TUESDAY, 7 SEPTEMBER 2004 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

The House met at 14:00.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

             CONDOLENCES ON THE DEATH OF DR BEYERS NAUDÉ


                         (Draft Resolution)

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

That the House –

(1) notes with shock and profound sadness the death of “Oom Bey”, Dr Beyers Naudé, who passed away early this morning on 7 September 2004 at the age of 89;

(2) recognises that Dr Naudé was a South African patriot who, in his life, demonstrated profound commitment to the liberation of the people of our country;

(3) recalls that he played an active and leading role in conscientising the South African religious community about the immorality of apartheid racialism;

(4) acknowledges the dynamic contribution Dr Naudé made in the anti- apartheid struggle towards the birth of our country’s nonracial and nonsexist constitutional democracy;

(5) believes that he leaves behind a legacy of dedicated service to our country that will serve to inspire future generations to continue working for the deepening of democracy and the reconstruction and development of our country; and

(6) conveys its sincerest condolences to the Naudé family, their friends and the entire religious community in our country.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Adjunkspeaker, die DA betuig sy meegevoel met die naasbestaandes van dr Beyers Naudé. Ons harte gaan veral uit na sy vrou, Ilse, wat hom met groot innerlike krag deur al die jare bygestaan het. Sy kinders en die res van die familie kan troos vind in die feit dat hy ’n lang en vol lewe gelei het waarin hy met sy groot bydrae tot versoening ’n onuitwisbare indruk in Suid-Afrika gemaak het. Dr Beyers Naudé was ’n Afrikaner in murg en been. Reeds aan die Universiteit van Stellenbosch waar hy studenteraadvoorsitter was, het hy leiding geneem en die kritiese denke ontwikkel wat hom later beslissende keuses sou laat maak. Op kerklike en geestelike terrein het hy sy boodskap helder en duidelik verkondig. Hy was bereid om verguising te verduur vir die beginsels waarin hy geglo het en vir sy onvermoeide ywer teen apartheid.

Min mense ervaar die voorreg om, soos hy, in sy tyd die verandering te sien waarvoor hy hom beywer het. Dit is jammer dat hy weens sy hoë ouderdom nie ’n meer aktiewe rol in die nuwe Suid-Afrika kon speel nie. Hy was deurgaans ’n simbool van versoening tussen rasse. Vir die helingsproses in Suid- Afrika was dit van groot betekenis dat dr Beyers Naudé terugontvang en geëer is deur verskeie samelewingsinstansies waarmee daar ’n breuk was, soos met die Nederduits-Gereformeerde Kerk.

Dit was daarom ook goed dat hy op talle terreine vereer is. Dit dien vir ons as Suid-Afrikaners as voorbeeld van wat ons in hierdie land kan bereik as ons bo onsself sou uitstyg. Suid-Afrika het ’n groot brugbouer verloor, iemand wat waardes wou oordra en nie ingestel was op persoonlike mag, eer of hoë posisies nie. Ons eer sy nagedagtenis. Dankie.(Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Deputy Speaker, the DA expresses its sympathy to the family of Dr Beyers Naudé. Our thoughts are especially with his wife, Ilse, who supported him during the years with great inner strength. His children and the rest of his family can be consoled by the fact that he led a long and full life during which he made an indelible impression on South Africa with his great contribution to reconciliation.

Dr Beyers Naudé was an Afrikaner to his very core. Even at the University of Stellenbosch, where he was chairman of the students’ representative council, he assumed leadership and developed the critical way of thinking which would later cause him to make crucial choices. On an ecclesiastical and spiritual level he proclaimed his message clearly and distinctly. He was prepared to endure vilification for the principles he believed in and for his tireless vigour in the fight against apartheid.

Few people experience the privilege, like he did, to see in their time the changes to which he devoted himself. It is a pity that, due to his advanced age, he was unable to play a more active role in the new South Africa. He continued to be a symbol of reconciliation between races. As far as the healing process is concerned, it was of great significance that Dr Beyers Naudé was accepted back into and honoured by various institutions in society with which there had been a split, as was the case with the Dutch Reformed Church.

For this reason it was also good that he was honoured at many levels. This serves as an example to us as South Africans of what we can achieve in this country should we rise above ourselves. South Africa has lost a great builder of bridges, someone who wanted to convey values and who was not focused on personal power, honour or high positions.

We honour his memory. Thank you.]

Mr H J BEKKER: Madam Deputy Speaker, the IFP would like to associate itself with the sentiments expressed about the late Dr Beyers Naudé. Our hearts go out to Tannie Ilse and the Naudé family with the passing of one of South Africa’s greatest sons.

The long walk to freedom of Dr Mandela was indeed shared by this remarkable white Afrikaner. He was a man, a theologian, who, despite being indoctrinated with the wrong philosophy and religious values, rebelled against them and, on his own, led a singular revolution against his peers. He was a man of principle who stood up against evil, despite knowing the consequences of banishment from his own community and from the church of which he was a leader and moderator.

As Afrikaner is ek vandag trots dat hy ons kon voortgaan. Die voorbeeld van oom Bey behoort in Afrikanergeledere nagestreef te word, en ons hoop dat die nageslagte en die geskiedenis aan oom Bey en tannie Ilse daardie spesiale plek en staanplek in die geskiedenis sal gee. Wanneer ek in Beyers Naudérylaan in Northcliff ry, daar digby die NG-gemeente in Northcliff waarin hy sy laaste dae deurgebring het voor hy verban is, dan salueer ek ’n groot gees van die Afrikanerdom. Ons eer jou, oom Bey! (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[As an Afrikaner, I am proud today that he could lead the way. The example of Oom Bey should be emulated amongst Afrikaners, and we hope that posterity and history will grant that special place and position in history to Oom Bey and Tannie Ilse. When I drive down Beyers Naudé Drive in Northcliff, close to the Dutch Reformed congregation in Northcliff where he spent his last days before being banned, then I salute a great spirit of Afrikanerdom. We salute you, Oom Bey!]

Hamba kahle! [Rest in peace, Oom Beyers.]

Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Sadly, we have lost another wonderful contributor to our democracy. We sadly grieve the loss of Dr Beyers Naudé of the ANC. As he retires from our victory, he must know that he shall be greatly missed. South Africa salutes him for all his efforts and contribution to where we are today.

The MF conveys its condolences to all bereaved family members, friends, loved ones and especially the ANC, on the loss of Dr Beyers Naudé. Dr Beyers Naudé, may you rest in peace, and may the Almighty place you in the greatest seat in heaven, as a man of worth and of his word.

Almighty, give the bereaved the strength to overcome this difficult period, and guide South Africa to being a true democracy and a God-fearing nation. Thank you.

Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Deputy Speaker, this morning’s passing away of Dr Beyers Naudé closes one of the most remarkable chapters in the life of a man who broke ranks when it was treacherous to do so. Azapo joins the family and friends of “Oom Bey”, as he was popularly known, in mourning as well as celebrating the life of this gallant soldier and campaigner for human dignity and freedom.

We will remember him as a very determined and yet very religious and humble servant of God. Beyers Naudé understood very well the biblical teaching that all men are born equal before God. As a result, he stood up and practised what God commanded him to do until this morning.

To Azapo, Dr Beyers Naudé was not just another Afrikaner who was born into a society which accorded him better privileges than blacks, but was one of those who were not part of the problem, but part of the solution. For the love of humanity, he gave his life for a free and democratic South Africa.

Those of us who were in the leadership of Saso and the BPC in the seventies will remember the many sacrifices he made by assisting us with resources, including the hiring of cars and kombis to enable us to carry on with the struggle for freedom. He has been an inspiration to many freedom-loving people all over the world. Azapo wishes to offer its deepest-felt condolences to his family and friends. May his soul rest in peace. [Applause.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Deputy Speaker, the UCDP noted with sadness the passing away of Dr Beyers Naudé. We would like to take this opportunity to express our condolences to his immediate family, friends and associates. His death should remind us of the importance of nation-building across colour and of interdenominational unity.

During his lifetime, he was one of the few religious leaders who stood up against the unjust apartheid government that sought to justify the evils of the ungodly and unchristian apartheid system. He spoke openly about equality and all humans being created in the image of God, irrespective of race.

To him, blacks and whites were the same, irrespective of colour, and what made them different had nothing to do with their birth rights. Indeed, during those tough years he dedicated his life to helping create a nonracial society. Today we say to Oom Beyers, you have achieved your task which God mandated you to carry out. We do not only have a democratic and free South Africa, you have made us understand the role and importance of the church in the community and how it can protect the weak and the poor. We say to you: “Robala kakagiso, oom Beyers” [rest in peace, oom Beyers].

Mnr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Mev die Adjunkspeaker, dit is met hartseer dat ons afskeid neem van dr Beyers Naudé. Ons voeg ons stem by almal wat vandag hulde bring aan hierdie man wie se naam sinoniem geword het met die totstandkoming van ʼn nie-rassige samelewing in ons land. Hy was een van die groot kampvegters vir die afskaffing van apartheid, en sy bydrae tot die daarstelling van ’n samelewing waar die kleur van jou vel nie jou waarde as mens bepaal nie, is prysenswaardig. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is with sadness that we bid farewell to Dr Beyers Naudé. Today we add our voice to those who are paying tribute to this man whose name has become synonymous with the establishment of a nonracial society in our country. He was one of the great champions of the abolition of apartheid, and his contribution to create a society where the colour of one’s skin does not determine one’s worth as a human being is commendable.]

He was a man who placed his country’s interests first and dedicated most of his life to bringing about racial reconciliation in South Africa. It is because of great men and women like Beyers Naudé that we are privileged today to live in a nonracial society.

Gedurende die apartheidsjare was dit mense soos Beyers Naudé wat die hoop lewend gehou het dat Suid-Afrika eendag ’n tuiste sal wees vir wit, swart, bruin en Indiër, sonder enige vorm van diskriminasie. Die pad wat Beyers Naudé gestap het, was nie maklik nie en hy moes baie opofferings maak. Hy is selfs deur sy eie mense verstoot, maar niks het hom van stryk gebring om te help bou aan dit waarin hy geglo het nie. Hy sal altyd onthou word as een van die groot helde in ons land se geskiedenis. Ons innige simpatie aan sy gesin, familie en vriende. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[During the apartheid years it was people like Beyers Naudé who kept the hope alive that someday South Africa would be a home for white, black, coloured and Indian, without any form of discrimination. The road that Beyers Naudé travelled was not an easy one and he had to make many sacrifices. Even his own people ostracised him, but nothing stopped him from contributing to that in which he believed. He will always be remembered as one of the great heroes in our country’s history. We express our deepest sympathy to his family, relatives and friends. Thank you.]

Mr L M GREEN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to align myself with the words of former President Nelson Mandela, when he said the following of Dr Beyers Naudé, also affectionately known as “Oom Bey”, on his eightieth birthday, and I quote:

Dr Beyers Naudé has reached his fourscore years, proving to us yet again that he is a man of strength. His is a strength of body and of mind, and of that indomitable spirit that defied the evil of apartheid to make him a hero of our people.

Beyers Naudé became an outcast amongst the Afrikaners, amongst many whites and amongst the church that he loved. Such is the price that prophets are required to pay. His life is a shining beacon to all South Africans, both black and white. It demonstrates what it means to rise above race, to be a true South African. If someone asks me what kind of person a new South African should be, I will say, take a look at Beyers and his wife Ilse.

It is with these words that I, on behalf of the ACDP, along with many others in this House and in this nation, would like to pay tribute to Oom Bey.

In 1963 Dr Beyers Naudé resigned as moderator of the DRC and founded the Christian Institute, an ecumenical organisation to pursue reconciliation through interfaith dialogue. Beyers Naudé spoke out against the rising tide of black violence, as well as against the apartheid system.

He was a committed Christian leader who stood against the tide. He will always be remembered as a patriotic and an unselfish Christian leader, a man who was prepared to pay the price for a free, democratic and nonracial South Africa. Oom Bey, we pay tribute to you today. We salute you for your courage. Our deepest sympathy goes to the family and friends of Beyers Naudé. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr V C GORE: Madam Deputy Speaker, the ID would like to associate itself with the motion and sentiments expressed in this House today. The passing of Beyers Naudé is indeed a sad moment for all South Africans in the whole of this country. We have lost a father and a guiding light.

Oom Bey will be remembered for his commitment to human rights and his unassuming and humble manner. He took a stand and continued to take a stand on basic rights, particularly at times when it was unfashionable, often making huge sacrifices for himself and his family.

To me as a young South African, he is an icon of the struggle against apartheid in this country. He was passionate about South Africa and all its people. He set an example to all South Africans to follow, and was committed to human rights, simplicity and dignity. On behalf of the ID, I would like to extend our heartfelt condolences to Tannie Ilse and her family. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Mev die Adjunkspeaker, in die vroeë oggendure is een van Suid-Afrika se groot seuns, dr Beyers Naudé, die beminde oom Bey, oorlede. Hy was ’n nederige, beginselvaste persoon met oneindige integriteit wat nooit eer en erkenning gesoek het nie, maar dit deur sy optrede en dade verdien het. Hy is ’n ikoon vir alle Suid-Afrikaners, oor rasse-, taal-, geslags- en klassegrense heen. Hy was ’n studenteleier, ’n kerkleier, ’n vryheidsvegter en ’n gesinsman. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, in the early morning hours one of South Africa’s great sons, Dr Beyers Naudé, the beloved Oom Bey, passed away. He was a humble, principled person with endless integrity who never sought honour and recognition, but earned it through his conduct and actions. He is an icon for all South Africans across racial, language, gender and class boundaries. He was a student leader, a church leader, a liberation fighter and a family man.]

He was named after an Afrikaner rebel, Genl C B Beyers. Maybe he himself was destined to become a rebel – a rebel who at one stage became the youngest member of the Afrikaner Broederbond, from which he resigned after 22 years.

As a Dutch Reformed Church minister, he became the moderator of the Southern Transvaal synod in 1961. He established the Christian Institute to unite Christians of all ethnic groups, and was editor of its newspaper, Pro Veritate.

His liberal and reconciliatory stance after the Sharpeville massacre resulted in him eventually losing his status as a minister and being excommunicated from the Afrikaner establishment. He received much recognition for his stance from various overseas countries and was honoured to be the first Afrikaner theologian to preach at Westminster Abbey. He was continually harassed by successive apartheid governments and was continually placed under house arrest.

Beyers Naudé, soos talle ander, het sy vryheid opgeoffer sodat ons vandag ’n vry en demokratiese, nie-rassige, nie-seksistiese Suid-Afrika kan wees. Hy het van homself gegee sodat ons kan ontvang. As ’n Afrikaner is hy verwerp terwyl hy die weg voorberei het sodat ons as Afrikaners ’n bydrae op die speelveld van die nuwe Suid-Afrika kan lewer. Hy het brûe tussen gemeenskappe gebou sodat ons die vrugte van ’n vreedsame oorgangsproses kon geniet. Hy het geloofwaardigheid aan die konsep van versoening verleen sodat swart, bruin en wit vandag kan hande vat op die pad van ’n verenigde Suid-Afrikaanse nasie. Die kerk wat hom verwerp het, het erken dat hy reg was en hulle verkeerd. Hy kon weer preek in sy geliefde Aasvoëlkopgemeente.

Die pad van eenwording tussen die Afrikaanse Gereformeerde Kerke kan in geen geringe mate nie aan hom toegeskryf word. Deur sy jare van verbintenis tot ’n regverdige bestel in Suid-Afrika, het sy gesin groot opofferinge gemaak. Aan sy eggenote van 64 jaar, tannie Ilse, hul kinders, kleinkinders en agterkleinkinders betuig ons ons opregte dank en meegevoel. Hul positiewe rol in sy lewe word opreg waardeer. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Beyers Naudé sacrificed his liberty, as did many others, in order for us to be a free and democratic, nonracial, nonsexist South Africa today. He gave of himself so that we may receive. As an Afrikaner he was rejected while preparing the way in order for us as Afrikaners to contribute on the playing field of the new South Africa. He built bridges between communities in order for us to enjoy the fruits of a peaceful transitional process. He gave credibility to the concept of reconciliation so that today black, brown and white can join hands on the path of a united South African nation. The church that rejected him acknowledged that he was right and they were wrong. He could preach again in his beloved congregation of Aasvoëlkop.

The road to unification among the Afrikaans Reformed Churches can be attributed to him in no small measure. Through his years of commitment to a fair dispensation in South Africa, his family sacrificed greatly. To his spouse of 64 years, Tannie Ilse, their children, their grandchildren and great-grandchildren, we express our sincere thanks and condolences. Their positive role in his life is truly appreciated.]

We pay tribute to a great South African, a great Christian, a hero of our revolution, someone who was blessed with those wonderful traits of resoluteness, steadfastness, integrity and compassion, whose contribution we will never forget. He was indeed the epitome of a true African. [Applause.]

Mr T GODI: Madam Deputy Speaker, the PAC joins the House in mourning the passing away of Dr Beyers Naudé. We wish to pass our heartfelt condolences and solidarity to his family, friends and comrades. He leaves a legacy of sincere commitment to his country, and a genuine love for justice and socioeconomic development.

Most of us had no choice regarding our participation in the liberation struggle because of our material conditions. Dr Naudé could, like most of his community, have chosen to live the sheltered life of white ignorance and indifference to the anguished cries and suffering of the African people. However, he took the noble road of struggle. He was a living example of a classless society. He fully identified with and became a part of the democratic majority.

His legacy is a challenge to white South Africans and a real test of their commitment to social justice and the fundamental transformation of South Africa in the interests of the majority. The reality is that, despite the exemplary life of Dr Beyers Naudé, there is still a significant portion of our white compatriots who have not shown commitment to the cause of the majority. Is it perhaps not time, on the occasion of the mourning and the celebration of Dr Naudé’s life and work, that a call is made to our white compatriots and their public representatives to hear the voice of the unemployed and marginalised and become part of the national agenda of transformation?

Dr Naudé has made his indelible contribution to our country. May his example be emulated. To him we say: go well, son of the soil; go well, son of Africa. Thank you. [Applause.]

Ms N C NKABINDE: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UDM extends its condolences to the Naudé family on the passing away of Dr Beyers Naudé. Words cannot adequately express the deep regret and sympathy that we feel.

For countless people Dr Beyers Naudé was a father, a spiritual beacon, a comrade and a true leader. He will forever be remembered as an icon of the people’s struggle. It is because of him and his efforts, together with those of millions of South Africans, that we can celebrate our freedom today. He still remains an inspiration to young men and women all over the country. We salute his courage and will always celebrate and cherish his memory and his contribution.

Dr Beyers Naudé was a pioneer in breaking away from the Broederbond and denouncing apartheid. As we bid him farewell, we cannot help but notice that the very political party that demonised him has now joined the ANC. Beyers Naudé was not rewarded with high political rewards, but he must be commended for playing a leading role in the political process that resulted in the downfall of the architects of apartheid. Dr Beyers Naudé demonstrated profound moral strength which recognised that the value of each and every human being can never be less than or inferior to a political ideology.

May Almighty God be with his family as they mourn this great loss. I thank you. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The condolences of the House will be conveyed to the family of Dr Naudé.

Debate concluded.

Motion agreed to.

           NEW IDENTITY, SYMBOL AND IMAGE OF KWAZULU-NATAL


                         (Draft Resolution)

Rev M S KHUMALO: Deputy Speaker, I hereby move without notice:

That the House –

 1) applauds the new identity, new symbol and new image for
    KwaZulu–Natal (KZN), captured by the new coat of arms which was
    unveiled last Friday;

 2) is encouraged by the strategic and mature leadership shown by the
    broad-based KZN government and legislature;

 3) trusts that this new identity is already imprinted in the hearts of
    the people of KZN;

 4) notes that peacemakers and peace lovers are excited with the new
    focus;

 5) notes that KZN is endowed with cultural and natural beauty; and

 6) wishes that the spirit of the new identity gives the poor, the
    unemployed and those infected and affected by HIV and Aids greater
    hope.

Agreed to.

                         MEMBERS’STATEMENTS

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before we come to members’ statements, we have with us Councillor T Palane and his wife from KwaZulu-Natal. Thank you for joining us in the House. [Applause.]

Before I go to the Order Paper, I am told that there is a technical problem. The Order Paper today is dated 1 September instead of 7 September. Everything else on the Order Paper is correct. The speakers’ lists and everything else are correct. Someone probably wanted to type 7 and typed 1, but that will be corrected. Members will be pardoned today for using this Order Paper. We are trying by all means to be with the times, but today we have this technical problem.

                   CITY OMBUDSPERSON FOR CAPE TOWN

                        (Member’s Statement)

Mr L M DIALI (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, the ANC welcomes the decision by the City of Cape Town to set up an Office of the City Ombudsperson. This is a welcome step, as it will contribute to improving service to the people of the city. Access to public service by the people of the city is not a privilege, but the right of all citizens. Putting people first is the cornerstone of our service delivery to the people. We call on our people fully to utilise the services rendered by this new office.

The ANC calls on our people to report all those public servants who ill- treat them. People must continue to strengthen the ward committees and other democratic structures for accountability. I thank you. [Applause.]

                           FLOOR-CROSSING


                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms H ZILLE (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, floor-crossing is a feature of most developed democracies, because it allows public representatives to cross the floor on matters of principle in order to uphold the mandate from their voters. In our country it is being used for different reasons to enable members, primarily of the NNP, to abandon their voters’ mandate and undertake a mass migration to the feeding troughs of power and patronage in the ANC. [Interjections.]

The only good thing that can be said is that the remains of the NNP will now cease to be a feature of our politics. [Interjections.] The serious negative is that the way floor-crossing is managed here, over 14 days each year, requiring a 10% minimum of any caucus, effectively clears the deck for a one-party state. This is what it is intended to achieve, and it will be a disaster for South Africa.

For this reason we are extremely gratified that so far 42 councillors have resisted the lure of patronage politics, have decided to build the ranks of a strong, principled and effective opposition, and are becoming part of the DA’s team of over 1 020 councillors. Thank you. [Applause.]

                             VIGILANTISM


                        (Member’s Statement)

Mr V B NDLOVU (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, a very worrying situation seems to be developing, where communities are taking the law into their own hands to deal with alleged criminals by using their own illegal systems or ways. Some of the methods used by communities in dealing with these alleged criminals include stoning, beating and necklacing them as methods of capital punishment. These forms of punishment are all reminiscent of the 1980s.

We need to find out why the people are taking the law into their own hands instead of letting the criminal justice system deal with the matter in a legal manner. Have these communities lost their faith in the criminal justice system, or have our security forces lost touch with the communities that they are meant to protect? These are just some of the questions that we need to answer if we want to put a stop to these illegal justice systems that seem to be developing.

We therefore urge the relevant authorities, as well as community leaders, to work together in order to find the solution needed to address this problem, and to restore people’s faith in the criminal justice system. I thank you.

                   FLOOR – CROSSING BY DA MEMBERS


                        (Member’s Statement)

Mr B W KANNEMEYER (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is clear that members of the DA have become disillusioned with the direction of that party. In the Langeberg municipality, an ANC councillor made a sworn affidavit to the SA Police Service about an offer of deputy mayorship, as well as R50 000 in cash, by a representative of the DA. [Interjections.]

The DA also forced all their councillors in this municipality to sign letters resigning from the council on the eve of the window period. [Interjections.] When one of them refused to comply, he was called to a disciplinary hearing, and he had to get court intervention to prevent the DA from letting him exercise his constitutional right. [Interjections.]

In the Knysna municipality, the former DA mayor and the deputy mayor, who was also the branch chairperson of the DA, have decided to leave their party, because they believe that the DA has totally moved away from the liberal values once held and defended by the PFP and the DP.

They also believe that a number of DA public representatives are uncomfortable with the right-wing direction that the DA has taken, and that has become the dominant force in the DA, making it impossible for the last remaining patriots in the party to make a constructive contribution to our country.

We call on the DA to respect the Constitution of this country and allow their members, who are tired of the right-wing leadership of Theuns Botha in this province, to leave the party and cross the floor, and to leave in the same way that the hon Helen Zille left the provincial legislature to get away from Theuns Botha. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

                BETTER SALARY INCREASES FOR TEACHERS


                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms S N SIGCAU (UDM): Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UDM supports teachers in their call for better salaries. Teachers have not received the same sort of salaries and increases that have been awarded to other public servants over the past few years. It is therefore our belief that teachers must be viewed as a special case in the current wage negotiations between government and the Public Service unions.

It is worth remembering that these are the people that we entrust with nurturing future generations. Teachers are intimately involved in the national effort to build a sustainable democracy and economy. We need to pay teachers better to attract and retain the brightest and the best.

Some of the biggest obstacles to the growth and development of our country is illiteracy and a lack of skills. We cannot hope to overcome these obstacles with underpaid teachers. Therefore the UDM urges government to completely restructure teacher compensation so as to effect a salary and benefits package improvement of at least 7%, to bring teachers on par with other public servants and acknowledge their importance to society as a whole.

Aside from the special case of teachers, the overall principle of wage increase moderation must continue to be applied in order to keep inflation in check. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

JOHANNESBURG+2 CONFERENCE REPRESENTS RENEWED COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENTATION OF WSSD GOALS

                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms C B JOHNSON (NNP): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Johannesburg+2 Conference, which was held last week, was a renewed commitment to the implementation of the WSSD goals. Two years have passed since the Johannesburg Summit, and we as South Africans need to ask ourselves what progress we have made in implementing these goals.

The departments that participated at Johannesburg+2 should be commended for their successes thus far. At our present rate of delivery with regard to water, our government is not only on track to meet the targets, but also to eradicate the existing backlog in infrastructure for water by 2008.

On housing delivery, the programme is well advanced, delivering 1,5 million houses thus far. On energy, we have diversified our energy resources and we are exploring gas, wind, hydroelectric and solar power; we are well within our target of reaching that.

We have also made great progress on the environmental front. That, to me, Madam Deputy Speaker, shows us three very important things: Firstly, that sustainable development can only be achieved if one looks at it transversally and crossdepartmentally; secondly, that South Africa is well on its way to meeting its WSSD targets; and thirdly, that this government is delivering the goods. I thank you. [Applause.]

                RENAMING OF STREETS IN POTCHEFSTROOM


                        (Member’s Statement)

Dr P W A MULDER (VF Plus): Geagte Voorsitter, die VF Plus stel voor dat die Parlement in Erfenismaand hom uitspreek en beleid formuleer oor die geskiedenis van die verskillende gemeenskappe, sodat dorp- en straatname in Suid-Afrika bewaar kan word.

Die VF Plus het nie beswaar as nuwe stadsrade nuwe ontwikkelinge of strate vernoem nie. Die VF Plus het egter wel ernstige beswaar as historiese name wat groot waarde vir sekere gemeenskappe het, verander word ter wille van verandering.

In Potchefstroom stel die ANC-stadsraad tans voor dat straatname wat uit die Voortrekkertyd en die Anglo-Boereoorlogtyd dateer, en wat vir die Afrikaner-gemeenskap baie waarde het, gewysig moet word. In Potchefstroom is aktiewe politici en omstrede persone in die verlede op ’n berekende manier juis nie vernoem nie, omdat die geskiedenis geleer het dat sulke name deur ’n volgende politieke groepering weer verander word. Hierdie beleid word nou gewysig. Dit beteken dat al die nuwe name oor 10 jaar, wanneer ’n nuwe politieke groepering soos byvoorbeeld die PAC, aan bewind kom, weer gewysig sal moet word. [Tussenwerpsels.] Maak dit 12 jaar as jy wil.

Behalwe vir die miljoene rande wat so ’n verandering vir die stadsraad en die private sektor kos, wis dit ook ’n gedeelte van die stad se geskiedenis uit. Die oorhaastige en onoordeelkundige verandering van historiese dorp- en straatname in Suid-Afrika soos dit tans in Potchefstroom gedoen word, is besig om steeds groter polarisering en verwydering tussen gemeenskappe te veroorsaak wat tot niemand se voordeel is nie. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)

[Dr P W A MULDER (FF Plus): Hon Chairperson, the FF Plus proposes that during Heritage Month Parliament should express itself and formulate a policy on the history of the various communities, in order that town and street names in South Africa can be retained.

The FF Plus has no objection if new town councils name new developments or streets. However, the FF Plus has serious objections if historic names which are of great value to certain communities are changed simply for the sake of change.

At present the ANC town council in Potchefstroom is suggesting that street names dating from the time of the Voortrekkers and the Anglo-Boer War, and which are of great value to the Afrikaner community, should be changed. In the past, streets in Potchefstroom were not named after active politicians and controversial persons on purpose, because history had shown that such names would be changed again by a subsequent political group. This policy is now being changed. This means that in 10 years’ time, when a new political group, for example the PAC, comes into power, all the names will have to be changed again. [Interjections.] Make it 12 years if you want to.

Apart from the millions of rands that such a change costs the town council and the private sector, it also eradicates a part of the city’s history. The hasty and injudicious changing of historic town and street names in South Africa, as is being done in Potchefstroom at present, is causing greater polarisation and distance between communities, which is not to anyone’s advantage. I thank you.]

     ANC WELCOMES EFFORTS TO EASE PLIGHT OF POOR IN WESTERN CAPE


                        (Member’s Statement)

Mnu M R SONTO (ANC): Sekela-Somlomo, umbutho wesizwe, u-ANC, uyawamkela umpoposho owenziwe nguMphathiswa weMicimbi yaManzi naMahlathi, uMphathiswa uSonjica, ehambisana noSodolophu weSixeko saseKapa uNksz Nomaindiya Mfeketo, wokuba baza kuphucula imeko yabantu bakuthi abahluphekileyo, abahlala ezilokishini nasematyotyombeni.

Le nquleqhu yenzelwa ukuba iSixeko saseKapa silwazi uluntu lwaso kwaneemfuno zalo. Kaloku lo masipala ubefudula ephantsi kolawulolwesandla se-DA esingananze mntu namfuno zakhe.[Uwele-wele.] Siyothulela umnqwazi inimba esike la maqobokazana ngexesha lezikhukhula neempuphuma kwezi veki ziphelileyo, nezibangele ukuba uMphathiswa enze uphando ngongcoliseko lwemifula, basinda abantu kwizifo ezosulelayo ngeli nyathelo. Unje ke urhulumente we-ANC ukubakhathalela nokubanyamekela abantu. Ngxatsho ke maqobokazana! Ndiyabulela. [Kwaqhwatywa.] The ANC welcomes efforts to ease the plight of the poor in the Western Cape. (Translation of Xhosa member’s statement follows)

[Mr M R SONTO (ANC): Deputy speaker, the ANC welcomes the announcement tabled by the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry, hon Minister Sonjica, together with the Cape Town City Mayor, Nomaindiya Mfeketo, that they will improve the lives of poor people living in townships and informal settlements.

This effort is made in order for the City of Cape Town to know the needs of its people. This municipality was previously under the management of the Democratic Alliance that did not care about people and their needs. [Interjections.] We take our hats off to these ladies for the compassionate manner in which they dealt with an unfortunate disaster situation involving floods that occurred during the past few weeks, which prompted the hon Minister to do some research about the pollution of rivers, as a result of which people were saved from contracting infectious diseases. The ANC-led government takes care of its people. Well done, ladies! I thank you. [Applause.] ]

     URGENT APPLICATION TO STOP PUBLICATION OF MAIL AND GUARDIAN

                        (Member’s Statement)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Deputy Speaker, a manager in the NCOP, an official, brought an unsuccessful urgent application in the Pretoria High Court to stop the publication of the Mail and Guardian at midnight last Thursday. That newspaper alleged that certain MPs had failed to make proper disclosures in terms of the code of ethics.

The applicant stated that he was acting on the instructions of the Speaker, the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP and Mr Andries Nel, ANC Deputy Chief Whip.

It was not the interests of Parliament that were at stake: it was the interests of Chairperson Kgoali, Chief Whip Goniwe and other MPs that counted. Using the power of Parliament to protect themselves was an abuse of office. These persons must personally pay the legal costs out of their own pockets, and they must not expect the people of South Africa to fund such a blatant abuse of power. [Applause.]

          INCREASE OF SEX WORKERS IN DURBAN AND CHATSWORTH


                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms S RAJBALLY (MF): Deputy Speaker, we are extremely worried about the increase of sex workers in the Durban-Chatsworth area. It is an even bigger concern that some of these sex workers are very young.

It has further been reported that some of these sex workers come from affluent homes and turn to sex work for fun and extra spending money. We cannot express how big a concern this is. Young girls are reportedly coming to school with spare clothing and after attending a few classes, abscond to perform sex work.

Drug money and poverty are among the reasons which make these ladies turn to sex work. We call for earnest assistance from the government, the community, schools and parents to stop and prevent the growth of this sex work industry. This does not only kill the moral fibre of our community, but also works towards the spread of HIV and Aids and other diseases. Further, these young ladies need to be aware of realities and consequences. There is so much potential for being more useful to the community than to engage in sex work. Thank you.

                            BANK CHARGES


                        (Member’s Statement)

Mrs R R JOEMAT (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, the ANC welcomes the statement of the Governor of the SA Reserve Bank on bank charges. This comes in the wake of a report released by a task team commissioned by the National Treasury and the SA Reserve Bank, which highlights the uncompetitive behaviour of the banking sector.

More than half of the South African population does not participate in the economy because they cannot afford the hefty bank charges levied by the banking community to run savings accounts. This behaviour of the banks makes savings by the South African poor only a dream that will never be fulfilled. We must promote a culture of saving among the citizens of our country and can ill-afford to have institutional mechanisms and rules that discourage South Africans from saving their money. We need to remind ourselves that when we save, we as individuals, families and the nation as a whole, achieve bigger investment goals.

South Africans pay banks charges that far exceed those in several countries, including, among others, Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Canada, to cite a few examples. Our banking sector is not at all competitive. Thank you. [Applause.]

             DISMISSAL OF 13 SAFM SPECIALIST PRESENTERS


                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD (DA): Madam Speaker, South Africans have read today about the mass axing of 13 specialist presenters from the English public broadcaster, SAFM. This situation came to my attention at the weekend. The ineffectual and unfounded excuses given by the spokesperson of the SABC, Paul Setsetse, about public service mandates, presumably giving the corporation the excuse to wipe out the remnants of what was once the most aspirational radio station in the country, just do not wash.

This country has to make up its mind what it expects from a public service broadcaster. Are we looking for finely-honed programmes, meticulously researched and informative to the nth degree, or are we to allow ourselves to be fobbed off with the endless dumbing down to the level of the lowest common denominator “Eddie-from-Ficksburg broadcasting phone-ins” now proferred? The listeners are switching off in droves.

As a nation, we rejoice in the crafting of our diverse national languages. Yet, somehow, any attempt to preserve the English language has now been ranked right up there with the grossest of atrocities. When one hears that Barry Ronge’s column in the Sunday Times magazine is now dumbed down as a matter of course, it’s a reflection of a terrible twist this country has taken, where it seems it has become an outrage for our citizens to dare expect the best.

I know full well that if I ask the station manager of Ukhozi FM, Bhodloza Nzimande, to dumb down the use of IsiZulu on his station, his reaction would be unprintable. [Applause.]

                      CELEBRATION OF DIVERSITY


                        (Member’s Statement)

Ms C N Z ZIKALALA (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, there are people from many different parts of our country who all have different and unique backgrounds and cultures. This diversity is what makes us such a unique and special nation, and helps us forge our own identity. It is this diversity that unifies and binds us together as a nation and makes us so proudly South African.

The IFP believes that our country’s disparate voices and constituencies are a source of pride and should be accommodated. This is the essence of pluralism and of building one nation.

Traditional leadership is also part of our heritage and the social fibre of the rural community. Our traditional leaders are the proud custodians of traditional values and are an integral part of what binds us as a South African nation - so are our languages, music, dance and rituals. We are all proudly South African and should not only practise tolerance and diversity, but we should actively embrace, appreciate and celebrate them. This is our heritage.

   SOUTH AFRICAN ACTS SHINE AT INTERNATIONAL PREMIER ARTS FESTIVAL


                        (Member’s Statement)

Mr L ZITA (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, on the occasion of Heritage Month, the ANC welcomes the contribution that South Africans, both individually and collectively, make in various fields, especially in the field of arts and culture.

Two South African groups, the Soweto Gospel Choir and Amajuba, represented our country in the International Premier Arts Festival in Scotland. The Edinburgh Festival, as it is known, is by far the largest gathering of this kind in the world. The two South African groups dazzled the crowd in the Scottish capital and outshone their counterparts from other countries who took part in the festival.

There were 15 000 performances and the South Africans came out tops. Amajuba and the Soweto Gospel Choir received top ratings from all the arts critics from around the world who were present at the festival.

South Africans continue to earn respect and recognition from the international community not because we impose ourselves, but because of our excellent talent and contribution to the positive things that unite the people of the world, acting with respect and humility. Thank you. [Applause.]

           GOVERNMENT’S OFFER TO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES


                        (Minister’s Response)

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Deputy Speaker, I think it is very important for hon members to familiarise themselves with the offer that Government has put forward in the Public Service Bargaining Council. The comments that have been made with respect to the offer that relates to educators, in fact, do not address the true status of the offer that is in the chamber.

Firstly, it is important to state that the totality of the sum available is over R20 billion, which is a significant amount of money put forward by government; secondly, we must also note that there has been an improved offer to the level of 6% that has been placed before the unions represented in the bargaining chamber.

Finally, I would like to say that the particular concerns of educators with respect to the matter of pay progression, which the hon member referred to, that is, the improvement of the remuneration of these professionals, has indeed been addressed by the provision of a sum of R500 million, thereby ensuring that a percentage beyond the 6% currently on offer is indeed provided by the state. The provision of a homeowner’s allowance further improves the amount that government has made available.

I therefore think it is vitally important that hon members do acknowledge that there is an offer, which we believe is a fair offer, in the bargaining council and that indeed the concerns of educators are being addressed and will continue to be addressed. I thought it important that we put this before this House. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I thought the half-hour wasn’t up. There is still a member from the DA who is ready, willing and able to make another statement. You asked for ministerial responses without looking in this direction.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, no, I did look in that direction. I even had to cut the ANC list, because the rule is that we should take 14 statements, and I came to the end of the 14. There are members of the ANC who were also willing to participate, but unfortunately they could not. So I actually did look in that direction.

I think you can’t doubt the size of my eyes. I can’t miss that, but thank you very much, hon member. The member will be ready for the next day we have statements. [Interjections.]

                          FLOOR - CROSSING


                        (Minister’s Response)

USEKELA-MPHATHISWA WEZOBUGCISA NENKCUBEKO: Sekela-Somlomo, enkosi kakhulu ndiyabulela. Ndifuna nje ukuchaphazela indawo ebiphakanyiswe liQela eliPhikisayo, i-DA, malunga nomba wokuwelela kwamanye amaqela. Ndifuna ukubakhumbuza ukuba isigqibo sokuwelela kwamanye amaqela sasithathwe apha, yile Palamente. Mabangayilibali loo nto.

Indawo yesibini, xa bejonge amanye amazwe babona umahluko. Awukho umahluko phakathi koMzantsi Afrika namanye amazwe ngokubhekisele kwindlela ekuwelwa ngayo ngumntu esuka kwelinye iqela esiya kwelinye. Ngaphezulu, elo lilungelo elikuMgaqo-siseko walapha. Xa ubani efuna ukuzibandakanya nelinye iqela angenjenjalo.

Mabangalibali ukuba bawuxhasa nabo lo mthetho. Akuzange kubekho ngxaki. Savumelana apha sonke. Enkosi. [Kwaqhwatywa.] Translation of Xhosa Minister’s follows.)

[The DEPUTY MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Deputy Speaker, thank you very much. I want to touch on a point raised by the opposition party, the DA, in connection with floor crossing. I want to remind them about a position taken by this House concerning floor crossing. They should not forget that.

Secondly, when they look at other countries they see things differently. There is no difference between South Africa and other countries in relation to floor crossing. Furthermore, that right is stated in the Constitution of this country. If a member wants to cross over he can do so.

They must not forget that they supported this piece of legislation. There was no objection. We all agreed. Thank you. [Applause.] ]

                           HERITAGE MONTH


                             (Statement)

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I wish to inform the House that by agreement there will be no party responses to the statement, as parties will have an opportunity to express their views during the debate scheduled for 16 September 2004.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR ARTS AND CULTURE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker and hon members. The Ministry of Arts and Culture, together with members of the executive councils in the provinces that are responsible for arts and culture, invites the nation to participate in Heritage Month celebrations that will be taking place in this month, September, throughout the country.

The theme that has been adopted for three years is: “Celebrating our living heritage”, in other words, what we live. For the purposes of this year, which coincides with our tenth year of democracy, our theme is: “Celebrating our living heritage in the tenth year of our democracy”.

Living heritage, like any other human activity, emanates from time immemorial. It is a lived experience of the various communities. It is the totality of their experiences: the manner in which they deal with birth, coming of age, maturity, marriage, old age and death; the manner in which they celebrate these stages of human development; the manner in which they deal with poverty and destitution; how they build their economies; how they create their stability; how they co-exist with other communities, as well as their natural environment; how they narrate their stories; and how they sing and dance.

This year a different approach to Heritage Month and Heritage Day programmes for 2004 has been adopted. It was agreed to discontinue the national event, so to speak, that is usually characterised by a big event at the Union Buildings or any other venue.

The Department of Arts and Culture and provincial departments envisage a decentralised Heritage Month and Heritage Day that will see the provinces, municipalities and traditional leadership authorities playing a prominent role in the roll-out strategy, so that Heritage Month and Heritage Day have an impact at a community level, generating capacity to mobilise the South African public around the concept of living heritage. The Department of Arts and Culture and the provinces hope to use the theme as a springboard to achieve a bigger vision of collecting, preserving and promoting our living heritage.

In the first week, which is week one in which we are now, the subtheme is music, dance and theatre. Music and dance programmes designed not only to showcase music and dance performances, but also to link these to particular stories, events, ceremonies or rituals will characterise this week. This will also be an opportunity to demonstrate how music and dance performances have evolved over time in a multicultural society and how various cultures have mutually influenced one another – transculturation.

The Department of Arts and Culture is working with the Universities of Venda, Zululand and Fort Hare in the collection and preservation of indigenous music, dance and oral history. This week will present an opportunity to showcase the work that this project has yielded.

In the next week, week two, the subtheme is indigenous or traditional knowledge and practices. There is a tendency to exclusively associate indigenous or traditional knowledge and practices to the African section of our population. The production of food, medicines and ointments centuries ago is completely different from how they are produced today.

This is a common phenomenon among all the population groups, and there is a lot that we can share in terms of how our ancestors engaged in judicious farming methods, how they made fire, how they dug for gold and diamonds, how they conserved our environment, how they bred livestock, how they played the roles of midwives, how they brought up their young ones, how they used facials and traditional make-up, and so on.

In the third week, week three, the subtheme will be icons of South African cultural heritage and their stories. This week will be dedicated to profiling and interviewing individuals or discussing the achievements of individuals who have excelled in various aspects of living heritage. We have used the concept of icons in order to simplify the concept of living human treasures, which is the Unesco definition of the same concept.

Icons are people who have contributed through solid action towards the revitalisation of a cultural tradition that is at risk of disappearing owing to either lack of means for safeguarding and protection, or to the process of rapid change, urbanisation or acculturation. These are people who have demonstrated their role as a means of affirming the cultural expressions of the peoples and communities concerned, their importance as a source of inspiration and as a means of bringing peoples and communities closer together; and people who have provided proof of excellence in the application of skills and techniques and have affirmed their value as unique testimonies to living cultural traditions.

In the fourth week, the subtheme will be national dialogue on the role of living heritage in moral regeneration, social cohesion, poverty alleviation, nation-building, reconciliation and in forging a national identity. We intend holding a national dialogue on the aforementioned national imperatives. The main purpose is to simplify these imperatives for the entire South African citizenry and, further, to discuss the manner in which South Africa can actually realise these ideals.

For Heritage Day, 24 September, we will be dealing with restitution and the return of cultural property to original owners. The former anti-apartheid movement of the Netherlands, through the foundation for audiovisual productions on Southern Africa, African Skies, plans to return the Dutch anti-apartheid material to South Africa.

The anti-apartheid movement of the Netherlands has presented to the Department of Arts and Culture a catalogue consisting of video footage and productions. The catalogue consists of 189 hours of historically valuable video footage and 15 edited productions about support for the struggle against apartheid in the Netherlands and on the co-operation between the Dutch anti-apartheid movement and the liberation movements of South Africa.

South Africa, in turn, intends to return to Namibia archival and library material that has been kept in South Africa since after the First World War when Namibia, then South West Africa, became a mandated territory of South Africa.

Therefore on 24 September 2004, which is Heritage Day, the Department of Arts and Culture is planning a handover ceremony that will witness significant international reciprocal events in the form of the African Skies project that will see the Dutch handing over anti-apartheid archival material to the government of South Africa and, at the same time, the government of South Africa will be handing over the Namibian historical records stored in the archives of South Africa. These will be handed over to the Namibian government. The ceremony, which will involve Ministers of culture and the embassies, will take place at the National Cultural History Museum, the African Window, in Pretoria, which forms part of the Northern Flagship Institution.

We therefore call upon all members of Parliament, government departments, nongovernmental organisations, community-based organisations, the private sector and individual citizens to participate in the preservation and popularisation of our living heritage. Thank you. [Applause.]

                   PETROLEUM PIPELINES LEVIES BILL


                           (Introduction)

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Chairperson, the Bill before the House today provides that the regulatory authority may impose levies on petroleum transported in petroleum pipelines. The levies will be based on the volume of petroleum transported and are intended to cover the costs incurred in the exercise of oversight over the petroleum pipelines industry by the new regulatory authority.

The pipeline network, which is used to transport crude oil and petroleum products between the port of Durban, refineries, synthetic fuel producers and inland areas, is of strategic importance to the economy. The economy depends on the stable supply of liquid fuels and hence the ongoing effective operation of the petroleum pipeline and storage infrastructure.

To date, the state has managed the operation of much of the pipeline network. It has now become a possibility that the private sector may become active in the ownership and operation of petroleum pipelines. It is therefore necessary to introduce regulatory measures to ensure the efficient operation of the pipeline network and the orderly development thereof.

The Petroleum Pipelines Act, Act 37 of 2003, provides for the establishment of a regulatory authority as custodian and enforcer of the regulatory framework for the petroleum pipelines industry. In terms of section 12(b) of that Act, funding for the regulatory authority is derived, amongst other things, from levies imposed under separate legislation. The Petroleum Pipelines Levies Bill, 2003, seeks to achieve this aim.

The Bill also provides for the Minister of Minerals and Energy, with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance, to approve or disapprove the imposition or variation of levies and the determination of interest on overdue levies.

I introduce the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]

Bill referred to Portfolio Committee on Finance for consideration and report, the committee to consult the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy.

         NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Madam Deputy Chairperson, I would like to take this opportunity to add my own voice to those who have paid tribute today to the late Dr Beyers Naudé, a visionary Afrikaner clergyman and political activist. Dr Naudé’s contribution to South African nonracialism will stand as the beacon of his legacy to our new democracy.

Imagine waking up on a Monday morning with a sense of real discomfort. Imagine climbing out of bed, wondering why your chest is tight, your eyes are burning, and your lungs are struggling for air. Imagine opening your curtains and looking up into a morning sky, filled not with sunshine but blanketed by a huge cloud of smoke. This was the reality that greeted families in Durban South on the morning of 12 April this year.

Or imagine walking or driving down your street on a Sunday afternoon and feeling a fine mist falling from the sky. Imagine your concern and frustration when you realise that the mist is not a light drizzle, but is instead a shower of oil rain settling on your home, your car and your family. This was a reality on 4 July this year, when residents of Table View in Cape Town were sprayed with crude oil as it fell to earth after an accident at a nearby refinery.

Unacceptable concentrations of cancer-causing pollutants are being measured in and around South Africa’s industrial centres. Every winter our people cough and choke from breathing a vile cocktail of airborne pollution that remains trapped under the annual inversion layer in the sky. Every year our country spends more than R4 billion on health problems related to air pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels. This list of shame goes on and on.

We have a duty to end this intolerable situation and we have a responsibility to act. Our Constitution guarantees every South African the right to air that is not harmful to our health and wellbeing. We, as government, must protect and defend this right, taking the necessary legislative and enforcement steps to ensure that the air that we breathe is fit to breathe.

The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill is one of the most important pieces of environmental legislation yet to serve before this House. It links directly to our government’s efforts to build a caring society and to improve the lives of especially our poorest communities.

From the outset, though, I must stress that new laws do not make blue skies. No matter how well a law is constructed, no matter how detailed, no matter how cutting-edge, the passing of a law will not miraculously scrub our skies of the pollution that threatens our health, and even the global climate itself.

Our skies will turn blue only through the hard work and dedication of committed South Africans, effectively and efficiently making use of the tools provided by this new legislation. As a number of communities have shown us over the past few months, every South African in every community can be an air quality manager. We all have a critical role to play.

Before we turn to the specifics of this new air quality Bill, we should perhaps reflect on the gaps and failures of our existing legislation. Although these failures seem obvious when breathing the foul air in some parts of South Africa, we should recall that the current Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, Appa, was passed in 1965, decades before we knew anything about global climate change, ozone depletion, or poisonous persistent pollutants. Although the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act may have been adequate to manage air quality in one-industry towns, it has not kept pace with industrial development and is now hopelessly outdated.

The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill represents a quantum leap in air quality management legislation, especially when compared to the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act. The Act provides no standards, nor does it give real guidance about what we regard as air that is fit to breathe. The result is that there is no level playing field for industry and no targets for improvement.

In contrast, the new National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill provides for the setting of standards, both for the quality of air that we breathe, and for what may be released into that air. These standards will provide the benchmark for air quality management in all South African communities and will now be used to measure how effectively we are managing our air.

Another major improvement is the fact that the Bill uses ambient air quality, the air that we breathe, as its point of departure. As such, government will now be able to set tighter emission standards in areas where multiple emission sources are present. In contrast, the Atmopheric Pollution Prevention Act looked only at each individual smokestack without ever taking into account the combined impact of multiple emissions. This gap was one of the factors that allowed the development of air pollution hot spots around our country.

The National Environmental Management Act introduced the polluter-pays principle as far back as 1998, and the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill not only turns this into a reality with regard to air pollution, it takes the principle to a new level. Not only does this Bill provide for cost recovery, it also provides for both ambient and emission monitoring by industry itself.

Furthermore, this Bill has teeth. Gone will be the days of the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, when the only offence was to operate a listed activity without a licence. Under the Act the most severe penalty that could be imposed for conviction on a first offence was a mere R500 fine or up to six months’ imprisonment. For a second offence the fine limit was raised to the still-paltry level of R2 000 or one year in prison. The National Environment Management: Air Quality Bill provides stiff penalties for noncompliance, with fines up to the maximum allowed by the Criminal Procedures Act and jail sentences of up to 10 years.

The new Bill ensures that the punishment fits the crime - looking at the seriousness of the offence, the financial gain from the commission of the offence and the offender’s contribution to overall air quality problems in that specific area. The message is clear: polluters will no longer be able to get away with the equivalent of a slap on the wrist; they will be punished.

So what does this mean in practice? Simply put, polluters will no longer be able to hide among other polluters and point fingers at one another when ambient air is no longer fit to breathe. Ambient air quality monitoring and air quality modelling, coupled with stack-emission monitoring, will quickly identify the culprits. Once identified, the Bill provides various tools to reduce emissions. Furthermore, minimum emission standards will provide a far better baseline.

Just over a month ago I was joined by the full portfolio committee on a site visit to the South Durban industrial basin. It was a valuable experience, because it brought us face to face with people such as the parents of Junaid Ally, Maria Sundram and Ivan Moses – parents of children cursed with chronic asthma whose only offence was being born into families living side by side with heavy industry.

I wish to repeat today the warning to some industries in our country, especially to some of our refineries: It is past time to clean up your act. If your equipment and plants are outdated, if your technology is unsafe, recapitalise and replace now before it is too late. Don’t wait for accidents or incidents, because with our new air quality legislation you will be held accountable.

This Bill is a product of partnership. We are forging blue-sky partnerships to clean up our air. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the NGOs and communities involved for their dedication and commitment to the development of this Bill and the finalisation of this process. The passion demonstrated by the people of South Durban, Boipatong, Sasolburg, Secunda, Richards Bay and, here in Cape Town, Table View, will remain a driving force behind the effective implementation of this Bill. The blue skies of our future, across South Africa, will bear testimony to their determination.

We would also not have reached this point without the hard work and the foresight of the past and present portfolio committees, whose members enthusiastically involved themselves in lengthy presentations and technical debates, and also in heated discussions. The new committee has even visited pollution hot spots all over the country, seeing first-hand why this Bill is both urgent and important.

I would like to pay tribute to both the former chairperson, the hon Gwen Mahlangu, and the new chairperson, the hon Elizabeth Thabethe, as well as every member of their committees. As we cross the last remaining hurdles in the finalisation of this piece of legislation, we must ensure that the partnerships forged in its development must continue. As we said during the Budget Vote process earlier this year, our sons and daughters must no longer grow up under the impression that brown and grey are the natural colours of our South African skyline.

Net oor die implementering van hierdie wetgewing: hierdie wetgewing verteenwoordig nie net ’n paradigmaverskuiwing in wetgewing oor lugkwaliteitsbestuur nie, dit verander ook hoe ons die implementering daarvan gaan bestuur.

Verby is die dae waar nasionale amptenare, ver weg gestasioneer van die probleme, besluite neem wat die lewens van gemeenskappe wat hulle nog nooit ontmoet het nie, sal raak. Verby ook is die dae van amptenare sonder die nodige magte of kundigheid om nakoming en afdwinging van hierdie wetgewing te verseker. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Concerning the implementation of this legislation: This legislation not only represents a paradigm shift in legislation on air quality management, it also changes how we will manage the implementation thereof.

Gone are the days when national officials, who were stationed far away from the problems, took decisions that would affect the lives of communities whom they had never met. Gone also are the days of officials without the necessary powers or expertise to ensure compliance with and enforcement of this legislation.]

Our department, together with its provincial and local partners, is gearing up for implementation. In this implementation process, the technical aspects of air quality governance will be backed up by what the Deputy Minister refers to as the Green Scorpions - officials in all spheres of government trained as dedicated environmental management inspectors.

Although the Bill already contains a list of initial ambient air quality standards, a protocol for the setting of new standards has already been drafted, and an initial round of standard setting will commence before the end of this year. So, too, will the identification of hot spots for prioritised action, the listing of activities requiring atmospheric emission licences, and the listing of controlled emitters.

During the transition between Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, the old piece of legislation, and this new Bill, our department, together with affected provinces and local authorities, will be reviewing the existing Act permits of the problem polluters over the next six to eight months. I hope they take note. Apart from heralding our new approach to air quality management, this exercise will also be used to build hands-on expertise in our provincial and local authorities.

In conclusion, legislation such as this National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill is the reason South Africa is regarded as a global leader in environmental protection and sustainable development best practice. This Bill embodies our commitment to improving the lives of our people and strengthening the health of our shared future.

I can assure this House that this will not be the last time that we talk about air quality. Indeed, with standards providing a measure for performance, I’m committed to providing this House with up-to-date and accurate information on our progress, and the general state of the air in our country.

Let us together cast off the clouds, the fumes and the stench. Let us give to our children the gift of clean skies, deep breaths and lasting health. Thank you. [Applause.]

Ms E THABETHE: Madam House Chairperson, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers, hon members and invited guests present today, let me start by expressing our condolences, as the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism, on the sad loss to this country of our comrade and cleric, Dr Christian Beyers Naudé.

One of the Afrikaner voices against apartheid, Oom Bey, as he was affectionately known, sacrificed his family and freedom to stand against the unpopular apartheid regime. He was a hero to our cause and nation. I salute him for all his support and the contribution he made, which resulted in the democracy whose 10 years we are celebrating today. May his soul rest in peace! Hamba kahle, Oom Bey!

The introduction of this Bill signifies some of the major achievements of this government. After only 10 years in power, it has already identified the need for complying with international protocols and conventions that regulate and prescribe international standards in relation to the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill.

As outlined by the Minister just now, the discussion regarding the framework of the Bill or, for that matter, the National Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998, must commence with an examination of the various rights established in section 24 of the Bill of Rights, in the Constitution.

Two primary and separate rights are entrenched, namely the right established in section 24(a), that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; and the right established in section 24(b), that everyone has the right to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that prevent pollution and ecological degradation, promote conservation, and secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources, while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

The environment is not an exclusive area of national legislative or administrative competence. In this regard, it is important to note that part of the schedules and sections that we refer to are also going to give impact in terms of how the municipalities make or administer bylaws for the effective administration of the matters that they have the right to administer. To the extent set out in section 155(6)(a) and section 155(7) of the Constitution, air pollution is, in terms of Part B of Schedule 4, an area of concurrent national and provincial legislative competence.

As also outlined by the Minister, we will be dealing with the norms and standards, frameworks and national policies that will then provide a way of adhering to the standards, as outlined. Plainly, it is not only through the national and provincial framework determination of standards and subordinate regulatory structures that are enabled by the Bill that these objectives may be achieved. As with any framework instrument that creates and enables administrative and structures subordinate to it to perform, it must enable a complex set of regulations to be made, and empower the exercising of powers by various Ministers and MECs of the provinces to do what is required, as well as by local government.

Before exercising powers contained in some of these particular clauses, there is a vast area of consultation with the relevant Ministers if a certain clause needs to be implemented. So we are happy that that particular aspect will be looked at in terms of dealing with the broader issues.

Clause 54 provides that before exercising such powers, the Minister or MEC must give notice of the proposed exercise of the relevant power in the Gazette, as well as give notice in one of the newspapers. That will make sure that at least our public and communities are also taken on board, so that they are not only thought about when the Bill is not working.

The Minister or MEC may, in appropriate circumstances, allow any interested person or community to present oral representation or objections to the Minister or MEC, or a person designated by the Minister or MEC. The Minister or MEC must give due consideration to all representations or objections received or presented before exercising the power concerned, notwithstanding the fact that the board advises the Minister, and engages in consultative processes and then concurs with the Minister or the MEC.

On concerns regarding the licensing of listed activities as provided for in chapter 5, in terms of clause 21 of the Bill the Minister or MEC may publish, by notice in the Gazette, a list of activities which result in atmospheric emissions, and which the Minister or MEC reasonably believes have or are likely to have a significant detrimental effect on the environment, including health, social conditions, economic conditions, ecological conditions or cultural heritage.

In clause 33(1) the Bill provides that metropolitan and district municipalities are charged with implementing the atmospheric emissions licensing system referred to it in clause 22 and must, for this purpose, perform the function of a licensing authority as set out in this chapter and other provisions. While this is inconsistent with the policy of developing the power of local authorities, the practical question is whether all metropolitan or district municipalities have the technical and financial capacity to perform the functions. Indeed, at present, not all have the skills and capacity to take on the tasks. However, we think that, with the assistance of the department, they will be able to execute that particular duty very well.

The application of clause 33(2) has the potential of causing difficulties in the future. The law permits a delegation of the function of licensing authority to other organs of state besides the provincial one. It may, for example, be desirable that Johannesburg delegates its functions to Tshwane, or for Northern Cape as a province, in order to consolidate its function, to delegate some of the powers to the North West province - but only after consultation and not just to impose those functions.

Other concerns were addressed by the department and some of the portfolio committee members when we visited some of the hot spots. The result is that this builds administrators. In addition to being experts in the technologies and science to be applied, they will be required to be experts in administrative, civil and criminal law. In South Africa we have the required skills base available – at a cost. Unless there is a willingness to provide sufficient financial resources to employ the requisite skills, the objects sought to be achieved will fail.

Air quality, along with other environmental concerns, is a high strategic priority. The future health and development of South Africa is indeed dependent on the successful actualisation of the rights provided for in clause 24.

I support the Bill as it stands, without further amendments. It is urgent that the reforms introduced by it be put in place. The Bill establishes a sound and implementable framework for the rational and constitutional management of air quality, as contemplated in section 24(b) of the Constitution.

The real work necessary for the implementation of the Bill only commences once it is passed. It is then that the regulations, management plans, frameworks and standards will require final formulation. We look forward to participating in those processes with the department.

Lastly, I would like to thank the portfolio committee members, old and new, that I found in the committee, and the Minister and Deputy Minister for their co-operation. I would also like to thank the director-general, Dr Crispian Olver; the head of the section, Joanne Yawitch; Mr Lukey, Mr Mkhetheni and other staff members for explaining some of these difficult and complex issues to us.

We also appreciate the House Chairperson’s approval of the budget of the committee, though he was a bit reluctant to allow a larger delegation to go to these hot spots. From today, however, you will be aware that that is going to be a contributing factor in making sure that we do our oversight function and that we have a consensus agreement in terms of agreeing to the Bill. We hope to report back to this House soon.

I’m sure that in future you’ll be able to fund us for more oversight visits so that legislation will be much more understandable and members will get a better sense of the issues rather than to sit here in Cape Town and get very nice presentations, but at the end we are not able to make sense of what is being presented to us.

However, it was quite a useful trip. We hope that when we monitor the implementation in terms of the reduction of pollution and emissions, we will also get necessary assistance from the office of the House Chairperson in the form of agreeing to give us more funds.

Batho ba heso re re, re lebohile haholo ho ba ka Foreistata le ba ka Gauteng, mmoho le ba Kwazulu-Natal ba re neng re bua le bona. Ke tshepa hore kajeno ba mametse mme, ba a utlwa hore molaotheho ona oo re neng re tsamaya re bua ka ona, o tla qala ho sebetsa mme ditho tsa Ntlo ena di tla tjhaella puo ya rona monwna mmoho le letona la rona esitana le motlatsi wa hae, sepheo ele hore re tle re kgone ho sebetsa kaha molaotheho o a bolela hore maphelo a batho a lokela ho hlokomelwa.

Jwale, jwalo ka ha re tseba hore mmuso ona wa rona wa ANC o leka ka hohle hore o seke wa lebala batho mme, o ba hopole, hobane maphelo a bona re tlameha ho a lokisa a dule a le hantle, re tle re tsebe hore ha re kena mona re bua ka tsa molao, re dumellana le lona ha re le lebale. Jwale, ke tshepa hore ka morao ho dilemo tse leshome feela re le pusong, melao eo re e lokisang ke ya dilemo tse 40, tseo eleng kgale di fetistswe empa batho sa di natse.

Jwale he, rona ka re mofuta wa mmuso o hlabollang maphelo a batho, re re mamelang molaotheho ona, le o sebedise. Re sa tla kgutlela ho lona hape, re sebedisane mmoho le lona. Ke a leboha. [Ditlatse.] (Translation of Sotho paragraphs follows.)

[We say thank you very much to our people in the Free State, to those in Gauteng and to those who are in KwaZulu-Natal whom we have spoken to. I hope that they are listening today and that they can hear that this Constitution that we used to go around talking about will begin to function, and that the hon members of this House, the hon Minister and the hon Deputy Minister will endorse what we said. The aim is to enable us to function, as the Constitution outlines that the lives of the people must be taken care of.

Now, we know that our ANC-led government is trying by all means not to forget the people because we must mend people’s lives; when we come in here and talk about issues of law, we agree with you and we do not forget you. Now, after only 10 years of governance, we are amending 40-year-old laws that were passed a long time ago and that were not given any attention.

As we are the kind of government that improves people’s lives, we ask you to listen to this Constitution and make use of it. We will still get back to you and work together with you. Thank you. [Applause.]]

Mr G R MORGAN: Chairperson, hon members, the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill is long overdue. It is a welcome addition to an already impressive list of environmental laws that have been promulgated in recent years, and replaces the defunct Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act of 1965. It contributes, in part, to the increased realisation of the right contained in section 24 of our Constitution, that being the right to a clean environment.

There are a number of excellent provisions in this new law. Most notably are the nationally set standards with opportunities for stricter provincial and local standards, provision for both emission and ambient monitoring, and extensive opportunities for public involvement in all administrative decisions.

I do not wish to dwell too much on discussing these new provisions, as they have already been well covered by the Minister and the hon portfolio chairperson. I would rather concentrate on the implementation process. It is important that expectations surrounding this Bill are well managed. While this House and the citizens of this country, particularly those who live in pollution hot spots, look forward to cleaner air, this will not happen overnight.

It is important, therefore, that government remains in constant contact with affected communities and emitters about the timeframes for implementation. Pollution is an inevitable consequence of production. We can never aim for totally pollutionfree production, although we can aim, and should aim, to reduce pollution wherever possible, especially to levels that are not harmful to human health and the environment at large.

It is a reality in South Africa that our biggest emitters are also strategic players vital for the security of our economy. These include, amongst others, the oil refineries and Eskom. While these companies certainly do not have a right to jeopardise the health of South Africans, the implementation of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill must be done so as not to place an overly burdensome responsibility on these industries over too short a period.

During the establishment of the national framework for this legislation, it is imperative that the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism work closely with the Departments of Trade and Industry, Minerals and Energy and Local Government. With an oil price that is already in excess of $40 per barrel, government must be careful not to stress these industries to a level where the costs of compliance are necessarily passed on to the consumers, with the likely associated inflationary effects, or where industry is forced to cut jobs.

The DA is in principle fully in favour of emitters paying the full social cost of their production, and indeed for being accountable for emissions, but government must move at a pace that allows for the appropriate adjustment by business.

The provision for tighter emission standards and licensing by provincial and local authorities is welcomed, especially as it allows for increased local knowledge to inform important decisions. It will not be without its problems, though, and I urge the Minister to pay particular attention to the provisions for co-operative governance when it comes to the licensing of an emitter such as Eskom.

Eskom is a strategic national grouping, which operates with a single network. While it is understandable that a local authority issuing a permit to a particular Eskom power plant will want to take into consideration the needs of the local community, consideration will surely have to be given to the fact that electricity is generated in a particular place and subsequently transported, sometimes hundreds of kilometres, for consumption in other areas.

Therefore, although a particularly high burden is placed on the generating area, it is of strategic importance to the economy and sustainable livelihoods of many other areas. Some mechanism needs to exist to create a fairly standard licensing procedure for a company such as Eskom. The creation of unlevel playing fields in particular economic sectors must be monitored.

While I would like to reinforce the need for the local municipalities to make decisions based on the needs and circumstances of their particular areas, this is another area where co-operative governance between levels of government is important. Fortunately the minimum standards are set at national level, and the department must be commended on suggesting standards that are well within the World Health Organisation guidelines.

With this in mind, tighter provincial and local standards remain an option if necessary, but guidance should be sought by these authorities when considering tighter measures, as the implementation, even at local level, may have broader national consequences.

It is certainly not my intention to be soft on industry. Industry will have a legal duty to comply and must ultimately face the consequences. If prosecution is necessary, then that instrument must be used. Of course it must be used as a last resort. This legislation, without even using the courts, should encourage industry to find means to reduce their levels of pollution. In fact, even without this legislation, many industries have worked continuously to reduce emissions.

In Durban, Sapref has invested R480 million in environmental improvements, and has successfully reduced its emissions by 45%. Much of these improvements can be attributed to the tireless pressure of community activists in the South Durban basin. However, it is also a reflection of improved available technology.

Many industries find that the best available technology, despite requiring an initial capital expenditure, in fact reduces expenses in the long run, as production becomes more efficient. It is hoped that this legislation will further encourage industries to reduce their emissions, even to levels below which they are permitted for. However, for those industries that ultimately cannot meet the requirements or are not prepared to spend the necessary capital to improve their technology, or indeed intentionally flout the law, prosecution must follow. If need be, such industries must close down.

The department will no doubt seek to prosecute a few high-profile cases, and so it should, as it will prove that the government is serious about enforcing the law. The introduction of the Green Scorpions is a fine achievement by the department. It is hoped that they will continuously engage emitters during the implementation of the legislation to ascertain whether they are in compliance or not.

Much of the success of this legislation revolves around the capacity of local governments. Licensing, enforcement, monitoring and liaising with communities and industry, all require significant resources, both financial and human.

It is pleasing that government has secured some funding from Scandinavian countries for capacity-building, but in order for the implementation to be successful the necessary funds will have to be directed towards this process. There have been some conflicting messages from the department with regards to whether this legislation is ring-fenced or not. Indeed it should be. Revenues generated from permitting must be used to pay for enforcement, and not become just another revenue stream for local government.

Key to the success of this legislation is partnership between the various stakeholders. There has been considerable mistrust between effective communities and industry. This legislation will force stakeholders to come together. While the debates may remain as heated as before, communities will increasingly feel assured that the law is on their side.

I would like to commend the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism for conducting an extensive public participation process during the drafting of this piece of legislation. Air pollution has proved to be a justifiably emotive subject for many communities all over South Africa, most notably for the communities of South Durban basin, Secunda, Sasolburg, Boipatong, Richards Bay and Milnerton. Many have fought long-standing battles with emitters and government, and most, at one time or another, have felt that their voices were ignored.

It is pleasing that these communities have been able to make significant inputs and, by all indications, most of their concerns with this legislation have been dealt with. Equally, businesses must surely be relieved that at least there is more certainty associated with the legal environment framework within which they will be expected to operate within the near future.

I have concentrated in my speech on the implementation of the Bill with regards to industry. There are many other points of emissions, most notably from vehicles. The department must give close attention to the transport sector when it draws up the national framework. If we are meaningfully to improve the quality of our air, the approach will have to be broad based.

In conclusion, the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill has the ability to create win-win situations for emitters and affected communities if implemented with purpose and with the necessary financial and human resources, and most importantly, if it is done at a pace that allows stakeholders to fully understand the ramifications of the legislation. Thank you. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson and hon members. I would like to thank the chairperson of the portfolio committee, Comrade Elizabeth Thabethe, and all the members of the parties that have supported this Bill. It is a privilege to participate in the discussion on this Bill.

Firstly, I would like to say that air quality is not a technical issue that no one apart from scientists can understand. People think air quality is something very technical and that we cannot monitor it. We have all been provided with very efficient air quality monitoring devices and have never needed to be trained on how to use these devices. I am talking about our noses. We know when air is not fit to breathe and we can tell the difference between clean air and foul smells. We are all air quality monitors, and we do not need to be technicians or academics. Now it is time for us to become air quality managers, because we have the other part and now we must advance and become managers.

The people of South Durban, Boipatong, Sasolburg, Secunda, Richards Bay, Table View and many other places have shown us that you do not need to be a scientist to know when the air that you are breathing is harmful to your health and wellbeing. These people have been waiting for this Bill and have actively involved themselves in ensuring that it will protect them and all the people of South Africa.

Following the public hearings on the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill, the department has met with all the groups who made presentations to the portfolio committee in order to ensure that all South Africans can make this legislation their own. The issue of ownership is very important, because nothing would be sustainable if we are not owners.

This process has resulted in a number of important proposed amendments which, I am convinced, will provide the means to properly deal with the air pollution problems many of our people have to deal with every day of their lives.

There are also links between this and the Constitution. The first one relates to our constitutional right to breathe air that does not harm us. Despite the arguments of the department that this Bill was inherently linked to the Constitution, the public hearings made it clear that people wanted to see a clear and unambiguous link between the Bill and their constitutional right. To this end, this link has been fully established through amendments to both the Bill’s long title and objectives.

Furthermore, a preamble has been inserted to make it doubly clear that the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill is there to protect our health and wellbeing.

Another issue that has been widely debated in the press is the impression that the Bill concentrates only on ambient air quality and does not make mandatory provision for emission standards. This perception is challenged by amendments that provide for mandatory minimum emission standards for all listed activities. The amendments ensure a level playing field whilst providing for stricter standards where these are required to protect and enhance air quality.

A further concern raised during the public hearings was the issue of timeframes. Even though it is difficult to set timeframes for things that involve participatory processes, we have shown our commitment to clean air by setting clear timeframes for publication of the National Air Quality Management Framework, the road map for air quality management implementation, over the next five years. We have also set clear turn- around times for atmospheric emission licensing.

In its original form, there was a concern that the wording of the Bill placed an unacceptable burden of proof on the state before it could act to control specific activities or pollutants. As this was never the intention, this wording has been changed to ensure that the Minister and MECs can take immediate action as soon as they reasonably believe that action must be taken.

Another important area of concern was around the transitional arrangements in respect of current atmospheric emission authorisations. In reviewing these arrangements, the department conceded that these were confusing and has reworked these arrangements substantially to allow for a smooth and trouble-free transition from the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act to the new approach to air quality management.

All of these amendments I have described have been accepted, and extremely well received in some cases, by the stakeholders who have involved themselves in the amending process. However, one amendment appears to have raised some concern. This amendment relates to the inclusion of a new regulatory tool within the Bill known as controlled fuels. Why it has caused concern is somewhat confusing and perhaps it is worth providing a little more detail.

Throughout the development of the Bill, there have been calls for regulations that will encourage cleaner production, that is, treating the cause of the problem rather than just the symptom. Cleaner production is encouraged when one takes a lifecycle approach to environmental management. Such an approach is what motivated the inclusion of the control of the dirty fuels component of the multipoint plan to clean up South Durban’s air.

During the portfolio committee’s visit to South Durban, the question of how dirty fuels are to be regulated under the Bill was raised. In this regard, although it was recognised that the Bill could be used in various ways to control the impact of dirty fuels, it was also recognised that there was no single regulatory tool within the Bill to deal with this issue simply and effectively. The inclusion of the controlled fuels provision closes this regulatory gap in the Bill.

Unfortunately, it appears that some people believe that this provision will encourage or legitimise the use of dirty fuels, but they will learn as time goes by that it is not what they think it is.

Although this logic is somewhat confusing, I will clear up any confusion by saying that this provision will be used to control, regulate and even outlaw fuels that give rise to unacceptable pollution. Government will never legitimise the poisoning of our people and our environment.

In conclusion, I again want to express our gratitude to all those South Africans who have given up their time to engage in the development and finalisation of this Bill. We will all be beneficiaries of your efforts.

I firmly believe that this Bill, together with its important amendments, will begin to address a problem that has been plaguing us for a long time. We all have a right to an environment that is not harmful to our health and wellbeing. This means that we also have a right to clean air. At last we are taking the first bold steps to ensure that this right is fulfilled.

LegalWise has a slogan that says, “don’t talk to me; talk to my lawyer”. We are saying, “don’t talk to us; talk to the Bill that you, the citizens of this country have made”. I thank you.

Mr L W GREYLING: Chairperson, the ID believes that this is a revolutionary piece of legislation and that it will, for the first time, introduce a proper regulatory environment for air quality in South Africa. I am saddened, however, that it took so long for Parliament to enact such a piece of legislation.

During our study tour of pollution hotspots we were shown communities that have, for many decades, been powerless to prevent pollution from industries. This pollution is not just an environmental issue, but as we vividly saw, a health issue as well. Many families have had to see their children contracting leukaemia and crippling respiratory conditions. One feels a certain amount of shame that justice was not delivered to these families at an earlier stage of our democracy.

I also feel a sense of injustice that this piece of legislation is not retrospective in its scope and that communities will not be able to use it to claim liabilities from past polluters. These communities will now need to resort to the legal realm to bring class action suits against those companies which for many decades exceeded international emission standards.

This piece of legislation does, however, have a clause in it that obligates government to perform health studies so that the precise causes and extent of these health conditions can be documented. I would urge the Department of Health to work closely with the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism to undertake such studies in the pollution hotspots of South Africa. These health studies are vital for communities wanting to obtain legal compensation.

I would also urge the department to use this legislation to strictly enforce the new air standards and ensure that polluting industries comply. What was clear to me on the study tour was that many industries only enact measures when government forces them to do so.

The ID would also like to see strong action finally being taken against companies that have a poor record of industrial safety. In the case of Phoscor in Richards Bay, families and individuals have been left destitute and incapacitated by accidents with very little by way of compensation being paid to them. These companies must be made to understand that negligence on their part will be severely dealt with, and the ID is confident that the department has now been given the teeth to do precisely that.

The ID supports this Bill.

Mnu M U KALAKO: Mam’uSekela-Sihlalo namalungu ePalamente, uMgaqo-siseko uthi wonke umntu waseMzantsi Afrika unelungelo kwindalo, imvelo nempilo engcono. Uqhuba uthi, siyile Ndlu yoWiso-mthetho kufuneka senze imithetho eza kukhusela indalo ukuze izizukulwana ezilandelayo emva kwethu zikwazi ukuxhamla kuyo.

Uthi ke, imithetho ekufuneka siyenzile apha yimithetho enxulumene nokujongana nomoya ococekileyo, imilambo ecocekileyo, ulwandle kunye nomhlaba ukuze sikwazi ukuba siphile ngaphandle kokuba sibe nezifo.

Uqhuba uthi, kufuneka sikhuthaze ukugcinwa kakuhle kwendalo, sizame ukuqhuba inkqubo yophuhliso olukwaziyo ukulondoloza indalo ngaxeshanye sizama ukukhulisa uqoqosho lwesizwe.

Umthetho esithe sawuqulunqa ke nesiza kuwuphumeza namhlanje ujonga zonke ezi zinto. Siyazi ukuba umthetho omdala ka-1965 ubuthethelela kakhulu oosomashishini ungabakhuseli abantu kwizifo neentsholongwane ezenziwa lushishino. Urhulumente okhokelwa yi-ANC ubone ukuba makaye ebantwini aye kuva izimvo zabo malunga nalo Mthetho uYilwayo. Bathethile ke abantu baseMzantsi Afrika bebonisana nathi malungu ePalamente ngawo.

Ngaphambili eMzantsi Afrika bekungekho zinto zikwaziyo ukubonisa oosomashishini ubungakanani bongcoliseko lomoya onganyanyezelwa ukhutshwa lushishino lwabo. Bekungekho nezinto ezithi zisinike amandla thina baseburhulumenteni ukuze sikwazi ukugxininisa ukuba oosomashishini bangawungcolisi umoya nemilambo, kungekho nantatho-nxaxheba ngabantu abangqongwe yile mizi-mveliso ukuze bakwazi ukuncedisana nayo ukuqinisekisa ukuba ayiwungcolisi umoya ophefumlwa ngabantu kwanamanzi aselwayo ngokunjalo, kwaneemeko ekuhlaleni.

Icandelo 9 lalo Mthetho uYilwayo siwushukuxayo apha namhlanje limisela umgangatho olawula ucoceko lomoya, kwanokuba iinkampani ezithi zenze ukhiqizo zilwenza kangakanani na ukuze lungachaphazeli abantu.

Kwakhona, icandelo 10 liyavumelana neCandelo 9 lalo Mthetho uYilwayo, kuba linika amaphondo amandla ukuze akwazi ukumisela imigangatho eza kuqinisekisa ukuba abo bangcolisa indalo bayatshutshiswa. (Translation of Xhosa paragraphs follows.)

[Mr M U KALAKO: Deputy Chairperson and hon members, the Constitution provides that the South African people has a right to the environment, nature and a healthy life. It also provides that this House should pass reasonable legislation that seeks to protect nature for the benefit of the present and future generations. These legislative measures should prevent pollution and ecological degradation of rivers, oceans and the soil in general, so that we can live safely and be protected from diseases.

The Constitution further provides for the promotion of conservation, the securing of ecologically sustainable development, and the use of natural resources while promoting economic development.

The Bill that we shall be debating and eventually adopting today has included all these matters. We know that the old Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, No 45 of 1965 catered for the interests of business more than it did for those of its ordinary citizens, and as a result many people contracted diseases. The ANC-led government has seen it necessary to engage the public and seek their views about this Bill. Therefore, the people of South Africa have participated in discussions with members of Parliament and tabled their views.

Previously South Africa did not have national standards to regulate stack emissions by big businesses. The government did not have any authority over the activities that amounted to air pollution by businesses and communities living close to industrial areas did not have platforms they could use to voice their opinions with regard to activities that pollute the air they breathe and the water they drink in their areas.

Section 9 of the Bill introduces a certain standard that is going to administer air pollution and regulate and measure stack emissions by businesses so that people’s wellbeing is secure and protected.

Section 10 of the Bill agrees with Section 9 in that it provides provinces with authority that would enable them to establish national standards for ambient air quality, as well as to ensure that those that continue with their dumping and air pollution activities are prosecuted.]

Equally, the Bill does not only regulate stack emissions. The new licensing system will also take into account atmospheric emissions, as outlined in clause 40 of the Bill.

When we undertook our tour of the hotspot areas, the cry from many communities affected by air pollution was the need to penalise polluters. This cry is answered in clause 52, where it says, “Those who break the law will be fined or imprisoned up to 10 years.”

Phaya ekuhlaleni, ezilokishini zethu, abantu kufuneka bazi ukuba lo Mthetho uYilwayo ujoliswe nakubo. Kufuneka bawuhloniphe kuba abo bangcolisayo baza kohlwaywa ngokwalo Mthetho uYilwayo. Abantu baseMzantsi Afrika bayazi ukuba ngalo Mthetho uYilwayo u-ANC ufezekisa iimfuno neminqweno yabo. Njengombutho onenkathalo ngobomi babantu nempilo yabo, njengoko usitsho kumqulu wawo wokugaya iivoti, i-ANC ithi kubantu baseMzantsi Afrika: Nanko ke umthetho wenu. Impumelelo yawo ixhomekeke ekubambisaneni kwenu norhulumente. Enkosi. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa paragraphs follows.)

[People in our communities must know that this Bill is meant for them. This Bill provides that those who do not adhere to the rule shall be prosecuted. South African people know that with this Bill the ANC has fulfilled their needs and wants. As an organisation that cares for the lives and well-being of its people, an objective captured in its election manifesto, the ANC presents the Bill to them and says: There is your Bill. Its success is dependent upon your cooperation with the government. Thank you. [Applause.]]

Ms C B JOHNSON: Chairperson and hon members, the portfolio committee had the privilege to visit some of the air pollution hotspots around the country, because we wanted to establish first-hand from the communities what problems they were experiencing with air pollution.

An estimated 20 million to 30 million South Africans regularly inhale smoke from burning coal or burning wood. This is not only because of industry, but many of these South Africans also have to burn coal in their homes.

Added to this problem are further emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide through traffic emissions, mining and various other industries. The impact of this is twofold. Firstly, there is the impact on the environment and, secondly, on the health of the people living in this country.

With regard to the impact on the environment, atmospheric pollution leads to ozone depletion and acid rain, which then leads to acidification of our soil and water, to global warming and to climate change, which then has a detrimental effect on agriculture and the production of food.

The second important impact relates to the effect on human health. It is exactly because air pollution affects people’s health that pollution and the prevention of pollution is in essence, at its very core, a human rights issue. That is why communities expect government to do something about it.

Communities expect government to protect their constitutional right to an environment that is not detrimental to their health, and this government has shown that it is committed to building a caring society.

In an essay written on air quality, the National Association for Clean Air writes that effective air pollution can sometimes be direct and acute or, as we’ve seen on the visit to the hotspots and as we’ve heard from various communities, more often the effective air pollution is less obvious and more long-term, making it difficult to identify and to prove who exactly was responsible for the damage.

Air pollution can also cause acute and chronic lung diseases, and research in the UK and Australia has shown very strong links between children living near refineries, airports and major roads and children suffering from cancer.

Up to now the outdated legislation has prevented effective environmental governance and strict compliance monitoring. In short, in order to build the caring society that this government is committed to, government has a duty to prevent air pollution, but without proper legislation, its hands are tied.

This new Bill is therefore very important. It will set, amongst other things, norms and standards for air quality monitoring and management, as well as compliance and enforcement provisions. This, in turn, will reduce the risk to human health and will promote pollution prevention and cleaner production.

However, we cannot leave it to government alone to take on the issue of air quality. It is going to take a proper partnership between government, the various spheres of government, civil society through the NGOs, and industry to make the legislation work. That partnership is an integral part of the new Bill. The new Bill aims to provide increased opportunities for public involvement and public participation in the protection of air quality, and further aims to ensure that the public has access to relevant and meaningful information about air pollution.

To conclude, I recently read a quote - unfortunately I can’t remember who it was attributed to - that reflected what I thought showed the attitude that we should have towards the environment. The quote said that we do not only inherit the earth from our ancestors, we also borrow it from our children. I think that the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill underpins that thinking, and it commits government to striving to ensure that we do just that, namely that we build a caring society and, at all times, maintain a clean and safe environment, not only for us, but also for generations to come. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairman, firstly, I would like to congratulate the Minister on this legislation. It’s one of several pieces of legislation that he has brought. He has been enthusiastic and committed and I congratulate him and his department for the excellent work that he has brought us thus far.

The air is everyone’s responsibility and it is no one’s responsibility. The Minister will find that it is also the last unchartered frontier, because it is also unchartered as a legal frontier. As many test cases will be fought, he will find that we are breaking new ground in this regard, and I would suggest that he begins to build the expertise of the department as rapidly as possible.

The Bill confers authority to establish ambient air standards on which emission control requirements will be based and delineates licensing procedures. That’s what the Bill does. The explanatory memorandum says it marks a turning point for pollution and waste governance in South Africa. Of course we are enthusiastic, but this is only a turning point, it’s only a beginning. In a certain sense, although a huge amount of work has gone into this, the easy part has been done, because polluters will pollute unless stopped by tough and uncompromising regulatory action. That’s the international experience.

I am not concerned about new generating capacity, Minister, because if you put up a new power station, nobody is going to finance it unless you comply with international norms and standards. You will not get the money for it. You will find that all new machines comply. The issue is existing capacity, and remember we are only adding 1% per annum to the productive capacity of the country. The problem is the other 99%. What you are dealing with, Minister, in your lifetime and the lifetime of this Parliament, is basically a retrofit problem: How do we deal with what we already have, not with what we are going to get?

Many of the existing coal-fired power stations, existing industrial boilers, existing hospital and other incinerators, existing old diesel bus fleets that are serious polluters are going to be with us for another 20 or 30 years. The problem is a retrofit challenge. The worst pollutants aren’t those that one can see, such as the black smoke from domestic fires, which is not very pleasant, but it’s the invisible toxic pollutants and emissions that you can’t see, which come out of high-temperature ovens, power stations, boilers, incinerators, engines, and dioxins that come out of hospital incinerators, particulates that come out of the back of buses and nitrogen oxide that you can’t see, but which are the real problems and are difficult things to deal with.

You may be interested to know that international opinion, which I consulted on this, said that they didn’t see a market emerging in South Africa for some time. They have been through it before. The argument from polluters always is, “It’s going to drive up costs. Our competitors don’t do it. How can you put the cost on us? How are we going to export?” The truth, Minister, is that the most successful economies of the world have the highest clean air standards and the most stringent requirements. Even developing countries such as South Korea and Taiwan have introduced stringent requirements.

I think, Minister, your difficulty is going to be to get the public on your side. I think they are on your side now; keep them there and educate them. Also, our Constitution provides challenges for you. With its three tiers of government it creates compliance and alignment problems. One of the biggest challenges for you and for us will be to align those tiers of government and get them pointing in the same direction.

The second biggest challenge, in my view, is to stop special pleading for delay and exemption. Anti-pollution measures deferred, Minister, is pollution allowed. International experience has shown that there will be constant requests for deferral and phasing. Firstly, they will say, “We can’t do it now, but we will do it in five years’ time,” and in five years’ time they will say, “Now we have to phase it in over the next 15 years.” You will find that you get nowhere fast. Very often cold turkey is the way forward.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! Hon member, your time has expired.

Mr K D S DURR: We wish the Minister well and we support the legislation.

Mr W D SPIES: Chair, in a free market governments sometimes have to intervene in order to protect marginalised people and communities from those who wield the economic power. This principle is well accepted in our country. At the other end of the scale are some assumptions which are also generally approved, but which contain much less wisdom. One of those is the assumption that nature will be able to deal with pollution.

Nature indeed has a mind-boggling ability to deal with pollutants. They are destroyed by the sun, de-armed by micro-organisms and simply diluted into the earth’s multiple systems. However, that also has a limit. Simply too much carbon has been burned over the past 200 years. Carbon exists in a never-ending cycle on and around the earth. Long ago, the earth had so much carbon dioxide in the air that humans would not have survived the high temperatures and moisture which evaporated into the atmosphere. Nevertheless, huge forests extracted carbon from the air until completely new circumstances prevailed in which humans could survive.

In South Africa, huge efforts are made to uplift marginalised African communities, and yet there is one big marginalised community whose voice is hardly ever heard, despite the fact that they might outnumber all the other communities in the country – this is the community of future generations. They have to live in the world that we are creating today.

Ecology and economy are two sides of the same coin. The present economic dispensation envisages an increasingly centralised energy-intensive global system. The flip side of this coin is a suffering environment without any chance of long-term sustainability. Much of what is actually needed can be found in the republican tradition: that all decisions are made at the lowest possible community level. This should lead to an economic system of localism, with the flip side of a well-cared-for environment which is recognised as a gift from God to be delivered to our children.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! Hon member, your time has expired.

Mr W D SPIES: The FF Plus supports the Bill in as far as it would lead to a cleaner environment, but we do so reservedly because a good fine-tuning law might just entrench the current dispensation.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order!

Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Chairperson. The MF notes that the Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act of 1965 has been, to date, the only law managing air pollution in South Africa. We further acknowledge that, with the development of our country, better definition and greater sources of air pollution, this Bill is outdated. In view of this, we welcome the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill, which brings legislation in line with the present and fulfils the requirements of the management of air pollution in South Africa.

We fully support the aims that this Bill serves to achieve and find the involvement of both local and provincial spheres very promising in ensuring that air quality standards are met throughout South Africa.

The provisions, offences and penalties in this Bill regarding any misuse and abuse of our air quality are definitely a deterrent and people will now be more cautious. In light of this, we call for local and provincial authorities to be given the resources to carry out proper management of polluting industries. Further, we request industries to give annual reports on pollutants they have been dispersing in the air, as is done internationally.

It is known that most areas affected by pollution from industries are poor and we need to address this with seriousness. These industries should not be allowed in areas neighbouring residential areas. This has serious health threats for our country. Pollution is a serious problem in South Africa, especially in areas such as KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga and many other provinces.

This Bill promises efficient provisions to improve our air quality, stop or avoid air pollution and manage a healthy air supply for South Africans. Our children and adults have suffered enough from diseases caused by air pollution.

The MF therefore supports the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill. Thank you very much.

Mr D A A OLIFANT: Mr Chairperson, it’s quite sad to note that the hon Spies decided to put some qualifications to his support for this particular Bill. I am not going to fight with him; I just want to say that I am sorry that he could not be with us on the oversight tour. Every party, except Mr Spies and the ACDP who were not there, enjoyed quite a good experience on that trip, interacting with industry as well as with the community.

For close to 40 years, South Africa, in its drive for industrialisation, particularly in the minerals and energy sector, has allowed our environment to be systematically polluted. The purpose of these projects was to improve the collective circumstances of the people suffering as a result of the disadvantages of this pollution.

Secondly, these projects were also established to fight economic sanctions against South Africa. What complicated matters more, was the forced removals and destruction of community life which arose from political policies deliberately enforced through violent means.

New townships were built close to these projects, or projects were brought closer to the townships. Over the years, pollution has progressively worsened, resulting in some people being forced to leave their beloved areas. Members of the communities surrounding these plants have started to suffer from all sorts of illnesses, such as kidney diseases, cancers, sinus diseases, respiratory problems, as well as asthma.

Strangely, when comparing the white suburbs and the black townships, the problems in the townships are, of course, worse than in the other suburbs. No wonder someone in the opposition could ask: Why this Bill now only after 10 years? It was certainly not my friend hon Morgan, nor was it hon Greyling. It was somebody else – I will not mention his name now, because he is not here. However, while this is a legitimate question to ask, one also needs to ask: What did those who were in power all these years do over the past 40 years to fight the pollution in these particular industries in order to bring about a better life for our people?

We strongly believe this Bill could not have come at a better time. The Constitution clearly states that our people must enjoy a clean and safe environment.

Let’s all give praise to the communities of Boipatong, Sasolburg, Secunda, Table View and other areas who gallantly fought companies such as Iscor, Sasol, Caltex and the mines for polluting the air.

Reports we got from these communities on our visits were that huge conglomerates, such as the ones we mentioned, were never really interested in their problems. Workers at these particular plants also complained about the safety standards of companies in these industries that left much to be desired.

Verlede week was daar ’n verskriklike groot ontploffing by Sasol in Secunda – die tweede in twee maande – waarin sewe mense gesterf het en meer as 100 beseer is. Ons pleidooi is aan die groot maatskappye, in die besonder groot maatskappye soos Sasol. Ons hoop dat hulle die ondersoek na daardie ongeluk so vinnig as moontlik sal afhandel, sodat die feite op die tafel kan kom en onnodige gissings en bewerings hokgeslaan kan word.

Namens ons portefeuljekomitee, en ek is seker ook namens die Parlement, wil ons graag ons diepste meegevoel betuig met die families van die oorledenes en beseerdes. Ons dink aan u in hierdie tyd van u beproewing. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Last week there was a terrible huge explosion at Sasol in Secunda – the second in two months – in which seven people died and more than 100 were injured. Our plea is to the larger companies, in particular companies such as Sasol. We hope they will complete the investigation into that accidents as soon as possible, so that the facts can come to light and unnecessary speculations and allegations can be eliminated.

On behalf of our portfolio committee, and I am also on behalf of Parliament, we would like to express our deepest sympathy with the families of those who died or were injured. We are thinking of you at this time of your tribulation.]

Our people’s cries for cleaner air and a safer environment have justified the repeal of the outdated law. The introduction of this new National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill is going to reform the law regulating air quality in order to protect and enhance the quality of air in the Republic, taking into account the need for sustainable development and providing for national norms and standards regulating air quality monitoring, management and control by all spheres of government in terms of specific air quality measures.

I must say - and I concur with hon Greyling - this is quite a revolutionary piece of legislation that we are about to vote into law. It speaks of norms and standards for quality and control of emissions from point to nonpoint sources, air quality monitoring, air quality management, planning and air quality information management. It provides for public participation in the protection and enhancement of air quality, public access to information, the reduction of discharges likely to impair our air quality, and the promotion of efficient and effective air quality management.

Do you know what this means? It means a healthier and cleaner lifestyle and, of course, a longer life. I visited Sweden recently and the average age of a person living in Sweden is 79 years, unlike in South Africa where our beloved elderly live a much shorter life. Now, this Bill seeks to change all this.

We further appeal to the Department of Provincial and Local Government to speed up the process of the electrification of the townships, so that the whole question of making these imbawulas [braziers] can stop and people can have access to electricity and electrical heaters, in order to assist in cutting down on these polluted areas.

Lastly, our communities can now look forward to going directly to municipalities where a licensed emission control officer will ensure that all the affected communities will be able to have their problems and concerns taken on board so that they can be resolved. Not only will they have an active say in the determination of the air quality, but they will also actively participate in making those kinds of decisions.

In supporting this National Environment Management: Air Quality Bill, I want to thank in particular the MEC and the Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment. They were very impressive and assured us that they were ready and waiting to implement this Bill.

We also want to thank the communities. It was extremely humbling that for the first time, in my experience at least, we went to communities that not only complained about not having jobs, but also complained about clean air and health problems. I think that is something that really struck a number of us on our visits to these particular areas. I want to take my hat off to these particular people who say, “We want to have a healthy society and a better and safe South Africa.”

Finally, Minister, please allow me now to steal just a bit … Where is the Minister? Oh. Please allow me just to steal a bit of your show – of course it is done in a comradely manner. I just need to say, as chairperson of the Western Cape caucus of the National Assembly, I wish to congratulate our premier and the Western Cape cabinet on their 100-day achievement. Let me mention some of these achievements.

In this period they have opened four new police stations, they have arrested drug lords, they are exceeding their target of providing child grants to 96 000 people …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! Mr Olifant, please take your seat.

Mr M J ELLIS: Mr Chairman, on a point of order: The hon member has made a very good speech about a particular piece of legislation. However, I don’t believe that the Rules of Parliament allow for him to do what he is doing at present, and I ask you to rule accordingly.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): You are correct, Mr Ellis. Mr Olifant, will you keep to the present topic.

Mr D A A OLIFANT: Mr Chairperson, I am effectively contributing to the environment. I missed the hon Ellis - I wanted to hit him, but he was lucky to sneak in here. I just need to say again - allow me, Mr Ellis - congratulations, Premier Rasool and your team, on a job well done in the Western Cape. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Thank you, Chairperson. I would really like to thank Mr Ellis. It is the first time in human memory that the DA has objected to somebody trying to steal my show. Thank you, Mr Ellis. [Laughter.] [Applause.]

I would like to thank all the parties for their support for this legislation and all the hon members for their excellent contributions. I would like to thank the hon chairperson for the way in which she has led this process and convinced the committee to take an active interest in legislation before them so that the role of the committee is not limited to only oversight, but is that of really leading the process.

I would also like to commend the hon Deputy Minister. She is the political champion of the multipoint plan in the Durban South basin that I referred to, and she played a pioneering role in ensuring that this issue continued to be on the agenda of government, and also that it moved up that agenda.

The hon Minister has led by example and they have put a framework in place in Durban South. Although it was voluntary, it provided the basis and the framework for what we are now legislating. It has moved from being a voluntary framework to one where we set concrete measurable targets that we will now be able to enforce. I would like to commend the hon Deputy Minister for that role.

A number of hon members – Johnson, Morgan and Greyling – referred to the health dimension of what we are now doing, that it is a human rights issue. That is true. Those of you who went on the visit will be able to testify that doctors came forward and alerted members of Parliament to what was happening in their specific areas with regard to children and communities staying in those areas. So, it is not simply about creating a framework that sounds nice, but it has that very important health and human rights dimension.

The hon member Morgan referred to the fact that we will have to manage expectations and that this legislation will have a lead time. We will not be able to change the situation overnight. We are now putting in place a framework. We must now make sure that we really move into the realm of concrete targets that we will be able to enforce over time. We must also make sure that we provide clarity and information to the public with regard to those frameworks. With regard to the revenue streams and how we are going to fund this, the department has proposed an annual permit fee in the legislation in order to provide a revenue stream for local government on this air quality management. The legal advice that we have received is that this was a money Bill matter and the director-general has therefore asked the National Treasury separately to process a section 77 Bill – a so-called money Bill. We have not yet had a response to this, although we do not see it as problematic. The only financial provision in the current Bill is for a once- off application fee which will only cover the cost of the administrative processing.

In conclusion, I believe that this legislation proves how a department and senior public servants who understand the issues can really assist us in creating a tool to improve the lives of people. Therefore, I would like to thank the director-general Dr Olver, Joanne Yawitch, Peter Lukey and many others of our senior public servants who understand the power of government in using the tools at its disposal to make a real difference, senior public servants who understand that legislation can be used positively to change the lives of people. Thank you to all parties for their support. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time.

         THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENTS IN PRESERVING BIODIVERSITY


                      (Subject for Discussion)

Mrs J CHALMERS: Chairperson, Minister, comrades and colleagues, of the many challenges that have taxed those of us holding public office during the past decade, and in particular as members of Parliament, the one that arguable has been the most arduous and is what being an MP is really all about, has been to put in place legislation that can really make a difference to the citizens of our country. It has been difficult, of course, because we have a duty to ensure that it improves the quality of people’s lives and we must also attempt to ensure sustainability for that improvement.

However, in addition to that, ideally it should also enrich the material that makes up the very fabric of our country so that the various elements - physical, cultural and spiritual - can fulfil their inherent potential, which is truly a monumental challenge. Then, of course, the laws, together with the attending regulations, must by all means attempt to be realistic and affordable and not amount to a wish list that looks great on paper, but is unenforceable in the tough outside world.

One of the challenges confronting our globe, and increasingly becoming centre stage internationally, is the fact that the natural resources of our planet, that have for so long been taken for granted, are rapidly being depleted. Some of them are disappearing even before we can really understand their role and value in the chain of life. This is a sad and sorry situation indeed.

We are inclined to take for granted the extraordinary diversity of our flora and fauna. We do so at our peril. Each and every one of the plants and animal species that we see in our everyday lives is a link in a greater chain. Take one out and inevitable there is a domino effect, which often goes unnoticed until it is too late to do anything about it.

A scary example can be seen in East Africa where Lake Victoria, the largest tropical lake in the world, supports Africa’s most important inland fishery. However, the lake has experienced massive changes in its ecology due to intensified fishing, increased human population and the introduction of five new species of fish. In 1959 the colonialists introduced the Nile perch as a sport fish in Lake Victoria and now more than half of the lake’s native fish population has been eliminated. You may say that as long as there are still fish there it is okay, but it does not work like that. Nature has a way of hitting back when its natural balance is disturbed, with new diseases appearing and the introduced species not having the natural resistance developed over centuries by the indigenous species.

Here in our own country a battle for survival is taking place, with fair numbers of our bird and animal species either critically or marginally endangered. It will be a sad day indeed if our children’s children have to look in books on natural history to see what our magnificent cheetah or the wattled crane looked like.

However, the good news is that, as I have already stated, all over the world governments are sitting up and taking note of the fact that we can no longer plunge headlong along the path to the eventual destruction of the very resources that provide us with the means to survive.

In 1987 the United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, convened a number of experts’ meetings that led to the negotiations and adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In June 1992, at the Rio Earth Summit, heads of state and governments of more than 150 countries signed on to the CBD. There are now 188 parties which have taken on the legal commitments of the Convention on Biodiversity, making it the most widely supported international environmental agreement.

In two weeks’ time the Interparliamentary Union will be holding its 111th Assembly in Geneva. It is very significant that one of the three subject items on the agenda for the meeting is, and I quote, “the role of parliaments in preserving biodiversity”. This discussion will take place in the committee that focuses on sustainable development, finance and trade. It is very interesting that there is a clear acknowledgement that biodiversity, which is of course the variety of all living organisms - animals, plants and micro-organisms - that inhabit the various biomes and ecosystems of the planet, is critical, not only to our capacity to develop sustainably, but also to create stable economies and healthy trade environments.

In South Africa the issue of environmental justice was an integral part of the anti-apartheid struggle, with the liberation movement giving it a clear place on the struggle agenda. We know that environmental degradation has always most seriously affected the poorer sections of our population, both in terms of loss of natural resources, as well as pollution and its impact on human health.

Just as appropriate legislation plays a critical role in managing and protecting the natural resources of a country, so skewed, discriminatory laws, as they existed in South Africa pre-1994, had a devastating impact on the land, and of course its people, leading to deforestation, soil erosion and loss of biodiversity on a massive scale. Clearly, by the time 1994 came around, a huge amount of restorative justice had to happen.

As Constitutional Court Judge Albie Sachs said, when we say “mayibuye, i- Afrika”, we are calling for the return of legal title, but also for the restoration of the land, the forest and the atmosphere. The greening of our country is basic to its healing, and so in 1996 we got a new Constitution and, critically, section 24 in the Bill of Rights, which is the environmental clause underpinning all future legislation. The challenges that faced legislators who got to work drafting new environmental legislation were huge. Of course, it was the same for all other sectors as well. The democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution were paramount, as well as equity, transparency, access to information, accountability and participation.

At the same time many of the key principles and objectives of the new environmental policy were committed to reflecting global concerns of sustainability. It meant constantly coming back to the Bill of Rights and, above all, section 24, to ensure compatibility with it and, crucially, to ensure an environment that was not harmful to the health and wellbeing of our citizens, and one that could be protected for the benefit of our present and future generations. This was a tall order indeed, given the fracturing of our society and land after 40 years of discriminatory rule.

Looking back at what has been achieved after 10 years of democratic government, it is no exaggeration to say that the framework of environment legislation now in place represents some of the most progressive and visionary policies and laws to be found internationally. The Natural Environmental Management Act passed in 1998 gave effect to section 24 of the Constitution and is regarded as framework legislation, containing as a key principle the requirement that environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern.

Following on that foundation Act have been the Environment Conservation Act, Acts covering biodiversity and protected areas, the Marine Living Resources Act and amendments to the various pieces of legislation. These last amendments are crucially important, given that inevitably, when groundbreaking legislation is put in place and begins to become a part of the fabric of society, gaps are perceived and subsequent strengthening of certain aspects of the laws has to take place.

We have also played a role in the formation of the cross-frontier parks, which is so crucial to preserving biodiversity across the boundaries of Southern African states.

While processing legislation is a crucial function of Parliament, other responsibilities also play a considerable part in our work. For those of us in the environmental portfolio committee it has been an exciting experience, and here I am referring particularly to our biodiversity responsibilities. As we have participated in the huge World Summit on Sustainable Development conference, hosted so successfully by South Africa in 2002, we have become familiar with what is happening in the botanical world of the botanical institutes such as Kirstenbosch and other botanical gardens.

We have also grown to understand the vital role being played by the Working for Water campaign to remove alien vegetation and to protect our own biodiversity heritage. We have attempted to grasp the complexities of our marine resources and the risks of fishing out that vital asset, and we have gotten a handle on the many challenges and threats to our biodiversity riches. Not least of our adventures has been going on wilderness trails and experiencing first-hand the magic of sleeping under the stars and taking a shift to keep the campfire burning.

Lastly, our Constitution states that everyone has the right to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations through reasonable legislative and other measures, but the challenge is that much more remains to be done. It is our duty and responsibility, as public representatives who have been granted the power to consider and pass the appropriate legislation, to make that written right a reality. It is our responsibility to do our utmost to ensure that that happens, so that in 10, 20 or 100 years’ time our unique biodiversity heritage is still there for future generations to marvel at and enjoy. [Applause.]

Mr G R MORGAN: Chair, hon members, South Africa’s obligations to the Convention on Biological Diversity will be a major test of this country’s political will, as indeed it will be for all countries that are signatories to this convention.

The DA welcomes the newly promulgated Biodiversity Act. It is a fine piece of legislation that provides the necessary legal framework for the protection of our impressive biodiversity and joins many other crucial pieces of legislation, especially the National Environmental Management Act. Parliament can be proud of itself.

Our country is blessed with one of the highest number of endemic plant and animal species on this planet. South Africa is home to almost 10% of the world’s known bird, fish and plant species, and over 6% of the world’s mammal and reptile species. However, this natural wealth is threatened. Our development is placing increasing demands on biodiversity.

There are worrying murmurings emanating from government, reinforced at last week’s follow-up to the Johannesburg Summit, that biodiversity must be used to alleviate poverty. This is particularly short-sighted. A partnership between people and the environment is necessary and, indeed, the participatory management provisions included in recent pieces of environmental legislation are in line with the current best practices in world conservation. Communities, particularly those living in and around parks, have a right to a sustainable living from these areas, but we must be acutely aware of the carrying capacity of our land and seas.

The primary value of biodiversity is not poverty alleviation. Biodiversity has a value in itself. It is natural capital, and in South Africa we have not even begun to acknowledge this. Our environment provides valuable essential services for free, whether as a means to ameliorate our pollution – at least up to a point – or as a sink for our carbon emissions, or as a factor in our climate stability, or as an ongoing source of knowledge in scientific fields.

If we as a country fail to capture such economic values, it will create a distortion which, as noted by esteemed environmental economists David Pierce and Dominique Moran, will continue to tilt the playing field with the odds stacked against conversation and in favour of the economic activities that destroy biological resources. We cannot afford to treat our natural capital as free, unlimited and inconsequential.

The loss of biodiversity may occur as part of a purposeful decision taken by society to use its natural resources on the basis of trade-offs if deemed beneficial, or it may be inadvertent, such as when the consequences of policies on biodiversity either were not foreseen or not properly assessed. An example of an inadvertent loss could result from the proposed construction of the N2 toll road through Pondoland, one of South Africa’s own biodiversity hot spots.

The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism insists that the road will only affect 0,36% of the centre of endomism. Of course this may be a very accurate assessment of the direct effect of the road, but it gives little consideration to the secondary impacts. The road – at least in its current planned route – would provide increased access to these pristine areas, possibly leading to uncontrolled and unsustainable harvesting of biodiversity.

The purposeful loss of biodiversity will happen if dune mining, for instance, along the Pondoland coast goes ahead. Although on the basis of trade-offs, this is hardly likely to be beneficial in the long run.

The creation of jobs is critically important in this depressed area, but when mining is likely to create only a few hundred direct and indirect jobs for a decade or two at the expense of a pristine stretch of biodiversity, the economics have to be wrong.

Despite our Parliament passing a laudable Biodiversity Act, it is in the actual implementation of the Biodiversity Act that its ultimate worth will be proven. Here, Parliament plays an important oversight role.

My concern is that the government is at the moment paying mere lip service to biodiversity. We all know that economic growth is an imperative in this country, and this growth needs to be in the region of 6% per annum in order to make a real impact on the growing unemployment figure, but this needs to be a sustainable growth. Development requires difficult choices. That is a given. However, if we do not give genuine consideration to environmental concerns, we are at risk of degrading our environment to a level at which it can actually accentuate poverty, not alleviate it.

The creation of jobs is important, but this must be done by means of good development. The temptation, of course, is that jobs may easily be able to be created through bad development as well. If we are serious about minimising biodiversity loss, then the EIA process must remain central in development planning.

While the department finalises its plans to streamline the EIA process for reasons that are mostly justifiable, the use of strategic environmental assessments should be instituted to ascertain the tolerance of environments to development. Individual developments underpinned by EIAs will often have a minimal effect on biodiversity loss, but it is the additive and cumulative effects of development that need to be closely monitored.

I’d like to encourage the Minister to seriously consider a more widespread use of strategic environmental assessments and, indeed, for him to encourage his colleagues in Cabinet also to use these assessments for all policies and programmes that may have direct or indirect effects on our environment. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr H J BEKKER: Mr Chairman, the role of parliaments in preserving biodiversity is particularly pertinent to this House, as our country is host to one of the most remarkable and fragile ecosystems in the world.

We have unequalled flora and fauna. Indeed, the Cape Floral Kingdom is the most diverse in the world. It is possible, if you live in KwaZulu-Natal, to see the big five in the morning and whales in the Indian Ocean in the afternoon. What a spectacular place and country we have.

We also face the added challenge of promoting sustainable development whilst, at the same time, uplifting the lives of the previously disadvantaged. From time to time these objectives may seem to come into conflict. The House will recall, for instance, the controversial debate a few years back about mining at the St Lucia dunes, the second highest in the world, which threw these imperatives into sharp focus.

The protection of biodiversity has far-reaching consequences for all aspects of public policy, and requires an intersectoral approach. As Parliament passes budgets and laws, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that protecting biodiversity and promoting sustainable diversity are given the political priority they merit.

In two weeks’ time the issue of the role of parliaments in preserving biodiversity will be tabled at the Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union in Geneva, Switzerland. I believe that in view of the burden of responsibility of representing the South African Parliament, it is vital that our representatives who will attend this meeting have a clear mandate from this House of what is expected of them. I think this is particularly important when one considers the broad range of issues and the scientific intricacies that relate to biodiversity.

I therefore request that this House not only debate this issue, but that from our deliberations clear and crisp mandates are drawn up to ensure that this House’s views are heard. The IFP believes that it is imperative that the mandates we draw up make public practical recommendations and directives, rather than be laden with heavy jargon and long rhetoric. I thank you, Mr Chair.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): The next speaker will be the hon L W Greyling. We’ll give you a minute to get to the podium, but your speaking time remains one minute.

Mr L W GREYLING: I’ve just been elevated to the ministerial position by Minister Van Schalkwyk, so I feel I deserve another minute!

Biodiversity is being destroyed at a rapid rate, and we are currently in the sixth-grade extinction period of the planet. This extinction is mainly related to the impacts of humans, such as climate change, habitat loss and the introduction of invasive alien species.

South Africa has a large responsibility in this regard. We are the third richest country in the world when it comes to biodiversity. Unfortunately, our record in protecting this biodiversity has not always been exemplary. We are one of the world’s largest polluters of greenhouse gases, and it is therefore essential that we become the prime leader in the development of renewable energy.

Although we have formulated biodiversity strategies throughout the country, we sometimes choose to ignore them in our development plans. In this regard, it is inconceivable that this government has proposed running a four-lane highway through one of the richest biodiversity hotspots in the world. The Pondoland area has over 250 species which are not found anywhere else in the world, and they are used by many of the local inhabitants for traditional medicines.

South Africa is also rolling out genetically modified organisms without properly assessing the damage that can be done to our rich biodiversity. As parliamentarians we urgently need to revise the GMO Act to ensure that proper environmental protection is in place.

Biodiversity does not only have intrinsic value, but economic value as well. Most of the world’s medicines are derived from diverse species. These species are found mainly in developing countries, and it is important that they derive an economic benefit from them. It is also vitally important that communities, particularly in South Africa, derive a direct economic benefit from the protection and sustainable utilisation of biodiversity. We must rectify the tragic historical legacy of conservation meaning exclusion.

This government has already started to address this issue.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order, hon member! Even your extended time has expired. [Laughter.]

Ms C B JOHNSON: Chairperson, hon members, the new Biodiversity Act has been signed into law and, if I am correct, came into effect on 1 September. This sets up a system to protect and control the use of South Africa’s rare and endangered species and to protect different bioregions.

Biodiversity or, as others would say, biological diversity, describes the very extraordinary diversity of animal, plant and insect species that exists on earth. Each species has a very different and a very distinct genetic make-up, which allows for it to cope with factors such as food supply, habitat, climate and defence.

In short, diversity of species is necessary for ecological stability. In other words, if the range of biological diversity is in any way reduced, it will directly weaken and threaten existing ecosystems. Today 24% of our mammals and 12% of our bird species are in danger of becoming extinct and, given this situation, it is important to take adequate steps and measures to prevent biodiversity loss within the context of a global framework.

For this reason one of the goals set at the WSSD was significantly to reduce biodiversity loss by 2010, and governments have a particular role to play. Governments must do their utmost to sensitise society about the importance of preserving and protecting biodiversity.

In order to do this a number of steps have been taken internationally, such as the adoption of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the Rio Earth Summit and the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992. The thinking and the idea behind the convention is that natural resources are indeed limited and that, whilst they can be scientifically and technologically used to the benefit of humanity, it is absolutely imperative that they are used in a sustainable way and preserved for future generations.

Parliaments across the globe therefore have a legislative and a moral duty to make biodiversity a priority, something that the South African Parliament has clearly done by enacting the Biodiversity Act. However, what must still be done on a global scale is that parliaments around the world must encourage projects aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. They must encourage close examination of the world’s flora and fauna, and investigate how many species can be classified and where they exist. Obviously, adequate funding for these projects remains and will remain a global challenge.

The loss of biodiversity is one of the greatest environmental threats facing us today and therefore it is going to take continuous commitment to protect biodiversity internationally, and it is of fundamental importance. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairman, it is essential that in addressing biodiversity we understand that biodiversity, biotechnology and biosafety are closely linked interdependently and that they need to be dealt with together in an integrated manner.

May I start by saying that one of the greatest assets of Africa is its biodiversity and, funnily enough, it is one of the few benefits of underdevelopment, that there is a relatively undamaged. For example, the Po River is a sewer and our rivers are not.

Minister, one of the current assaults on African biodiversity is a product of biotechnology, namely genetically modified organisms. We must protect biodiversity, but research shows that, for example, GM pollen travels up to 26 km and can last up to 16 years. Studies in the US and UK have shown that birds such as the skylark would face extinction in a GM environment.

Rapeseed oil researchers in the UK have found that crossbreeding between GM crops and their wild relatives continued for up to three miles from the nearest field, with some 3 200 hybrids being created every year along rivers, and 17 000 in arable areas.

Is this what we want to unleash upon our pristine fynbos, Minister? Is this what we want, for US corporations in their clamour to move up the food chain, to patent our food source in a new form of food colonialism? Is that what we want to happen? Are we doing any environmental impact assessments? The answer is no, we are doing desktop assessments of a variety without public participation. We need to correct the situation, Minister.

Even in the wine industry, the French have just banned talk of GM wine. We need to do the same quickly.

Minister, can we not place a moratorium on these GMOs, or at least declare the Western Cape a GM-free area, like Austria and many other countries of the world and regions have done?

I recommend, firstly, that we stop all trade in GMOs until the Cartagena Protocol has been implemented; secondly, that in terms of article 23(2) of the protocol, we consult the public in our decision-making; thirdly, that in implementing and redrafting the GMO Act, this Parliament in South Africa complies with and implements the recommendations of the African Union summit and use the African model law; and fourthly, that the government should put in place a strict liability and redress regime to ensure that biotech companies act in a responsible and cautious manner.

This is a new form of food colonialism. You know, Minister, Nigeria used to be a wonderful producer of food. Then came the discovery of oil. They used the petrodollars to buy cheap subsidised food and they smashed their agriculture.

Now GMOs, which are banned from almost every large market of the world, are finding their way into South Africa. They see us as the soft underbelly for entry of these products into Africa, and we have not done the research, Minister. Now you have the law on your side. I request you please to use it. We will support you. Thank you. [Time expired.]

Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, we are discussing this subject suitably in Heritage month. We as government have to realise that our responsibility extends beyond the people of South Africa. We are often so preoccupied with the social development of our people that we neglect our environment. However, it is the state of our environment that supports the wellbeing of our people.

We have seen illegal trading of animals in the form of poaching, as well as other natural resources that serve as delicacies here and abroad. We have a responsibility towards biodiversity, and we need to protect and fulfil this responsibility. Parliament has the tools to introduce powerful legislation to guard biodiversity and protect our natural environment.

The MF calls for a system to validate the use of our natural environment and animals as a means of survival, and not for luxury. Furthermore, it is the beauty of South Africa and our people that make South Africa such a popular tourist destination. By ensuring its preservation, we are securing the future of South Africa’s biodiversity, which is a great insurance policy to fighting poverty. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

Mr M I MOSS: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, one of the goals set out by the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002 was to plan measures aimed at protecting biodiversity to prevent animal and plant species from becoming extinct.

The world’s parliaments have a crucial role to play in this regard as they make and pass laws and budgets. Through public policy and legislation, biodiversity protection should become a priority as a political objective. As public representatives of the people’s will and makers of policies and legislation, parliamentarians and members are crucial and should play the most important role when it comes to matters and issues of biodiversity and protection.

Comrade Minister, you and I and all living species are alive today because of biodiversity. The natural environment provides the basic conditions without which humanity could not survive. Biodiversity is a resource upon which families, communities, nations and future generations depend. It is a link between organisms, binding each into an interdependent community or ecosystem in which all living creatures have their place and home. It is the web of life.

In die lig van bogenoemde moet parlemente deur middel van effektiewe gunswerwing en inligtingverspreiding poog om die steun van opiniemakers te verkry en die algemene publiek oor plaaslike projekte in te lig. Nasionale inligtingsveldtogte om die belangrikheid en die insiggewendheid van die ekosisteem te populariseer, moet georganiseer word om die dringendheid daarvan uit te wys ten einde te verseker dat biodiversiteit beskerm word. Beskermde gebiede soos nasionale parke speel ’n groot rol in en dra by tot die bevordering van biodiversiteit.(Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[In the light of the above, parliaments should try, through effective lobbying and dissemination of information, to obtain the support of opinion- makers and to inform the general public of local projects. National information campaigns to popularise the importance of the ecosystem and to promote insight, should be organised to point out the urgency thereof in order to ensure that biodiversity is protected. Protected areas like national parks, for example, play an important role in the promotion of biodiversity.] Parliaments should also ensure compatibility between biodiversity and protection, and enhance road infrastructure and tourism development.

The conservation of biodiversity also plays a big role in the promotion of tourism. In South Africa, protected areas such as the Kruger National Park and world heritage sites such as Robben Island, the St Lucia Wetland Park and the recently declared Cape Floral Kingdom are very well known and count amongst the most popular and most visited tourism attractions in the country.

Funding should also be reflected in the national budgets, to express the importance of biodiversity to conservation, in the form of financial pledges. Multinational organisations should be requested to fund specific projects. Development assistance loans granted by industrialised countries should be based on the criteria of fostering and conserving biodiversity. More funds should be mobilised from civil society and the private sector to the work of biodiversity protection.

Beyond its national borders, Parliament should organise parliamentary conferences on biodiversity within the context of the Interparliamentary Union and regional interparliamentary organisations, so as to compare experiences and exchange information.

Parliament should encourage other countries to ratify international agreements on biodiversity such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals.

In hierdie verband verdien Suid-Afrika ook ’n pluimpie vir sy leidende rol in en bydrae tot die beskerming van biodiversiteit oor grense heen met ander lande. Suid-Afrika het met Mosambiek en Zimbabwe, en ook met Botswana en Mosambiek, ooreenkomste aangegaan om gesamentlik die parke van daardie lande te beskerm. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[In this regard South Africa also deserves a pat on the back for its leading role in and contribution to the protection of biodiversity beyond our borders with other countries. South Africa has entered into agreements with Mozambique and Zimbabwe and also with Botswana and Mozambique to protect the parks of those countries collectively.]

The ANC-led Government enacted important legislation, which ensures fair access to resources, transparency, environmental justice and participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance. The National Environmental Management Act gives effect to the environmental right of section 24 of the Constitution. A key principle is that environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern. The Biodiversity Act passed this year sets out mechanisms for managing and conserving biodiversity, protecting species and ecosystems.

Other important Acts are the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act and the Living Marime Resources Act of 1998.

Omgewingswetgewing beskerm nie net die biodiversiteit nie, maar verskaf ook werk deur “werk-vir-water”-projekte, soos die uitroei van uitheemse plante, veral in riviere. Opleidings- en bewusmakingsprojekte word ook jaarliks in ons land toegepas. Vandag is reeds die einde van Boomplantingsweek wat jaarliks die eerste week in September plaasvind. Ander belangrike jaarlikse omgewingsaktiwiteite is Omgewingsdag en Nasionale Marieneweek.

Suid-Afrika is naas Brasilië en Taiwan die land met die derde grootste biodiversiteit ter wêreld. Dit is dus baie belangrik dat ons in Suid-Afrika ’n leidende rol moet speel om te verseker dat ons te alle tye die leiding neem en die trant voortsit. Baie dankie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Environmental legislation does not only protect the biodiversity, it also provides work through the “working for water” projects, such as the eradication of alien vegetation, especially in rivers. Training and awareness projects are also implemented in our country annually. Today is already the end of Arbor Week that takes place annually during the first week of September. Other important annual environmental activities are Environment Day and National Marine Week.

South Africa is, after Brazil and Taiwan, the country with the third largest biodiversity in the world. It is therefore very important that we in South Africa play a leading role to ensure that we take the lead and continue this trend at all times. Thank you.] [Applause.]]

The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Thank you, Chairperson. I would like to thank all hon members for their participation in this debate. A number of members made the point that Parliament as an institution has a vital role to play in protecting our right to biodiversity.

However, I also believe that individual members of Parliament have a very crucial role to play. In this regard I can refer to some members of Parliament who have approached me recently, such as the hon member Chalmers, who pressurised us about the issue of a botanical garden for the Eastern Cape, and she is not letting up on that pressure.

The hon member Durr alerted me to the fact that there is a very important farm on the West Coast, Elandsfontein, that should have been incorporated into the West Coast National Park. It is a very important part of the unique renosterveld. We took immediate action because of his lobbying. I would like to thank individual members for assisting us in giving attention to issues that we should be giving attention to.

This is a wide-ranging issue and a wide-ranging debate. Let me just touch on some issues. First of all, hon member Moss referred to Sanbi. The SA National Biodiversity Institute builds on and brings together existing capacity in the National Botanical Institute, MCM, the Global Diversity Information Facility, amongst others, into a new centre of research, knowledge and policy support.

It was formally established on 1 September, in terms of the Biodiversity Act. The President signed that last week. It is the single most important institutional development in terms of building our country’s capacity to manage biodiversity. Adverts for a new board, which will reflect the different views and interests that need to make up Sanbi, will be placed in newspapers this coming weekend.

I would also like to inform members that because of the new national character it is being moved from Kirstenbosch to Pretoria. A new head office is being built and it will be opened in November 2004 as part of the formal launch of Sanbi.

The hon member Durr raised the issue of GMOs. Colleagues will be aware that until now this matter has been entirely regulated in terms of the GMO Act, administered by the Department of Agriculture. The Biodiversity Act, approved by Parliament, introduced two new provisions which give our department a formal role for the first time. Firstly, Sanbi is obliged to assess the impact of GMOs on the environment and biodiversity

• that is the issue that the hon member raised – and to report to the Minister in this regard. I would like to undertake here that those reports will be made public and will also be provided to Parliament.

Secondly, the Minister can require particular applications to the GMO council to be submitted to a full environmental impact assessment. In this regard, I have already instructed the department to prepare guidelines for which applications will require EIAs and to gear up for the implementation of that provision.

Maybe I should also refer to the issue of transfrontier parks. That is a very important part of ensuring biodiversity in our region. We had a meeting recently with some of the other SADC ministers to make sure that we speed up this process of transfrontier parks. We believe that we can speed up that process.

Later this year we will continue to drop a further 20 km of fence between Mozambique and ourselves. We have a meeting scheduled in Mozambique for 1 and 2 November, to make sure that we also start addressing the issue of the Lubombo spatial development initiative. I hope that we will come back to Parliament with good news, and I would also like to invite hon member Thabethe and the committee to take an active interest in the issue of the transfrontier parks; it is good for the region as a whole.

Members may also have taken note that we have declared four marine protected areas recently, bringing 18% of our coastline under protection for the first time. A week or two ago we announced a very important step in enlarging and consolidating our national parks by adding another 66 000 ha to our national parks.

These are all the steps that we are taking and we are doing that with the support of Parliament as an institution, and also many individual members who share an active interest in this issue. Thank you for a good debate. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

House adjourned at 17:14. ____

                     THURSDAY, 2 SEPTEMBER 2004

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson

 Report and Financial Statements of the Financial and Fiscal Commission
 (FFC) for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
 Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 159-2004].

1. The Minister of Labour

 Report and Financial Statements of the Construction Sector Education
 and Training Authority for 2003-2004, including the Report of the
 Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 42-2004].

1. The Minister of Defence

 Report and Financial Statements of Vote 22 - Department of Defence for
 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
 Statements of Vote 22 - Defence for 2003-2004 [RP 137-2004].

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the Competition Tribunal for
     2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 103-2004].

 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of the South African National
     Accreditation System (SANAS) for 2003-2004, including the Report
     of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2003-
     2004.

 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the Council for Scientific
     and Industrial Research (CSIR) for 2003-2004, including the Report
     of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004
     [RP 82-2004].

1. The Minister of Arts and Culture

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of Business and Arts South
     Africa for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Independent
     Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of Artscape for 2003-2004,
     including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
     Statements for 2003-2004.

 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the National English Literary
     Museum for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

 (d)    Report and Financial Statements of the National Library of South
     Africa for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

 (e)    Report and Financial Statements of the Northern Flagship
     Institutions for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 139-2004].

 (f)    Report and Financial Statements of the National Film and Video
     Foundation of South Africa for 2003-2004, including the Report of
     the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP
     109-2004].


                      FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2004

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson

 The Fifth Economic and Social Rights Report of the South African Human
 Rights Commission for 2002-2003.

1. The Minister of Arts and Culture

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the South African Heritage
     Resources Agency for 2003-2004, including the Report of the
     Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 112-
     2004].


 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the Afrikaans Language Museum
     for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2003-2004.


                      MONDAY, 6 SEPTEMBER 2004

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister of Finance


     (i)     Securities Services Bill [B 19 - 2004] (National Assembly
          - sec 75) [Bill and prior notice of its introduction published
          in Government Gazette No 26684 of 18 August 2004.]

     Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Finance of
     the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging
     Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160, on
     7 September 2004.

     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of
     the Bills may be submitted to the JTM within three parliamentary
     working days.

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Minister of Home Affairs

 (a)    Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa
     and the Government of the Republic of Rwanda on the Waiver of Visa
     Requirements for holders of Diplomatic and Official/Service
     Passports, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution,
     1996.

 (b)    Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
     Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
     Rwanda, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution,
     1996.

1. The Minister of Education

 Report and Financial Statements of the National Student Financial Aid
 Scheme (NSFAS) for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-
 General on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 172-2004].


                      TUESDAY, 7 SEPTEMBER2004

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister of Finance


     (i)     Petroleum Pipelines Levies Bill [B 18 - 2004] (National
          Assembly - sec 77)

     Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Finance of
     the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging
     Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160, on
     7 September 2004.

     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of
     the Bill may be submitted to the JTM within three parliamentary
     working days.

          NOTE:
          The Portfolio Committee on Finance has been instructed by the
          Speaker in terms of National Assembly Rule 249(3)(c) to
          consult the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy.

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Minister of Minerals and Energy

 Report and Financial Statements of the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR)
 for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
 Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 113-2004].

1. The Minister of Arts and Culture

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the Freedom Park Trust for
     2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of the Iziko Museums of Cape
     Town for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on
     the Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 104-2004].

 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the Voortrekker and Ncome
     Museums for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly:

CREDA PLEASE INSERT REPORTS:

1. Insert No 1 from ATC0907e

2. Insert No 2 from ATC0907e

3. Insert No 3 from ATC0907e

4. Insert No 4 from ATC0907e

5. Insert No 5 from ATC0907e

6. Insert No 6 from ATC0907e

7. Insert No 7 from ATC0907e

8. Insert No 8 from ATC0907e

9. Insert No 9 from ATC0907e

10. Insert No 10 from ATC0907e

11. Insert No 11 from ATC0907e

12. Insert No 12 from ATC0907e

13. Insert No 13 from ATC0907e

14. Insert No 14 from ATC0907e

15. Insert No 15 from ATC0907e