country.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, the alleviation of poverty being our prime focus, it is pleasing to note that the Medium-Term Budget has been established in line with this aim.
The MF is extremely pleased at the department’s aims and focus to intensify growth and development. The reinforcement of education and skills development is a strong mechanism to mobilise our people to advancement. We all know that an educated nation makes for a strong nation. This will also cater for greater social development.
The MF celebrates the reduction of inflation and a lower interest rate that allows for an international recovery and domestic demand. We are glad to meet this Medium-Term Budget with the earnest determination to accelerate growth and employment creation, reduce poverty and broaden participation in our economy.
It is encouraging to note that inflation is expected to remain within target range, with growth rising to 4% in 2006. A continuous decrease in interest and debt as a percentage of the GDP is sure to please many. The increase in shares to local and provincial governments will greatly assist these spheres of government with delivery.
The further extension of the child support grant is needed and very pleasing. Our children are a priority and the Government’s extensive attention to their wellbeing is encouraging. The child justice centres that are being established are also promising.
The MF voices its support for the framework that is based on a growth- orientated fiscal policy and supports the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement. [Applause.]
Ms T E MILLIN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. In supporting the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement there are nevertheless some serious reservations.
Even though social spending has increased steadily from the late 1990s, the huge volume of further social spending, as recently announced by the Minister of Finance, must be seen as well-timed to woo the masses as elections approach which Government no doubt hopes will mark their manifest failure to date to tackle two current and critical issues, namely, Aids and unemployment. If, however, the ANC-led Government is indeed sincere in this plan for these huge increases in social spending without concommitant and significant increases in taxation, the national budget’s deficit will inevitably grow along with all the problems that that situation would impose.
Some economic experts are of the opinion that an increase of 8% to 10% in the VAT rate would be required to fund a full-scale Aids prevention and treatment programme and to create jobs through Public Works for only about one third of the total number of unemployed. It is interesting to note that First World countries such as Sweden, with a much bigger tax-paying base than ours, are reducing social spending while we propose these massive increases. Clearly, further debate is required with regard to the sustainability of such overambitious social spending by Government. I thank you.
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement deals with issues that have been debated before. For that matter, some of the intentions in the statement are consistent with what Azapo would like to happen in our country.
Having said that, Azapo is, however, concerned that some of the pronouncements in the policy statement, including those of previous statements, have not been implemented. For example, time and again job creation has never been omitted from previous statements and rightfully so. But unfortunately jobs have been lost and continue to be lost severely, particularly in the textile industry.
Time and again the Minister has talked about the Expanded Public Works Programme and has gone on to put resources aside for this purpose, yet the fact that the Department of Public Works has not created the jobs that are intended should be a cause for concern to all of us. It therefore remains to be seen whether Government will intervene this time around so that the intended expansion of the Public Works Programme can materialise.
Recently we have passed legislation on broad-based black economic empowerment. We have been able to define what broad-based …
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order! Hon members, please!
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: … black economic empowerment means. But before the ink is dry, champions of capitalism have already decided who their partners are and redefined broad-based economic empowerment, the types of vehicles to be used by communities to access finance and the types of deals and when these deals should materialise. Owners of finance have started to dictate terms on empowerment deals. Fronting has been replaced by a collection of organisations of the poor led by would-be real partners emanating from the black elite. These kinds of activities should be strictly monitored. Azapo is of the view that unless Government intervenes both at job creation level and checking what kind of empowerment deals are entered into the poor will continue to be marginalised. I thank you.
Ms N M TSHEOLE: Deputy Speaker and hon members, allow me to quote from the book of Exodus, chapter 14 verses 11 and 12:
Wat het jy ons aangedoen dat jy ons uit Egipte laat trek het? … Dit is vir ons beter om vir hulle te werk as om hier in die woestyn om te kom. [What have you done to us by bringing us out of Egypt? … It would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the desert!]
These were the words of the Israelites to Moses when they were confronted with difficulties in the desert, on their way out of Egypt. Some of the voices that I hear here remind me of those voices. It looks like they would prefer to have been in the past than in the present situation.
We heard what the hon member Nefolovhodwe said. Yes, we know that there are problems and in fact in his introduction to the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement the Minister said: `` We can be proud of our past achievements while contemplating challenges ahead with resolve and humility.’’ The fact that there are challenges cannot be denied. But definitely we are proud of our achievements.
Idasa, in their presentation to the Joint Budget Committee, also said: ``The budget once again facilitates service delivery to the poor but there is a long road ahead in realising socioeconomic rights.’’ This is the attitude that one would expect members of Parliament to adopt - to say and acknowledge that there are challenges ahead.
Yes, the road ahead is still very long, because the new dispensation started on an empty but soiled slate. The current budget presents a complete paradigm shift from the pre-1994 model of budgeting in that it is deracialised, it prioritises socioeconomic rights, it advocates sustainable development, it targets poverty through redistribution of available resources, it is expansionary and progressive in that it progressively addresses social development in the medium-term while contributing to human and physical capital formation required for long-term sustainable growth.
There is no way in which these two can be taken together and I’m surprised that the hon Millin compares South Africa to Sweden. Sweden is reducing their social spending while South Africa is increasing it. And yet, at the same time, she makes reference to poverty. How would you address poverty if you cannot create jobs in the meantime if people are not skilled? This budget makes provision for them. It makes provision for the capital formation in human resources.
Social spending over the next three years should show that this budget has increased to R164 billion. So you can imagine what it was initially. So we find that there is really an increase and these are some of the achievements that we have to be proud of.
We looked at our Department of Health, for example. They recently announced the roll-out of the antiretroviral programme, which means the plan for comprehensive treatment and care for HIV-positive and Aids patients. I’m here making a distinction between HIV-positive and Aids patients, because there is a great distinction. The debates outside usually concentrate on coalescing the two as though people who are diagnosed HIV-positive are already suffering from Aids. And these are the confusions that are usually raised in the debate over Aids, as though nothing is being done.
We should also look at the fact that the programme that the Government has for HIV and Aids has to emphasise prevention to ensure that the millions of people who are not infected should remain that way, while at the same time Government wants to attend to the 5 million who are infected. But other than what people usually promote outside, they bring these two together like nothing is being done. It’s tantamount to saying that those who are not positive should be ignored and should not be told to abstain or to be careful or to change their lifestyle. So these are issues that need to be taken into consideration. [Applause.]
We also looked at education. When we look at education, the current budget looks first at the transformation of higher education. The Minister explained why that had to be done. We know that education at certain institutions was regarded as inferior education. People who graduated from institutions such as bush university were not respected. So this had to be brought together. Transformation had to take place, unfortunately.
There was also the attitude towards institutions such as technikons - people were not always willing to go to technikons, because the qualifications from technikons were always regarded as inferior, which is not right. So this had to be transformed in order to address these issues. And we find that the budget also makes room for increasing allocations to infrastructure in learning institutions, especially in the poor areas. So these are issues that need to be taken into consideration. We cannot just look at the long-term and seem as though we are like the Israelites, who want to go back to Egypt.
With regard to education, we also looked at poor students who go to tertiary institutions. There is the National Student Financial Aid Scheme that has been announced. Students who are poor can go there for assistance. But what is important is that people should know that the state cannot offer free education at tertiary institutions, because of the social benefit that is limited with regard to that. There’s more benefit to the individual than to society and so the state needs to choose, as the hon member indicated, between competing needs.
We looked at social development. We have been saying, even when we were passing the Bills - the Social Assistance Bill and the Social Security Agency Bill - that judging by the increase in the budget, viz in terms of spending on social development, the number of beneficiaries receiving grants has increased. They now total about 7,1 million. We also know that the child support grant has also increased too, and that they are also deepening the extension from 7 years to 14 years.
These issues show that this budget is really concentrating on the issues, but at the same time we know that there are skills development and Public Works programmes in place. The hon member referred to the Public Works Programme which is trying to address those issues. We know that there are issues that have to be considered, such as sustainability. We cannot just go onto these things without taking care. That’s why the budget has to be progressive and it has to be expansionary. It has to ensure and make room for sustainability. We cannot just embark on these things without looking to the future.
There are quite a number of things that one can quote with regard to the Social Services, the socioeconomic right, like unemployment … Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Speaker and hon members, let’s just pause to remind ourselves of the purpose of the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement. It was introduced about five years ago for the first time, and the objective was very clearly to place before Parliament those ideas which we will use finally to shape the Budget. In this case the Budget will be tabled in this House, all things being equal, on 19 February next year. So this point is quite an important point because it invites Parliament and, through Parliament, all of South Africa into the process of finalising the Budget against the fiscal framework that is clear and certainly a policy direction.
In this context, or against this backdrop, therefore it is appropriate that we recognise the important contribution of the Joint Budget Committee. When it was first introduced, I think a number of us had misgivings about how it would go but I think that if we look at the inputs from the Joint Budget Committee now, as tabled in the ATCs of yesterday, that report suggests that the process has matured under the joint leadership of the hon Nene and the hon Ralane. We would like to express our appreciation to them, to advise them that the system is working and to say to all members of the Joint Budget Committee that we value their inputs.
In the approach taken by the Joint Budget Committee leadership in shaping the hearings, the five themes - social services and social security, economic growth and development, urban renewal and rural development, international relations and peace support in Africa and justice and protection services - cover the span of all the key decisions that Government must pay attention to and I think that, as the report indicates, the focus that we have taken is correct. This is supported largely by the way in which departments have interacted with the Joint Budget Committee and as reflected in its report. And again I would like to say that we consider the advice of the committee appropriate in the circumstances.
Turning to the subjects raised in the debate, it is important that we all remain alive to the complexities of the global environment. Changes to global output, and therefore global demand patterns, and the fall in exports have a profound impact on our own performance. Similarly, changes in the trends in capital flows will have an impact on a country that has as low a savings ratio as South Africa has. And what is important, and again I would like to express appreciation to the Joint Budget Committee because they engage with these issues, is that we understand the difficulties and we seek partners, as the hon Hogan pointed out, especially with like-minded countries such as Brazil and India, to carve a different perspective in the global political economy going forward.
A number of members, starting with the hon Rabie, have said that this is an election Budget. Now if you want an election Budget, hon Rabie, you will get one, but this is not it. You will get an election Budget that is populist, inorganic and silly. This is not it. This is careful. It is organic. It builds on past performance. It takes a direction from where we have been. It measures the capacity of Government to absorb money, to utilise money correctly and to implement programmes.
This is not an election Budget. It’s not an election Budget, because the ANC does not need an election Budget. We are confident of the ground we stand on. [Applause.] But if we were wavering and if we had any doubts about our own position we might chose to be populist, but this is not it. I can give you budgets from different countries and show you what an election budget is, but this I assure you is not it.
Similarly, I don’t want colleagues to be too overawed by the growth in the deficit, because growth in debt is a big problem whether it’s in your personal life, in your family circumstances or in the country. There is no joy in debt. It will catch you later. Because if we only want to use the deficit as a measure then there is a country that has grown from a surplus to a deficit of close to 6% of its GDP this year, largely to fuel a war in a country far away, and if you say that is a good budget because the deficit is large, I ask you to think again. Similarly, there is a country not too far to the north of this country where the deficit is very large and where inflation is now 540%, where a budget was tabled last week and I say to you: If you think that is a good budget, because the deficit is large, think again.
We have to understand the context of what we are doing here, understand the ability of Government to change and to drive changes and to recognise what we can do and what we can’t do. We are not closed to all ideas, but I certainly would like to invite the hon Nefolovhodwe, when he says Government must intervene in respect of jobs, to tell us what to do. Don’t say intervene. Let’s have an open discourse about these issues, because it’s not an opposition concern that there is unemployment. In fact the ANC represents the largest number of unemployed in this House as we sit here here. [Applause.] It’s a demographic fact.
We have to be concerned about our constituency so if there are ideas don’t hide them under a bushel. You know the hon Tsheole was very biblical so I have taken it forward. Don’t hide your lamp under a bushel, my brother. Bring it forward. Let’s share the light, because that is what Parliament is about and that is what the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement is about. Let me also … [Interjections.]
Mr M J ELLIS: [Inaudible.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Of course, I do. Of course, I do. Let me … [Interjections.] No, it’s not a bush. It’s not the one with the 6% deficit, nor is it the one that the two Australians hit balls under on Sunday. This is something else we are talking about.
I want to supply the hon President of the PAC, the hon Dr Pheko - if he is still in the House - with a copy of the Constitution. It is very clear this is not a document he is familiar with. [Laughter.] It’s very clear that he doesn’t know who has responsibility for what in this country. I really would like to supply the hon President of the PAC with the Constitution. I would also like to have a discussion with him about what he calls international standards, because I think he makes these things up as he goes along.
But, hon Deputy Speaker, I would like express sincere appreciation for the leadership provided by the Joint Budget Committee. We have a very clear idea of the issues that have been raised and of those that have been deeply and properly considered by the Joint Budget Committee and I want to give this House and all of South Africa the assurance that we will consider the advice that we received from this House as we finalise the allocations to various departments over the course of the next fortnight. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE - MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET POLICY STATEMENT
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move:
That the report be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -
MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET POLICY STATEMENT.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move:
That the report be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(First Reading debate)
Mr N M NENE: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Of the 15 minutes I’m allocated I may use three minutes, because if this is not unfair labour practice, I don’t know what it is.
Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, when the Minister of Finance tabled the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, he also tabled the adjusted estimates for a number of departments that had requested additional funding for unavoidable and unforeseen expenditure. Some of the departments were also applying for roll-overs for reasons that were explained in the report. With regard to the departments referred to above, allow me to address myself to a few of them because of their significance.
The Department of Provincial and Local Government receives an additional amount of R34 million in order to rehabilitate the flood-damaged infrastructure in the Western Cape and to settle outstanding liabilities in the 11 municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal. This is to address the legacy of apartheid where there were a number of municipalities where staff had to be transferred owing to restructuring. The committee was satisfied that indeed these expenses were unforeseeable and unavoidable. In line with the mandate of this department of promoting a national system of integrated and co- operative governance, the additional allocations are in order.
The Department of Water Affairs also receives an additional allocation of R346 million, mainly to respond to the need for emergency water supply in drought-affected areas and to fight forest fires. This is also in line with the ANC’s commitment to the provision of basic services to the people of South Africa and ensuring a healthy environment.
The Department of Communications receives R750 million to provide for the recapitalisation of the Post Office. This is done with the proviso that the Postbank will now be separated from the rest of the business of the Post Office and with an agreement on a business plan to put the agency on a sound financial footing. We sincerely hope that the Department of Communications will ensure that outstanding issues in the finalisation of this matter are resolved as speedily as possible. This is particularly crucial because the Postbank mainly caters for the needs of the poor and marginalised who are commonly referred to as the unbankable.
The Postbank is also an important player in the rural areas in promoting the culture of saving that this country needs so desperately. Ensuring that this institution is put on a sound financial footing is therefore a responsible thing to do, but extreme caution must be exercised that a precedent is not set for parastatals to run their financial affairs irresponsibly. The Joint Budget Committee has undertaken to work with the Portfolio Committee on Communications to hold the department to account on this matter and to avoid a reoccurrence of this.
My colleagues will speak on the adjustments for other departments as dealt with by the committee. Allow me to remind hon members of their responsibility once again of ensuring the quality of the spending of these allocations in their respective sector committees as they exercise oversight. The ANC supports the Adjusted Estimates of National Expenditure, and I thank you.
Dr P J RABIE: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon members, hon Minister … [Interjections.] I will not be distracted by the New NP.
The Public Finance Management Act of 1999 stipulates that the National Revenue Fund may pay adjusted required amounts of money shown in the Schedule adjustments in the Appropriation Bill. If you study the Adjusted Estimates of National Expenditure, it’s easy to discern that the ANC has failed regarding unemployment, Aids and crime.
The DA welcomes the statement of the hon Minister of Finance that just less than R12 billion has been allocated to fight Aids over the next three financial years. What is of concern is that 60% of this amount will be transferred incrementally to the nine provinces via the equitable share allocation. There is no guarantee that this Aids allocation will actually go to Aids-related treatment.
Idasa’s Aids Budget Unit pointed out to the Joint Budget Committee that less than a third of the equitable share incrementally increased by the hon Minister of Finance was actually spent by the provinces on Aids-related interventions in the 2002-03 financial year. What is unacceptable is the delay of antiretroviral treatment. It is unpardonable! The HIV/Aids antiretroviral programme must be implemented. The war on Aids must be won. The DA appeals to all role-players to fight Aids in a proactive manner. The Joint Budget Committee heard submissions from departments, stakeholders and civil bodies between 14 and 19 November. The committee - and allow me to thank the chairpersons and all the members - listened extensively to whether departments were planning their expenditures and seeking effective implementation.
The Department of Defence, and in particular the hon Deputy Minister, mentioned that the department assists in internal crime prevention, will assist the SA Police Service in the general election and that 3 000 troops were deployed in five African countries, but they have profound problems regarding depleted and outdated stocks, etc.
Ek het in my voorlegging rakende die Mini-Begroting gemeld dat die DA die grootste agting en respek vir die SA Nasionale Weermag het. Wat vir ons egter moeilik is om te verstaan is dat die SA Nasionale Weermag werklik 19 nuwe, pasaangestelde admiraals en generaals nodig het. Aantygings word in die media gemaak, en ek verwys spesifiek na die hoofartikel van die grootste Afrikaanse dagblad verlede Maandag, dat kleur ‘n baie ernstige kriterium was met die aanstelling van hierdie admiraals en generaals.
Die DA is nié teen swart bemagtiging nie, maar dit moet gedoen word binne ‘n gegewe bekostigbare tydperk. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek is bewus van hoeveel generaals daar in die vorige weermag was, maar dit is nie ter sake nie. Ons bepaal ons by die huidige aansuiweringsdebat. U wat van fiskale dissipline praat, moet dit toepas. Die ander argument wat gebruik word, is dat daar reeds 207 generaals is; een per 338 soldate. Hierdie aanstellings is gedoen teen die agtergrond van ‘n onvoldoende verdedigingsbegroting, en dit is nie my eie woorde nie, maar wel dié van die agb Adjunkminister van Verdediging.
Aanstellings wat slegs op kleur gegrond is, is moreel moeilik verdedigbaar. ‘n Ernstige beroep word gedoen op alle bemagtigingsinstansies om op ‘n deursigtige wyse hiermee te werk te gaan sodat dit nie verdere rassespanning in die Weermag ontketen nie. Die SA Nasionale Weermag moenie verpolitiseer word nie. Hierdie is ‘n uiters netelige aangeleentheid en moet baie versigtig gehanteer word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[I mentioned in my submission regarding the Mini Budget that the DA holds the SA National Defence Force in high esteem and has the greatest respect for it. However, what is difficult for us to understand is the fact that the SA National Defence Force actually needs the 19 newly appointed admirals and generals. Allegations are being made by the media, and I am referring specifically to the editorial of the biggest Afrikaans daily paper last Monday, that colour was a very serious criterion in the appointment of these admirals and generals.
The DA is not against black empowerment, but it must be done within a given affordable period. [Interjections.] I am aware of how many generals there were in the previous defence force, but that is irrelevant. We are focusing on the current adjustment debate. You who are talking about fiscal discipline must apply it. The other argument that is being used is that there are 207 generals already; one for every 338 soldiers. These appointments were done against the background of an inadequate defence budget, and these are not my own words, but indeed those of the hon Deputy Minister of Defence.
Appointments which are only based on colour are difficult to defend morally. A serious appeal is being made to all empowerment institutions to go about it in a transparent manner so that it does not unleash further racial tension in the Defence Force. The SA National Defence Force should not be politicised. This is an extremely contentious matter and should be handled very carefully.]
The Department of Justice is at present struggling to fill vacant posts. The departmental budget showed some savings on personnel. The question one has to ask oneself, however, is whether the department is able to render a service if the personnel is inadequate.
Another aspect of concern in Justice is that the department lacks a computerised accounting system. An official from the department stated during public hearings that some areas had no telephones or security to prevent theft of computers if they did receive them. This situation is clearly untenable. I call upon the hon Minister to reprioritise and find the resources to rectify security in and around courts.
The DA welcomes additional spending to improve the sector policing strategy and the Protection and Security Services Division for border post policing. The 46 new child justice centres are also a positive sign. What is of concern, however, is the departure of skilled officers and that the overall crime rate has increased in nearly every category, especially violent crimes.
The DA welcomes the success in calming taxi violence and the establishment and success of the Scorpions. Rural security is extremely important. It’s important to fill the vacuum which will be left when the commandos are replaced by reservists. Landelike veiligheid en die onrusbarende aantal landelike moorde moet daadwerklik aangespreek word. Die vraag wat ontstaan, is of daar werklik voldoende proaktiewe voorkomende maatreëls getref word om hierdie onrusbarende verskynsel hok te slaan. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Rural security and the disturbing number of rural killings should be actively addressed. The question arises whether adequate proactive measures are actually being taken to crack down on this disturbing phenomenon.]
A number of departments are actively engaged in rural economic development and job creation, which is a very commendable action. It was mentioned in a number of nongovernmental submissions to the Joint Budget Committee that human development does not require more money, but more time and community interest. A bottom-up and not a top-down approach is needed. People at grass-roots level have the ability to identify their needs. A speaker at the hearings described it as follows: Community interest is very important, and people should not just see projects as Government babies, they should own the projects.
At present there is greater access for learners, but the education system fails to provide adequate highly skilled individuals. The loss of skilled teachers is also alarming. Budget committee members expressed concern that students who qualified for the NSFAS bursaries were denied access to universities by the high initial registration fees. The hon Minister of Education shared this concern and it is in the interest of all South Africa, especially the youth, that this matter be resolved timeously.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Minister, are you rising on a point of order?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Yes, sir, a point of order and edification together. What is the subject matter at hand, I plead to know. Is it not the adjustments estimate? Does the hon member have the correct speech? Dr P J RABIE: If I may respond to that, it was mentioned in the hearings … [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I think the member is within his rights. The debate allows for a free-ranging discussion of all of Government’s activities, and to that extent we will permit that. [Interjections.]
Dr P J RABIE: Hon Minister, I think I’m definitely entitled to refer to education since the hon Minister discussed it … [Laughter.] [Time expired.]
Dr G G WOODS: Deputy Chairperson, the interim fiscal year event that we are talking about caters for five different categories of adjustments to the Budget. I will not comment on the adjustments concerning the annual public servants salary adjustments, where Government is simply not in a position to guess what exactly the increases ultimately negotiated will be, and neither will I comment on the savings and underspending adjustments, since these are largely due to the fluctuating rand. Therefore, I’ll only contemplate adjustments presented in the other three categories before us.
I think what can be said of each of these is that, to some degree, they show up a failure of the annual budgeting exercise to properly plan, anticipate, evaluate and judge what they will do and how they will do it in the financial year ahead. Of course, it would be unreasonable to expect the Budget to get the future exactly right, but my contention is that the range and incidence of adjustments in the Adjustments Appropriation Bill show that our budgeting has some methodological weakness.
To comment briefly on these three categories, roll-overs have been an issue for a number of years and there have been many instances where it has become clear that a department had asked for or had been given money which it never had the ability to spend in the first place. This is especially evident in times where Government policy is compelling it to push up allocations for welfare spending. I think the public outcry when such moneys have not been spent in recent years has placed the relevant departments in a difficult position. The concern here has to be that this causes such spending to be made with less than the necessary concern for value received.
Bigger budgeting planning will make it clear whether the department has the ability to fulfil the Government’s policy wishes or not, and will give a clearer picture of what needs to be enhanced or corrected in order to make such spending possible. We must accept that certain roll-overs are more an issue of timing and that when the Accounting Standards Board formulates accrual accounting for Government, and if they do so for the income side of the budget as well, a number of the so-called roll-overs will not be treated as such.
With regard to the category for self-financing expenditure, there is not much to say here when looking at the detail, but obviously, there is again the lack of budgeting foresight that has caused a number of these adjustments. The one example that stands out is the R2 002 million sale of armaments. It’s hard to understand how no provision was made for the possibility of such income.
Concerning the unforeseeable and unavoidable expenditure here, as with last year’s unforeseeable and unavoidable adjustments, one has an uneasy feeling when contemplating the explanations given. I can only repeat the long- running sentiment of the Portfolio Committee on Finance, and say that we do need a tighter and more explicit definition of what constitutes unforeseeable and unavoidable expenditure than what currently exists in the Treasury regulations.
We also need National Treasury to formulate strict and objective tests, which would then apply consistently to all applications for such adjustments. As things are, and from my years of unauthorised experience in Scopa, it seems to me that, as things are, National Treasury are something of a soft touch when it comes to certain applications.
My contention is that the budget approach, as it is inferred by the PFMA, would help us to considerably tighten up on how we plan expenditure and thus significantly reduce a number of adjustments we need to consider each year. For a few years now, I and others have on the one hand acknowledged National Treasury’s committed role to driving the implementation of the PFMA across government, but on the other hand, have expressed disappointment at National Treasury’s reluctance regarding the performance budgeting system the PFMA requires, a system which would produce more considered and more exact budgets, which would give Parliament more meaningful performance reports to exercise oversight by.
I’ve always made the point that until budgeting is based more on thorough and rigourous strategic planning than is currently the case, and on having all intended activities costed, it would be of questionable value. It’s, therefore, most gratifying to hear the National Treasury official, who appeared before the committee last week, make these exact points and explain these as in large part the reason why we have as many adjustments to contend with as we do.
I subsequently phoned the official, Mr Tesh Oprende, of the Budget Office, and learnt from him that the National Treasury is now setting up a costing unit with a view towards strengthening budget exercises. We certainly welcome this. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members who are standing in the aisles, would you please take your seats! Order, hon members!
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Hon Chairperson, the New NP will support the Adjustments Appropriation Bill. Over the past 10 years the inflation rate in South Africa has come down from a staggering 20% plus, inherited from the pre- 1994 beleagured economy, to less than 5% at present - it is 4,5% today. The solution to the problem was to liberate the economy and create a climate of monetary and fiscal discipline for it to operate in.
The Government must also be congratulated on the moderate, positive economic growth rate of between 2% and 4%, which has been sustained for a period of 10 years in a row. The business plan that bore these sweet fruits, as the Minister said, was the implementation of the sound macroeconomic policy that we now call Gear. What a far cry from the chilling statement by Mr Nelson Mandela, in his first speech from the balcony of Cape Town City Hall, that he intended to nationalise the mines and the banks. Reason, however, prevailed.
The major problem facing us now is that 4% growth will never root out the poverty fuelled by the alarmingly high unemployment rate. Presently, this runs at 40% plus and rising. South Africa needs to exceed 6% growth in the GDP. The only sustainable way to combat unemployment, apart from liberating labour, is to bake a bigger economic cake that would produce more slices for more people each year. Imagine how disappointed I was to hear South Africa’s Minister of Finance reply to a question of mine that the South African economy is not able to exceed the predicted annual growth rate of 4% over the next five years, while emerging countries across the world will average more than 6% ``because Verwoerd, in 1953, decided to ban blacks from studying mathematics’’.
The time, surely, has now arrived, after a decade of government, to accept responsibility for what is happening in South Africa. Escapism is dead. Government cannot claim all the successes while blaming all the failures on apartheid. Take charge, sir! Let’s be positive! We can grow by more than 4% per annum. We can win the war against unemployment. The consequences for our infant democracy, if we do not succeed, are too ghastly to contemplate.
The solution, I think, is to further intensify the proposed programmes in the Budget aimed at the expansion of the role of small business enterprises in South Africa.
Mr A BLAAS: Chairperson, although the net adjusted appropriation is only R1,22 billion - less than 0,5% of the original Budget - there are concerns that need to be addressed. There are objections against some of the Schedules, but the Adjustments Appropriation Bill in general will be supported by the ACDP.
The capital to current ratio declines from 20,6% to 18,6%. This is caused by a R1,4 billion reduction in fixed capital expenditure while there is a continuous upward creep in personnel expenses. This trend must be reversed to ensure that job creation objectives are met.
Out of the total of R2,8 billion provided for unforeseeable and unavoidable expenses, R1,65 billion, approximately 60%, is required by three Votes. They are Vote No 34 - Water Affairs, Vote No 27 - Communications, and Vote No 22 - Defence. With reference to Vote No 34, one can accept the expenses, barring the payment of unrecoverable debt and repayment of loans where the department gave the necessary guarantees. With reference to Communications, they require R799,7 million for the postal services, programme 3, to repay money taken from deposits in the Postbank and used by the Post Office staff in their operations. They can’t pay them back and Government must see to it that they bail them out.
No account of this was given to Parliament. Is such intervention by Government into banking operations acceptable? From previous experience, I do not think so. A full inquiry and report to Parliament is needed.
The amount given to Defence is not sufficient. The R500 million only covers the direct expenses for involvement in peace initiatives. Deployments incur additional costs relating to mobilisation, mission training, transport, sustenance and demobilisation. These were funded from existing resources, but all reserves are now depleted to such a level that the landward defence capability is in jeopardy and the success of foreign missions is at risk.
We support the peace initiatives but the necessary resources must be made available. Although the net additional appropriation is within acceptable norms, specific items such as Defence, Communication, among others, should receive attention.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Deputy Chair, the MF is concerned that we have such a large roll-over of R1,1 billion of unspent funds. We constantly cry that we do not have enough funds to save. To have such a large roll-over does not make much sense.
The MF strongly believes that the funds should be efficiently utilised to attain and ensure that our needs are met. Perhaps our hon Finance Minister can assist in monitoring certain departments in spending their budgets within their allocated time.
The unforeseeable or unavoidable expenditure of R4,9 billion is understood. No objection is raised to the salary adjustment of R407,2 million, nor to the R442,9 million for self-financing expenditure. It is hoped, though, that working rationally with our Budget the expected R2,5 billion underspending may be reallocated to faculties requiring such funding.
The R2,4 billion for salary adjustment is fine. The adjusted appropriation of R150 million to Communications is supported. Communications are crucial to the wellbeing and development of our democracy. With terrorism being a global fear and protection of our people a crucial priority, the MF supports the appropriation adjustment of R500 million to Defence. Social Development is hopefully to be improved by the adjustment of R346 million to Water Affairs, R180 million to Public Works and R100 million to Social Development.
The MF is pleased with the new Home Affairs setup and efficiency. It is hoped that the R103 million adjustment will assist in this process. The MF supports the Adjustments Appropriation Bill. Thank you, Deputy Chair. [Applause.]
Mr R J B MOHLALA: Deputy Chair, hon Ministers present here today, colleagues, we can but learn from the turtle. The turtle is an animal, an amphibian, which is very obsessed with cleanliness. But every time it is in the water, it wants to get out so that it can be seen. And, when it starts walking on the beach, when the sand gathers around its legs, what does it do? It turns back to the water because of its obsession with cleanliness.
This best describes how our Government and ANC Government behaves. An ANC Government is a transparent Government, which, from time to time, believes in clean governance. It does everything - it budgets well and cuts to the bone. But it will realise that when it gets out of the water, it gathers dirt, so it goes back and says, ``Let us adjust.’’ [Applause.]
Now, we are here today to discuss the adjustments estimate. We talk of the R103 million that has been provided to the Department of Home Affairs. Let us see who benefits. The whole of South Africa benefited through the current ID campaign in preparation for the next general elections, which, hopefully, will be good news for all the political parties present in this House.
An amount of R180 million has been allocated to Public Works for unanticipated rates and municipal charges owed to state properties. What are the implications of these debts? If Public Works does not pay, the landlords will evict our departments from the buildings they occupy and this will lead to a serious disruption in service delivery. Surely, we do not want to see that?
Allow me to deal with the next issue, which is the R90 million for the Department of Health in order to begin implementation of a broader treatment plan for HIV/Aids. I always get suprised. When this turtle gets back into the water to clean itself, people complain. When it gets out of the water and onto the beach and gathers dirt, they still complain.
But, listen, this money is being given to the Department of Health because the Government of this country, an ANC Government, believes in a healthy society. Now, I want us to look at this in that although the money is earmarked for HIV/Aids, it is not the only thing that the Department of Health does. In this year only, no less than R3 billion is going to be spent on the health of our people. I think that is something we need to be proud of.
We talk of R500 million to meet the unanticipated costs of the Department of Defence, or the SA National Defence Force, because of its United Nations peace mission in the DRC, participation in Burundi and so forth. But listen to what happens when we talk about the R500 million. They then tell us of generals. Now tell me of any army without generals - any army that will occupy the moral high ground and does not have generals. [Interjections.] Tell me of any army that can be called an army if it is not combat-ready. Tell me of any army that can be called an army if the soldiers don’t have uniforms, don’t have boots. [Interjections.]
I want to submit, therefore, that it would appear that R500 million is not even enough. The Department of Defence needs more than that given that, among other things, in the next general elections it will be called upon to assist the SA Police Service in ensuring that there is peace and stability during the elections, so that we have a free and fair election that will ensure that this Government comes back with a bigger majority than it has today. [Interjections.]
I want to deal with other things. You know, later this afternoon there will be a number of objections and divisions that will be called from left, right and centre, and all over the show. The reason is very simple: They were here. They coudn’t tell us what problems they had with those Votes. They don’t have any problem. The problem is this time of the year. It is Eid today, and very soon it will be Christmas. People get so excited when they see adverts, Christmas trees and so forth. And, because we are having elections next year, they think that if they object left, right and centre and call for divisions they will get more votes. [Laughter.]
You know, I don’t understand one thing: Why would you waste your time on objections and divisions when you know very well that you are going to lose? How can you enjoy losing? That should be very painful. [Interjections.] I would submit that if we have a clear understanding of what we are dealing with, in no time we can be finished with this and the House can adjourn. But, of course, they will waste our time, and we are ready to have our time wasted.
Allow me, in conclusion, to indicate that a cockerel … mokoko, ge o fatafata, o fatela dithojana le matsuana, ona oja matlapa [… a man caters for his own family].
Now, an ANC Government ensures that the people of South Africa get the best life, better than a better life, and it will suffer the consequences of being held here for the whole afternoon. I thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. The hon member who has just finished speaking must be the foremost authority on animal psychology in the House. [Laughter.] The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, I do not represent the Mutant Ninja Turtles this afternoon. [Laughter.] I would like to express appreciation and perhaps just deal with some of the comments made.
The hon Woods was very expansive in his descriptions when he talked about the failures of the budgeting process. I would like to invite the hon member to look at budgets elsewhere and to look at the maturing of the processes in this country. He should also recognise that, in the course of the next fortnight, as I said earlier, the Treasury will place before Cabinet decisions for the fiscal year which ends on 31 March 2005 for this Parliament to vote on. It will also make laws about moneys. If one looks at the time period and the uncertainties that may arise, then it is a gross exaggeration to talk about a failure in the budgeting process when the numbers are as they are in the adjustments estimate.
Both the hon Woods and Rajbally spoke about the size of the roll-overs. We are talking about 0,8% of the total expenditure. Of that R1,079 billion, the bulk is in the Treasury. Not for the Treasury, it’s in the Treasury. Virtually 80% of what the Treasury holds sits in two parts. This is well explained in the adjustments estimates.
The first would be for allocations, transfers to local government against certain performance criteria. Conditional grants to local governments have to be rolled over. They cannot be ceded and given away in violation of the Division of Revenue Act. That is why they are there. When local authorities perform and the applications are there, the money is released. There is no problem. The other large chunk of money is for transfers to Lesotho and Namibia in terms of the Southern Africa Customs Union Agreement where we are holding up money to ensure that we can first reconcile the figures.
Shoot me, shoot me for not giving away money when the Act is very clear. We try to adhere to the letter and spirit of the law by ensuring that where conditions are set, those conditions must first be met before the money can be released.
So 88% of what the National Treasury sits on will be transferred but hasn’t been transferred because the conditions have not been met. That is the bulk of the R1,079 billion. It does not suggest a failure or an inability to plan. It suggests that the system is working and that the PFMA has kicked in, Dr Woods.
Similarly, when one deals with performance budgets, it is important to again look at growth and organic development. What we published in the estimates of national expenditure tabled in this House in February are in each chapter measurable objectives for departments. They are there. The MOs are there. They are there for the first time and they will grow from here.
We will not be able to ripen this tomato by squeezing it. One has to ensure that the capacities are in place and performance budgeting will come. I do not think that we are far off the track. The spirit in which the adjustments estimates have been debated here and the way that these discussions have taken place in the committee largely recognise the fact that we have come a long way from where this country was.
When I became Minister of Finance, we had roll-overs of R12 billion a year of a budget a third the size of what we have now. One has to recognise the progress. Unless one does this, one might get into the mode of believing that this is production planning in a factory for a week. It is not the same. It is a different set of processes and we must be alive and sufficiently flexible to manage change.
Let me conclude by referring to the hon Odendaal. I think his colleagues have advised him that I would do so. Dr Odendaal, I have said this to the hon Andrew time and again. One can get up in this House, stand at this podium and declare that there will be growth of 8% next year. You will not be able to deliver it. Unless one has a fairly fine understanding of what the constraints are to that growth, one is going to make mistakes. I have heard the hon Odendaal’s preaching three times this afternoon on small and medium enterprises.
One of the key issues that is a constraint in this economy is that we do not have sufficient skills. We have lots of people who do not have sufficient skills. The reason we do not have sufficient skills is that the education system in this country has been wrong. The difference between education and training has been binary. In that split between education and training, black people have been seen as hewers of wood and drawers of water. One cannot get rid of this unless one makes a commitment over at least a generation. This is a problem we have to deal with. Unless we make appropriate interventions in training and skilling, in science and technology against the backdrop of apartheid in this country, we will fail the next generation and the one after that.
We have to be realistic. It is a residue, it’s a legacy, it’s what we are and what shapes this economy, and it is what will act as a brake to growth for a long time yet. That, coupled with living in parts of South Africa that were way above the means, that saw a lifestyle fuelled largely by debt, ignoring the need for savings and therefore investment capital, will continue to constrain growth in this country.
We have to deal with those realities, work at them and understand that it is our burden and responsibility to effect that transformation because that is where the burden of transformation rests. Siyabulela kakhulu. [Thank you very much.]
ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(Consideration of Votes and Schedule)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, the proceedings will initially take the form of a question-and-answer session. I shall put each Vote in turn, whereupon members will have the opportunity to pose questions to the relevant Ministers. Hon members should please wait until I recognise them before they put their questions.
Vote No 1 - The Presidency:
Ms M SMUTS: Chairperson, the amounts being rolled over and voted upon in this Vote are small, but our concern about the Presidency is great. This bureaucracy, after all, is the engine room of the …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, if you speak while someone is putting a question, the Minister will not be able to fully apply his or her mind to what is being asked. Please, could I call on you to settle down. Order! You can now proceed, hon member.
Ms M SMUTS: The bureaucracy, that is the Presidency, is the engine room of the centralisation of power in South Africa. The new funds being voted upon are largely for salary increases in the policy co-ordination and advisory services. We note that this directorate, amongst other things, runs the secretariat for all the directors-general who are nowadays appointed, not by their Ministers, but by the President.
Among the key projects that it has undertaken is the ten-year review. In fact, the R1 million rolled over also went to this project, which the DA has found to be an exaggeration of Government successes and a misrepresentation of failures such as the control of crime. In short, crime statistics were sexed up while the Gini coefficient was sexed down.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, could I address you on a point of order? Basically, I think, it’s a procedural question. You gave us a guide that this is a question-and-answer session which, in effect, actually means that, distinctly, it is not the time for statements to be made. Rather, it is the time for questions to be posed and responses to be solicited. So, we would like your direction in regard to that question. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon Chief Whip. The first point I want to make is that it is indeed a question-and-answer session. The second point is that it is not limited to merely asking a question. The member is entitled to make a statement. But, I would like to advise you that if you are going to make your statement extra long, it is going to be difficult for the Minister to be able to give you an answer that is going to cover the extent of the question. Therefore, I would like to advise you to try to be terse and brief.
Ms M SMUTS: With pleasure, Chair. With respect, Sir, I’m not sure that there is someone in the House to answer the question.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: I am available.
Ms M SMUTS: Oh, the Minister of Finance is available. Thank you very much. Our objection is against the sexing up of …
Prof B TUROK: Chairperson, there is a problem with sound.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, could you please move to another microphone. [Interjections.] Order! Let’s try this one. Proceed, hon member.
Ms M SMUTS: I am delighted that the hon Minister of Finance is available to answer the question. I didn’t see the Minister in The Presidency.
Our objection is against all the sexing up and sexing down, specifically the sexing up of salaries. And, since you require a question, sir, we would like to know who these increased salaries are for. How large a staff component does this directorate have and what skills do the staff have?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, are you rising on a point of order?
Prof B TUROK: The point of order is that we cannot understand how a Vote has anything to do with sex. I would like the hon member to withdraw. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I think the context in which it was put is clearly understood. The hon Minister of Finance is on his feet and ready to answer.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: I think the hon Smuts may actually have a problem with sex rather than the appropriations. [Laughter.] That’s not something that we can resolve by question-and-answer here; it needs a couch and a psychiatrist.
Back on the subject: What you will find as a thread through every adjustment is that the settlement in the wage bargaining was initially done on a three-year agreement. But, because it was premised on inflation in May, the adjustments in the salaries were higher than we had budgeted for. So, regarding the R224 000 in the Policy Co-ordination Services and the R20 000 in the Cabinet Office, basically the increases are explained by the higher than budgeted amounts for settlement. You will find that on each and every Vote, and I would ask the hon Smuts to accept it in that spirit. It’s not something peculiar to The Presidency. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon Minister. I just want to advise hon members: I think you are aware that all political parties were allocated a specific amount of time and that the Table is actually recording by the second the time you are using. So, once you go into lengthy speeches, you are going to be merely using up the time that has been allocated to you. So, you will need to use your time most efficiently.
I now put Vote No 2 - Parliament. Are there any questions?
Mr I J PRETORIUS: Chairperson, on a point of order: Aren’t we first going to vote on The Presidency? [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: No, I’m going to take them … [Interjections.]
Mr I J PRETORIUS: I was told beforehand that that would be the procedure. I’m just making sure.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I will take them out seriatim, and we will put the Vote at the end.
Vote No 4 - Home Affairs:
Prince N E ZULU: Thank you, Deputy Chair. There are free photos, free mobile units, free volunteers all relating to the ID campaign, and on top of that there is a R30 million allocation from Treasury. I believe this is a commendable step forward, especially in terms of the ID campaign. Thanks.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. I think the hon member has made a statement.
Vote No 6 - Public Works:
Mr J DURAND: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair. Mr Minister of Provincial and Local Government, some time ago the Deputy Minister indicated that there were concerns around the efficiency and efficacy of cross-boundary municipalities, such as the one we have in Tshwane. Also, the portfolio committee, during its recent visit some time ago, expressed concern in its report.
Now, there is a possibility that we might change this model, because it doesn’t work as efficiently as it could owing to the intergovernmental grants that come from different provinces. Is there money allocated in this budget to do some research and investigation into the model of cross- boundary municipalities with the option of changing it?
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Yes. [Laughter.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Yes, the Minister’s very short and pithy reply.
Vote No 8 - National Treasury:
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Agb Voorsitter, die agb Minister het vroeër vanmiddag op verklarings gereageer en veral op die verklaring van die leier van die ACDP oor die ou HOP-fonds wat deur sy departement geadministreer word en wat eintlik maar net dien as ‘n transmissierekening vir skenkings wat uit die buiteland ontvang word. Daar is volgens koerantberigte meer as ‘n miljard rand in die fonds. Ek het in die aansuiweringsbegroting gekyk of ek sien of enige van daardie geld uit daardie fonds aangewend is in die programme wat aangedui is ten opsigte van werkskeppingsprogramme. My vraag is: Gaan van daardie fonds se geld nou beskikbaar gestel word vir programme in die aansuiweringsbegroting of dalk eers iewers in die toekoms? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Dr W A ODENDAAL: Hon Chairperson, the hon Minister responded to statements earlier this afternoon and especially to the statement of the leader of the ACDP about the former RDP fund which is administered by his department and which actually merely serves as a transmission account for donations received from abroad. According to newspaper reports there is more than R1 billion in the fund. I have looked in the adjustments appropriation to see whether any of that money in that fund has been utilised in the programmes indicated in respect of job creation programmes. My question is: Will money from that fund now be made available for programmes in the adjustments appropriations or possibly only some time in the future?]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, because the RDP fund is, as the hon Odendaal correctly points out, but a transmission mechanism, it is not appropriated as part of the adjustments estimate. It’s part of our general accounting, but not part of the Treasury Vote for the adjustments estimate. We don’t have the power to appropriate those resources. In every case, as I pointed out in response to the hon Meshoe earlier, there would be a contract between a recipient - be it a department at national, provincial or even local government level - and the donor, largely the European Union. Those contracts would actually set the performance criteria to be met for the release of those funds, so it wouldn’t be recorded as part of the Adjustments Appropriation Bill. Thank you. Vote No 16 - Health:
Ms C DUDLEY: Hon Minister, the ACDP welcomes the fact that R90 million is now available for the roll-out of antiretroviral treatment. Has this injection of funding eradicated the Minister’s previous concerns regarding lack of capacity? What makes this a better time to invest the R90 million in antiretroviral treatment than a year ago, say, or two or even three years ago? What has changed, and why now?
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, somebody said it’s the best time. Let me correct the hon member. This allocation is for comprehensive management and treatment of HIV/Aids. So if one could capture it correctly, I think we would then understand if this money was enough or not. Let me also say that we had requested, indeed, a little bit more money, but this is what we got.
Let me say upfront that we had to transfer the sum of R20 million to the National Health Laboratory Service. This is an indication, indeed, of the inadequacies of our laboratory services, services that are absolutely critical for monitoring patients. You need your CD4 count, your viral load, of course you need the testing for haematology and microbology, and for general chemistry. This is partly the infrastructure we have been expressing and continue to express our concerns about.
The issue of HR is also going to be a great challenge to us. The upgrading and harmonising of our national health patient information system is another very big challenge. Research, including research into traditional medicines, is another area we want to engage in very robustly.
Another challenge is going to be the procurement of medicines. Patients, obviously, move from one combination, or one regimen, to the next very quickly. They develop resistance, particularly if there is poor adherence and compliance with the medicine. Therefore, this is going to be a very big challenge.
We also need, of course, to improve the upgrading of the distribution system of the medicines. There are a lot of activities that need to be done. There is the accreditation of our service points - one in each district. We can only hope that this money will be a kick-start for us to undertake all those activities. Thank you.
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Deputy Chair, the IFP commends the hon Ministers for the allocation of R12 billion over three years for HIV/Aids programmes, and especially for channelling 60% to the provincial equitable share allocation. We are certain that the IFP’s determination to provide antiretrovirals in KwaZulu-Natal and to challenge the ANC’s no-treatment policy in court played an important role in Government’s change of heart. If elections were the final spur, well and good for millions with HIV and for the country at large.
However, as the Minister pointed out, budgeted funds are not sufficient. Capacity must be built locally and provincially to have the full amount accountably spent. The blame should not fall on provinces for failing to spend their full allocation for HIV, because, while we follow contradictory policies with money and accountability going down to provinces and local government and authority going up to national Government, we will struggle to reach our goals.
Some provinces have already started to implement the task team’s recommended plan of action. Political delaying tactics have held them back. Where, for example, is the Global Fund’s gift to KwaZulu-Natal, Lovelife and national Government? Why do we not see it in hard cash and real programmes? Only the Minister of Health and the Minister of Finance’s lack of will can be blamed for this unforgivable delay.
My questions to the Ministers are: Where exactly is the Global Fund money? Has it been received and is it being rolled out? How will they make provision for the increased need for antiretroviral programmes, because it appeared that the budgeted amount was sufficient only for 2004-05, not 2005- 06 and 2006-07? And, how will they cater for the need for greater decentralisation and a simpler, clearer relationship between national, provincial and local governments?
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, there are so many questions. I hope I will be able to remember all of them in order to answer them. Let me say that two months ago I signed the agreement with the Global Fund. The resources have not been transferred. So, I think, we have played our part in the sense that I actually signed the agreement. I also signed the agreement with a project in KwaZulu-Natal with regard to the management and control of malaria. So those agreements have been signed.
The other question that you raised is that we should not blame the provinces if they do not perform. I wish the members of Parliament would also assist us in this regard - visit your departments of health, interact with the MECs, interact with the HODs, and, if they have any problems, bring them to us as well. We do interact with them, and we try to support each other so that these funds are spent.
Of course, there is an arrangement in which we work very closely with the provinces and also with local government, and this is in the normal course of events and not specific to the management and treatment of those with HIV/Aids. I don’t know whether I have answered all your questions. I think there is one that I didn’t address, Chairperson.
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Can I follow up with the question, Deputy Chair? It was, hon Minister …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I think, just the question that has not been answered, hon member, but in very, very few words.
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Okay, Deputy Chair. The question was about the allocation being sufficient for roll-out next year, but not sufficient for roll-out the next two years. Does that make it an election strategy?
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: I am sure the hon member has not read the Budget correctly. May I ask her to go and consult the Internet? She will find that moneys have been made available. However, we will, of course, be interacting with the Treasury if we run short.
Vote No 19 - Social Development:
Ms C DUDLEY: Hon Minister, the ACDP welcomes the R100 million which has been made available for child grants. We are concerned, however, that these grants will be vulnerable as gambling and liquor are tempting options for desperate people. What controls are in place to ensure that money is used to put food in hungry children’s mouths, and has Government considered food stamps, which would prevent spending on alcohol, lotteries and casinos? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Mr Chairperson, not yet. We have not yet considered that. We are thinking about that, but this is a constitutional state. We cannot really be expected to tell people what to do with their money. I personally, and I think the Government as a whole, have been a little worried about the way in which the grants have been used by quite a number of people; not only those intended for children either, but also the mothers themselves. The way they use that money is not what it is meant for. We would like to think with you and try to resolve that matter in a friendlier way than is possible at the moment.
Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Mr Deputy Chairperson, the Government has spent R1,142 billion on backpay to approximately 1 600 000 beneficiaries of social grants over the past couple of years. Provision has been made for R2,667 million to be rolled over in order to administer this situation. My question is, will the National Social Security Agency possibly take this role over in future, and will we then have a saving in this regard?
The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Mr Chairperson, we hope to be able to do that, but quite obviously, it’s not as easy as it seems, because it takes very long for some of the people to realise that they are entitled to this, and the hon member would be very helpful if he could go out in his own constituency and tell people that they are entitled to this money.
Vote No 21 - Correctional Services:
Mr J DURAND: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairperson. Minister, we were shocked last week by information of the young boy Jabu who was raped and sodomised in prison, and who is now HIV-positive. Are there sufficient funds in this budget that will ensure the safety of juveniles in prison so that they don’t get mixed up with hardened criminals?
The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you, Chairperson, and the hon member for that question. I think one does sympathise with situations such as those in which young people are raped and sodomised in our facilities, inasmuch as I think we should if members of the general public - children, young people and women - are raped and assaulted. Our sympathy should go both ways.
But let me say that we have about 242 prisons in this country, a staff complement of about 34 000 people and 180 000 prisoners who are incarcerated, including approximately 55 000 awaiting-trial prisoners. We have about 70 000 on parole and probation. Some may be your neighbours and you wouldn’t know that. About 60% of our prison population is between the ages of 18 and 35, which means we have a lot of younger people and juveniles in our prisons.
Yes, we have budgeted adequately. We have about 13 juvenile centres throughout the country, but we have found that this number of young people is quite overwhelming in our prisons, and at the moment we are also trying to renovate the old prisons which were built many, many years ago to try and accommodate young people there.
The four prisons that we are also proposing as the new-generation prisons have been designed more to cater for the young people whom we cannot cater for in other places. I must say, however, that, owing to the lack of co- operation and co-ordination at some point at the facility level between the various components of the criminal justice system, we find that there are children who slip through the net and end up in prisons, and then end up being assaulted or sodomised.
I think these are the issues that we need to deal with in a comprehensive manner with other components of the criminal justice system and not only Correctional Services.
Mr S N SWART: Deputy Chairperson, hon Minister, we are all aware of the severe overcrowding in many of our prisons, highlighted particularly by Judge Fagan of the Inspectorate of Prisons. Whilst the prisons are the recipients of a criminal justice system under pressure, and certain initiatives have been taken to reduce overcrowding, particularly amongst awaiting-trial prisoners, would you explain to the House why the amount of R200 million will not be spent during the current financial year on programme 5: Facility Management and Capital Works, ie building prisons, and why delays have taken place during the planning stages of capital projects? Surely the building of further prisons would have alleviated the overcrowding problem? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Well, I think a week ago the Minister of Finance did mention that the R200 million which was budgeted for more facilities could not be spent this year, simply because as Correctional Services we’re not establishing facilities alone; we do have advice from Treasury. We also rely on Public Works. We do budget, however, for facilities, but we do not build facilities. It is Public Works which builds facilities. It is Treasury which also advises Correctional Services.
Vote No 22 - Defence:
Mr R JANKIELSOHN: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. The Department of Defence approached Parliament with a request for funding to redesign and restructure the SA National Defence Force. This is necessary, since our troops are old and equipment is becoming unserviceable and obsolete. We need to bring younger men and women into the SANDF and re-equip our army.
The SANDF will not be able to play a meaningful role in South Africa, or Africa, if this is not done. More money allocated for peace support operations and the appointment of more senior staff will not assist the SANDF’s attempts to sustain itself or improve mission readiness. The SANDF is already experiencing capacity and logistical problems with its current deployments abroad.
Minister, when is Government going to prioritise spending in the Department of Defence to allow the SANDF to restructure and redesign itself so that it can become a modern, young, professional and sustainable force?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, there were certain constraints to the exit strategy for people from the Defence Force. One of these was in the pension system; the reason why there are footsoldiers, if you wish - corporals and below - in the infantry who are 35 and above. Mr I J PRETORIUS: And generals!
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Generals’ ages are less of an issue, Sakkie. We’ll teach you about the army sometime!
But the reason why we’ve had this difficulty is that the pension system had been unfavourable to people who were integrated just recently. Hon members may be aware of the fact that there was an amendment approved by this House about a month ago to the Government Employees Pension Fund legislation which would allow for some adjustment and substantial improvement to the pension benefits of soldiers, and this would facilitate the exit of people who are overage.
Similarly, there are a number of brass in the army who should in fact exit, not because they’re part of the fighting corps, but because their age is prohibitive. This has resulted in a situation where it’s a top-heavy structure at the moment. But there too, I think a number of people, primarily those who come from the former nonstatutory forces, could be released because of the changes now approved in the pension system.
So the SA National Defence Force advises that this will facilitate the movement of people out and equip the Defence Force to recruit younger people and therefore improve its “paraatheid”, as Sakkie would like to hear us say. Thank you.
Vote No 24 - Justice and Constitutional Development:
Ms C B JOHNSON: Deputy Chair, Mr Minister, this morning certain NGOs and women’s rights organisations went on record in the press and they are alleging that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is spending more money on the Hefer Commission than it is to combat violence against women and children. If one looks at the adjustments appropriation, there is an amount of R1,7 million that has been used as a roll-over to fund the 16 Days of Activism. Could the Minister kindly clarify the situation?
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, the comparison is not a proper one. In order to understand how much we are spending on vulnerable groups, we have to examine the Budget in its entirety. For instance, in the current financial year we have allocated R50,6 million to address the needs of vulnerable groups in the legal system in programme 2. So in that context, you will immediately realise that we are spending more money on vulnerable groups, including women and children, than whatever amount you think we are spending on the Hefer Commission.
Vote No 25 - Safety and Security:
Adv P S SWART: Deputy Chair, the whole Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security, and presumably all members here as well as everybody out there, are agreed that police officers, in particular those below the rank of director, are seriously underpaid. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order please! Order! Adv P S SWART: They are the people who are understaffed every day and don’t have the resources, but literally put their lives on the line to do their task. There is often a direct and negative consequence to this, namely that morale in the SAPS is far from what it should be, and that some less scrupulous members unfortunately become susceptible to corruption. This, in turn, causes serious damage to the image of our police and much needed resources have to be redirected to investigate this corruption.
Every year we hear promises of improved remuneration, but apart from inflation-related increases, nothing happens. The appropriation for this Vote is for just such increases. Hon Minister, at what stage will we budget to financially empower our police officers? Whilst we can never pay them what they are worth, it is a shame that some don’t even earn a liveable income.
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you very much. Well, the question that is being posed, if related to what we are dealing with, goes an extra mile because it is looking at the overall salary packages of our police officials. It is true that we do want to pay our police officials at least salaries which we can also be proud of. There are circumstances, and the member is aware of the circumstances that we are dealing with in regard to this matter. It is our desire that they should have adequate salaries.
That question, as I say, fits into other processes which are not related to today. Today we are looking at the amount of R83 million that has been appropriated for purposes of ensuring that we respond to amounts that the police ought to have received in the past, which they did not. That is the question. Thank you very much.
Mr J SCHIPPERS: Hon Minister, the total additional appropriation for Safety and Security, as you mentioned, is R83,46 million. According to salary adjustments, the total amount has been allocated to the department to cover the costs of the higher-than-expected salary increases. Yet, in the standard item specification on page 118 of the document, four items are listed, of which R28,86 million is allocated to equipment. My question to you, Mr Minister, is: Can you clarify that? Secondly, why was no allocation made towards programme 4, that is, detective services? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Firstly, I would like to refer the hon member to the overall budgeting for this department, but also to ask him to actually refer back to the year 1999 and look at how this particular item - detective services - was handled. You will see, for instance, if you take the years 1999 to the last financial year, that we have had an increase which accounts for 9,8%. But if you look at the next financial year, you will see that this has dropped to 8%.
The reason for that is the fact that we have restructured in the department, and the consequence of that has been for us to reprioritise. But, if you look at those amounts you will see that the highest allocation goes to crime prevention and that the second highest, indeed, goes to detective services. I am not talking about administration, I am talking about functional programmes, because we are paying a lot of attention to this. Now, if you look at general investigations, you will see that they account, in terms of the detective services, for more than 50% of the allocation within that particular area.
Of course we are also seeing an increase - and this is one of a few items where there is an increase - in regard to the units that relate to family violence, child protection, and sexual offences. So, if you look at this overall, you will see that there has been a necessity for the particular item, detective services, in the first instance, to move in a straight line. And then, it is now tipping as a result of the reasons that I have already indicated.
The issue of equipment is an important one for us. There are new items that we have acquired, which have accounted for the R28 million you have referred to. Thank you very much.
Vote No 26 - Agriculture:
Mr M V NGEMA: Thank you, Deputy Chair. Minister, the IFP notes that there have been huge savings in programmes 7 to 9, which have been redirected to fund other activities within the department, something we appreciate. But the volume of savings would indicate that the department either bit off more than it could chew, or that the funds were not used because of operational problems. Most of these savings are on vacancies not being filled and new appointments not being made when the money was allocated for these very purposes. What really necessitated these posts not being filled and appointments not being made?
The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Thank you very much, hon member. As you rightly said, the issue is more the personnel vacancies which have not been filled or new appointments which have not been made. The majority of those posts in various programmes were affected by the fact that we needed to comply with our restructuring of the department, but, at the same time, take into consideration certain measures that were put in place in terms of Resolution 7. Clearly, what has happened is that after the conclusion of the process, some of the advertisements went out. Obviously, some of those resources have not yet been expended. Thank you.
Vote No 27 - Communications:
Mr L M GREEN: Chair, could the Minister explain how it is possible for the Postbank to mismanage R750 million belonging to depositors, and what regulations are in place to ensure that this kind of mismanagement does not happen again? Does the Minister know of any other bank in South Africa that has mismanaged depository funds to the same extent?
The MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. If Mr Green had followed what was happening with the Post Office, he would have realised that the problem is one that started with the corporatisation of the Post Office in 1991 - long before this Government came into power. The way the Post Office worked was that it used moneys interchangeably between the Postbank and the Post Office. It was when we discovered this in 2001 that we put a stop to it; and, because of the other commitments that the Post Office also had regarding the pension and medical aid deficits that existed, it was important then that we looked at how, in fact, we could overcome this.
So two things were done: firstly, to look at exactly what those amounts were; and, secondly, to make sure that that deficit would not be increased by creating a firewall so that the exchanges that used to take place between the Postbank and the Post Office no longer continued. Therefore, with the granting of this money, we have made sure that the Post Office will not be able to access Postbank money. Also, you will remember that we removed the subsidy for the Post Office because we were told at the time - I think it was in 2000 - that the Post Office had a R207 million surplus, which was actually not a surplus. Now, we have reintroduced the R3 million subsidy.
What has since happened is that the Post Office is running much better. It has been able to repay about R200 million of that R970 million, and that is why the Minister was then able to allocate R750 million to the Post Office. This was, indeed, because we are now confident that the business of the Post Office is running much better. Thank you.
Mr V C GORE: Thank you, Deputy Chair. The DA cannot and will not support the DOC’s Adjustments Appropriation Bill for one simple reason: the R750 million earmarked for the recapitalisation of the Post Office is money that is being used to bail out a loss-making parastatal, after the Post Office unethically and immorally took money from the poorest of the poor to hide its loss-making operations from the South African public. It was only after the DA uncovered the scam, Madam Minister, not the Government, of cross- subsidising loss-making operations from poor depositors’ money at the Postbank that the accounting books of the two entities were separated.
Now that the Post Office cannot get its money from the poor, it is turning to the taxpayer. The R750 million is in addition to the R1,2 billion subsidy over the next four years. Madam Minister, my questions to you are: When are the cross-subsidisation, the grants and the subsidies, going to end? When is the Post Office going to be turned around and become an asset to this country rather than a liability?
The MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS: Chairperson, I’m not so sure where the member got the information that the DA uncovered this. This was uncovered through hard work done by the department and the Treasury. Simply not having heard us talk about it, doesn’t mean you uncovered it; we did.
Secondly, the issue of the Post Office, as you will also know, is that the Post Office services were not, in fact, enjoyed by the majority of South Africans. The subsidy was introduced especially because the Post Office itself was suffering losses because of the new technologies that were developing - people were no longer sending messages by postcard or through letters. That technology had encroached on the Post Office. However, what we have done is to reinvent the Post Office in the work that it does, for example by the extension of citizen post offices - PITs - in many rural areas so that these new technologies can actually begin to service the very disadvantaged people that had never, in fact, been properly serviced before.
If you are saying we should not make that subsidy availiable, that means you want to take away that subsidy from the poorest of the poor about whom you were talking. What we are doing as this Government is to make it possible for you to go anywhere - to small places like Kuruman for example
- and find some of those PITs, which had never existed before in these areas. These PITS are giving ordinary people access to e-mail, to faxes, to scanners and to computers - something that this Government had committed itself to in terms of ordinary people being brought into the world information society that we want. That is what we pay the subsidy for. Thank you. [Applause.]
Vote No 28 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism:
Mrs A VAN WYK: Chair, as a recognised driver in a successful modern economy, it could be argued that South Africa’s scientific research and technological development are chronically underfunded. And now that the SA National Antarctic Programme will be transferred - without personnel - from the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism to the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology at the beginning of October, what will the budgeted amount in their allocation be used for and how will that help the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology?
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Thank you, hon member. Regarding this programme, we are only transferring the research part of it; the rest of it will remain our responsibility. So it is only the research part that will go to the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology where the right amount of money or finances will be determined by our sitting down to see how we can assist. We feel that it is not worthwhile for it to be with us, because what is taking place in practice is research work, which is not our work, on issues of technology and other issues. So that is why it is going there.
Vote No 30 - Land Affairs:
Mr M V NGEMA: Deputy Chair, Minister, the IFP notes with regret that whereas land restitution restricted indigenous communities to claiming a small portion of their dispossessed land - not earlier than June 1913 - the National Treasury could not find R13 945 million to enable the department to meet its anticipated expenditure of R213 294 million on land reform.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Minister, did you get the question?
The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Hon Deputy Chair, it would help if the member could repeat the question. I didn’t hear the question, I heard a statement.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, very pithily, what is your question?
Mr M V NGEMA: Chairperson, it is not a question, it is an expression of regret by the IFP that Treasury could not give the department the funds it requested and, therefore, decided to cut down on the money the department requested for land reform.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, if I heard the question - perhaps the hon member could assist - he said it’s a pity we couldn’t find R13 000 million or R13 billion. We couldn’t find it lying around anywhere, we looked. And, if we continue to look for the R13 billion, it’s not going to be found. So, I do plead with the hon member to be more realistic in what he asks for. Thank you.
Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry:
Dr R T RHODA: Chairperson, SMMEs, particularly those owned and operated by black entrepreneurs, should by now have been an integral part of our national economy. This is not the case. Microcredit for productive purposes and general access to finance remain a major impediment. Khula and Ntsika’s impact has been disappointing. Is it the intention of the DTI to urgently review Government’s strategy as applied to small business? Minister, have you specifically budgeted to intensify efforts to assist small businesses, especially in the light of the recent adoption of the National Small Business Amendment Bill in this House? I thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, the hon member is making an assumption that the impact has been limited; I think he is wrong. If you look at the reports from the DTI call centre, we register between 1 000 and 3 000 close corporations per week, and most of those are black-owned corporations. So there has been a very marked increase in registration of small enterprises and, as far as it is possible for us to ascertain, a very sharp increase in those enterprises owned by black persons.
So I think your starting point is inaccurate. If you look at the adjustments appropriation, you will see specifically that, to support black economic empowerment in this financial year and to support the procurement process, we did the virement of R50 million towards the black business procurement supplier programme. So I am confident that we have sufficient funds. If you take a close look at the budget you will see too that we made certain adjustments to further support the small business programme. As you are aware, we did present to the portfolio committee a revised business strategy programme, and we are also moving towards the microfinancing project as well. So I think there is a great deal of activity on small and medium business in this budget.
Mr C M LOWE: Deputy Chairman, the Department of Trade and Industry should be the key instrument for Government to shape the economy. It should be the driving force with a bold vision and a radical plan to lead the economy and stimulate growth to create jobs in order to ensure a better life for all South Africans in an expanding economy. Instead, after nearly 10 years of ANC incorporated, over one million jobs have been lost and eight million South Africans are now unemployed.
Minister, surely, introducing real broad-based economic empowerment from the bottom up, thereby reaching those people who need it most first, is better than Government’s top-down racially based system which opens the door to making an elite, well-connected and wealthy few even richer, and leaves ordinary South Africans just as marginalised and excluded as ever they were. Surely, the most empowering thing of all is a job and until South Africans everywhere realise this, we will all pay the price and the jobless queues will only get longer. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, well, as the Minister of Finance said, this is not an election Budget. But I can see that the questions are the usual election nonsense. [Interjections.] The position is very clear: If the hon member and the DA would look at the census statistics and the labour force surveys, they would see that in the period 1996-2001 we created more than 1,5 million jobs - net new jobs in the formal sector. So this clichéd loss of a million jobs that keeps coming up is inaccurate and wrong.
If you were also to look at the census you would see that there is a challenge which the Government and the President have quite clearly taken on, ie the participation ratio in this economy has dramatically increased; women, in particular, are coming into the labour market; and also the effects of higher population growth rates one and two generations ago. We have achieved a much higher participation ratio and we have created more jobs. As the President outlined, we discussed the concept of a second economy, and this Government has put massive resources behind addressing that second economy through rural development, urban development and now through the extended Public Works programmes.
So, I think we should stop the clichés. I am very confident that my department has provided leadership and guidance in this economy and will continue to do so because the ANC will be the government in the next Parliament.
Debate concluded.
Vote No 1 - The Presidency - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 2 - Parliament - put and agreed to.
Vote No 3 - Foreign Affairs - put and agreed to.
Vote No 4 - Home Affairs - put and agreed to.
Vote No 5 - Provincial and Local Government - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 6 - Public Works - put and agreed to.
Vote No 7 - GCIS - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance abstaining).
Vote No 8 - National Treasury - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting). Vote No 9 - Public Enterprises - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 10 - Public Service and Administration - put and agreed to.
Vote No 11 - Public Service Commission - put and agreed to.
Vote No 12 - South African Management Development Institute - put and agreed to.
Vote No 13 - Statistics South Africa - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance abstaining).
Vote No 14 - Arts and Culture - put and agreed to.
Vote No 15 - Education - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance and African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).
Vote No 16 - Health - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance and African Christian Democratic Party dissenting). Vote No 17 - Labour - put.
Division demanded.
The House divided:
AYES - 247: Abrahams, T; Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Asmal, A K; Bakker, D M; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Bapela, O; Benjamin, J; Blaas, A; Bloem, D V; Booi, M S; Botha, N G W; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chiba, L; Chikane, M M; Cindi, N V; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Daniels, N; Davies, R H; De Lange, J H; Diale, L N; Didiza, A T; Dithebe, S L; Ditshetelo, P H K; Dlali, D M; Doidge, G Q M; Du Toit, D C; Dudley, C; Durand, J; Erwin, A; Fankomo, F C; Fazzie, M H; Ferreira, E T; Fraser- Moleketi, G J; Gogotya, N J; Gomomo, P J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Gous, S J; Green, L M; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hendricks, L B; Hendrickse, P A C; Herandien, C B; Hlengwa, W M; Hogan, B A; Jeebodh, T; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Johnson, C B; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kasrils, R; Kati, J Z; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Komphela, B M; Koornhof, G W; Kota, Z A; Lamani, N E; Landers, L T; Lekgoro, M K; Lishivha, T E; Lobe, M C; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Ludwabe, C I; Luthuli, A N; Lyle, A G; Mabandla, B S; Mabena, D C; Mabuyakhulu, V D; Madasa, Z L; Magashule, E S; Magazi, M N; Magubane, N E; Magwanishe, G B; Mahlangu-Nkabinde, G L; Mahlawe, N; Maimane, D S; Maine, M S; Makasi, X C; Maloney, L; Maluleke-Hlaneki, C J; Malumise, M M; Manuel, T A; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Martins, B A D; Masala, M M; Maserumule, F T; Mashimbye, J N; Masithela, N H; Masutha, M T; Mathebe, P M; Mathibela, N F; Matlanyane, H F; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Maziya, M A; Mbadi, L M; Mbombo, N D; Mdladlana, M M S; Mdlalose, M M; Meruti, V; Mfundisi, I S; Mlangeni, A; Mnandi, P N; Mngomezulu, G P; Mnguni, B A; Moatshe, M S; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mohamed, I J; Mohlala, R J B; Mokoena, A D; Molebatsi, M A; Moloi, J; Moloto, K A; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Moropa, R M; Morutoa, M R; Morwamoche, K W; Moss, M I; Motubatse-Hounkpatin, S D; Mpahlwa, M B; Mpaka, H M; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mthethwa, E N; Mtsweni, N S; Mufamadi, F S; Mutsila, I; Mzondeki, M J G; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncinane, I Z; Ndzanga, R A; Nefolovhodwe, P J; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Newhoudt- Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngcobo, N; Ngculu, L V J; Ngema, M V; Ngubeni, J M; Ngwenya, M L; Nhleko, N P; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njobe, M A A; Nkabinde, N C; Nonkonyana, M; Nqakula, C; Nqodi, S B; Ntombela, S H; Ntshulana-Bhengu, N R; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, J T; Ntuli, S B; Nwamitwa-Shilubana, T L P; Nxumalo, S N; Odendaal, W A; Olckers, M E; Olifant, D A A; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Oosthuizen, G C; Phadagi, M G; Phala, M J; Phohlela, S; Pieterse, R D; Pillay, S; Rabinowitz, R; Radebe, B A; Radebe, J T; Rajbally, S; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Ratsoma, M M; Rhoda, R T; Ripinga, S S; Roopnarain, U; Rwexana, S P; Schippers, J; Schneeman, G D; Schoeman, E A; Seaton, S A; Seeco, M A; Sekgobela, P S; September, C C; September, R K; Shabangu, S; Sibande, M P; Sigcau, S N; Sigcawu, A N; Sikakane, M R; Simmons, S; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, D J; Sithole, P; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Skweyiya, Z S T; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Swart, S N; Tarr, M A; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Tsheole, N M; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, P; Turok, B; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Wyk, Anna; Van Wyk, Annelize; Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, S C; Vos, S C; Woods, G G; Zita, L; Zondi, K M; Zondo, R P; Zulu, N E; Zuma, J G.
NOES - 23: Andrew, K M; Blanché, J P I; Borman, G M; Camerer, S M; Farrow, S B; Jankielsohn, R; Koornhof, N J van R; Lowe, C M; Maluleke, D K; Morkel, C M; Nel, A H; Ntuli, R S; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Redcliffe, C R; Schalkwyk, P J; Schmidt, H C; Semple, J A; Smuts, M; Steele, M H; Swart, P S; Theron, J L; Van Niekerk, A I.
Vote accordingly agreed to.
Vote No 18 - Science and Technology - put and agreed to.
Vote No 19 - Social Development - put and agreed to.
Vote No 20 - Sport and Recreation South Africa - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 21 - Correctional Services - put and agreed to.
Vote No 22 - Defence - put.
Division demanded.
The House divided:
AYES - 247: Abrahams, T; Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Asmal, A K; Bakker, D M; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Bapela, O; Benjamin, J; Bloem, D V; Booi, M S; Botha, N G W; Buthelezi, M G; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chiba, L; Chikane, M M; Cindi, N V; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Daniels, N; Davies, R H; De Lange, J H; Dhlamini, B W; Diale, L N; Didiza, A T; Dithebe, S L; Ditshetelo, P H K; Dlali, D M; Doidge, G Q M; Du Toit, D C; Durand, J; Erwin, A; Fankomo, F C; Fazzie, M H; Ferreira, E T; Fraser-Moleketi, G J; Gogotya, N J; Gomomo, P J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Gous, S J; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hendricks, L B; Hendrickse, P A C; Herandien, C B; Hlengwa, W M; Hogan, B A; Jeebodh, T; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Johnson, C B; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kasrils, R; Kati, J Z; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Komphela, B M; Koornhof, G W; Lamani, N E; Landers, L T; Lekgoro, M K; Lishivha, T E; Lobe, M C; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Ludwabe, C I; Luthuli, A N; Lyle, A G; Mabandla, B S; Mabena, D C; Mabuyakhulu, V D; Magashule, E S; Magazi, M N; Magubane, N E; Magwanishe, G B; Mahlangu-Nkabinde, G L; Mahlawe, N; Maimane, D S; Maine, M S; Makasi, X C; Maloney, L; Maluleke-Hlaneki, C J; Malumise, M M; Manuel, T A; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Martins, B A D; Masala, M M; Maserumule, F T; Mashimbye, J N; Masithela, N H; Masutha, M T; Mathebe, P M; Mathibela, N F; Matlanyane, H F; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Maziya, M A; Mbadi, L M; Mbombo, N D; Mdladlana, M M S; Mdlalose, M M; Meruti, V; Mfundisi, I S; Mlangeni, A; Mnandi, P N; Mngomezulu, G P; Mnguni, B A; Moatshe, M S; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mohamed, I J; Mohlala, R J B; Mokoena, A D; Molebatsi, M A; Moloi, J; Moloto, K A; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Moropa, R M; Morutoa, M R; Morwamoche, K W; Moss, M I; Motubatse-Hounkpatin, S D; Mpahlwa, M B; Mpaka, H M; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mthethwa, E N; Mtsweni, N S; Mufamadi, F S; Mutsila, I; Mzondeki, M J G; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncinane, I Z; Ndzanga, R A; Nefolovhodwe, P J; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngcobo, N; Ngculu, L V J; Ngema, M V; Ngubane, H; Ngubeni, J M; Ngwenya, M L; Nhleko, N P; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njobe, M A A; Nkabinde, N C; Nonkonyana, M; Nqakula, C; Nqodi, S B; Ntombela, S H; Ntshulana-Bhengu, N R; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, J T; Ntuli, S B; Nwamitwa- Shilubana, T L P; Nxumalo, S N; Odendaal, W A; Olckers, M E; Olifant, D A A; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Oosthuizen, G C; Phadagi, M G; Phala, M J; Phohlela, S; Pieterse, R D; Pillay, S; Rabinowitz, R; Radebe, B A; Radebe, J T; Rajbally, S; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Ratsoma, M M; Rhoda, R T; Ripinga, S S; Roopnarain, U; Rwexana, S P; Schippers, J; Schneeman, G D; Schoeman, E A; Seaton, S A; Seeco, M A; Sekgobela, P S; September, C C; September, R K; Shabangu, S; Sibande, M P; Sibiya, M S M; Sigcau, S N; Sigcawu, A N; Sikakane, M R; Simmons, S; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, D J; Sithole, P; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Skweyiya, Z S T; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Tarr, M A; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Tsheole, N M; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, P; Turok, B; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Wyk, Anna; Van Wyk, Annelize; Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, S C; Vezi, T E; Vos, S C; Woods, G G; Xulu, M; Zita, L; Zondi, K M; Zondo, R P; Zulu, N E; Zuma, J G.
NOES - 28: Andrew, K M; Blaas, A; Blanché, J P I; Borman, G M; Camerer, S M; Dudley, C; Farrow, S B; Green, L M; Jankielsohn, R; Koornhof, N J van R; Lowe, C M; Madasa, Z L; Maluleke, D K; Morkel, C M; Nel, A H; Ntuli, R S; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Redcliffe, C R; Schalkwyk, P J; Schmidt, H C; Semple, J A; Smuts, M; Steele, M H; Swart, P S; Swart, S N; Theron, J L; Van Niekerk, A I.
ABSTENTIONS - 1: Middleton, N S.
Vote accordingly agreed to.
Vote No 23 - Independent Complaints Directorate - put and agreed to.
Vote No 24 - Justice and Constitutional Development - put and agreed to.
Vote No 25 - Safety and Security - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 26 - Agriculture - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 27 - Communications - put.
Division demanded. The House divided:
AYES - 245: Abrahams, T; Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Asmal, A K; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Bapela, O; Benjamin, J; Bloem, D V; Booi, M S; Botha, N G W; Buthelezi, M G; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chiba, L; Chikane, M M; Cindi, N V; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Daniels, N; Davies, R H; Dhlamini, B W; Diale, L N; Didiza, A T; Dithebe, S L; Ditshetelo, P H K; Dlali, D M; Doidge, G Q M; Du Toit, D C; Durand, J; Erwin, A; Fankomo, F C; Fazzie, M H; Fraser-Moleketi, G J; Gogotya, N J; Gomomo, P J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Gous, S J; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hendricks, L B; Hendrickse, P A C; Herandien, C B; Hlengwa, W M; Hogan, B A; Jeebodh, T; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Johnson, C B; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kasrils, R; Kati, J Z; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Komphela, B M; Koornhof, G W; Kota, Z A; Lamani, N E; Landers, L T; Lekgoro, M K; Lishivha, T E; Lobe, M C; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Ludwabe, C I; Luthuli, A N; Lyle, A G; Mabandla, B S; Mabena, D C; Mabuyakhulu, V D; Magashule, E S; Magazi, M N; Magubane, N E; Magwanishe, G B; Mahlangu-Nkabinde, G L; Mahlawe, N; Maimane, D S; Maine, M S; Makasi, X C; Maloney, L; Maluleke-Hlaneki, C J; Malumise, M M; Manuel, T A; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Martins, B A D; Masala, M M; Maserumule, F T; Mashimbye, J N; Masithela, N H; Masutha, M T; Mathebe, P M; Mathibela, N F; Matlanyane, H F; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Maziya, M A; Mbadi, L M; Mbombo, N D; Mdladlana, M M S; Mdlalose, M M; Meruti, V; Mfundisi, I S; Middleton, N S; Mlangeni, A; Mnandi, P N; Mngomezulu, G P; Mnguni, B A; Moatshe, M S; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mohlala, R J B; Mokoena, A D; Molebatsi, M A; Moloi, J; Moloto, K A; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Moropa, R M; Morutoa, M R; Morwamoche, K W; Moss, M I; Motubatse-Hounkpatin, S D; Mpahlwa, M B; Mpaka, H M; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mthethwa, E N; Mtsweni, N S; Mufamadi, F S; Mutsila, I; Mzondeki, M J G; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncinane, I Z; Ndzanga, R A; Nefolovhodwe, P J; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Newhoudt- Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngcobo, N; Ngculu, L V J; Ngema, M V; Ngubane, H; Ngubeni, J M; Ngwenya, M L; Nhleko, N P; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njobe, M A A; Nkabinde, N C; Nonkonyana, M; Nqakula, C; Nqodi, S B; Ntombela, S H; Ntshulana-Bhengu, N R; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, J T; Ntuli, S B; Nwamitwa-Shilubana, T L P; Nxumalo, S N; Odendaal, W A; Olckers, M E; Olifant, D A A; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Oosthuizen, G C; Phadagi, M G; Phala, M J; Phohlela, S; Pieterse, R D; Pillay, S; Rabinowitz, R; Radebe, B A; Radebe, J T; Rajbally, S; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Ratsoma, M M; Rhoda, R T; Ripinga, S S; Roopnarain, U; Rwexana, S P; Schippers, J; Schneeman, G D; Schoeman, E A; Seaton, S A; Seeco, M A; Sekgobela, P S; September, C C; September, R K; Shabangu, S; Sibande, M P; Sibiya, M S M; Sigcau, S N; Sigcawu, A N; Sikakane, M R; Simmons, S; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, D J; Sithole, P; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Skweyiya, Z S T; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Tarr, M A; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Tsheole, N M; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, P; Turok, B; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Wyk, Anna; Van Wyk, Annelize; Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, S C; Vezi, T E; Vos, S C; Woods, G G; Xulu, M; Zita, L; Zondi, K M; Zondo, R P; Zulu, N E; Zuma, J G.
NOES - 28: Andrew, K M; Blaas, A; Blanché, J P I; Borman, G M; Camerer, S M; Dudley, C; Farrow, S B; Green, L M; Jankielsohn, R; Koornhof, N J van R; Lowe, C M; Madasa, Z L; Maluleke, D K; Morkel, C M; Nel, A H; Ntuli, R S; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Redcliffe, C R; Schalkwyk, P J; Schmidt, H C; Semple, J A; Smuts, M; Steele, M H; Swart, P S; Swart, S N; Theron, J L; Van Niekerk, A I.
Vote accordingly agreed to.
Vote No 28 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism - put and agreed to.
Vote No 29 - Housing - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 30 - Land Affairs - put and agreed to.
Vote No 31 - Minerals and Energy - put and agreed to.
Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry - put and agreed to.
Vote No 33 - Transport - put and agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 34 - Water Affairs and Forestry - put and agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.
ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance dissenting). REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(First Reading debate)
Ms B A HOGAN: Mr Chair, I’m advised that there were certain technical printing errors in the Bill as it was published, and I have agreed that the amendments be read into the record.
These amendments are: That, on page 11, line 27, (1)'' be inserted before
Section 3’’; on page 11, after line 57, the following be inserted, (2)
Subsection (1)(c) shall in so far as it deletes the reference to sections
9E and 9F come into operation on 1 June 2004 and shall apply in respect of
years of assessment commencing on or after that date''; on page 18, in line
54, the wordcontrolled’’ be deleted; on page 32, in line 25, the words
“commits to be objective in processing” be omitted and substituted by
commits to the objective of processing''; on page 84, in line 47, this
Act’’ should read that Act''; on page 97, in line 19, by notice’’
should read by proclamation''; on page 115, lines 1 and 2 should read:
(g) by the substitution in subparagraph (h) of paragraph (3) for the
words preceding item (i) of the following words’’; and, on page 135, in
line 51, ``for the words preceding paragraph (a) of the following words’’.
be added after “Income Tax Act”, 1962: Those are the amendments to correct
some of the printing errors.
This Bill is an omnibus Bill that amends numerous matters relating to different aspects of our taxation law. Some of it is so complex that no right-thinking person should ever be allowed to present matters of such complexity to Parliament. I would say that it took the committee some time to even begin to understand what we are dealing with. I refer particularly to corporate restructuring rules which, as time goes on, we are amending, and which arise out of the earlier taxation reforms that were introduced. Specifically with corporate restructuring rules, there are anti-avoidance measures that are being introduced plus matters relating to financial instrument-holding companies and a number of other matters.
One of the issues that attracted a lot of debate and a lot of comment in this Revenues Laws Amendment Bill was the reporting requirements now being imposed on financial institutions, which will impact mainly on the banking industry. It relates to matters where special reporting rules have been introduced for transactions that contain indicators of potential tax avoidance. So if you are a bank and you are engaged, for instance, in a very sophisticated agreement with a client and that agreement means that there might be instances in which these arrangements contain a tax rebate clause, you will now be obliged to report on this beforehand.
The Minister is granted the power to identify some of these reporting taxation agreements arrangements in terms of the Gazette but this has to be tabled in Parliament within 12 months.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, please take your seats.
Ms B A HOGAN: Failure to report these transactions will result in quite stiff penalties. My colleagues will speak on a range of other matters that came before us. But, there are certain issues which I think are of use. Firstly, this Bill clarifies the VAT treatment of grants paid by public authorities and local authorities. So if Government gives grants, what is the VAT status of those grants? It also clarifies when national and provincial departments too, with the grants given, will act outside the scope of VAT activities. Constitutional institutions, likewise, are excluded from the definition of enterprise.
Schedule 2 deals with major public entities. However, entities such as Eskom and Transnet etc will be included within the definition of enterprise. National and provincial public entities also have their VAT status clarified. Importantly, the VAT treatment of vendors in industrial development zones and customs-controlled areas will be treated as though one is operating in a customs-controlled area. This has also been an area where there has been uncertainty. As regards urban development zones, this is a major tax incentive aimed at revitalising the inner cities of our country. A substantial tax relief is granted to people who are refurbishing buildings in a city either for commercial or residential use, in which case they will get a straight-line tax write-off of 20% over a five-year period. For those who will be constructing anew, they will equally get a tax write-off of 20% in the first year and then 5% off in future 16 years. Certain requirements stipulate that there be a formal resolution of council to the effect that it fits into an integrated plan, and it’s envisaged that certain areas will be designated for tax relief. I think there are at least 16 metropolitan and major inner city areas that have been designated.
A major concession has been made to public benefit organisations. But, regarding tax-exempt status, those who now donate to such organisations will now also be able to enjoy the benefits of donations tax. This, I think, will free up donations, particularly as it has been complex and there have also been various amendments to the list of public benefit organisations. As you know, this committee has placed enormous emphasis on the tax status of public benefit organisations. We really welcome the constructive approach from the National Treasury and Sars in this regard.
Other matters that were before us were, of course, the continual amendments relating to the Capital Gains Tax. These are coming through as experience develops with the implementation of Capital Gains Tax, the reworkings of arrangements around customs and excise, and certain administrative issues relating to this.
However, I must say that, in the time allocated, I cannot give justice to the wide range of issues which are covered by this Bill. I would certainly appeal to a future Parliament that the way in which we process revenue laws be re-examined because I do not think that we do justice to it either in the committee or the House, and to the complexities which these Bills present.
On behalf of the ANC, we support this Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr P J RABIE: Mr Chairman, hon Minister, members, the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill is a technical Bill and the product of a number of major tax reforms which broadened the present tax base.
One of the changes is that we changed from a residence to a source-based tax system. In submission to the finance committee, as speakers have said, the drafters of the new legislation in general gave limited opportunity to the compliance complexity of tax legislation and an appeal was made that the hon Minister and Treasury will provide for a period of consolidation in the years ahead. The hon Minister mentioned in his Budget Statement that a period of tax consolidation was envisaged for the year ahead. This can only contribute to a tax culture of compliance.
The Revenue Laws Amendment Bill introduces amendments to 17 tax laws. I shall briefly refer to a number of them. There is the amendment of the Transfer Duty Act of 1949, so as to regulate the provisions related to the duty on the conversion of share blocks to sectional titles and the duty payable on the cancellation of transactions. A positive amendment is the provision which will allow for changing of the Taxation Laws Amendment Act regarding tax exemption of public benefit organisations and other entities. This will enable PBOs to meet their financial commitments. The Exchange Control Amnesty Act is amended regarding the application of beneficiaries and extends the date of application. All the respective submissions to the finance committee welcomed the extension till 29 February 2004.
The Marketable Securities Tax Act of 1948 and certain regulations are repeated to provide for transitional provisions relating to gold bullion and the shares of companies acquired from funds transferred to South Africa. The Value-Added Tax Act of 1991 is amended regarding the provision that relates to assessments, objectives and appeals that relate to disputes.
Mnr die Voorsitter, Suid-Afrika bevind hom tans as ‘n rolspeler in die internasionale beleggingsgemeenskap. Dit is gebiedend noodsaaklik dat ons belastingstelsel beleggings- en verbruikersvriendelik is, maar geen geleentheid laat in ‘n vinnig veranderende omgewing vir individue of instellings om belasting deur middel van skuiwergate te ontduik nie. Sonder ‘n effektiewe en ‘n regverdige beslastingstelsel wat belastingontduiking ontmoedig, sal die sosioekonomiese gevolge van armoede in Suid-Afrika moeilik opgelos word.
Hierdie wetsontwerp is omvangryk en beslaan meer as 138 gedrukte bladsye. Die finansiële komitee en amptenare en belanghebbende rolspelers van die private sektor het ure gespandeer om ‘n haalbare en praktykgerigte wetsontwerp daar te stel. Vergun my ook die geleentheid om die voorsitter van die finansiële komitee, me Barbara Hogan, baie hartlik te bedank vir haar goeie leiding wat sy in dié verband gegee het. Dankie ook aan al die ander lede van die finansiële komitee. Die DA steun hierdie gegewe wetsontwerp. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr Chairman, South Africa currently finds itself to be a role-player in the international investment community. It is essential that our tax system is investment and consumer-friendly, but leaves no opportunity in a rapidly changing environment for individuals or institutions to evade tax through loopholes. Without an effective and fair tax system which discourages tax evasion, the socioeconomic consequences of poverty in South Africa will not easily be solved.
This Bill is comprehensive and comprises more than 138 printed pages. The finance committee and officials and interested role-players in the private sector spent hours drafting a feasible and practice-oriented Bill. Allow me the opportunity very sincerely to thank the chairperson of the finance committee, Ms Barbara Hogan, for the sound leadership she provided in this regard. Thank you also to all the other members of the finance committee. The DA supports this particular Bill.]
Dr G G WOODS: Chairperson, tax policy and the law that is used to capture and interpret this policy are most often very technical and highly complex, as previous speakers have mentioned. As such the individual minds and even the collective mind that comprises the Portfolio Committee on Finance would be seriously stretched when contemplating Bills such as the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill, if it were not for the particular approach we used.
Here one must also pay tribute to the committee chairperson, the hon Barbara Hogan, who has, over the past few years, developed an ever more effective facilitation type role for the committee in this regard. It is where, after gaining a basic understanding of tax Bills, substance and intentions, a range of appropriate experts and interest groups are identified and invited to participate in the committee’s legislative process. The value of this participation comes from how these experts and interest groups interact through the committee, with the drafters of the law, that being Sars and National Treasury.
I know a number of other committees allow for public participation, but the effectiveness of the Portfolio Committee on Finance’s approach, given the complexities of the subject matter we have to deal with and the chairing of the hon Hogan and the clever choice of participants and the constructive and non-defensive approach of Sars and National Treasury, I think, through this, we produced significant amendments to tax Bills. I found the process rather satisfying and know that the tax laws we pass in the Assembly, like the Bill before us, will amount to well-considered law. I think the hon Hogan, in her earlier comments, is underestimating the effective way in which she does chair the committee through these tax Bills.
As it seems that other participants in this debate will speak to the specific amendments in the Bill, I will use my remaining time just to make one general observation. From 1994 right up to a couple of years ago, it was clear that Sars dictated the nature and purpose of all tax law, and did so on the basis of seeking a sound, efficient and fair system which realised an optimal tax return for the fiscus each year. The Katz Commission tax reforms were also restricted to such thinking. Considerations of the broader economy and the tax effects thereon were few and incidental at most, but of late, it seems that National Treasury’s Tax Policy Department has been more positively active in assessing and converting relevant parts of the tax system in a way which will be more consistent and more directly promotive of official economic policy.
It has long been my observation that tax policy has been underplayed in the bigger economic scheme of things. It is therefore significant that National Treasury’s Martin Grote with his economic perspectives and his right-hand man, Prof Ingels with his modern tax perspectives, are increasingly influencing the tax system into a more integrated and thereby a more supportive role of the national economy in its search for growth.
We were quite impressed with a recent analysis undertaken by National Treasury where a modelling expert, using a wide basis of carefully thought- out variables, has explored the possibilities of various tax approaches to FTI. Also positive is learning that National Treasury is thinking of how we can use our taxation agreements better in assisting our economy to grow. Thank you.
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Agb Voorsitter, ek wil graag aansluit by die vorige spreker, die agb dr Woods, om ons waardering uit te spreek teenoor die voorsitter van ons komitee, me Barbara Hogan, wat werklik ‘n baie kundige voorsitter is en baie goed weet wat sy doen. Die sukses van die finansiële komitee se werksaamhede het baie te doen met haar kundigheid en die goeie leiding wat sy daar gee.
Die Nuwe NP sal hierdie wetsontwerp plus die amendemente steun. Dit is inderdaad ‘n finansiële rommelkaswetsontwerp wat ‘n hele aantal wette amendeer, selfs sover terug as 1949. Wat my egter die mees opgewonde maak, is klousule 28 van hierdie wetsontwerp, wat ‘n verandering aanbring aan die Inkomstebelastingwet van 1972, waarkragtens ondernemings wat begin, beginnerondernemings, nou toegelaat gaan word om uitgawes wat hulle aangegaan het voordat daardie onderneming begin funksioneer het, by ‘n latere geleentheid oor ‘n tydperk gestrek of onmiddellik in die eerste belastingjaar af te skrywe teen hulle inkomste. Ek weet nie wat dit die staat na raming sal kos om dit so te doen nie, maar ek dink dit is ‘n uiters belangrike maatreël wat getref is.
Ek weet u is nou al moeg vir my omdat ek vanmiddag so baie praat oor veral die kleinsakeondernemings, maar, mnr die Minister, ek dink veral die kleinsakeondernemings sal dit baie waardeer en dit is werklik ‘n uitstekende stimulus deur wetgewing wat u geskep het om dit makliker te maak om sake aan te gaan soos om ‘n bietjie marknavorsing te doen voor ‘n mens jou onderneming begin, om ‘n lewensvatbaarheidstudie te doen, of om omgewingsimpakstudies te doen voor die tyd - alles goed wat baie noodsaaklik is, en dit kan nou afgeskryf word en ons is baie dankbaar daarvoor. Baie dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr W A ODENDAAL: Hon Chairperson, I would like to associate myself with what the previous speaker, the hon Dr Woods, said to convey our appreciation to the chairperson of our committee, Ms Barbara Hogan, who is truly a very capable chairperson and knows exactly what she is doing. The success of the finance comittee’s activities has a great deal to do with her expertise and good leadership.
The New NP will support both this Bill and the amendments. It is indeed a financial omnibus Bill that amends quite a number of Acts, even as far back as 1949. What excites me most, however, is clause 28 of this Bill, which amends the Income Tax Act of 1972, in terms of which enterprises that are starting out, emerging enterprises, are now allowed to write off expenses that they incurred prior to the enterprise starting to function, on a later occasion over a period of time or immediately in the first tax year. I do not know how much it is estimated this will cost the state to do it this way, but I think it is a very important measure that has been introduced.
I know you are tired of me already, because I have been talking so much about small business enterprises in particular this afternoon, but, Mr Minister, I think small business enterprises in particular will appreciate it greatly and it is truly an excellent stimulus, through legislation that you have created, to make it easier to go about matters such as doing a bit of market research before starting one’s business, doing a feasibility study, or doing an environmental impact study beforehand - all things that are essential, and this can now be written off and we are very grateful for that. Thank you very much.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill appears to bring a number of Bills in line with the current structure of democracy and rule of law. It is very important that each sphere of government inculcates the values of the national Constitution and that all factors that contribute, influence, enhance and effect such matters be taken seriously.
This Bill amends many Acts, and it is important to ensure that these amendments are made not only for the improvement of revenue securities, but also for the betterment of all South Africans. At the end of the day, all we do is to maintain that we are a government of the people by the people and that we are answerable to our people all the time. This is the reason the values of transparency and accountability are so firmly entrenched in our beauracracy.
We all know the importance of national revenue in the running of our country. In fact, without such revenue, would this be possible? Many other factors contribute to such revenue and it is important to maintain and improve these.
The MF supports the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Mr M A TARR: Chair, to generate enthusiasm for a text debate in the dying stages of a sitting such as today’s is extremely difficult. The Revenue Laws Amendment Bill consists of some 226 clauses and amends 14 different Acts dealing with revenue collection. It’s impossible, obviously, as other speakers have said, in a short debate of this nature to begin debating the whole Bill in a meaningful way. But, I really believe that Sars need to be congratulated on compiling this Bill and getting the explanatory memorandum done in such a short time, because it’s an extremely long and complex Bill.
As a general statement, it can be said that tax policy has been and is under constant review, and this has resulted in significant improvements under our current Minister of Finance. Tax policy is a complex field where a number of often competing issues have to be dealt with simultaneously. For example, questions such as the following need to be addressed: How should the tax burden be spread between different taxes, such as, VAT, personal tax, company tax, customs and excise duties? And then within a category of taxation, for example, our system of progressive taxation, how should that also be spread so as to promote equity and growth? Then, of course, there is another question such as the following: Where should concessions be made so as to promote Government policy?
These and many other questions need to be answered. Since 1994, there has been a broadening of the tax base, which has resulted in a fear of tax burden, and this has also been accompanied by significant tax relief. We have seen new taxes, such as the Capital Gains Tax, introduced. We have moved to a residence-based tax collection system and the current year is a continuation of the reform process.
Tax policy has also been aimed at stimulating investments and developments by making various concessions, such as the new urban development zones discussed by the hon Barbara Hogan today. Revenue collection has been improved and there has been a vast overall improvement and change under our current Minister. A few examples, which are in the present Act, I think, are worth noting. To start with, let’s look at ring-fencing.
The issue of ring-fencing sparked considerable debate in the committee, particularly, in relation to horse racing. Ring-fencing is aimed at preventing losses in the so-called suspect trade from being offset against profits from another trade occupation. That only applies to individuals in the maximum tax bracket who attempt to disguise their hobbies as trades.
The Act sets out a number of rules to identify suspect loss trades, such as the three-out-of-five-year-loss rule, and also lists a number of trades which by their very nature give rise to suspicion. The Act also provides an escape hatch to prevent ring-fencing being applied, provided the taxpayer can demonstrate certain features.
Horse racing was originally listed as a suspect trade, but after hearing representations, the committee recommended that it be removed from the list pending further investigation. This came about because of the unique nature of horse racing. While it may be true that there are many instances where wealthy individuals purchase race horses and offset their costs against other income, the picture does not end there.
The horse racing industry also has many other players, who all combine to form a very significant economic infrastructure, for example, horse breeders, who are involved in making their living out of breeding; trainers, who can train horses; jockeys; farmers; farmworkers; turf clubs and all their personnel that organise meetings; transport operators; and horse racing also provides a significant source of tax revenue to provinces.
So taking the above into account, the committee felt that at this stage it would be a good idea if horse racing was removed from the list pending a further in-depth investigation by Sars and the Department of Trade and Industry.
I should also mention, of course, that this does not mean that the three- out-of-five-year rule does not apply. But, of course this serves to illustrate the point that a given course can actually result in undesirable effects elsewhere and illustrates the complexity of the whole tax process.
Other concessions we saw were in research and development, and the concessions are aimed at encouraging research and development. The present provisions do not always make it possible to claim expenditure and the concessions were made to make this possible.
Further concessions were in the area of reinvestment relief, and this is aimed at stimulating investments by providing tax relief on income and capital gain from the sale of an asset when the proceeds are to be reinvested within three years.
I have quoted a few examples in the short time available to me to demonstrate ways in which tax policy can be used in a way that encourages growth and investments, and also some of the pitfalls. I believe that our hon Minister of Finance is to be congratulated on the way in which he has reformed the tax system to make it conform with the needs of our developing economy. Again, I believe congratulations are due to Sars, and I’m happy to support this Bill on behalf of the ANC. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Mr Chairperson, there’s so much enthusiasm in this House that if I added to the Bill, this afternoon, the trebling of tax on members of Parliament, nobody would even notice, but the Hansard would reflect that the Bill was thus amended. [Interjections.] Ken would notice; nobody else has noticed.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: The Chair is still here, hon Minister.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, may I express appreciation to the committee under the leadership of hon Barbara Hogan. I think they have done a fine job and, as the hon Woods has said, the ability to influence, notwithstanding the prohibition on the formal amendments to money Bills, is borne out by the fact that the Bill that entered the committee is quite different from the one that emerged, and I would like to express appreciation, because I think we have learnt to understand how to work around these issues.
I have about 10 and a half minutes left, so I’ll use them to say Merry Christmas to each and every member, and Eid Mubarak. Thank you, very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! The Minister of Finance has requested that certain textual corrections to the Bill, as printed, be effected. These corrections have been circulated to all members and will also appear in the minutes of proceedings for record purposes.
Question put: That Bill, with textual corrections, be read a first time.
Bill, with textual corrections, read a first time.
REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, we shall now come back to Order No 4, which stood over earlier today.
RECONSIDERATION OF PENSIONS SECOND (SUPPLEMENTARY) BILL
There was no debate.
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move:
That the Bill be passed again.
Motion agreed to.
Bill accordingly passed again.
The House adjourned at 17:45. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FRIDAY, 21 NOVEMBER 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 20 November 2003 in terms
of Joint Rule 161, classified the following Bill as a money Bill:
(i) Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 71 - 2003] (National
Assembly - sec 77) TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister for Provincial and Local Government:
Report and Financial Statements of the Board for Municipal Accountants
for 2002-2003.
National Assembly:
- The Speaker:
(a) Report of the National Assembly Delegation to the 34th
Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) Africa Region
Conference held in Nairobi, Kenia from 2 - 9 August 2003.
Copy of Report available at the Office of the Clerk of the Papers.
- The Speaker:
Letter dated 18 November 2003 from the Minister of Education to the
Speaker of the National Assembly, in terms of section 65(2)(a) of the
Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999), explaining the
delay in the tabling of the Annual Report of the South African Council
for Educators (SACE) and the Council on Higher Education (CHE):
Dear Frene
LATE TABLING OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN COUNCIL FOR
EDUCATORS (SACE) AND THE COUNCIL ON HIGHER EDUCATION (CHE)
I wish to apologise for not tabling the Annual Report of the above
public entities in time, as required in terms of Section 65 of the
Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).
I can confirm that all the requirements were met concerning
timeous submission of the financial statements to the Auditor-
General/external auditor, the auditing of the financial records
and statements by the Auditor-General/external auditor and the
submission of their annual report to me, National Treasury and the
Auditor-General. However, these public entities omitted to arrange
with the Clerk of Papers in Parliament for the timeous tabling of
their reports, as required.
I trust that my sincere apology will be accepted.
With my best wishes.
Yours sincerely
Signed
Professor Kader Asmal, MP
MINISTER OF EDUCATION
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Bill [B 1B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 21 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Bill [B 1B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 19 November 2003, p 1460, and Minutes of Proceedings of National Council of Provinces, 20 November 2003, p 1498), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 1C - 2002].
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 71 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 21 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 71 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a Money Bill, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on the Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill [B 37B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 21 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, having considered the Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Bill [B 37B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 13 October 2003, p 1288), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 37C - 2003].
Report to be considered.
MONDAY, 24 NOVEMBER 2003
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
Special Report of the Auditor-General on the Delays in the Tabling of
Annual Reports for 2002-2003, as required by the Public Finance
Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999) [RP 215-2003].
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- Report of the Joint Budget Committee on the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement, dated 24 November 2003:
CREDA INSERT - Insert 1ATC2411e.doc
National Assembly:
- Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement, dated 24 November 2003:
CREDA INSERT - Insert 2ATC2411e.doc
- Report of the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration on Provincial Visits, dated 17 September 2003:
CREDA INSERT - Insert 3ATC2411e.doc
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 69 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 21 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 69 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development on the Prevention of Corruption Bill [B 19 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 24 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered the subject of the Prevention of Corruption Bill [B 19 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, endorses the classification of the Bill and presents the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Bill [B 19B - 2002].
The Committee reports further, as follows:
-
Having considered the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Bill [B 19B - 2002], the Committee is of the view that certain offences may overlap, and the Committee is concerned that an accused person may be charged and convicted of committing different offences arising from the same facts and circumstances. The Committee therefore considered including the following provision in the Bill: Accused person may not be charged on same facts and circumstances
21A. Nothing in this Chapter contained shall be construed as allowing a person to be convicted of committing different offences arising from the same facts and circumstances: Provided that, if by reason of any uncertainty as to the facts which can be proved or if for any other reason it is doubtful which of several offences is constituted by the facts which can be proved, the accused may be charged with the commission of all or any of such offences, and any number of such charges may be tried at once, or the accused may be charged in the alternative with the commission of any number of such offences.". -
However, the Committee is of the view that the above provision may be superfluous, in view of, amongst others, the following provisions:
(a) Section 35(3)(m) of the Constitution provides that every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right not to be tried for an offence in respect of an act or omission for which that person has previously been either acquitted or convicted.
(b) Section 336 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No. 51 of 1977), provides that where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more statutory provisions or is an offence against a statutory provision and the common law, the person guilty of such act or omission shall, unless the contrary intention appears, be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either statutory provision or, as the case may be, under the statutory provision or the common law, “but shall not be liable to more than one punishment for the act or omission constituting the offence”.
(c) Paragraphs (c) and (d) of section 106 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, provide that when an accused pleads to a charge he may, among others, plead that he has already been convicted of the offence with which he is charged(par (c)), or that he has already been acquitted of the offence with which he is charged (par (d)).
-
In spite of the above provisions, the Committee did not have time to thoroughly research and discuss the matter. The Committee therefore recommends that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development be requested to investigate the matter and to report back to the Committee within three months of the date of adoption of this Report.
-
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 73 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 21 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, having considered the subject of the Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 73 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports the Bill without amendment.
TUESDAY, 25 NOVEMBER 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 November 2003 in terms
of Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill as a section
75 Bill:
(i) Electoral Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 73 - 2003]
(National Assembly - sec 75)
(2) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 November 2003 in terms
of Joint Rule 161, classified the following Bill as a money Bill:
(i) Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 69 - 2003] (National
Assembly - sec 77)
- Assent by President in respect of Bills:
(1) Mining Titles Registration Amendment Bill [B 24D - 2003] - Act
No 24 of 2003 (assented to and signed by President on 21
November 2003); and
(2) National Small Business Amendment Bill [B 20B - 2003] - Act No
26 of 2003 (assented to and signed by President on 21 November
2003).
- Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent:
(1) Bill, as rejected by National Council of Provinces, passed by
National Assembly on 25 November 2003:
(i) Pensions Second (Supplementary) Bill [B 59 - 2003]
(National Assembly - sec 77)
(2) Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 25 November
2003:
(i) Higher Education Amendment Bill [B 36 - 2003] (National
Assembly - sec 75)
National Assembly:
- Messages from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly in respect of Bills passed by Council and transmitted to Assembly:
(1) Bill, as amended, passed by Council on 25 November 2003 and
transmitted for consideration of Council's amendments:
(i) Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 38D - 2003] (National
Assembly - sec 76)
The amended Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Education for a report and recommendations on the Council's
amendments.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Public Auditing Function, dated 25 November 2003:
The Ad Hoc Committee on Public Auditing Function was established by resolution of the House (see Minutes of Proceedings of National Assembly, 24 June 2003, p 700) and mandated to introduce a bill on the objects contained in a legislative proposal reviewing the public auditing function, which was submitted to the Speaker by the Audit Commission (see Announcements, Tabling and Committee Reports, 2 June 2003, p 518).
The Ad Hoc Committee wishes to submit a progress report, as follows:
- Prior notice of the introduction of the draft bill was given in the Government Gazette, No 25064, dated 5 June 2003, by this Parliament, and an explanatory summary of the draft bill was published in the same Gazette.
-
The Gazette also contained an invitation to interested persons and institutions to submit written representations on the draft legislation to the Secretary before 25 June 2003. The Committee duly considered the submissions and conducted public hearings thereafter.
- In addition, the Committee consulted with the chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence (JSCI), the chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Defence, the Auditor-General, the Speaker of the National Assembly, The Presidency, the National Department of Intelligence, the National Department of Defence, the South African Police Service and the National Treasury. In this regard, the Committee wishes to take this opportunity to thank those who willingly provided invaluable input.
-
The Committee has now approved the final draft of the bill, and will introduce the bill when it is ready for publication by publishing a final report and submitting a copy of the bill to the Speaker in terms of Rule 243.
- In conclusion, we recommend that, upon introduction, Members be afforded an opportunity to debate the bill in the House.
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs on the Spatial Data Infrastructure Bill [B 44B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 25 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs, having considered the Spatial Data Infrastructure Bill [B 44B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 8 October 2003, p 1277), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 44C - 2003].
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government on the Local Government: Municipal Systems Amendment Bill [B 49B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 25 November 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government, having considered the Local Government: Municipal Systems Amendment Bill [B 49B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 13 October 2003, p 1285), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 49C - 2003].
Report to be considered.