THURSDAY, 16 MARCH 2000 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:04.

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.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

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

That the House -

(1) notes that this week is Human Rights Week;

(2) further notes that South Africa, by virtue of its being a member of the United Nations, is a member of the International Labour Organisation;

(3) recognises that South Africa is one of a few countries to lead the process of the ratification of ILO conventions aimed at protecting workers’ rights;

(4) further recognises that section 23 of the Constitution and the aims and objectives of the Labour Relations Act, the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and the Employment Equity Act are concrete examples of our commitment to the principles of the ILO conventions;

(5) supports the activities of the Department of Labour towards achieving workers’ rights; and

(6) calls on all South Africans to celebrate Human Rights Week with its theme of ``Workers’ rights are human rights’’. [Applause.]

Mr D K MALULEKE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House -

(1) notes the racist, anti-Semitic statements made by an ANC member in the KwaZulu-Natal legislature;

(2) further notes the delight of ANC members of the legislature in these intolerant remarks and the failure of the ANC leadership to condemn both these words and the behaviour of its members;

(3) unreservedly condemns this overt racism; and

(4) calls on -

   (a)  the individual involved to apologise to the people of South
       Africa; and


   (b)  the ANC to act against racism in its ranks.

[Applause.]

Chief M W HLENGWA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move:

That the House -

(1) notes with shock the incident in which a number of teachers were robbed of their possessions in broad daylight at the Nathaniel Sabelo school in the Umbumbulu district, KwaZulu-Natal;

(2) notes with shock that such incidents are happening at schools where our learners and educators are supposed to be safe and protected;

(3) calls on the Department of Education to come up with a mechanism that will ensure the protection of educators and learners; and

(4) calls on big local industries to help by donating fencing material to those schools that are not fenced in.

Mr S A MSHUDULU: Madam Speaker, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that South Africa is a member state of the United Nations;

(2) notes that the Declaration of Human Rights is a product of this body;

(3) further notes that South Africa, by virtue of its being a member of the United Nations, is a member of the International Labour Organisation and subscribes to fundamental human rights;

(4) believes that South Africa is among a few member states to lead the process of the ratification of ILO conventions aimed at protecting workers’ rights;

(5) further believes that section 23 of the Constitution and the aims and objectives of the Labour Relations Act, the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and the Employment Equity Act bear testimony to the above commitments; (6) resolves that we celebrate Human Rights Week from 15 March to 17 March 2000;

(7) resolves that the theme ``Workers’ rights are human rights’’ be adopted; and

(8) further resolves that the activities of the Department of Labour …

[Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr K M ANDREW: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: Is the hon member allowed to give notice of a motion which is identical to one given by his colleague just three minutes ago?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I actually think that that point of order is correct. That needs to be corrected.

Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes that although the ANC Government assures us, on paper and in the House, that the alleviation of poverty is one of its first priorities, the situation in the Department of Welfare and Population Development indicates the contrary;

(2) further notes that the Minister blames the officials at management level for their negative attitude towards the transformation of the department, but there are no officials to blame and the department does not have the capacity to drive the process, as it is understaffed by 37%, with many vacancies at management level; and

(3) calls on the Minister, as the political head of the department, to assist its sixth director-general in six years to embark on a process to recruit suitably trained officials to fill the 147 vacant posts in the department, since this should enable the department to run at full capacity and manage the process of poverty relief.

Chief N Z MTIRARA: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move: That the House -

(1) highly commends His Excellency the President for recognising that the traditional leaders had not been properly consulted before the demarcation process began and for consequently visiting the North West and the Northern Province with a view to correcting this omission; and

(2) in consideration of the fact that the issue of demarcation affects all traditional structures throughout South Africa in the same way because of the commonality of their interests and concerns, submits that the President should convene a meeting of all traditional leaders and/or their representatives for the purpose of discussing these concerns, arriving at a common decision and avoiding confusion.

Ms N N MAPISA-NQAKULA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House - (1) notes the announcement of the Paris Club of creditor nations that it will defer all Mozambique’s debt-serving payments until a global accord cancelling the country’s debt has been agreed on;

(2) commends the creditor nations for their humanitarian approach in assisting Mozambique to recover from the devastating floods that have plagued the country; and

(3) calls upon the IMF and the World Bank to do all in their power to reach a speedy conclusion of the international debt accord, which will bring much-needed relief to the heavily indebted poor countries.

[Applause.]

Mr P H K DITSHITELO: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UCDP:

That the House -

(1) notes that a train carrying commuters from Mabopane to the city of Pretoria on Tuesday morning, 14 March 2000, had no fatalities, thanks to providence, when a passenger bridge collapsed on it, but that 12 passengers were injured;

(2) wishes all those who suffered injuries a speedy recovery; and

(3) challenges Metrorail to mount a full-scale investigation into the cause of the accident as a matter of urgency.

Dr M S MOGOBA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the PAC:

That the House -

(1) observes that the progress of transformation in SA Airways, which saw a lot of black hostesses and check-in clerks serving at our major airports, seems to have slowed down or been put into reverse gear; and

(2) calls on the relevant administrative authority to check if this trend is true, and if true, to remedy a situation that this House would clearly regard as being unacceptable and retrogressive.

Ms E GANDHI: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes the tremendous response to the Portfolio Committee on Arts, Culture, Science and Technology’s Year of Science and Technology in 1999 and the enthusiasm with which the department carried this forward;

(2) acknowledges that emphasis needs to be placed on explaining intricate scientific and technology issues in simple everyday terms;

(3) therefore congratulates the Minister on building on this achievement through launching a Week of Science and Technology, to be implemented on a rotational basis in the various provinces; and

(4) calls on the department to ensure that the mass of our people are not left behind in the field of science and technology.

[Applause.]

Mr G B D McINTOSH: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House -

(1) urges all South Africans to support National Water Week; and

(2) commends Mr Tony Leon, MP, for visiting -

   (a)  the Kyasands landfill site, which is one of only 16 licensed
       sites out of the 116 in Gauteng, and shares his shock at seeing
       the dumping of hazardous waste and the lack of enforcement and
       monitoring of water quality by the Department of Water Affairs
       and Forestry; and


   (b)  the Bloubosrand sewerage pumping station where poor maintenance
       has seen raw sewerage being pumped into the Klein Jukskei River
       on regular occasions. Viva, water pure and clean!

[Interjections.] [Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that the Israeli government plans to withdraw all troops from occupied parts of Lebanon by the end of July;

(2) recognises that this will bring an end to 18 years of occupation of Southern Lebanon by Israeli troops;

(3) believes that this move will contribute greatly towards peace in the Middle East and is an indication that Israel now realises that occupation of another country does not solve any country’s security concerns;

(4) hopes that this example will serve as a lesson to parts of the world where similar situations exist;

(5) welcomes the decision of the Israeli government; and

(6) applauds the sections of Israeli civil society who continue to campaign against the occupation and put pressure on their government to withdraw troops from Lebanon and other occupied territories.

Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move:

That the House notes -

(1) the irregularities during the recent election in Mozambique and particularly during the counting process, which led to one million votes not being counted;

(2) that the result of these irregularities was that Mr Alfonso Dhlakama was effectively cheated out of the presidency;

(3) that the politically biased judge of the Mozambican supreme court denied Renamo’s urgent application for a recount of votes;

(4) that Renamo should be congratulated for victories in six of Mozambique’s 11 provinces; and

(5) that, despite these circumstances, Renamo admirably decided to remain part of the democratic process.

[Interjections.]

Ms A VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes that today is the culmination of the five days of Hajj, which millions of Muslim pilgrims will be celebrating in the holy city of Mecca …

Mr N J GOGOTYA: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: I would like the Chair to make a ruling on whether it is proper for a member of this Parliament to cast aspersions on the judicial system of another country. Mr Geldenhuys said that the judge was biased.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. The Rules of this House provide for this House.

Ms A VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes that today is the culmination of the five days of Hajj, which millions of Muslim pilgrims will be celebrating in the holy city of Mecca after spending the past few days in meditation and prayer at Mina, Mount Arafat and Muzdalifah;

(2) expresses the wish that this day, which demonstrates the Prophet Abraham’s willingness to make the supreme sacrifice and is marked by a spirit of love, brotherhood, tolerance and sacrifice, will be enjoyed by all in Mecca and throughout the world today and tomorrow; (3) wishes the Muslim community in our country a joyous Eid-Ul-Adha tomorrow and expresses the hope that the sacrifice of animals, which are meant to feed the poor, the destitute and the ``miskeen’’, will be hassle-free; and

(4) wishes the pilgrims Haj Mubarak, and may Almighty God make their travels back to their homes and dear ones a pleasant experience …

[Time expired.]

           MEMBERS DESIGNATED FOR SADC PARLIAMENTARY FORUM

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move without notice:

That the following members be designated to represent Parliament in the Southern African Development Community Parliamentary Forum in terms of article 6(3) of the constitution of the said Forum:

 Eglin, C W; Ntlabati, S N; Yengeni, T S.

Agreed to.

EXTENSION OF PERIOD OF OPERATION OF SECTIONS OF CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT

                         (Draft Resolution)

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development, I move the draft resolution printed in his name on the Order Paper, as follows:

That the House gives its consent that the President by proclamation in the Gazette extend the period of operation of sections 51 and 52 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1997 (Act No 105 of 1997), in terms of section 53(2) of the said Act for a further period of one year, with effect from 1 May 2000.

Agreed to.

          INTERPELLATIONS AND QUESTIONS: INTERIM PROCEDURE

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move the draft resolution printed in his name on the Order Paper, as follows:

That -

(1) with effect from 5 April until 23 June 2000, the provisions of the Rules insofar as they relate to interpellations be suspended and that, notwithstanding the provisions of the Rules that apply to questions for oral reply, the procedure for questions for oral reply be dealt with in accordance with guidelines published in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports and in compliance with the following requirements:

   (a)  question time to be increased to 2 hours per week;

   (b)  questions to have precedence on Wednesdays from 15:00;

   (c)  clusters of Ministers to take turns to answer questions on a
       weekly rotation basis;

   (d)  each Minister may be asked a maximum of eight questions on any
       question day;

   (e)  each party be allocated a number of question opportunities as
       contained in the guidelines;

   (f)  a maximum of two urgent questions may be put on any question day
       to Ministers whose turn to answer questions is not due;

   (g)  time limits be set for the answering of questions and for
       supplementary questions; and

   (h)  questions to the President to be scheduled for once a quarter;
       and

(2) notwithstanding the Rules, the Chief Whips’ Forum develops a set of guidelines to govern the interim question procedure and adjust these guidelines as necessary from time to time on the basis of continuous monitoring of the system.

Mr D H M GIBSON: Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the motion put by the hon the Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party. The DP regards this as no more and no less than a power grab by the ANC aimed at pumping itself up at the expense of the opposition parties. [Interjections.]

The ANC appears not to understand that in a democracy one of the main purposes of a parliament is for members to hold the government to account. Because of the nature of our system where members have little or no independence within their parties and where they can be thrown out as MPs if they upset their parties, it is simply impossible to expect Government MPs to put Ministers on the spot.

It is therefore up to the opposition parties to perform this function, and perform it we have. The Government’s Chief Whip admitted that the DP had dominated question time and that this had to stop. He changed the Rules to ensure this. I remind hon members that the present Rules regard all MPs as equal and any party, including the ANC, had the opportunity of putting two oral questions and three written questions per MP per week.

The ANC had only between 2% and 4% of the questions because ANC MPs failed to ask questions. The Rules are now being changed to ensure that they do not have to work any harder. All that will happen is that their few questions will be inflated to about 50% of members’ time and that, with their Ministers joining in reply, something like 75% of question time will go to a party with 62% of the vote and the combined opposition, with 34% of the vote will, at most, have 25% of question time. [Interjections.]

Interpellations have been abolished because, to use the words of the hon Mr Yengeni, they ``are boring’’. I state categorically that interpellations introduced by the DP have not been boring; they have never been boring. [Interjections.] They were not boring yesterday or last week or any other Wednesday. On the contrary, some of the most interesting, exciting, and worthwhile debates in this Parliament have been on interpellations. [Interjections.]

Boring interpellations have been sweetheart questions put by hon members of the ANC. [Interjections.] The real reason for the abolition of interpellations is that the Government had one each week and the combined opposition had three. The ANC is determined to marginalise the opposition parties and they rejected out of hand the DP proposal to shorten interpellation debates to 10 minutes each and to have six of them in order to empower the smaller opposition parties. Naturally, they did not even consider that proposal. [Interjections.]

Our proposals for making question time more relevant, immediate and topical, were similarly rejected. I want to say to hon members that presidential question time, as proposed, is a pathetic travesty of executive accountability. [Interjections.] Six questions, once a quarter at three weeks’ notice, sifted by the hon the Speaker, will ensure that the hon the President is not called to account on anything topical or anything relevant. The changes are not an improvement. They do not strengthen parliamentary oversight or parliamentary democracy.

The DP will not commit suicide with a smile, and join the hon Tony Yengeni’s consensus about which he bragged in the press the other day. We are opposing this measure as a retrograde step, and no one can persuade us that we should do anything else other than that. What we are open to persuasion about is improving it; making it more interesting and making it more exciting. But that is not what the ANC is busy with. What the ANC is busy with is muzzling the opposition, and pumping themselves up by simply changing the Rules, because the Rules do not suit them, as they have been for the past six years.

The DP will oppose this motion. [Applause.]

Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Madam Speaker, hon members, conservatism as a political ideology, has to do with conserving that which is good in any system, while accepting change. When the proposal to scrap interpellations was put to the Chief Whips’ Forum for discussion, we were opposed, and still are, to their scrapping.

Interpellations are an instrument which is available to the opposition to hold the executive accountable to Parliament. With the scrapping of interpellations, we see a further reduction of the right of opposition parties to make party-political statements. The one minute given for follow- up questions is, of course, a further reduction of that right. We are aware, of course, that the right to make political statements, is now embodied in the new system. This is a major concession.

We note also the majority party’s reasons for wanting to scrap the interpellations - that they are ``boring’’. It must, however, be remembered that there is no system which is better than the people serving under that system. What must be improved, perhaps, are the skills of debate.

Lastly, as the IFP, we support the trial run with the above reservations. [Applause.]

Mr D M BAKKER: Madam Speaker, since I first came to Parliament, question and interpellation time on a Wednesday has always been a highlight of my weekly programme, and I would never miss this session on a Wednesday afternoon. However, over recent years, due to various circumstances which I do not have time to discuss today, interpellations became less interesting, and I can understand why the ANC wants to try a new system.

Reg van die begin, toe die ANC hul eerste voorstelle op die tafel geplaas het, was daar groot ooreenstemming dat vrae en interpellasies in die huidige vorm verbeter behoort te word. Hoewel die Nuwe NP ernstige voorbehoude oor die ANC se oorspronklike voorstelle gehad het, is daar reeds verskeie toegewings deur die ANC gemaak deur op konsensus-soekende wyse opposisiepartye se voorstelle te akkommodeer. Hierdie toegewings het ons in staat gestel om baie meer positief na ‘n nuwe formaat vir vrae te kyk. In dié verband wil ek my opregte dank uitspreek, spesifiek teenoor die Hoofsweep van die Meerderheidsparty.

Van die belangrikste en ingrypendste veranderings behels onder meer ‘n proeftydperk vir hierdie voorstelle, die instelling van ‘n deurlopende moniteringsmeganisme, die wegbeweeg van ‘n proporsionele grondslag vir die stel van vrae na ‘n rotasiegrondslag, gegrond op die mosie-prosedure, en die onveranderde voortbestaan van alle skriftelike vrae aan Ministers. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Right from the outset, when the ANC laid their first proposals on the table, there has been significant agreement that questions and interpellations in their present form should be improved upon. Although the New NP had serious reservations concerning the ANC’s original proposals, various concessions have already been made by the ANC in a consensus- seeking manner so as to accommodate the proposals of opposition parties. These concessions have enabled us to look at a new format for questions far more positively. In this respect I want to convey my sincere appreciation, specifically to the Chief Whip of the Majority Party.

The most important and radical changes entail, inter alia, a trial period for these proposals, the introduction of an ongoing monitoring mechanism, moving away from a proportional basis for posing questions to a rotation basis, based on motion procedures, and the unchanged continuing of written questions to Ministers.]

There are also several positive aspects in the new proposal. Firstly, it once again confirms the right and duty of all members of the National Assembly to ask questions to members of the executive. Secondly, question time is considerably lengthened. The idea is that more questions should be answered on a question day than is currently the situation, and in this regard, parties will have to co-operate to see that it happens. Thirdly, the new proposal now also provides for making political statements in the time-slot for follow-up questions, which means that many of the questions can become mini-debates. The new proposal entails that the President will answer questions once a quarter. Although we would have preferred this to happen at least once every month, it is still a major improvement over the past five years, during which the President answered no questions in Parliament at all.

Die groepering van Ministers vir vraetyd is ook ‘n verbetering wat tot gevolg sal hê dat Ministers beter beoordeel sal kan word en dat ‘n meer gefokusde debat sal kan plaasvind. Die Nuwe NP sal ook graag wil hê dat daar voorsiening gemaak word vir enkele vrae waarvoor vooraf kennisgewing nie nodig is nie om dringende aangeleenthede te hanteer. Met die voorbehoud dat die stelsel deurgaans gemoniteer en geëvalueer moet word en die nodige regstellings aangebring moet word, steun ons hierdie voorstel omdat ons glo dat dit nuwe uitdagings aan ons sal stel. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The grouping of Ministers for question time is also an improvement that will result in Ministers being better evaluated and a more focused debate taking place. The New NP would also like to see provision being made for a few questions that do not require prior notice for the purpose of dealing with urgent matters. On condition that the system is monitored and evaluated continuously and necessary improvements effected, we support this proposal, because we believe that it will put new challenges to us. [Applause.]]

Mr T ABRAHAMS: Madam Speaker, the political system permitted by our democratic Constitution fosters the existence of a diversity of political organisations, each reflecting a political perspective that must be expressed. In the main, however, the parliamentary procedures that are being adhered to do not suit our changed political circumstances and at times turn towards the incongruous. Hence the very real problem of its inherent incongruity, giving the observing public the distorted idea that to be a modern parliamentarian one has to be either a clown, a pompous buffoon or simply a dullard.

The UDM holds the view that a revision of the procedures of Parliament has become overdue. The basic principle of the old parliaments - that the time allowed a party to express itself on an issue should be commensurate with its numerical representation - renders parliamentary sittings tedious, uninspiring and sometimes downright ridiculous. Thus, for example, the Rules have allowed three parties to participate in interpellations regularly every sitting week, while 10 parties have had to make do with taking turns in the fourth slot.

The UDM will support the motion. We support it because of a very important principle which is being introduced. The UDM hopes to see a return of the interpellation in a different form. We fully support the revision mechanism which was devised by the Whips’ forum in seeking changes to the method of questioning. The innovative idea of suspending the existing Rules, in order to allow for a trial run before changing those Rules, is bound to work, especially because it allows for regular monitoring and modification as we go along. I believe that we should see how it runs. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr L M GREEN: Madam Speaker, the idea of a trial run was the ACDP’s idea. [Interjections.] But - and this is a big but - the draft resolution, as it stands, is not supported by the ACDP for the following reasons. [Interjections.] The first important reason we are raising is the comparison. If we compare the past position with the present position, we believe that this model, as proposed, is being proposed, as the only model. The other alternatives were not considered. [Interjections.]

Instead of doing away with interpellations altogether as a model, we as the ACDP feel that we should also have the introduction of a system that would allow the model of six interpellations on a trial basis. Giving us six interpellations instead of four interpellations would allow political parties, especially the opposition parties, more scope to make the debates lively.

If we compare this, the ANC’s position was that if we looked at interpellations they were boring, they were not interesting and people read their contributions to the debate. I would agree to a certain extent. However, if we look at yesterday’s debate, I doubt whether the interpellations then were boring or uninteresting. Now, although this was the ACDP’s idea, we are not afraid of trial runs. We say that we must have trial runs. But as the draft resolution stands at the moment, the idea we are getting is that it is excluding all other trial runs. We believe that we must give things a trial run, but this should not be the only other trial run. We want to see a DP trial run, we want to see an ACDP-PAC trial run, we want to see trial runs of all the other opposition parties. [Applause.]

Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, the FF sees itself as a modern political party. We are in favour of renewal, reform and change. We have no obsession with the past or certain practices of the past. As a matter of fact, we strongly believe that South Africa’s Constitution also needs urgent renewal, reform and change. But that is a different discussion for a different topic.

Today we are discussing a proposal by the majority party to drastically change the fundamental aspect of how parliamentary procedure works, namely questions and interpellations. The question is: Why? Why do we need to change the system? That is the basic question. The fact of the matter is that the present system makes provision for one interpellation for the Government and three for the opposition. With regard to the questions, the governing party never really asked any questions. Why are we changing this?

The matter of fact is that opposition parties that are supporting this proposal are making a major mistake. [Interjections.] One cannot, for one moment, go into the technical detail. The principle is wrong. The principle should be that question time should be opposition time. [Interjections.] It is not for the Government to use those times for themselves. It is opposition time.

When we came to this Parliament, after the June election, Madam Speaker clearly asked: How do we manage a Parliament with 13 parties? Maybe, we made a mistake. It is not a question of how we manage a Parliament with 13 parties. The question is: How do we manage a Parliament with 15 parties? Thirteen of those parties are visible and two of them are invisible. The two invisible ones are Mr Cronin’s SA Communist Party and Cosatu. [Interjections.] Those are the two. [Interjections.]

The fact is that the SA Communist Party and Cosatu want to use 50% of question time to keep the ANC on its toes. [Interjections.] That is what it is all about. It is not about true opposition. No party can support this proposition. We will reject it. [Applause.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Madam Speaker and hon members, we have been on a learning curve over the past nine months. We appreciate the magnanimity of the ANC in giving some of their time to the opposition.

While we welcome change, such change should be for the better. The proposed system of party questions, if followed as proposed, will hurt the opposition parties the most. If such parties file questions to the President, chances are that their questions may only be answered after some three years or so. This is most unacceptable. While the current system rewards hard work through the first-come, first-served principle, those who bring in their questions in time get a chance to have them answered. But where one has to follow a set pattern, one sits with the problem of always having to stand at the back of the queue.

With the proposed new system, the parties cited above may have their questions answered only after some 80 questions have been answered or filed by some parties to the Ministers. That means that, for a whole month or so, the said parties will be sitting here without anything to do. The proposal may appear attractive on paper, but, in real practice, it is not as it should be.

On that note, the UCDP will not align itself with this proposal. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mrs P DE LILLE: Madam Speaker … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mrs P DE LILLE: I have not even opened my mouth and there is a lot of noise already. [Interjections.]

I want to put it on record that, in a meeting held on 8 March, I asked a question, and deliberately so, because I wanted a clear answer. I said that the PAC was in agreement with the view that interpellations should not be scrapped permanently. This was the answer from the ANC. Mr Doidge said that there was no permanent scrapping of interpellations. It was a trial run of the proposal, and the abolition of interpellations was not a permanent decision. That is our understanding.

But, I also want to add that it is a fact of life that the ANC, combined, has only asked 2,5% of the questions in the past five years. The opposition parties combined, have asked 97,5%. We understand that the ANC wants to use this as a public relations exercise to improve their image. We will grant them a couple of weeks to do so. [Interjections.]

I also want to agree with hon President Thabo Mbeki when he said that the level of debate in this Parliament is so low, that members of Parliament should read more. I am sure that he was referring to his members of Parliament, because they should read more. They should do some more research and work so that we can have important debates in this House. [Interjections.]

I hope that after this, we will take a final decision on whether we are going to go ahead with it or not, but the PAC only supports the trial run. [Applause.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Madam Speaker, questions and … [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order!

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Madam Speaker, questions and interpellations posed by the opposition parties in Parliament are an important aspect of any democratic parliament. In their present form they have became pale and uninspiring to some extent. So a new experiment is before us, and the FA supports the provisional changes of the Rules in this regard to make the interaction between Government Ministers and opposition parties more relevant.

The success of this experiment will depend not so much on the Rules before us, but on the spirit in which the Ministers and questioners interact to create a new convention in this regard. However, there are serious limitations in the new proposals. They minimise the opportunity of smaller parties to interact with Government. They also increase the opportunity for members of the majority party to put sweetheart questions to their Government. The support for the change by the FA is thus provisional, and a final decision will be taken in time to assess how these changes facilitate an effective, better interaction between Government and opposition parties.

Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, questions and interpellations are a transparent method used to clarify doubts and enforce accountability on important issues. The mechanism used at present to put forward questions and interpellations is time consuming and most often, owing to unwarranted circumstances, answers cannot be received timeously.

I therefore support the new guidelines for questions and interpellations. The guidelines are reasonable and provide all role-players with the maximum time to co-operate with each other. The new procedure should be given an opportunity to be exercised on a trial-and-error basis. During the process we should monitor and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages, which should determine our final decision. [Applause.]

Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, the temptation is very great for me today to congratulate the AEB and its candidate, Mr Leon Fick, on the AEB’s first win in a municipal by-election yesterday in Newcastle. [Applause.] And that was against the mighty ANC! As the by-election has nothing in common with the subject of questions and interpellations, I will refrain from doing that. [Laughter.] May I, however, challenge any party in this House to double its caucus of elected representatives within one day. [Laughter.] With regard to the proposed change of the interpellation format in this House, the AEB says no.

Interpellasies is die een werksaamheid van hierdie Huis wat die grootste openbare belangstelling uitlok. Ja, daar was probleme met die stelsel, maar nou wil ons die kind met die badwater uitgooi.

Ons kan eerstens ‘n sommetjie gaan maak. Volgens die ou stelsel van interpellasies het die ANC een uit elke vier beurte gehad; nou word dit een uit drie. Verder het die ANC by monde van sy Ministers agt uit die 15 minute van elke interpellasie gehad; nou word dit 13 uit 18 minute.

Tweedens vereis die nuwe stelsel dat vrae ligjare voor die tyd reeds gestel moet word. Teen die tyd dat die Minister dit moet beantwoord sodat dit gedebatteer kan word, is dit dikwels al dood en begrawe.

Derdens maak vrae deur die ANC aan die ANC eenvoudig nie sin nie. In die reël is dit regte Siembamba-vragies, en heel dikwels word dit gebruik as ‘n vooraf georkestreerde beeldbou-oefening vir die betrokke Minister. Nog nie een keer in hierdie Huis moes ‘n Minister behoorlik keer vir sy paaltjies as die ANC ‘n bal na hom geboul het nie.

Vierdens is die stelsel van rotasie en groepering van kabinetsposte heeltemal te ingewikkeld. Ons sal later nie meer weet of dit Dinsdag of Dingaansdag is nie. Vrae wat oorstaan, sal dan drie weke moet oorstaan tot die volgende geleentheid vir die betrokke kabinetsgroep.

Die AEB is daarvan oortuig dat die nuwe stelsel nog minder reg sal laat geskied aan die beginsel van verantwoording van die uitvoerende gesag aan hierdie Parlement. Die AEB, met sy verdubbelde koukus, stem heelhartig daarteen. [Tussenwerpsels.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Interpellations are the one activity in this House that elicits the most public interest. Yes, there were problems with the system, but now we want to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

We can first make a quick calculation. According to the old system of interpellations the ANC had one out of every four turns; now this becomes one out of every three. Furthermore the ANC, through its Ministers, had eight of the 15 minutes of each interpellation; now this becomes 13 out of 18 minutes.

Secondly, the new system requires questions to be posed light-years before the time. By the time the Minister must answer it so that it can be debated, it is often already dead and buried.

Thirdly, questions by the ANC to the ANC simply make no sense. As a rule they are real Siembamba questions, and quite often this is used as a previously orchestrated image-building exercise for the relevant Minister. Not once has a Minister really had to defend his wickets when the ANC has bowled to him in this House.

Fourthly, the system of rotation and grouping of Cabinet posts is far too complicated. We will eventually not know what day of the week it is. Questions that stand over will have to stand over for three weeks until the next opportunity for that particular Cabinet group.

The AEB is convinced that the new system will do even less justice to the principle of accounting to Parliament by the executive authority. The AEB, with its doubled caucus, votes wholeheartedly against this. [Interjections.]]

Mr M A MANGENA: Madam Speaker, it is our understanding that there is a desire on the part of all of us to improve the interaction between members of this House and the executive, and that the present arrangement is not entirely satisfactory; and hence the need for all of us to search for other effective ways of enriching the debates between the Government and the legislature.

The suggested two-hour question time is such an attempt. Azapo supports a trial run of the new system. Some among us doubt whether this will indeed be an improvement; whether it will not disadvantage some parties; whether it will not make Parliament dull. Azapo hopes that all of us will keep an open mind during the trial run; that we will, as objectively as possible, monitor and assess the new system; and that we will all come together soon to refine or change the system until we have something that works. It should not only work, but be fair, equitable, just and interesting.

Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Madam Speaker, we are a new Parliament in a new democracy. Our new dispensation was forged out of a ground-breaking process of negotiation and reconciliation. We came to this House recognising that we had to transform the workings of Parliament. We set about this in a sober and sensible way, not trying to change everything immediately, but taking a long view; first understanding the system so that we could retain the good and change what does not work.

One of the most complex issues is that of parliamentary questions. How do we ensure that question time is lively, informative and meaningful? How do we fulfil our constitutional obligation to hold the executive to account? What does accountability mean particularly in terms of that section - members of the Cabinet are accountable collectively and individually to Parliament for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions.

The Constitution is clear. The executive is accountable to Parliament. It is Parliament to whom the executive must give an account of its activities. It is Parliament that must hold the executive to account, ensuring that its actions are in line with the stated aims, and for the benefit of the people, not solely to the opposition, but to all of us as MPs. [Interjections.]

The DP is the sole party that has not supported our plan to change questions and interpellations - a plan for scrapping the lifeless interpellations that were introduced by P W Botha. [Interjections.] And it was an artificial platform to boost his government. We have devised a plan ensuring that there is an even spread of questions between parties, creating more lively and spontaneous interchange between Ministers and backbenchers.

The DP has not been able to move out of its past as a party condemned to eternal opposition. [Interjections.] Mr Gibson speaks about a Government Whip. What is a Government Whip? What is a Government Whip? [Interjections.] It has failed to grasp the opportunities of participating in a constructive collective to build a new society. The DP resists change to the question system that does not work. The old system was unwieldy. The ANC could have flooded the question paper, make no mistake. [Interjections.] It allowed parties to flood the Question Paper by employing researchers to come up with repetitive questions and used to recycle questions, I tell hon members.

The ANC could simply have used our resources to flood the Question Paper, squeezing the opposition out. But we wanted a system that works for all parties and that promotes fairness. This is a fair system. We are not insisting on proportionality. We are not saying that we should have two questions out of every three. But we are saying that, as a party that has the overwhelming support of the electorate, two thirds, we should not have to resort to guerrilla tactics to get on to the Question Paper. [Interjections.]

The DP believes that it is the sole agent of accountability. But what about a legislature where the voters have voted so overwhelmingly for the majority party that there are only one or two opposition members. Does accountability fall away? [Interjections.] It is not a dangerous assumption. [Laughter.]

We in the ANC come from a tradition of vigorous debate and not yelling like the hon Mr Ellis. [Interjections.] We have perhaps been a little tentative in asking our Ministers searching questions or a little intimidated by the traditions of this often archaic and colonial institution. Is the hon member listening? [Interjections.] We now have a different understanding of our roles as parliamentarians. Maybe I should face this way. There is more sense there. [Interjections.]

It is not our job, as the opposition thinks it is theirs, to seek to embarrass Government. But we do know that as the voice of the people, as this institution that holds Government to account, we are the foot soldiers of Government and we will use this forum to get answers from Government and to point out where the challenges lie. We believe that our committee process and the way that we engage on issues of national importance has paved the way for us to hold Government to account in a challenging yet constructive way. [Interjections.]

There are those who like to paint the ANC as a docile group, bullied by the leadership, compliant and submissive. Anyone who believes this, is ill informed or uninformed. [Interjections.] We are a family, united in our commitment to transformation, so that our differences are aired without acrimony. It is in this spirit that we engage with Government.

The issue of questions to the President seems to get the opposition, and in particular Mr Leon of the DP, very worked up. Our President is both the head of state and the head of the executive. He is not, as the hon Gibson thinks, a prime minister in the Westminster system. There is no constitutional requirement for the President to answer questions in Parliament. The President has chosen to answer questions in Parliament, believing that this is an important aspect of accountability and transparency. Questions put to him that he is unable to answer in person will be answered by the Deputy President, himself the holder of an office defined in the Constitution. [Interjections.] Mr Ellis should listen. No question to the Presidency will be unanswered.

Some of our opposition members, such as Mr Gibson, are locked into the Westminster mind-set that there should be a weekly debate between the President and the Leader of the Opposition. We are not a parliament dominated by two parties and our people are not obsessed with who has the sharper tongue or more caustic wit. Our people have elected the ANC by an overwhelming majority, choosing a party committed to delivery and transformation over parties that make policy by sound bites. Our people are concerned with improving their lives. Our Government’s first priority is the people. Yes, our President must account to Parliament, but he must also fulfil his function as head of state and head of government and lead our nation to its commitment to transformation.

To Mr Ellis’s surprise, the ANC has taken on board the concerns of the opposition parties. It has accommodated these and welcomes the sufficient consensus reached by the majority of opposition parties. We look forward to lively Wednesdays with focused questions, lively interaction and useful information. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the motion be agreed to.

Division demanded.

The House divided:

AYES - 241: Abrahams, L A; Abrahams, T; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Asmal, A K; Bakker, D M; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Baloyi, S F; Belot, S T; Benjamin, J; Beukman, F; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, G B; Blaas, A; Bloem, D V; Bogopane, H I; Botha, N G W; Carrim, Y I; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chiba, L; Chikane, M M; Cindi, N V; Coetzee-Kasper, M P; Cronin, J P; Davies, R H; De Beer, S J; De Lange, J H; De Lille, P; Diale, L N; Didiza, A T; Dlamini, B O; Doidge, G Q M; Dowry, J J; Duma, N M; Durand, J; Du Toit, D C; Dyani, M M Z; Ebrahim, E I; Erwin, A; Fankomo, F C; Feinstein, A J; Ferreira, E T; Fihla, N B; Fraser-Moleketi, G J; Gandhi, E; Gaum, A H; Gcina, C I; Gillwald, C E; Gininda, M S; Gogotya, N J; Goniwe, T M; Greyling, C H F; Grové, S P; Gumede, D M; Gxowa, N B; Hajaig, F; Hanekom, D A; Hendrickse, P A C; Hlengwa, M W; Hogan, B A; Holomisa, S P; Jassat, E E; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kekana, N N; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Khoza, T S; Kota, Z A; Landers, L T; Leeuw, S J; Lekgoro, M K; Lekgoro, M M S; Lishivha, T E; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Lucas, E J; Lyle, A G; Mabudafhasi, T R; Mahlalela, C C; Mahlangu, G L; Maimane, D S; Makunyane, T L; Makwetla, S P; Malebane, H F; Maloney, L; Maluleke-Hlaneki, C J; Malumise, M M; Mangena, M A; Maphalala, M A; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Marshoff, F B; Martins, B A D; Masala, M M; Mashimbye, J N; Masutha, M T; Mathebe, P M; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Maziya, A M; Mbadi, L M; Mbombo, N D; Mbongo, P F; Mbuyazi, L R; Mgidi, J S; Middleton, N S; Mkhize, B R; Mlangeni, A; Mnandi, P N; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mogale, E P; Mogoba, M S; Mokoena, D A; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B G; Moloto, K A; Momberg, J H; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Morwamoche, K W; Moss, M I; Mothoagae, P K; Motubatse, S D; Mpaka, H M; Mpehle, M; Mpontshane, A M; Mshudulu, S A; Msomi, M D; Mthembu, B; Mzondeki, M J G; Naidoo, S; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncinane, I Z; Ncube, B; Ndabandaba, L B G; Ndlovu, V B; Ndou, R S; Ngubane, H; Nel, A C; Nel, A H; Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngculu, L V J; Ngwane, L B; Nhleko, N P; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njobe, M A A; Nkomo, A S; Nkosi, D M; Nqakula, C; Ntshangase, I B; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, M B; Ntuli, S B; Nzimande, B M; Nzimande, L P M; Odendaal, W A; Olckers, M E; Olifant, D A A; Oliphant, G G; Omar, A M; Pahad, A G H; Pahad, E G; Phala, M J; Phantsi, N E; Phohlela, S; Pieterse, R D; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Rabinowitz, R; Radebe, B A; Radebe, J T; Rajbally, S; Rajoo, K; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Rasmeni, S M; Rhoda, R T; Ripinga, S S; Schneemann, G D; Schoeman, E A; Schoeman, R S; Scott, M I; Sekgobela, P S; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shilubana, T P; Shope, N R; Sigcau, S N; Sigcawu, A N; Sigwela, E M; Sikakane, M R; Simmons, S; Sithole, D J; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Slabbert, J H; Smith, P F; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Solomon, G; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Tshivhase, T J; Turok, B; Twala, N M; Vadi, I; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, A S; Van der Merwe, J H; Van der Merwe, S C; Van Deventer, F J; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Niekerk, A I; Van Wyk, A (Anna); Van Wyk, A (Annelizé); Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Verwoerd, M; Vilakazi, B H; Xingwana, L M T; Zondi, K M; Zondo, R P.

NOES - 44: Andrew, K M; Baloi, G E; Bell, B G; Borman, G M; Botha, A J; Bruce, N S; Clelland, N J; Cupido, P W; Da Camara, M L; Davidson, I O; De Vos, P J; Delport, J T; Ditshetelo, P H K; Eglin, C W; Ellis, M J; Farrow, S B; Gibson, D H M; Gore, V C; Green, L M; Grobler, G A J; Heine, R J; Kalyan, S V; Lee, T D; Leon, A J; Madasa, Z L; Maluleke, D K; Meshoe, K R J; Mfundisi, I S; Moorcroft, E K; Mulder, C P; Ntuli, R S; Opperman, S E; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semple, J A; Seremane, W J; Sigabi, N B; Singh, A; Smuts, M; Southgate, R M; Swart, P S; Swart, S N; Taljaard, R; Viljoen, C L.

Question agreed to.

Motion accordingly agreed to.

                           POINT OF ORDER

                              (Ruling)

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Before we proceed to the first Order of the Day, I would first of all … Order, hon members! I would like to recognise a delegation from the agriculture department of the United States of America. [Applause.] [Interjections.]

Order! May I have some order, hon members! During the debate on an interpellation on Wednesday, 1 March, the hon De Lange raised a point of order concerning a statement that was made by the hon the Leader of the Opposition which, he contended, was in breach of Rule 66.

Rule 66 states that members shall not reflect upon the competence or honour of the holder of an office whose removal from such office is dependent upon a decision of this House, except upon a substantive motion.

In terms of the Human Rights Commission Act commissioners must serve impartially and independently, and exercise or perform their functions without fear, favour, bias or prejudice. The Leader of the Opposition stated that the chairperson of the Human Rights Commission had made, and I quote:

… unsubstantiated accusations of racism, which I think have done great damage to the very cause of human rights which the commission itself is charged with.

I regard this statement as a reflection on the integrity of the chairperson of the SA Human Rights Commission and in breach of Rule 66, and must therefore ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw these remarks.

HON MEMBERS: Yes!

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I withdraw the remarks.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.

       CONSIDERATION OF FIRST REPORT OF JOINT RULES COMMITTEE

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON LABOUR - ELIMINATION OF CHILD LABOUR CONVENTION

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

                     COMPETITION AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

Order disposed of without debate.   Bill read a second time.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION - VISITS TO EASTERN CAPE AND KWAZULU-NATAL

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON WELFARE AND POPULATION DEVELOPMENT - CENTRAL DRUG AUTHORITY Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

CONSIDERATION OF FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

CONSIDERATION OF SECOND REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

CONSIDERATION OF THIRD REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted. CONSIDERATION OF FOURTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

                 LAND AFFAIRS GENERAL AMENDMENT BILL

(Consideration of Bill and of Report of Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs thereon)

Order disposed of without debate.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

Debate on Vote No 3 - Agriculture, and Vote No 20 - Land Affairs:

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOLIMO NEZEMIHLABA: Somlomo, malungu ahloniphekile ePhalamende, zivakashi zethu ezikhona lapha ezivela emnyangweni wezolimo waseMelika kanye namalungu esifunda, ikakhulukazi lawo amele uhlaka lwezolimo, njengoMnu Makweya okhona lapha ovela eNtshonalanga Kapa nabantu abakhona esibamemile ukuthi bazolalela lolu daba esikhuluma ngalo lokwabiwa kwezimali zoMnyango wezoLimo nezemiHlaba, ngiyanibingelela.

Uma ngingathi qaphu-qaphu nje, ukusukela eminyakeni emihlanu edlule, singasho ukuthi lokhu kuyisikhumbuzo sokuthi sivelaphi, siyaphi, sikuphi futhi namhlanje. Okunye ngukuthi lolu hambo esiluhambile kule minyaka emihlanu lusinikeza izikhumbuzo zokuthi sijabule kangakanani emsebenzini wethu, kwaphinde kwaba nobunzima obungakanani. Kodwa okubalulekile kuyo yonke le minyaka emihlanu, ngukuthi sifundile ukuthi uguquko kuseyilona hlaka okufuneka silhambe ngalo. Awukapheli umsebenzi wokwakha kabusha leli zwe lethu. Ngakho-ke mangisho ukuthi, uma sibheka, singasho ukuthi umgudu esawuthatha ngo-1994, woHlelo loKwakha kaBusha nokuThuthukisa usasisiza ukuthi sibheke phambili lapho sifuna ukuya khona.

Sithe uma silungiselela lo Hulumeni wesibili okhombisa ukuthi sesihambe safikaphi, singamalungu amaningi ezinhlangano zombusazwe esilapha, sahamba saya kubantu sayosho ukuthi thina sizobenzelani nokuthi sizoyenza kanjani impilo yabo ibe ngcono. Abantu bona babe sebeyaziqokela. Baqoka kahle, baqoaka inhlangano ka-ANC. Basho ngamavoti abo bathi: Nansi inhlangano ezokwenza inpilo yethu ibe ngcono. Mangisho futhi ukuthi ababekusho ngukuthi kule minyaka emihlanu nihambe kahle, niyazama. Senisibekile isisekelo. Babesho futhi ukuthi manhe sesininikeza omunye umdlandla ukuze niqhubeke phela nokwenza impilo yethu ibe ngcono. Thina, singu-ANC, savuma sathi elethu. Impela sathi sizokwenza lokho abakufunayo simbambisene nabo.

Uma siwukhumbula kahle umyalezo kaMongameli eqala ukuvula le Ndlu yomKhandlu, wathi masibambisane. Thina njengomNyango wezoLimo, kusukeka ngoJuni, siye sahlangana nezinhlangano eziningi zalabo bantu esisebenzisana nabo njengabalimi savumelana ukuthi ngempela kufanele sibambisane. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, hon members, our distinguished guests who come from the Department of Agriculture in America, hon members who are representing their provincial agricultural departments, like Mr Makweya who is present today and who is representing the Western Cape, people whom we invited to come and listen to the issues that we will be discussing concerning the budget in the Department of Agriculture and Land affairs, I take pleasure in saluting all of you.

If I briefly look at the past five years, we can say that this is a reminder of where we come from, where we are going and where we are at the moment. Another thing is that the journey we have been taking for the past five years, has reminded us of our satisfaction with our work, and how tough the problems were that we were facing. The important thing about the last five-year period is that we have learnt that transformation is the foundation that we should build upon. The task of developing our country is not finished. Therefore I must say that if we look at where we come from, we can say that the route that we took in 1994, the one that is about reconstructing and developing our country, is still guiding us on our way to achieve our objectives.

During our preparation for the second democratic government, which would show how far we have come as members of different political parties, we went to tell the people what we would do for them and how we would improve their lives. People then made a choice and they chose well, because they chose the ANC. Through their votes they said: This is the party that will improve our lives.'' I must say that another thing that they said was: You have done well in the past five years. You are trying your best. You have laid the foundation.’’ They also said: ``Today we give you support so that you will continue improving our lives.’’ We, as the ANC, agreed. We said we would cooperate with them and do what they would want us to do.

We remember well the message of the President when he opened Parliament, and he said: “We need to work co-operatively”. In the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, since June, we have met with several farmers’ organisations and we have agreed that we will work co-operatively.]

Today is the start of what I hope will be a constructive political debate on the Agriculture and Land Affairs budget for the year 2000-01. This afternoon, we will have to debate about the allocations that have been given to us by Parliament.

The first part of my input will be on agriculture. I have had the privilege in the first democratic Government to serve as Deputy Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, and opportunity which I hope will serve as a basic building block to the challenges before me in my new capacity as the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs.

I am now charged with the responsibility to deliver land for development and to change the structure of landownership in South Africa. At the same time, I have the responsibility to provide leadership for the national governance service in support of sustained agricultural economic growth, equity and social development.

The challenges for Government in terms of developing South African agriculture remains the need to deracialise the sector, promote and support economic growth and to ensure that in our pursuit of these policies, we attain a better life for our people and continuously nurture our natural resources. This was articulated by the ANC in 1994 when we ushered our first democracy. Various initiatives to respond to the legacy of apartheid were put in place, and now, almost six years later, we are beginning to see the results of those interventions.

One key initiative was the effort to broaden access to agricultural services, particularly to those who did not have it before. As an outcome of that process we have identified the constraints faced by the previously disadvantaged farmers. We have prioritised their concerns and developed new instruments for information dissemination amongst them.

Key to the new South Africa was the range of initiatives aimed at creating a culture of inclusivity in the industry. We now no longer find it strange to find black people, young people and women taking an active role in the agricultural economy. Another major initiative was the deregulation of our agricultural markets and the removal of the control boards. This has positioned us well for participating as a country in the global markets, while at the same time raising new challenges about the necessary elements for a truly competitive economy.

At another level our changed approach to the conservation of our natural resources has resulted in our people taking responsibility for caring for our soils, water and biodiversity. We would like to express our gratitude for the partnerships that we have had amongst our people as well as with the Australian government and the United States in this programme of land care. We are now placed as a fully fledged member of the international economy. [Applause.] This experience has confirmed to all that agriculture has a central role to play in building a strong economy whilst contributing to increased income and employment opportunities for the poor.

The strategic emphasis on rural development further challenges us as a sector to work for increases in production and income at farm level in order to provide the necessary stimulus for the development of the economy. We believe that a matter of critical significance is the benefit that should come when the increases are generated by resource-limited small- scale and black farmers. I think it is necessary to dwell for a moment on the concept of small-scale agriculture in South Africa.

Past experience has shown that the term small-scale'' is laden with subjectivity and has been associated for a long time with nonproductive agriculture that is not commercially viable. The truth of the matter is that black farmers are not exclusively small, nor would it be correct to limit the definition ofsmall-scale’’ to those who are black. Small-scale farmers in South Africa can be anyone, black or white, woman or youth. What is of the essence now is that small-scale enterprises can become commercially viable if correctly supported.

One of the realities of South Africa, however, is that most black farmers, whether small-scale or not, have limited access to land and capital and have received inadequate or inappropriate research extension and marketing support. This has limited their ability to grow and is a direct result of the legacy of apartheid and our history of land dispossession. This in turn has resulted in an undue reliance, to a greater or lesser extent, on subsistence production. As if to add insult to injury, this sad state of affairs is used by some to justify the perpetual exclusion of black farmers from large-scale and intensive commercial agriculture, by finding reasons every time for using the expression ``poorest of the poor’’ instead of actually acknowledging the fact that our responsibility as Government and as a society is to eradicate poverty in our midst.

Given the South African experience we have resolved to deal with all farmers, recognising that they operate on different farm sizes. What remains is to finalise the characterisation of small-scale, medium-scale and large-scale farms using a combination of the size of the holding and its capacity to generate income. Nonetheless, I wish to reiterate that the challenge facing us in this second democracy with regard to the deracialisation of the sector is to ensure that we increase the participation of those who were previously disadvantaged.

Mangisho ukuthi uma sikhulma ngokushintsha ubuso kumbe isithombe sezolimo kule ngabadi, kuzofanele siquale sibone oMaZondi, sibone noTshawe njalo njalo, abazobe bengabalomi abasondlayo kule ngabadi yakithi. Ngalawo mazwi, umsebenzi wethu kaHulumeni usho ukuthi kuzofanele siyeke ukucabanga ukuthi uma sikhuluma ngomlimi sisuke sikhuluma ngalabo abamhlophe kuphela kumbe ondlebe zikhanya ilanga. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[I would like to say that if we talk about changing the face or the picture of farming in this country, we should first see black people from different ethnic backgrounds, feeding us in this country. In other words, our work in the Government demands that we should not think that if we are talking about farmers we are only referring to white farmers.] In October last year, we held an agricultural indaba with the aim of establishing an annual forum for dialogue between Government, farmers and labour where they could deliberate on those issues that are critical for the sustainable development of agriculture. There was general agreement that, in order to achieve economic growth and development, we would need to address various challenges such as improving the competitiveness of industries in this sector, implementing farmer settlement and dynamising our trade promotion, as well as ensuring the creation of jobs in the agricultural sector. In order to ensure that we attain these objectives, we will dedicate resources towards the gathering and proper analysis of statistics, the search for effective policies and development strategies and the commercialisation of the subsistence sector, as well as interaction with other countries to promote and protect our international trade interests.

I must say that it has been heartening to look at the results of the partnerships that we have with some of the organised agricultural organisations such as Agri SA. The work that they did while they were still Nampo, in those days, together with black commercial farmers in the North- West region in particular, on how they could improve their maize yields and also start to bring them into the commercial fold, has indicated to us that if we work in partnership, and if we support one another, we can indeed contribute to economic development in the agricultural sector.

I must say that working together with the Department of Trade and Industry, we will continue to engage the World Trade Organisation, the EU and other trading partners in order to achieve our trade interests in the agricultural field. I must commend my colleague, Minister Alec Erwin, and his team, together with the team in Agriculture, who fought fearlessly at the World Trade Organisation meeting in Seattle and with the EU to ensure that we continue the fight around grappa and ouzo, and they did that with the interests of South African farmers at heart. I hope that, as we start the round of negotiations with the WTO, we will firmly work as partners. Clearly, this has shown the integration of government in practice. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

We will commence with efforts to increase the economic integration of the Southern African region. We have agreed on the implementation of the SADC protocol, and we are mindful of the challenges that this will pose in the agricultural sector. In working with the industry, we will be able to find synergy on how we can actually maximise this free-trade area, both for our region and ourselves. As a Government department, we have been working already with some of our member states to ensure that we remove some of the sticky points that can actually cause unnecessary irritations when we implement such a protocol.

I must say that for us to be successful in the Southern African development integration, as well as in ensuring that we continue to improve our trade opportunities, we have agreed that we would need to redirect our resources in order to ensure that there is capacity for the promotion of both domestic markets and international markets. We are also saying that it is important to manage agricultural statistics if we are to do this correctly. We also have to revisit our green box measures on how we can develop defensive trade measures, not in a way that is obstructive to competition, but will allow us actually to defend our farmers against the dangers that are sometimes posed by those who are oversubsidised.

I know that this House will agree with me that growth must increasingly be based on the ability to export and compete on the world markets in the products that we produce. I also give the assurance that this will be done with the full appreciation of the fact that the empowerment of historically disadvantaged citizens has to continue to become our thrust in terms of our economic programme.

One of the important issues that the agricultural indaba last year in October deliberated on was job creation. For us, it is very clear that if we are to be a country that can employ its citizens and ensure that we effectively deal with issues of poverty, agriculture remains a key focus in terms of employment creation. Our implementation of the Jobs Summit commitments do attest to this. When we implemented our land care programme, we were able to create about 3 046 jobs. But it was not just about job creation. The results indicated to us, in terms of the projects that we implemented, particularly in the Carolina district in Mpumalanga, where we provided technical advice and resources to improve the quality of the soils in order to reverse the acidity problem, that farmers in that district were able to double their yields of maize production.

In this coming year, we will focus on supporting agricultural job creation through labour-intensive agriculture, again within our land care projects such as the livestock development programme among sheep farmers in the Eastern Cape. I must also indicate that one of these programmes, in which we will be working with the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, is that of improving water conservation and water quality in some of our Government estates. One of those projects will be implemented at Arabie in the Northern Province.

Linked to this rethinking about how we as Government can facilitate the development of production and marketing infrastructure, particularly in the former homelands, I have been engaged in discussions with my colleague, the Minister of Public Works, to identify concrete initiatives where public infrastructure can be developed or rehabilitated with the deliberate objective of facilitating agricultural economic development. To this end we have identified two projects in which we will be working together. One of those is in my beautiful province of KwaZulu-Natal, at Ingwavuma in Makhathini. The other will be in the Eastern Cape, particularly around the Lambasi farms.

Madam Speaker, I am sorry, I did not see that you were in the House. I kept on referring to you as Madam Deputy Speaker. I must say, Madam Speaker and hon members, that all these things that we said had to be done, which are so good, will actually remain dreams if we do not pay attention to some of the important areas. I must indicate that in order for us to achieve our objectives, access to appropriate information and services becomes critical. All around us are rapid developments in the application of information technology that require that we in agriculture also move with the times. The content of information, however, remains a long-term challenge.

I am pleased to announce that the department is in the process of setting up an early-warning and information system for food security and natural disasters as part of our national information system. To sustain these, we need to attract and retain adequate numbers of statisticians, economists and the link professions within Government. Agricultural research results are critical for farmer development. I must say that the department, and have noted the concerns raised in our budget review by members of the portfolio committee about the decline of the agricultural research budget. We do agree that this is a matter of concern.

However, we will take up these matters in our interaction with my colleague the Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. In the meantime, the current budget will be directed to programmes that seek to improve technology transfer, training and extension. Furthermore, we have identified specific products, largely indigenous in nature, whose use by small-scale producers we will support.

Izinto ezifana nokusansangu kodwa okungesiyo esikubiza sithi phecelezi ngolimi lukaJoji sithi i-hemp, amadumbe, nezindlubu. Ezinye zezinto lezi esincediswa ngazo yilabo abacwaninga ukuthi ngabe yiziphi izinto ezintsha, kumbe izitshalo ezintsha, ezingasilekelela ukuthi sikwazi ukungena kulezo zimakethe ebesingekho kuzo ngaphambilini.

Uma ngingathi nqampu-nqampu i-hemp le, efana nokusansangu, iyakwazi ukwenza indwangu enjengalawa malokwe esiwagqokile namhlanje kumbe yenze o-dashboard bezimoto. Emsebenzini esiwenzayo-ke kulokhu, sisebenzisana nabakwa-Mercedes Benz ngoba nabo banawo umdlandla wokubheka ukuthi bangasisebenzisa kanjani lesi sitshalo esisitshalayo. Ngithi-ke, kule mali encane esiyitholayo yocwaningo lwezolimo, sizobhekisisa kulezo zinto ezibalulekile zokuveza izinguquko ezintsha kulezo zinto esizikhiqizayo. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Things like dagga, but not the one that we call hemp in English, the amadumbe, and the izindlubu are some of things that we are being helped with by those who are conducting research on new crops, the crops that will enable us to enter into those markets that we could not enter before.

In brief, hemp produces dagga, and its fibre can be used to make clothes such as we are wearing today. It can also make dashboards. To make the latter possible, we are working together with Mercedes Benz, because this company has shown interest in finding out how it can use this type of plant that we grow. Therefore, I would like to say that, with this small amount of money that we were given to conduct research on agriculture, we will consider the important things that will improve our product.]

Support services can only succeed against the background of adequate basic infrastructure. Infrastructural provision focusing on water, energy, transport, storage and communication should be recognised as the basis of economic activity and pursued as such. Farmers should not be relegated to the past when it comes to infrastructural development and technological advancement. They also want to have cellular phones, and therefore I say to Comrade Ivy that I think such infrastructure should also be provided in those areas where my constituency works and resides. [Applause.]

Farmers know that one cannot expect to reap where one has not sown. It is only proper that the nation should show its appreciation of this wisdom by ensuring that the budget provides for the necessary investment in the future of this industry. Enhancing our household food security remains our priority. All our policies, including those guiding land reform, international trade and rural development, must result in greater availability and accessibility of food at household level. Our policy has shifted from that of national self-sufficiency to household food security in accordance with our commitment to the elimination of hunger and malnutrition amongst all members of our society.

I am pleased to announce that as Government, in partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organisation, we are implementing a special food security programme which has two main components: That of irrigation rehabilitation and that of diversification of crops. This will improve the production capacity of subsistence and resource-limited farmers in the areas of the Northern Cape, the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal.

I would like to turn to Vote No 20, that of Land Affairs. I think all of us in this House will agree that the land question in South Africa remains one of our daunting challenges. In the past five years we have laid the basis, both in terms of legal instruments, as well as programmes for addressing the legacy of our past.

In presenting the Vote of the Department of Land Affairs, I would like to indicate the achievements that have been made so far, as well as the challenges that continue to confront us, and the programmes and budgetary implications of dealing with these. If one were to look at our achievements for the past five years, one would see that our redistribution programme has shown steady progress. We have given land to those people who were landless. We have ensured that some of our projects have a mix of both settlement and agricultural activity. We do note that indeed in this area there had been many other programmes, such as commonages, both in the rural towns, as well as now in the rural communities.

There has also been an exponential increase in the number of settled claims when it comes to restitution. If we look back at the number of claims we settled in March 1999, we only had about 41, but today we can proudly say that we had settled about 1 651 by the end of February 2000. We have set a target which we hope we will meet by March 2000, that of settling about 3000 claims.

We would like to rejoice with communities of Sophiatown, which have been waiting for so long before we were finally able to resolve their claims of the past years. [Applause.] We would again like to say that, when it comes to restitution, particularly that of land restoration to those communities which have been disadvantaged previously, we have been able to settle the claim of the community around Putfontein, in the North West, and we will soon be finalising the claim of the community of West Bank in East London, before the end of March 2000. [Applause.] I think this will help hon members as they go back to their constituencies to, at least, be able to respond to the questions as to what happens to one claim or another. However, that indicates the work that we have actually done in the past five years, and which we will continue doing.

We are aware of the concerns that people have raised around this programme

• that it is slow and that it has not given the results that we all desire. We say yes, that is true. However, if one looks at some of the instruments that we have put in place, particularly in January, we actually have some increase. I think for this we must say thank you to Comrade Hanekom for the administrative process that he brought into place. It has laid a good foundation for us. [Applause.]

With regard to the tenure programme, we have had the legislative reform programme, in which we have put in place those laws that protect the tenure of those people who are vulnerable. One of these pieces of legislation is on land tenure reform, or what is commonly known as Esta. We have also put in place the interim protection of informal land rights and many others which I will not highlight by name.

I must say that the Bill that was passed today, further gives us some of the instruments that we need in order to accelerate our land delivery programme. I must also say that the above achievements were made against the following challenges that continue to confront us: A full realisation of the land reform policy objectives, as envisaged in the RDP document, which we still have not reached. I know many of the members in this House have been wondering what we meant when we said we would deliver 30% of agricultural land.

We meant precisely that, and that remains our objective. To what extent we will be able to reach that objective in these coming five years, will actually be reflected in terms of the budgetary allocation that we will receive. However, it is an idea that, in my view, will take us a long way in redressing the imbalances of the past.

To this extent, we can say that we have delivered, at least, about 0,6% of agricultural land. It is marginal, but it has made some dent and we will continue to do so. One of those challenges that we face is still that of how we can accommodate a black commercial farming sector into the agricultural development, by using our land reform programmes.

We are also challenged about increasing the choices, suitability and quality of land parcels acquired by our beneficiaries through the land reform programme. We have, therefore, said to ourselves that our direction in mid-term will seek to address the following: Recommitting ourselves to the Government objectives set in the RDP, acceleration of the work of the two departments, and ensuring that the quality of the lives of those beneficiaries who have access to land is, indeed, improved. We will also ensure that, in terms of the resource allocation that we have received in this Parliament through the redistribution programme, we meet these challenges.

One of the questions raised by parliamentarians in the portfolio committee was why there has been a decline in the 1999 budget, particularly the spending in the redistribution programme. In 1998 … [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, I wish to ask you to draw your remarks to a close: the time allotted to you has expired.

The MINISTER: It is as a result of the reprioritisation that we started in January 1999, where we were starting to look at the quality of the projects that we were receiving from the beneficiaries. That has helped us to ensure that the projects that we now receive are those that can improve the quality of life of our people. Therefore, the budget must, at the end of the day, maintain a balance compromise between these programmes and the resource allocation in a manner that allows decisive Government intervention in addressing the inequalities of the past.

We have to ensure that the development of our rural communities, served by land reform, happens where people are. We believe, therefore, that the 2000- 01 budget allocation will allow us, as these two departments, to meet our current commitments and objectives. [Applause.]

Adv S P HOLOMISA: Mphathiswa, kuyakufuneka ndingxolise umntu ngokuthi xa usathetha, athi ixesha lakho liphelile [Minister, I have to reprimand someone for telling you that your time had expired whilst you were still talking!]

Madam Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, amakhosi present in this House, it is common knowledge that South Africa is one of the leading nations in the field of agricultural production. Our agricultural sector is in a position to compete in the international trade arena with the best economies of the world. State assistance to this sector has played a crucial role in developing commercial farmers. This assistance has taken various forms, which were cumulatively political, financial, technological and in the form of vast tracts of land.

It is imperative and in the interests of the nation that this level of development within this sector be maintained and driven to even greater heights, since it is an integral part of the economic development of the country. The unpleasant feature of this commendable scenario, however, is that the state support accorded to the industry was almost exclusively directed at the white section of our population. This was done at the expense of black South Africans, who, due to a lack of political power over a long period of time, were not able to enjoy equal support and opportunity. On the contrary, an emerging black class of farming entrepreneurs was systematically destroyed as a result of deliberate state policy.

The major challenge facing this Government and our people, therefore, is striking the necessary balance between the need to ensure that the sector continues to develop and grow and the need to facilitate a meaningful and productive entry of blacks into the mainstream agricultural economy. This is obviously a mammoth task requiring a partnership between government and the private sector, in particular white agriculture, which benefited from the previous dispensation. Surely, it would not be asking too much of white agriculture to urge them to transfer skills to their aspirant black brethren, to share their land and equipment with them and to enter into partnerships with them. Some of them, we must concede, are already doing some of these things, but we need to see more of them being partners in this drive towards national development and reconciliation.

The state, for its part, must expedite the process of making agricultural land at its disposal much more available and accessible to black farmers, irrespective of their levels of development. This has to be done with sensitivity to the needs of the communities who were dispossessed when such land was declared state land. Here we are talking about land outside the communal areas some of which would be land which was used for the development of irrigation schemes, dairy farming, crop production and so on. When it is placed at the disposal of the people, we should be careful not to be seen to perpetuate dispossession. Institutions such as the Land Bank, the ARC and the National Agricultural Marketing Council must be brought closer to the people. They must be user- friendly and a common feature in the lives of ordinary South Africans. They must not be so remote as to be associated with Pretoria, a distant and far- away place reachable only by those who have the means to travel. Information about the services that these and other institutions have to offer must be disseminated through all forms of communication.

All state departments and offices, including traditional authorities and their houses, must be centres of information. Within the reasonable bounds of fiscal discipline, adequate funds should be allocated to these agricultural institutions. We are justly encouraged to learn about the establishment of village or community banks which are aimed at what are known as subsistence farmers. They should indeed be community banks with outlets in each and every village. Care should be taken, however, to ensure that they do not turn out to be omashonisa [microlenders] who will further impoverish the people.

An integrated rural development approach is indispensable to agricultural growth and food security in the countryside. The Department of Public Works can play a vital role in ensuring that enough dipping tanks are constructed to help fight tick-borne diseases and other sicknesses. The same department could facilitate access to the arable allotments by building roads and bridges between residential areas, neighbouring towns and markets and the fields themselves.

Naturally, the Department of Trade and Industry can facilitate the opening up of domestic and international markets for farm produce. I am certain that all the parties involved in the work of the portfolio committee are committed to ensuring that the Minister and Department of Agriculture succeed in attaining these and other goals as mentioned by the Minister, which are aimed at the eradication of poverty and the development of the economy for the benefit of all South Africans. With the usual complaint, of course, that we could have done with a bigger Vote than has been allocated, we as the ANC support this Vote. [Applause.]

Mnr A J BOTHA: Mevrou die Speaker …

‘n AGB LID: Mooi praat, Andries, mooi praat! Mnr A J BOTHA: Baie dankie, ek sal probeer.

Mevrou die Speaker, die landbou het die afgelope agt maande ‘n besondere ondervinding gehad. President Mbeki het gereeld met landbouleiers vergader en duidelik belangstelling getoon in die syfers wat hulle aan hom voorgelê het. Onlangs is daar veel gepraat oor die funksie van die opposisie en watter optrede sinvol is. Hierdie is ‘n kritiese waarneming van konstruktiewe gedrag van die President se kant af, soos om ook van sy Kabinetskollegas by die besprekings te betrek. Net so sal ek voortgaan om kritiese kommentaar te lewer, ook waar die Regering se optrede nie konstruktief was nie.

In hierdie verband wil ek by die Minister van Finansies aanbeveel dat hy ook luister en die syfers bestudeer wanneer hy by hierdie geleenthede teenwoordig is, net soos alle landbouers na hom geluister het en sy syfers bestudeer het toe hy sy Begroting ingedien het. Dit kan nie veel verbeelding verg nie om ons ontsteltenis te begryp dat hy alleen na die landbou verwys het toe hy maatreëls aangekondig het wat ten gunste van die mariene bedryf en teen die landbou diskrimineer. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.) [Mr A J BOTHA: Madam Speaker …

An HON MEMBER: Speak well, Andries, speak well!

Mr A J BOTHA: Thank you very much, I will try.

Madam Speaker, over the past eight months agriculture has had an exceptional experience. President Mbeki regularly met with agricultural leaders and clearly showed interest in the figures which they submitted to him. Recently much has been said about the function of the opposition and what actions are meaningful. This is a critical observation of constructive conduct on the part of the President, such as involving some of his Cabinet colleagues in the discussions too. In the same vein I will continue to deliver critical comments, also where the action, of the Government were not constructive.

In this regard I want to recommend to the Minister of Finance that he should also listen and study the figures when he is present at these functions, just as all agriculturalists listened to him and studied his figures when he submitted his Budget. It does not take a lot of imagination to understand our dismay that he only referred to agriculture when he announced measures which were in favour of the shipping industry and discriminated against agriculture.]

He quite rightly identified the absurdity of a ship paying for road development, and therefore granted the marine industry an effective 34% rebate on diesel. Yet he did not find it as absurd for an agricultural tractor that is tilling the fields to pay for road development. He explained to Parliament that this was necessitated by the possible misuse of the system in that the same diesel needed for use on the land could be used to power motorcars, bakkies and lorries on the road.

Firstly, the fraction of diesel that may be used by the average farmer for road use is indeed very small. If not, he would be so unproductive that he would not manage to survive. Secondly, in addition, the hon the Minister and the industry know only too well that agricultural diesel can be identified with a marker as it has already been agreed to mark paraffin in order to discourage mixing it with diesel. The discrepancy between the decision to mark paraffin and not diesel can thus only be construed as having a tax implication and has nothing to do with the practicality or not of marking diesel.

One can pump diesel fuel out of a ship’s tank into a land-based tanker or any other receiving vessel for use on the roads. Why worry about the possible abuse in agriculture only and not about this possible abuse? I request the hon the Minister to clarify this position with regard to the discrepancy in the rebate, and further to reassure us that only economic considerations motivated this decision and that there is no political reason behind it whatsoever.

The much-needed agreement with the European Union is actually detrimental to many sectors of South African agriculture and every resource will have to be mustered to achieve competitiveness against heavily subsidised imports. We must maximise our productiveness through technological excellence, our marketing strategy must be globally competitive and we must examine the possibility of export incentives for agriculture. In order to achieve this, the Agricultural Research Council must be continually expanded and developed, which is not possible with the steadily diminishing budget for it, as we have experienced over the past few years and as the hon the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs has so clearly identified in her speech here.

If the hon the Minister of Agriculture cannot get the funds required from the Government directly, and we have no explanation why this is so, then by all means let her get it from the science council via the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. Without this, not only will existing agriculture suffer, but the emerging sector will suffer even more and indeed be under threat.

The hon the Minister of Finance announced a capital gains tax in order to close loopholes that enable a very select few to avoid paying the full amount of tax owed by them. If this proposal, as announced, is not radically adjusted to exclude virtually all agricultural sales of land, a mortal blow will be dealt to the industry. Land remains land and only marginally changes in intrinsic value. It is inflation that increases the nominal value of land, and to tax this nominally inflated value after 40 to 45 years, which is the working lifespan of the average farmer, is absurd. Profitability in farming is so marginal that a very large proportion of farmers cannot afford to establish a pension scheme. To now tax capital which they must use to survive in their old age is not good governance, nor is it morally justifiable.

In addition, this proposal will also detrimentally affect rural development. It is standard procedure to sell some land in order to establish collateral for increased land holding. This is no attempt to avoid taxes, but indeed a direct investment of risk capital into the economy. Capital gains tax once again will so detrimentally affect this market as to make it a disaster - not only for existing commercial agriculture, but for the very matter that the hon the Minister mentioned here this afternoon, namely black commercial agriculture, which we want to develop.

Black commercial agriculture also requires collateral, and if this market is destroyed, then the main collateral that agriculture requires worldwide will no longer be available to any of these sectors and this plan and this scheme of the hon the Minister, which is indeed admirable, will not survive. We fully agree with the hon the Minister that the poorest of the poor are a matter for welfare and must not be dumped on the agricultural sector, which is already under threat. I cannot understand … [Time expired.]

Mr G B BHENGU: Madam Speaker, hon members, the IFP applauds hon President Mbeki for his foresight and understanding in respect of two important facts. Firstly, that the majority of subsistence farmers are women. Secondly, the saying that if one educates a man, one has educated an individual, but if one educates a women, one has educated a nation. [Applause.]

This he did by appointing Madam Minister, in the person of ka Msane-Didiza, whose roots stem from the rural area, which is also a traditional area. With that understanding, we are sure that care is going to be taken to embroil disadvantaged women who have been left out, and who are really the torchbearers in the task of feeding the nation.

A large percentage of citizens, especially in rural areas, depend on agriculture as the only means of ensuring a living. Unfortunately, they depend on subsistence agriculture. The challenge facing us is to develop our people from subsistence farmers to commercial farmers who can stand on their own in the international arena.

Where should we start to be able to do this? The IFP believes that the issue relates to land and the security of tenure is of utmost importance to farmers. Many farmers in rural areas would like to improve their farms. They are however hampered by the fact that they enjoy no security of tenure. Provision should, for instance, be made for leases to be granted for land. The tenant must be allowed to effect improvements, all of which must be recorded. He or she should pay rental to traditional authority and at the end of the lease, he or she should be paid out of the unused value of his or her improvement.

In commercial farming, large areas of unused and underutilised land should be made available to emerging farmers. The imposition of land tax may be one of the methods of making this available.

May I commend the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs for devolving all state agricultural land to be administered by the provincial department of agriculture with the help of her regional offices.

Lokhu thina sikubona njengegxathi elikhulu elizokwenza ukuthi kubhekelwe laba bantu akade belokhu belahliwe bengakwazi ukulima. Bekuthi uma belima kube sengathi abakwazi ukudlula babe ngabalimi abalima kakhulu. Bazokwazi ukungena kulawa mapulazi, bakwazi nokukhombisa ukuthi ngesikhathi befika abamhlophe kuleli zwe, abafikanga abantu abansundu belamba. Bafika belima. Bafika bakhonza kodwa base benza ukuhlakanipha ngokuthi babaqhelise nezindawo ezazingamadolobha lapho babengakwazi ukuthi badayise khona. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[We see this as a great step that will make it possible to cater for the previously marginalised farmers. Whenever they farmed it was as if they could not become great farmers. They will be able to occupy farms and show that when whites arrived in this country they did not find black people starving. They found them ploughing their fields. They first sought refuge and later tricked black people by pushing them away from the cities where they could sell their products.]

Coming to training, most of our people are entering farming for the first time since they were debarred by the apartheid era. Since neither good land nor restricted capital should be wasted, their training must receive top priority. Most of the aspirant farmers will not have time to attend formal training institutions. Therefore, we recommend that they need to be provided with training on the job, that is training where they are working on the farm.

Financial assistance is very crucial for farming purposes. Having been trained, an aspirant farmer must have access to financial assistance. However, private and public ownership of land must not be prerequisites for financial assistance. Our people must develop within the African context of understanding communal ownership of land. We need to devise an African system which can enable the communal farmers, in a communal situation, to be able to access the financial funding.

Kudingeka sikuyeke lokhu ukuba uma sikhuluma ngokuthuthukisa, sithathe indlela yokwenza izinto yaseNtshonalanga sifike siyiphoqelele e-Afrika, bese kuthiwa i-Afrika yehlulekile. Ayehlulekile. Yehlulwe ukuba iphoqwe ngento okungesiyona eyase-Afrika. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[We should avoid entrenching the Western way of doing things in Africa when we talk about developing people. At the end of the day we will say Africa has failed. It has not failed. It has failed because there was something un- African that was entrenched in Africa.] We require our Agricultural Research Council to go into that with the Agricultural Marketing Council so that they can come up with an African system that can address African problems, so that we in South Africa who are regarded as the best can then sell it throughout Africa as a module. [Time expired.]

Mrs B M NTULI: Madam Speaker, hon members, hon Minister, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to applaud the assurance given to us during the budget review of the Department of Agriculture that it will continue with its programme of targeting women in agriculture. Because of our history, women in the agricultural sector have been marginalised. The commitment by the department will ensure that women are brought into the mainstream of the agricultural sector, which, for far too long, has been one dominated by males. The Female Farmer event of last year gave us a basis upon which we could evaluate the gender programme of the department. As the ANC, we wish to encourage the department to continue making this one of the important dates in their national events calendar.

One of the most important elements of this programme is that it highlighted the role that women can and continue to play in the socioeconomic upliftment of our communities. I wish to highlight the work done by Mrs Philisiwe Mathabela of KwaZulu-Natal, who has made an immense contribution towards job creation in her village of Ngwavuma. Through her entrepreneurial skills, she contributed significantly to the rural development of her community. Well done, Philisiwe!

Wenze kahle nkosikazi, halala! [You have done well, woman, congratulations!]

To all the other women she has demonstrated that women can make a difference in agriculture. I would like to encourage every woman to follow the efforts of Mrs Mathabela and become an entrepreneur.

Uma sizothi siyisizwe, simele ukuthi sikwazi ukuzondla. [If we call ourselves a nation, we must be able to feed ourselves.]

We all know the history of this country, which relegated blacks to the status of always being tenants, but never landowners. Thus black people were involved in the agricultural sector as workers on smallholdings in the so-called reserves. If they tilled the land, it was never for commercial gain, but as a means of putting food on the table. Now the challenge is to make use of the opportunities and encourage blacks to become commercial farmers, large or small.

Heading the department’s list of priorities for the year is their agricultural support services. This is a bold step in the right direction to create an environment for black farmers to enter into commercial farming. Providing adequate support services continues to be an urgent challenge. In the budget debate last year, I made particular reference to the importance of extension services. These services should play a meaningful role in support of the previously disadvantaged communities.

Extension services provide important technical assistance to emerging farmers. This kind of support will ensure that emerging black farmers become efficient in the way they conduct their farming activities. Hence training farmers on the farm becomes important. I wish to stress to the Minister and her department that, this year, we will monitor how the institutions of the state impact on this matter and how their budgets are used in support of our programmes.

The challenge is to see how the parliamentary grant of the ARC and the marketing council gets directed towards meeting the priorities that serve our development agenda. The refocusing of the priorities of the ARC and the marketing council should provide support to the black emerging farmers. Clearly, the synergy between provincial departments and agricultural development institutions also become key. I trust that the Minmec of agriculture will pay particular attention in order to enhance co- ordination.

The quality of our extension services needs to be improved and enhanced. This can be achieved through linking extension services with research. But, more importantly, is how the knowledge is transmitted to those we serve, particularly women, in the rural areas.

Ngithi kumhlonishwa uNgqongqoshe bayaludinga lolu sizo omama. [To the hon the Minister, I say women need this assistance.]

The culture of quality service provision from our men and women in the Public Service is critical. Bahlala emahhovisi kanti kufanele babe sensimini nabalimi. Lokhu kumele ukuba kubukwe ngamanye amehlo. [They stay in offices instead of ploughing fields with farmers. This needs to be looked at differently.]

My opinion is that it must not end at the Batho Pele campaign level, but we must see it in the attitude of workers at local level.

Regarding the Land Bank, in the past the Land Bank’s clients did not include certain categories of society, particularly blacks. However, we are happy to see that the Land Bank has broadened its client base to include those who were previously disadvantaged. These efforts of the Land Bank are also encouraging. Their number of clients has grown considerably owing to their financial aid packages to emerging black farmers. Importantly, the Land Bank also changed the criteria for loan applicants. This, we hope, will ensure that the previously disadvantaged will have a better chance of obtaining loans.

I am also optimistic that the Land Bank will accelerate the implementation of the development of black empowerment and rural financing. These efforts are all commendable. But of what use are they if our rural communities must travel hundreds of kilometres to the nearest branch of the Land Bank? I would like to urge the Land Bank to bring the bank closer to the people.

Kudingeka basondele ebantwini abantulayo. [They need to come closer to needy people.]

It should be made more accessible to the rural communities. I have noticed that, with regard to the land care and irrigation schemes, the department’s programme on land care has captured the need for rehabilitation of irrigation schemes which remain a legacy of our past. These so-called white elephants which we see in the previous homelands can turn into something good - black elephants - that can empower our people.

Akube nendlela abalimi bakithi abathola ngayo amanzi banisele nabo. [There should be a way for our farmers to get water so that they can irrigate their crops.]

By empowering our people we will make sure that they, in turn, contribute positively towards the economic development agenda of our country. This type of infrastructure and others are critical for the support of an economically viable agricultural sector in our society. The ANC-led Government is more than ready to meet the challenge of creating an environment within which we can strategically manage an integrated approach to service delivery, thus creating a better life for all.

Sizonxusa uNgqongqoshe wezeziMali ukuthi athi ukwengeza imali ngoba phela ngaphandle kolimo akukho ukudla, umphakathi uzokufa. [Ihlombe.] [We will appeal to the Minister of Finance to increase the budget, because without farming we cannot have food and society will perish. [Applause.]]

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Mr Chairman, this is the first Vote handled by the hon the Minister in her capacity as a fully fledged Minister. As Deputy Minister we learnt to know her as a sensible, clear-thinking and resolute person whose primary concern is the well-being of agriculture, irrespective of the size of the farming enterprise or the colour of the skin of the entrepreneur.

Of course, it is in the best interest of our future that the face of agriculture should change and the progression from subsistence to small- scale commercial and further to fully fledged commercial farmer be facilitated and expedited. Fundamental to this process is that our vital unrenewable resource, namely the land or the soil, be utilised in a sustainable way.

Although I believe that this concern is shared by the hon the Minister, it is disconcerting to view the continued degradation and deprivation of this resource when one travels our country. Despite the fact that agriculture is mainly a provincial competence, I would like to ask the Minister if the time is not opportune to, once again, initiate a national campaign to protect our soil. It would have to be accepted that this cannot be a once- off campaign. Erosion is the Aids affecting our earth and carries the germ of eventual desertification and consequent destruction in it.

The ravages of the fires in the Western Cape and the floods in other parts of our country has a short, medium and long-term effect on agriculture. It is therefore disturbing that it would seem that totally insufficient provision is made for alleviating the effects of natural disasters like these. Although I am aware that disaster aid for agriculture is not provided for by the Agriculture budget, I want to call on the hon the Minister to present agriculture’s case in Cabinet, so that adequate provision can be made to meet at least the basic requirements of those many farmers who would not survive without state aid after the most recent disasters.

Only this morning we observed on television that farmers in the Northern Province are up in arms because the Land Bank is refusing to assist them, and I would like to ask for the hon the Minister’s intervention. It would also be short-sighted and naive to think that farmers who are victims of these disasters should be allowed to lose their land in order to enhance the redistribution process. The fields, orchards and land which have been destroyed will require millions of rands to restore, and that is capital which is beyond the means of most farmers.

Dit is ontstellend om te sien dat daar weer eens ‘n afname in die begrotingstoewysing aan die Landbounavorsingsraad is. Die afname van R20,318 miljoen beteken dat eksterne finansiering met 20% per jaar sal moet toeneem. In ‘n kompeterende wêreld en globale ekonomie is die enigste paspoort na mededingendheid meer effektiewe produksie. Dit word verkry deur verbeterde produksiemetodes en effektiewe arbeidsbenutting. Eersgenoemde kan slegs bewerkstellig word deur volgehoue navorsing en tegnologie- oordrag.

Alhoewel daar sekere tegnologieë is wat geredelik in die buiteland beskikbaar is, is daar geen manier waarop navorsing vir die plaaslike vereistes afgeskaal kan word sonder drastiese en uiteindelik rampspoedige gevolge nie. Die direkte asook indirekte bydrae van die landbou tot die bruto binnelandse produk is van so ‘n aard dat ‘n tekort aan mededingendheid en verlore markte rampspoedige gevolge inhou. Die rooi ligte flikker helder. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[It is disturbing to see that there is once again a decrease in the budget allocation to the Agricultural Research Council. The decrease of R20,318 million means that external financing will have to increase by 20% per annum. In a competitive world and global economy the only passport to competitiveness is more effective production. This is attained by better production methods and effective labour utilisation. The former can only be achieved by continued research and the transfer of technology.

Even though there are certain technologies that are readily available in foreign countries, there is no way in which research for local needs can be scaled down without drastic and eventually disastrous results. The direct, as well as indirect, contribution of agriculture to the gross domestic product is of such a nature that a lack of competitiveness and lost markets could have disastrous consequences. The red lights are flashing.]

In conclusion I would like to ask the Minister something. She mentioned labour-intensive agriculture. Wherever I go I hear of commercial farmers managing with fewer labourers, and I think we must address this problem. [Time expired.]

Mrs R M SOUTHGATE: Chairperson, the Ministry has recently committed itself to providing up to R5 billion for the transformation of the farming industry over the next 20 years. We support Government in its policy to develop farmers from previously disadvantaged backgrounds. What we are concerned about is the cutting of funds for agricultural research. If it takes up to 20 years for agricultural transformation to take place, we must be careful that our strategies for change do not implicate negligent or current strong areas. We all want to see our land teeming with livestock and other forms of farm produce owned by all our farm owners. But if we want to see this happening we must invest in developing our research capacity and education opportunities, which can only serve to empower and enhance the success of our farmers. Farmers have been warned that they must increase their level of competitiveness. Some sectors that show high enough levels of competition are those in maize, pineapples and wool, to name a few. Others, like those in the meat and dairy sectors, for example, are not sufficiently competitive at all. We call on Government to come to the aid of especially those weaker sectors, perhaps through certain incentives, subsidies or loans in order to assist them to compete more favourably on the global market.

Job losses in the agricultural sector have decreased the labour force from 1,2 million in 1994 to about 650 000 currently. We must not allow our agricultural sector to disintegrate to levels at which global market pressures would force our farmers to cut down on their workforce. We must not blind ourselves to the possibility that unless the agricultural sector remains stable, the upcoming farmers will face extreme difficulty in the future to sustain themselves. We may as well kiss goodbye to the R5 billion the Government aims to invest in these new farmers. [Time expired.]

Genl C L VILJOEN: Mnr die Voorsitter, ek wil die Minister bedank vir die uiteensetting, en haar ook loof vir die wyse waarop sy in haar eie taal met ons gepraat het. Baie dankie.

Die VF loof en bedank die boere van Suid-Afrika - ‘n land waarin daar net 4% goeie landbougrond beskikbaar is - daarvoor dat hulle, ondanks geen beskerming teen wêreldlandbou, geen of baie min simpatie van die Regering en geen subsidie, genoeg kos produseer vir Suid-Afrika en nog belangrike buitelandse valuta verdien.

Die VF wil ook hulde bring aan die georganiseerde landbou; Agri SA met mnr Chris du Toit as president, die Transvaalse Landbou-unie met sy sterk lojale ondersteunerskorps en die groeiende African Farmers Union. Ek wil ‘n beroep doen op hierdie organisasies om hulself te herorganiseer sodat hulle uit een mond oor landbou kan praat, soos die organisasie Graan SA, wat onlangs in Bothaville aangekondig het dat al die graanprodusente nou by wyse van een organisasie met een stem praat.

Ek wil ook hier lof uitspreek vir die wyse waarop hierdie graanorganisasie ‘n komitee vir vennootskap en ontwikkeling in landbou het, waardeur hulle op dié wyse aktiewe steun gee aan die ontwikkeling van boere in die opkomende landbou. Ek sê ook baie dankie aan die uittredende president, mnr Japie Grobler, in dié verband.

Hierdie begrotingspos is ‘n afskeepbegrotingspos sover dit program 2: Landbousteun en -ontwikkeling betref. Dit is reeds vandag wyd bespreek en die Minister het daarna verwys. Ek wil vra hoe sy navorsing gaan handhaaf. Hoe gaan ons regtig aan opkomende boere voorligting gee en bestaansboere help? Dan is daar die belangrike werk van die Landbounavorsingsraad, waarna ook al verwys is. Ons móét hierdie vakante poste gevul kry.

Ten slotte net ‘n opmerking oor die moreel van die boere: die Regering moet asseblief meer landbouvriendelik wees teenoor al die boere. Eerstens is daar die plaasmoorde en die diefstal. Daar is die onsekerheid met betrekking tot grondhervorming, kapitaalwinsbelasting, duurder lisensies, swakker paaie, groter invoere sonder heffings, die knellende wetgewing oor verblyfreg aan arbeiders, die insetkoste en ook die duurder dieselprys … [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Gen C L VILJOEN: Madam Speaker, I want to thank the Minister for the exposition, and also praise her for the manner in which she spoke to us in her own language. Thank you very much.

The FF praises and thanks the farmers of South Africa - a land in which only 4% of good agricultural land is available - for producing enough food for South Africa and still earning important foreign exchange, despite having no protection against global agriculture, little or no sympathy from the Government and no subsidy.

The FF also wants to pay tribute to organised agriculture; Agri SA with Mr Chris du Toit as president, the Transvaal Agricultural Union with its strong loyal support base and the growing African Farmers Union. I want to make an appeal to these organisations to reorganise themselves so that they can speak about agriculture with one voice, which is what Grain SA has done, by announcing in Bothaville recently that all the grain producers are now speaking with one voice from one organisation.

I also want to express praise for the manner in which this Grain organisation has established a committee for partnership and development in agriculture, by means of which they give active support to the development of emergent farmers in agriculture. In this regard, I also want to thank the outgoing president, Mr Japie Grobler.

This Vote is being neglected in so far as Programme 2: Agricultural Support and Development is concerned. This has already been widely discussed today and the Minister has referred to it. I want to ask her how she is going to maintain research. How are we really going to give emergent farmers guidance and assist subsistence farmers? Then there is the important work of the Agricultural Research Council, to which reference has also already been made. We must have these vacant posts filled.

In conclusion I want to say a few words about the morale of the farmers: the Government must please be more agriculturally friendly towards the farmers. Firstly, there are the farm murders and the theft. There is uncertainty with regards to land reform, capital gains tax, more expensive licences, poorer roads, bigger imports without levies, the oppressive legislation regarding tenure rights to labourers, the input costs and also the more expensive diesel price … [Time expired.]]

Mr M S GININDA: Mr Chairperson, as a member of the ANC, I wish to express myself on how I think this budget can be used to advance our objectives of developing small and medium farmers, particularly those who were previously disadvantaged. This point is critical if we want to transform the economy of our country. The political miracle achieved in 1994 has better enabled us to accelerate the transformation agenda in all spheres of our society.

Agriculture was, in the past, characterised by large inequalities with regard to access to land in terms of both race and gender. Large subsidies used to go to commercial farmers, largely white entrepreneurs. These imbalances must be corrected urgently. My view is that the budget should be viewed as an instrument that has to assist us in implementing our noble ideals and the dreams of our electorate. Our challenge in the coming five years is to ensure that deracialisation of the agricultural sector becomes a reality. This can be done by increasing the number of participants. A radically changed ownership on the basis of race and gender and of productive resources must become a priority.

In my own constituency we currently have a range of small and subsistence farmers who want to grow and become commercial. The constraints are largely captured in the implementation of the broadening agricultural thrust strategy document of the department as reflected in the land policy. The challenge is this: To what extent is the department going to put in place programmes that will demonstrate, in real terms, the implementation of Batat?

If one looks at the role of the National Agricultural Marketing Council, one detects that it has limitations in as far as implementing the results of their investigation is concerned. My own view is that there has to be synergy between the national Department of Agriculture and the provinces in order to ensure that implementation occurs.

We must increase market access, both locally and abroad. International trade is, in fact, the trade of domestically produced and consumed products. Therefore our emphasis and strategies must be on the maximisation of domestic products. It is then that we can have competitive international trade that is sustainably optimised. It must be clear that international trade develops from or is supported by domestic market products which are first produced locally and then expanded to foreign markets.

On the issue of financing, clearly, the Land Bank is trying its best through the range of products it offers. However, my view is that those who are at the lower end of the market still face challenges in accessing finance. It is therefore important to look at how we can bridge the gap. This is urgent. The village bank institutions set up by farmers and communities are going to deal with these challenges of rural finance in some way, but they will need support in order to become viable.

Another important matter is access to land. We are pleased about the strategic intervention that the Minister is making with regard to dealing with this matter. The integration of land affairs and agriculture has been long overdue. In addressing inequalities we need to accelerate the land reform initiative that is aimed at vigorously implementing programmes to support resource-poor farmers and black farmers. Encouraging human resource development within the sector and improving access to services and resources, including extension and credit, are urgent necessities.

I would like to give my support to the Ministry’s priority on farmer settlement. Human resource development and capacity-building in the form of farmer training, the development of institutions, improved extension services and easier access to finance must become our top priority. The black emergent farmers must be capacitated with regard to investment in marketing infrastructure in rural areas in order to give them better access to markets. It is in this way that we can build a commercially viable black farming sector.

We need to accelerate the implementation and monitoring mechanisms of the programmes that deal with the transfer of ownership of land through redistribution, restitution and tenure reform in order to benefit the poor and the historically disadvantaged. The Agricultural Research Council’s research technology information must be disseminated to the black commercial farmers so as to put this knowledge into practice. This will improve productivity and boost the economy of our country. Kune lesikucela eNdvuneni yeliTiko leTekulima neTemhlaba. Kwekucala sicela umhlaba, lona lowatsatfwa ngulaba labamhlophe, ngobe sifuna kulima. Kwesibili sicela kusitwa ngetimali tsine balimi kanye natsi lesifuna kulima, ngobe baze babe lapha bakhona khona laba bekunene, basitwa nguhulumende wabo. Natsi-ke sicela iNdvuna kutsi isisite. Kwesitsatfu sicela kutsi labo labafuna kulima baceceshwe babe nelwati lwekulima kuze kube khona umkhicito.

Kwekugcina sicela kwekutsi kutsengisa, loku lesitsi yi-marketing, iNdvuna ikwente kuvuleke, ngobe kuze kube ngulamuhla nje, solo kuvulekele laba labamhlophe labatsatsa live labogogomkhulu batsi badlisa tinkhomo tabo, kwasa live lihambile. [Tandla.] (Translation of Swati paragraphs follows.)

[There are four things that we are asking for from the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs. First, we are asking for land, the land which was taken from us by the whites. We also want to do commercial farming. Second, we, the emergent farmers and those who want to do farming, are asking for some financial assistance, because the whites also rose up to where they are now through the help of their own government. That is why we also want our Minister to help us. Third, we request that those farmers who want to do commercial farming must be trained, and well informed about farming so that they can become productive farmers.

Lastly, we would like the Minister to open the sales, that is what we call marketing, so that it is open to all. Because up till now marketing has only been open to whites - the very people who took the land of our great grandfathers. They pretended to be asking for some grazing fields; the next thing the land was gone. [Applause.]]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Mr Chairperson and hon members, South Africa has a dual agricultural economy comprising a well-developed commercial sector and a predominantly subsistence-oriented sector in the rural areas. The hon the Minister pronounced herself very clearly on this one too.

This dichotomy manifests itself in the way the sector is developed. In some fields such as sports and education we are at pains to speak out against separate groupings, whereas in agriculture there are unions which operate along racial lines. This is not compatible with the way of life in the new South Africa. The sooner Agri SA and Nafu find each other and tackle agricultural issues together the better for this country.

In the wake of the floods that hit some parts of this country, it is very unfortunate that the Land Bank tells farmers such as those in Letaba that they are not from declared disaster areas while they have lost large chunks of land and crops through the floods. The department should wake up to the plight of those who feed the nation, given the fact that they are asking for soft loans and not to be bailed out for free. The Land Bank has to provide a full range of financial services for farmers while maintaining strict business principles. The step-up scheme which proved very popular when introduced, has to be refined and it must keep pace with inflation. The small and beginner farmers will find help in such schemes.

We hope that the problems that beset the Land Bank until early this year are passed and buried, and the institution can go on with service and assistance to farmers. A thorough investigation into how some provincial agricultural institutions such as Agribank in the North West province conduct their business has to be mounted as a matter of urgency. Clients have their assets and farming implements repossessed, in some cases allegedly without the necessary legal process being followed.

Agriculture will only succeed if more and more students enrol for courses at agricultural tertiary institutions. Such intending students should be encouraged by making financial aid available to them. A case can be made for them in the National Students Financial Aid Scheme championed by the Department of Education. The country has an acute shortage of people who hold qualifications in agriculture.

Interest in agricultural engineering as a career choice has to develop amongst students. Success in the course of study will qualify them in food processing, packaging, storage and transport. Coupled with these are off- farm activities such as the operation of computers and sales.

Sadly, we notice a cut in the funding for the Agricultural Research Council. This will definitely affect research adversely. This council should in no way be left to compete with or ask for funds from the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology like some other institutions.

We are grateful to the Minister of Trade and Industry and the Government for standing their ground on the question of port and sherry which are agricultural products. We are not oblivious to the controversy still besetting these names in other quarters. However, we are just grateful that farmers have made their mark.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, there is much truth in the saying that farmers are never really satisfied: It either rains too much or too little; the market prices are never high enough; the wind is too strong or too weak; and the water is too little or too expensive!

This is common among all farmers in South Africa. There are many faces to agriculture in South Africa. I will not be speaking much in terms of the development side, but on the commercial side today, and I say this because there are serious threats. There is an uneasiness in the present agricultural climate in South Africa, and the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs should take note of some of the reasons for this.

Farmers are being murdered at a constant rate on farms; floods have destroyed the future of many farmers; land reform and land claims create uncertainty on all sides; imports of subsidised agricultural products distort our domestic market; the increase in fuel costs has an impact on production costs; labour laws are not agriculture-friendly; and problems with crop and animal thefts are not easy to solve. There is nothing wrong with the policy and the objectives set out by the Minister and the department in regard to these problems. In fact, they have wide support. However, the problem lies in the methods used to implement this policy in practice and in obtaining the support of all role-players. That is where the problem lies.

Die sterkste instrument wat die Minister het om die beleid te implementeer is die Departement van Landbou en sy bekwame amptenare. Baie kundigheid is in die Ministerie te vinde. [The strongest instrument the Minister has to implement the policy is the Department of Agriculture and its competent officials. There is a great deal of expertise to be found in the Ministry.]

There is no other agriculture department in Africa which has the knowledge and the expertise that the South African Department of Agriculture has - and I hail the officials who sit there, and those of the Agricultural Research Council. They have to be used, but they have a problem in that the shortage of funds in South Africa does not allow the department to function optimally, and that problem does not emanate from the Minister, but from the allocation from central Government.

Die toedeling van beskikbare fondse deur die Departement van Landbou is in pas met die Regering se beleid om nuwe toetreders te begunstig, en ek is nié daarteen nie. Die tekort aan fondse veroorsaak egter dat daar nie genoeg fondse is om aan ander belangrike fronte geld toe te ken nie. Fondse vir byvoorbeeld effektiewer voorligting, dieresiektebestryding soos TB en brucellose, veeartse wat nodig mag wees, die monitering van die in- en uitvoer van landbouprodukte, hulpbronverbetering, veral ná oorstromings, en vir navorsing is absoluut noodsaaklik. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The allocation of available funds by the Department of Agriculture is consistent with the Government’s policy to favour new entrants, and I am not opposed to that. However, the shortage of funds is resulting in there being insufficient funds to allocate money to other important spheres. For example, funds for more effective extension services, the combating of animal diseases such as TB and brucellosis, veterinarians that may be needed, the monitoring of the importation and exportation of agricultural products, resource improvement, particularly after floods, and research are absolutely essential.]

There is another important point. If we consider the African renaissance which our President speaks of, it would be based on agricultural development, which in turn would create development throughout Africa. That development in agriculture in Africa would be initiated in South Africa, which has the expertise. We must seriously consider funding that expertise and keeping it in place, or else we will not be able to fulfil our role in Africa.

Die Minister moet gelukgewens word met die feit dat toenemend gebruik gemaak word van kundigheid binne-in die Departement van Landbou en van plaaslike adviseurs, en al minder van die wonderlik opgeleide buitelandse adviseurs wat nie veel van ons omstandighede af weet of wil weet nie, en in die verlede baie wantroue op vele terreine geskep het.

Die sukses van die vestiging van nuwe boere sal ten nouste afhang van kundigheid oor die maatskaplike en ekonomiese realiteite in Suid-Afrika. Die rigting wat die departement onder leiding van die Minister en die direkteur-generaal inslaan, skep al meer hoop en vertroue by die kommersiële landbousektor as in die verlede, en ons dank haar daarvoor dat sy die realiteite raaksien.

Die uitdaging van die Minister van Landbou is om die vertroue volledig te wen van al die boere in die land dat sy en die departement die ware kampvegters is vir hulle belange en nie net vir dié deel van die bevolking wat in die verlede sogenaamd benadeel is nie. Haar uitdaging is om die suksesvolle boere se vertroue en samewerking te kry, en sy sal vind dat die doelstellings van die Regering van die dag om nuwe boere te vestig en van bestaansboere kommersiële boere te maak baie vinniger verwesenlik sal word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The Minister is to be congratulated on the fact that increasingly use is being made of expertise in the Department of Agriculture and local advisers, and less and less use is being made of the wonderfully trained foreign advisers who do not know or want to know much about conditions here, and in the past created a great deal of mistrust in many spheres.

The success of the establishment of new farmers will depend to a very great extent on expertise relating to the social and economic realities in South Africa. The direction the department is moving in under the leadership of the Minister and the director-general, is already creating more hope and confidence in the commercial agricultural sector than in the past, and we thank her for perceiving the realities.

The challenge of the Minister of Agriculture is to gain the full confidence of all the farmers in the country that she and the department are the real champions of their interests and not only that part of the population which in the past was ostensibly prejudiced. Her challenge is to gain the confidence and co-operation of the successful farmers, and she will find that the objectives of the Government of the day to establish new farmers and to turn subsistence farmers into commercial farmers will be achieved far more quickly.]

With regard to research, the Government cannot escape its responsibility to fund basic research. The more we expect the industry to fund research, the more the shift will be away from basic research towards applicable research and that will have to be bases on the basic research done in other countries. By doing this, we will be doomed to depending on basic research from outside our country and control of basic knowledge and new alternatives by patent price … [Time expired.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Mr Chairman, I am very glad that the hon Dr Van Niekerk likes us in this department. Apparently he has a problem with the Minister of Finance rather than with us. I assure the hon member that we will ask the Minister for some more money next time.

I would like to address a problem that the hon Botha brought up - he is not here now - and that is the question of competitiveness.

Mededinging is fundamenteel tot die huidige doelwitte van die Departement van Landbou. Wat ons betref, is mededinging ingeskryf in die hart van ons doelwitte. Ons wil ‘n doeltreffende landbousektor opbou. Ons wil internasionaal mededingende landbousektor skep. Daar word dikwels geredeneer dat die landbou nie meer so belangrik is nie. ‘n Mens kry soms mense in ander sektore wat redeneer dat die nasionale statistiek daarop dui dat die landbou tans net 5% bydra tot die land se totale bruto binnelandse produk. Ek wil hierdie wanopvatting oor die waarde van die landbou tot die ekonomie baie graag uit die weg ruim. Die landbou se bydrae tot die ekonomie is baie groter as daardie syfer van 5% en die grootte is ‘n standaardfaktor waarvan ‘n geweldige groot groep mense in die land afhanklik is.

Wat ‘n mens moet doen om te sien hoe belangrik die landbou se rol in die ekonomie is, is om te kyk wat gebeur wanneer daar ‘n droogte is of wanneer daar ‘n ander ramp of vloede is. Dit het onmiddellik ‘n uitwerking op die ekonomie, soms van groot omvang. Daar word byvoorbeeld bereken dat droogtes en lae oesopbrengste die bruto binnelandse produk met van 0,5% to 2% kan beïnvloed. Die bruto binnelandse produk kan met hierdie persentasie styg of daal as gevolg van gunstige of ongunstige landboutoestande. Dit is hoe belangrik die landbou vir die ekonomie is.

Daar is terug- en vooruitbindings in die landbou. Die boere koop kunsmis, chemikalieë en implemente. As hulle dit nie doen nie, dan het dit ‘n terugwaartse uitwerking op en aansienlike gevolge in die vervaardingsektor. Net so is daar ‘n voorwaartse skakeling ten aansien van die lewering van rou materiale. Agb lede sal nog sien wat hulle vanjaar vir tamaties en aartappels gaan moet betaal na die vloede in die noorde. Dit is die skakels wat die landbou se belang vir die totale bruto binnelandse produk beklemtoon. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Competition is fundamental to the current goals of the Department of Agriculture. As far as we are concerned, competition is entrenched in the heart of our goals. We want to build up an effective agricultural sector. We want to create an internationally competitive agricultural sector.

It is often argued that agriculture is not that important any more. Sometimes one encounters people from other sectors who argue that national statistics suggests that agriculture currently contributes only 5% to the country’s total gross domestic product. I should very much like to eliminate this misconception about the value of agriculture to the economy. The contribution of agriculture to the economy is much larger than that figure of 5% and this size is a standard factor on which an enormously large group of people in the country are dependent.

What one should do to see how important the role of agriculture in the economy is, is to look at what happens when there is a drought or when there is another disaster or flood. This immediately has an effect on the economy, sometimes of great magnitude. For instance, it is estimated that droughts and low crop yields can influence the gross domestic product by between 0,5% and 2%. The gross domestic product can rise or fall by this percentage as a result of favourable or unfavourable agricultural conditions. That is how important agriculture is to the economy.

Agriculture has links with both those sectors servicing it and with those relying on it. The farmers purchase fertiliser, chemicals and implements. If they do not do so, then the effects of this will work back towards, and have significant consequences in, the manufacturing sector. In the same way there is a connection with regard to the delivery of raw materials. Hon members have yet to see what they will have to pay this year for tomatoes and potatoes after the floods in the north. These are the links which emphasises the importance of agriculture to the total gross domestic product.]

Let us look at competitiveness. We can look at it from different perspectives. Perhaps the most important is to look at it from the angle of production inputs. This is what farmers normally mean when they refer to competitiveness. In other words, they imply that the Government has the ability to intervene to reduce their costs or, indeed, to increase them.

In the past, as members know, many farm inputs were subsidised by the South African government. The government also determined output prices to the advantage of farmers. Now we are in a situation in which output prices are set by world markets, which have been low for many years, especially since the Asian crisis of 1998. On the other hand, farmers sometimes tend to feel that input prices are raised by government policies. This is what is called ``the cost price squeeze’’ on agricultural incomes.

The major costs to farmers, in order of priority, are the following. Firstly, wages is the biggest one. The second biggest one is fuel costs, especially the diesel price. The third one is taxes, including VAT, then interest rates, the cost of water and, of course, there are a lot of other costs.

Let us just look at this cost price squeeze for a moment. The fact of the matter is that throughout the years 1973 to 1991 the terms of trade in the agricultural sector were completely negative. There was a positive growth in productivity, that is true, especially in the years 1973 to 1983. In those years it was possible for farmers to get a substantial positive growth after farm income, but on the whole we lost about 1% per year in farm income between 1973 to 1991. At present the indications are that we are in the same position as in the period from 1973 to 1983, during which farm income was very bad.

Our people are talking about subsidising. The last big subsidy was the pay- out of the drought of 1991 to 1992. In respect of subsidies, we did the right thing by bringing them down. That was exactly the right thing to do. However, one reaches a point where the competitiveness of agriculture reaches a critical point. Indications are now that the levels of subsidisation in South Africa have reached levels that are lower than those for Australia and New Zealand, which were traditionally the lowest agricultural subsidisers in the world.

In other words, what one needs now - and that is what speakers today have been arguing - is better targeted support to farming, for example in terms of risk management. Risk management affects small farmers far more than big farmers, in respect of a drought, for example. Big, strong farmers can take out insurance. If one targets assistance to smaller farmers by way of insurance, one is reaching the right people, and that is the challenge for us in South Africa at the moment.

But in general I would say, with regard to the numbers that I have available, the position shows that farmers are, of course, making less profit than they would in a free market, partly because of the taxes on inputs. This intervention by the state includes also taxes and tariffs on tradable input such as pesticides, herbicides, chemicals, packing material, packing equipment, mechanical parts and the taxation on diesel.

How should one look at the matter of diesel, which the hon Botha brought up today? The fuel tax, or taxes on fuel, distorts the price of diesel to the extent of 40% of its price. I just want to run through it, although most hon members know how the diesel price is constituted. It is constituted of the Equalisation Fund levy, the Road Accident Fund levy, customs and excise and the fuel tax, which includes the fund for roads. The distortion in total is 40% while in a free market situation, the distortion of the fuel tax alone would be 33%. What does this mean?

The tax on diesel has a substantial effect on the profitability of farmers over the short term. That is a scientific fact and not a question of policy here or there. But to some extent our farmers have done brilliantly, because they have lowered their input. They simply use less diesel and in that respect they, over the long term, seem to adapt to the price of diesel quite well. However, the question is whether we have not reached the stage now where this should be looked at, and the Government and our department is looking at the matter continuously together with the Department of Finance.

However, the problem is that that the diesel rebate on agricultural activities is misused very easily, as the Minister of Finance has said. We must find a way around this. How can one find a way around it? Perhaps colouring will help. We have looked at colouring and it is not a foolproof method. I want to ask a question.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Deputy Minister, your time has expired.

The DEPUTY MINISTER: I am asking whether we should not look at the diesel tax and give it a rebate on account of increasing labour on farms. [Applause.]

Mnr C AUCAMP: Mnr die Voorsitter, landbou is een van die slagare van die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie. ‘n Gesonde landbousektor het ‘n heilsame invloed op almal in die land. Die landbousektor is primêr daarvoor verantwoordelik dat 40 miljoen mae in Suid-Afrika gevul word teen ‘n prys wat dit moontlik maak om darem ‘n bietjie sous ook oor die pap te kan gooi. Verder is die landbousektor een van die grootste werkskeppers in die land, en is nagenoeg ‘n miljoen mense, plus hul afhanklikes, vir hul daaglikse bestaan van die landbou afhanklik. Verder is ‘n pleit vir die landbou verreweg nie meer ‘n pleit vir wit bevoorregting nie, aangesien talle swart entrepreneurs nou hierdie mark betree. Net vanoggend het ‘n ANC-lid my gevra om hom te help om ‘n plaas te koop. Ek wil ses knelpunte in die landbou baie kortliks onder die agb Minister se aandag bring. Eerstens, die Landbounavorsingsraad se krane word finansieel feitlik toegedraai. Hulle is nie eens meer in staat om personeel te vergoed nie. Geld wat in landbounavorsing belê word, word driedubbel terugontvang. Landbou het ‘n hoogs gespesialiseerde bedryf geword en elke mislukte oes is skadelik vir die hele land se ekonomie. In die verband kan ook werklik uitgereik word na, en geleer word van ander lande in die substreek van Suidelike Afrika.

Tweedens, die Landbank het hulp van R20 miljoen aangekondig vir die vloedgeteisterde gebiede. Ons vra dat hierdie geld spoedig en doelmatig aangewend word, maar on gaan verder. Ons kan maar enige boer vra; droogtes is erger as oorstromings. Dit mergel ‘n mens uit oor ‘n geleidelike tydperk van jare en niemand kry jou eintlik jammer nie, behalwe miskien die dominee. Finansiële instellings is simpatiek wanneer te veel water skade aanrig, maar nie wanneer die gebrek daarvan erger skade bring nie. Ek pleit vir die herinstelling van ‘n goedgereguleerde droogtehulpskema. Ons kan maar dink aan Josef en Egipte se sewe vet jare en sewe maer jare. Die Regering en georganiseerde landbou moet eenvoudig weer hierdie groot probleem kollektief en proaktief die hoof bied.

Baie dankie vir die woorde van die Minister aangaande dieselpryse. Ek pleit vir die uitbreiding van die dieselrabat wat nou op die visserybedryf van toepassing is na die algemene boerderybedryf. Sekere soorte boerdery, veral saaiboerdery, word wel lamgelê deur die dieselpryse. Die deel van die dieselprys wat aan die padboufonds afgestaan word, is onregverdig teenoor boere wie se implemente 99% van hul dieselverbruiktyd glad nie op ons paaie beweeg nie. Die verskoning van die uitvoerbaarheid gaan ook nie op nie. Gekleurde diesel, plus swaarder strawwe in geval van misbruik as afskrikmiddel kan ‘n antwoord wees.

Aangaande kapitaalwinsbelasting doen ek ‘n ernstige beroep op die Minister dat die toegewing van toepassing op privaatwoonhuise en -voertuie ook uitgebrei sal word na plaaseiendom. Kapitaalwinsbelasting sal gewoon bygevoeg word by die pryse en die koste van voedselproduksie nadelig tref.

In verband met plaasmoorde vra ek die Regering om groter sensitiwiteit. Uitsprake soos wat on onlangs op Ermelo gehoor het, of wat na bewering gehoor is, is stereotiperend en groot veralgemenings. Boere word onregverdig gekriminaliseer en Kill the Boer, kill the farmer'' word 'n afskuwelike werklikheid. Haatspraak teen 'n deel van die gemeenskap is aan die orde van die dag. Die Regering moet groter erns in verband hiermee aan die dag lê en 'n daadwerklike, voorkomende offensief instel soos tans in die stede. Daar bestaan persepsies dat die Regering in hierdie verband 'n Jan Smuts-benadering het van,Let things develop’’.

In die laaste plek wil ek praat oor Zimbabwe. Die totale landbougemeenskap kyk met groot besorgdheid na wat tans in Zimbabwe gebeur, waar kommersiële plase eenvoudig beset word en mnr Mugabe sy arms behaaglik vou. Die landbougemeenskap kyk met grote kommer na hierdie Regering wat tot nog toe nie ‘n woord van veroordeling hieroor laat hoor het nie. Ons vra ‘n duidelike, ondubbelsinnige versekering dat sulke optrede met die volle mag van die gereg behandel sal word. Die beskerming van die reg op privaatbesit word allerweë beskou as die mees basiese van menseregte. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr C AUCAMP: Mr Chairperson, agriculture forms part of the backbone of the South African economy. A sound agricultural sector has a healthy influence on everyone in the country. The agricultural sector is primarily responsible for 40 million stomachs being filled in South Africa at a price which at least makes it possible to be able to pour a bit of gravy on the pap. Furthermore, the agricultural sector is one of the biggest job creators in the country, and approximately a million people, plus their dependants, are dependent on agriculture for their daily existence. Furthermore a plea for agriculture is by no means still a plea for white privilege, as numerous black entrepreneurs are now entering this market. Just this morning an ANC member asked me to help him buy a farm.

I would very briefly like to bring six problems in agriculture to the hon the Minister’s attention. Firstly, financially speaking, the Agricultural Research Council’s taps are virtually being shut off. They are no longer even capable of remunerating staff. Money invested in agricultural research is recouped threefold. Agriculture has become a highly specialised industry and each failed crop damages the entire country’s economy. In this regard we could also really reach out to, and learn from, other countries in the subregion of Southern Africa.

Secondly, the Land Bank has announced assistance in the amount of R20 million for the flood-ravaged areas. We would ask that this money be utilised quickly and effectively, but we would go further. One can ask any farmer; droughts are worse than flooding. They wear one down over a progressive period of years and no one really takes pity on one, except perhaps one’s pastor. Financial institutions are sympathetic when too much water causes damage, but not when a lack thereof causes more damage. I am appealing for the reintroduction of a well-regulated drought assistance scheme. One can think of Joseph and Egypt’s seven fat years and seven lean years. The Government and organised agriculture simply have to face this big problem collectively and proactively once again.

Thank you very much for the words of the Minister regarding diesel prices. I appeal for the extension of the diesel rebate, which is currently applicable to the fishing industry, to the general farming industry. Certain types of farming, particularly crop farming, are in fact being paralysed by the diesel prices. The portion of the diesel price which is paid into the road-building fund, is unfair to farmers whose implements are not on our roads at all for 99% of their diesel consumption time. The excuse about practicability is also not acceptable. Coloured diesel, plus heavier penalties in the case of misuse, as a deterrent, could be an answer.

With regard to capital gains tax, I would also like to make a serious appeal to the Minister that the concession applicable to private homes and vehicles also be extended to farming property. Capital gains tax will simply be added to the prices and will negatively affect the cost of food production.

With regard to farm murders, I would ask the Government for greater sensitivity. Statements such as those we recently heard in Ermelo, or which were allegedly heard, lead to stereotyping and great generalisation. Farmers are unfairly criminalised, and Kill the Boer, kill the farmer'' becomes an atrocious reality. Hate speech against a sector of the community is the order of the day. The Government must exhibit greater seriousness in this regard and institute a decisive, preventative offensive as is currently the case in the cities. Perceptions exist that in this regard the Government has a Jan Smuts approach ofLet things develop’’.

Finally I would like to talk about Zimbabwe. The entire agricultural community is watching with great concern what is happening in Zimbabwe, where commercial farms are simply being occupied and Mr Mugabe is comfortably folding his arms. It is with even greater concern that the agricultural community is looking at this Government, which has to date not expressed a word of condemnation in this regard. We request a clear, unambiguous assurance that such behaviour will be dealt with using the full force of the law. The protection of the right of private ownership is universally viewed as the most basic of human rights. [Time expired.]]

Mr M A MANGENA: Chairperson, when talking about meaningful agriculture and farmers, we are talking about white people. One needs only to watch their congresses, meetings and protest marches, whenever they have them, and that becomes very clear to one. Of course, history has seen to that. Large-scale farming is not only a technical and financial thing, it is also a cultural thing.

Because of forcible exclusion from it, black people have no large-scale farming culture. I recently met a black man who has ventured into large- scale farming. Although he was not doing very badly financially and technically, he was thinking of quitting because on the social side he was not doing very well. He did not know where the boerewors gatherings were happening, or where the latest information was shared about where the rats had been sighted or where the worms had been seen recently. Therefore he was thinking of quitting. I think, by now, he has already done so.

Yet it is imperative that large-scale farming be democratised. How we get there is a huge and complicated matter. But there are a few blacks in small- scale farming, and perhaps these are the people who might graduate into large-scale farming, but at the moment they have enormous problems.

Firstly, they have a very small infrastructural base. Secondly, their financial base and support is extremely weak. Thirdly, they often have no collateral, and financial institutions, including the Land Bank, give them a hard time. Fourthly, compared to their large-scale farming counterparts, their farmers’ organisations are weak and therefore not able to help them much. Fifthly, it seems as though Government does not consult them sufficiently. Government officials go to them with policies or schemes all ready for implementation.

Sixthly, the training given to small-scale farmers by the Land Bank or the ARC is often very limited. Seventhly, small-scale farmers have very little support in the area of marketing for their products. Eighthly, information and technology transfer for small-scale farmers is very weak. It seems as though, if we are to democratise farming, we would need to embark on a robust 10-year to 20-year programme to deliberately promote black farmers. We need to do this, particularly for future generations. And I can see, Comrade Minister, that future generations are definitely coming. Their arrival is imminent! [Laughter.]

Such a programme could include such things as marketing, financial management, leadership skills, farming, technical matters, and so on.

Mr G B D McINTOSH: Chairperson, Pavarotti said that one of the best things in life is that, three times a day, one must stop what one is doing, sit down and eat. Of course, we, as farmers, play a big role in that. [Interjections.] I would like to congratulate the Minister on her lovely green dress, which is appropriate to wear on the day of her first Vote as Minister. I think the colour is probably from a genetically modified organism, but we congratulate her and trust that her period as Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs will be successful.

We believe that her emphasis on commercial agriculture is right. Before I came back to politics, I was the president of the KwaZulu-Natal Agricultural Union. We defined a commercial farmer as anybody who produced more than they could eat, and who bartered or sold whatever they had left. What are we doing in Kwanalu? We brought together about 4 000 large commercial farmers, mostly white, and over 30 000 small black farmers. [Interjections.] We have, today, very strong district agricultural councils, equally representative of both the communities and doing a great job.

In our sugar industry in KwaZulu-Natal our small-scale farmers produce more sugar than the whole of the Kingdom of Swaziland. There is absolutely no reason why small farmers and black farmers cannot compete with white farmers. [Interjections.] What we need to do is to have an emphasis on assisting those people to cross those thresholds, and I believe that our Minister’s approach and our Department of Agriculture’s approach is a good one. If the Minister wants to see more development of commercial agriculture, we have to ask why our high producing areas, such as the former Transkei, are not producing adequate food. Why are what Mamahlangu Ntuli calls the ``black elephants’’ not black elephants? Why are they white elephants?

I believe that is the question we have to ask ourselves. Why are areas which have huge potential, good soils and good infrastructure not actually producing? [Interjections.] We can go to Tugela Estates, or Makatini. We can go to many other examples of classic colonial approaches to commercial agriculture. I want to encourage the Minister to build that partnership which she has already started building with organised agriculture. In Kwanalu, we have been able to bring the capacity of the larger commercial farmers together with the opportunity for development of the small farmers.

In the meetings of our district agricultural councils, whether one speaks Zulu or English, there is no need for translation, because everybody understands one another. It is an example of rural people co-operating, working and bringing about development. They are able, through those district agricultural councils, to lobby local government to get better services to build capacity.

Finally, I do want to commend our department. We have a department of excellence in the Department of Agriculture. We must not allow that to change. I do, however, believe that the economic review, which the Minister’s department produces, could be better. There is, for example, no mention in the economic review of what the labour position is. I think the economic review’s assumption that there are 57 000 large commercial farmers and 1,3 million small farmers is questionable. I venture to suggest there are very many fewer of the other farmers. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr D A HANEKOM: Mr Chairperson, Minister, hon members, I would like to say a few words about trade in particular, but let me first just give hon members some background. In the agricultural policy document released by the department in November 1998, three major policy goals were set out: firstly, to build an efficient and internationally competitive agricultural sector; secondly, to support the emergence of a more diverse structure of production with a large increase in the numbers of successful small holder farming enterprises; and thirdly, to conserve our agricultural resources.

The policy document then goes on into some detail on what needs to be done in order to achieve these goals. It should be said that much has already been done by this Government towards the realisation of our goals. The past few years have seen rapid and quite dramatic changes in the agricultural sector. These changes have already produced impressive results: a significant rise in agricultural exports, food price inflation lower than in decades, the transfer of over a million hectares of land to black farmers through our land reform programme and a shift towards more sustainable farming practices in response to policy changes.

Just to deviate a little, I know the statistics can sometimes be a bit depressing, but the Minister should not get depressed, because I think that we have made very significant progress in giving land to the landless people of our country. The statistics can easily be used to make it appear less than what it is. If we take the restitution programme, together with the redistribution programme, and if we look at it as a percentage of the available land for redistribution, obviously the conservation land of our country, the forestry land, the mountainous land, etc, is not available, then indeed the outcome is still a modest outcome, far more modest than we would like to see it be, but perhaps it is a bit better than the statistics show at the moment.

Nonetheless, there is much to be done. We have good farmers in our country, black and white, male and female. Established farmers have responded well to changes in the marketing system, and many of our land reform beneficiaries have taken full advantage of new opportunities offered to them. Of course, much more needs to be done to achieve the diversity of production and to re-establish a vibrant class of black farmers in our country.

One of the challenges facing this Government is to reinforce and support these changes by a number of well-considered proactive interventions in the area of agricultural trade. The main goal is to maintain and enhance market access for agricultural products and to ensure that the sector contributes to its full potential to the export growth target aspired to in Gear, namely a 10% export growth rate per annum by the year 2000.

Agricultural exports are critical to the achievement of this target. By 1996, agricultural exports were already contributing over 10% of foreign exchange earnings and showing a steady upward trend. To achieve our export growth potential, however, we need an environment in which we can exploit our comparative and competitive advantages. We will have to make full use of the World Trade Organisation’s rules to eliminate unfair market access barriers and to protect our local agricultural industries against unfair trade practices. In this regard, our effective participation in the WTO to press for global reforms in agricultural trade is critical.

Our main export market for our farm products is the European Union. If unreasonable market barriers were removed and we were operating under conditions of fair trade, our farmers would have no difficulty competing with European farmers despite our resource limitations. The truth is that huge sums of money are paid out annually to European Union farmers. More than half the European Union budget goes to direct and indirect subsidies to farmers. They are effectively being paid to farm. Our fight is not with European Union farmers, but the effect of these subsidies and market access barriers makes it extremely difficult for our farmers to be competitive.

It goes further. Because of the subsidies, surpluses are produced and exported at prices which do not reflect production costs. The result is that potential export markets for us and our neighbouring countries are no longer available, because those countries are buying cheaper products from Europe. We should not underestimate the effect that these price-distorting subsidies have on developing countries that are dependent on their agricultural exports. [Interjections.] It is the one area in which many African countries have some comparative and competitive advantage.

Countries that are currently net importers of agricultural products could be and should be net exporting countries, but because of the price- depressing effects of the subsidies, they are simply not able to compete. We must take up this issue with vigour and engage in collective action with countries which are facing similar market access difficulties and which are negatively affected by price-distorting subsidies. Our active membership of the Cairns group of countries must be used to our full advantage.

The department should indeed be commended for the excellent work that is being and has been done in trade negotiations and in their participation in the preparations for the Seattle meeting of the WTO, and other often unnoticed work done to enhance our country’s export potential. The requirements of importing countries are often rigorous. Our foot-and-mouth- disease-free status is critical. Our attempts to eradicate Newcastle disease and other animal diseases are vital, not to mention a variety of actions necessary to meet the phytosanitary standards of importing countries. Without becoming overprotectionist and doing exactly what we are criticising other countries for doing, we should certainly be on our guard against the so-called dumping of agricultural products from those highly subsidised countries and ensure that appropriate measures are introduced in order to protect our farmers from the effects of unfair trade.

I will now respond briefly to some of the points made by previous speakers during this debate. I must say that the first point that really struck me was a remarkable degree of consensus in trying to deal with and identify those measures that are most important and most significant in order to achieve the best for our farmers in the country and for our agricultural economy. However, there clearly still seem to be points of difference which I will refer to in a moment. However, let me briefly speak about the point about diesel, the Land Bank loans to farmers and the support for greater allocations of funds to the ARC, then I will go on and speak about the rather shocking point mentioned by one member regarding the poorest of the poor.

On the issue of diesel, we have to admit that there does appear to be a contradiction. I would agree with many of the points made by the hon member Botha. We need to put our minds together and seek an effective solution to this problem. It really does not make sense that one sector should enjoy the fruits of a rebate effectively, while another sector, a very important sector to our country, much more important in terms of contribution to gross national production or gross domestic production than the fishery sector, does not enjoy the benefit of the rebate. We need to put our minds together and find a solution to the problem, so that this benefit can be extended to our farmers. With respect to the budget allocation to the ARC, I think everybody here is in agreement that the returns on money spent on research in agriculture, are high, and that we really do need a greater budget allocation to the ARC. There is no doubt that we will have difficulty in achieving the competitiveness and/or maintaining the competitiveness that I spoke about, unless we have the best in agricultural research, we stay with the best in the development of technology, and we introduce appropriate cultivars, animal species and farming methods which can make us among the best in the world. Therefore, the work of the ARC is incredibly important and they need to be sufficiently resourced to continue with their work.

On the Land Bank issue and the question of loans to farmers, which the hon Dr Schoeman raised, I think the Minister will respond to that, but it is not true that the Land Bank did not go out of its way to accommodate their clients in the Northern Province, and one should make the point that it is not the Land Bank’s responsibility to come up with disaster relief measures in the face of the disaster. Their job is to provide farmers with finance on the best possible and sustainable terms, and to treat their clients, especially their diversified range of clients, as well as they possibly can. I think that they are doing that.

On the matter of the poorest of the poor, I was rather shocked by the comment made by the hon member Andries Botha that this is a matter for welfare. It is not. It is, of course, an important issue that there be some kind of safety net for the poorest, but a large number of the poorest of the poor live in rural areas. In fact, the majority of the poorest people in our country live in rural areas. Many of them are women and many depend on their own modest agricultural activities for their livelihoods. Therefore, I am rather shocked. I believe that through improved technology, through improved access to finance, through better training and extension, they could double their incomes or produce a good supply of nutritious food for their families and, thus, contribute well towards the achievement of the goal of household food security.

The Minister emphasised, indeed, a shift in policy towards household food security. It is very important. If we are going to ensure that all people in our country have enough to eat, we have to redirect our efforts towards the poor. We need a paradigm shift. We need to acknowledge that the poor… I have no doubt that the Minister will never neglect the poor. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Adv S P HOLOMISA: Mr Chairperson, ladies and gentlemen, the Department of Land Affairs has, against almost insurmountable odds, made tremendous strides towards addressing the problem of the land. I am saying this, fully cognisant of the fact that one can still confidently state, without fear of contradiction, that more than 80% of the land is in white hands, while no more than 13% is under black occupation.

The three land reform programmes, namely tenure reform, restitution and redistribution, are still a long, long way from achieving the desired results. Yet, there are thousands of victims of land dispossession, who can testify that this Government’s policies have brought some changes in their lives. It is, for instance, no longer an easy matter for soulless landowners to evict people from their farms without the due process of the law. This due process of the law, which is buttressed by, among others, the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act and the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, also requires that alternative accommodation be available before an eviction order is granted by the court.

Furthermore, eviction orders issued by magistrates, most of whom are known sympathisers and friends of current landowners, are subject to automatic review by the Land Claims Court. It is a sorry but predictable indictment against our inherited judicial system to report that the majority of these eviction orders have been overturned by the Land Claims Court on review. This is why the period for review has had to be extended by a year. Due to the poor conditions under which the intended land reform beneficiaries live, most of them are still not aware that they are entitled to apply for the registration of their rights as labour tenants, and that they have the right to apply for land on which they live or for alternative pieces of land.

We are encouraged, therefore, to learn that the Department of Land Affairs is embarking on a publicity campaign to bring this vital information to the intended beneficiaries. We would appeal to all departments - nationally and provincially - as well as nongovernmental organisations, traditional authorities and most importantly, white farmers on whose land these beneficiaries live, to assist the department in sending out this message to its target group. If all of these people were to be aware of these rights and were to take advantage of them, we would have made a difference to lives of thousands of our people.

Millions of the people living in communal areas will commend the Minister for her unequivocal decision to transfer legal ownership of the land to its rightful owners - that is, the communities or tribes. This is an odious legacy of the apartheid past, which has no place in a nonracial, democratic state. As recent experience shows, the co-operation of traditional leaders and the affected communities will go a long way towards the acceleration of the transfer of this land to the people. The Government’s standing policy of giving recognition to all forms of land tenure, including communal tenure, will give the affected people their inalienable right to decide by themselves which system of land-holding will be to their benefit and to the benefit of those who are still to come.

The restitution process is galloping apace, despite the teething problems experienced in the initial stages. The amendment of the Restitution of Land Rights Act to do away with legalistic methods of settling claims has paid dividends because, in less than a year since the amendment, 1 610 claims have been settled. We are confident that the target of 3 000 claims - to be settled by the end of March as set by the commission itself - will be realised. About 63 455 claims have been registered. This is an awesome task which, however, can be overcome if the necessary support is given to the commission. Now that the commission has begun to deliver and is in a position to spend its allocated budget, its morale will no doubt be boosted if more funds in the future come its way.

We might do well to remind this House and the nation that the restitution process is part of the national programme of reconciliation. It is not a retributive exercise aimed at punishing those who enjoy the ill-gotten gains of colonialism and apartheid. If there are any people, therefore, in this House who are friends to the group of farmers resident in parts of Mpumalanga and the Northern Province who still call themselves the Transvaal Agricultural Union and have resolved to mobilise millions of rands to fight the restitution process, they might wish to do them and the country a service by advising them that this Government will not be deterred in its struggle to right the wrongs of the past; that these farmers should join the new South Africa and help build a nation whose defining feature is no longer a rich white section and a poor black section; and that they are nevertheless wasting their money - money they could put to better use by, for instance, investing in the education of their children if they cannot reconcile themselves with the idea of sharing their wealth with farmworkers and their families.

The redistribution arm of the Land Reform Programme was from the beginning a programme whose success would depend on co-ordination with and co- operation from departments such as Agriculture, Water Affairs and Forestry, Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Housing, Provincial and Local Government, Health, Education and many others. Besides the fact that the amount of R16 000 was inadequate to buy land and at the same time develop it, it was an unfair burden that the Department of Land Affairs was required to carry. After all, its task is to provide land to the poor and not to carry out the line functions of the other departments.

While the review of the programme was inevitable, it is our view that the department should continue to identify land suitable for distribution and to assist the landless to acquire such land. The increase in delivery on land reform is bound to make demands on the deeds registration systems, surveys and mapping. These systems, fortunately, continue to be the best in the world. We are confident that any volume of work to be generated by the land reform programmes will easily be accommodated.

Mhlali-Ngaphambili, ndikhuthazwa ngumoya omhle wentsebenziswano phakathi kwawo onke amalungu ekomiti xa sihlangene ekomitini. Ndingamqinisekisa uMphathiswa nesekela lakhe, okaDu Toit, namasebe abo omabini ngenkxaso esizakuyinika kumalinge abo okwenza impilo yabemi beli ibe ngcono.

Liyaphela ngoku ixesha lokuba kubekho abamele oohlohl’ esakhe bengabananzele nto abahlwempuzekileyo. Simema wonke ubani, onento yokwenza nezolimo nosetyenziso lomhlaba, ukuba beze ngaphambili size kwabelana ngezakhono esinazo ukuphucula intlalo-ntle yethu sonke.

Sikhuthazwa na lilinge elitsha leemanyano zamanye amafama, ukomeleza amakhonkco entsebenziswano phakathi kwawo nawo onke amaqela amelweyo ekomitini. Loo nto iza kwenza sikwazi ukwabelana ngezimvo nabo ngqo, singaxhomekeki kwimibutho yezombuso.

Ekuhambeni kwexesha le komiti iza kuthi bhazalala ijikeleza amaphondo osithoba iqwalasela inkqubela neengxaki eziphathelele kwinkqubo yenguqu kumiwo-mhlaba. Siza kuzama ukubonana nabo bonke abachaphazelekayo. Iinjongo zinye, kukupheliswa kwendlala nophuhliso lwemveliso yokutya kumakhaya onke asemaphandleni.

Sithi, okokugqibela siyi-ANC, siyayixhasa le voti. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa paragraphs follows.)

[Adv S P HOLOMISA: Mr Chairperson, I am heartened by the good spirit of co- operation prevalent among all members when we meet as a committee. I can assure the Minister and her deputy, hon Du Toit, and their two departments, of our backing in their efforts to create a better life for all the citizens of this country.

The time for people with self interests, who do not care about the plight of the poor, has come to an end. We invite everybody who has anything to do with agriculture and the use of land to come forward so that we can share our skills and improve the welfare of all of us. We are also encouraged by the new efforts on the part of agricultural unions to strengthen working relations between themselves and all groups represented in the committee. That will make it possible for us to share skills with them directly, and not depend on state organs.

In due course, this committee will visit the nine provinces to look into progress and problems relating to landownership. We will try to meet with all stakeholders. The objective will be the eradication of hunger and the development of food production for all rural households.

Finally, we as the ANC support the Vote. [Applause.]]

Mr W J SEREMANE: Mr Chairman, hon Minister and hon members of this House, the Portfolio Committee on Land Affairs is an incredibly important one.

We on this side of the House are as eager as anyone to see the department succeed in its aims of bringing about a more equitable distribution of land, without disrupting either the economy of the country or the productivity of the land upon which we all depend for food and fibre. We are, therefore, gratified to note that there has been a deliberate shift in policy away from the old approach which sought to encourage the redistribution of land by way of encouraging communal ownership, to a more modern and pragmatic approach which seeks to encourage individual title deeds rather communal ones and commercial rather than subsistence agriculture.

We must not be misunderstood. We fully appreciate the importance of existing communal land to those who live on it and work it. It is a most important source of security to them, and we welcome all the attempts which are being made through legislation to tighten up this form of ownership and allow it to bring greater benefits to those who share it. What we are saying to the Minister is that, despite these existing benefits, it is an outmoded system of tenure which, for a host of very good reasons, cannot deliver maximum benefits to the owners. We now need to accommodate the new owners of land in a more modern system of individual freehold tenure, so that our emergent farmers and new landowners can log into the modern financial world which requires working capital, collateral, cash flows and other aspects of a modern economy which have been denied to so many for so long.

My colleague, the hon Maluleke, will be dealing at greater length with some of the options that are open to us in assisting those who want to be landowners to acquire such land. I should like to use the short time still available to me to touch on the vex problem of land restitution and reparation. I wish to tell the Minister that my experience in this field has given me a good insight into the difficulties and pitfalls.

There are enormous administrative and financial problems to be overcome. That is why we support a budget that will enable the hon the Minister to do this. However, there do appear to be some encouraging signs that people who were dispossessed of their land now have renewed hope that their claims will be addressed. Like they say in Africa, even if the elephants have fought, the grass will still grow. We welcome this. However, we do have some reservations about the redistribution programme, which my colleague will address at great length.

We once more want to call upon everybody in the House to remember the flood victims. We also want to draw the attention of the Government to the plight of those farmers who have lost stock, property and crops in this disaster. A way will have to be found to relieve the burden of their losses.

Last but not least, we wish the new Minister well in her important task. As Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, she has the responsibility of providing resources for all our people. [Applause.]

Prof H NGUBANE: Chairperson, hon members, hon Minister and friends, the Minister has lately produced a number of new strategies for dealing with land reform, which are commendable and which should therefore be highlighted.

In the context of state land management, the hon the Minister has directed that all state agricultural land should be administered by the provincial departments of agriculture, whereas up to now, it was administered by the central Department of Land Affairs in Pretoria. To give substance to the change, the hon the Minister has further instructed that powers of attorney be given to each provincial MEC responsible for agriculture. This step is very welcome. The far-reaching consequences of these matters can hardly be over-emphasised.

The different provinces each have their own distinctive historical experiences regarding land matters. For instance, the labour tenancy system has a long history in KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga, which now have to cope with multitudes of landless people as a result of upheavals over the past two years when people were evicted from white-owned farms.

These two provinces have thereby borne the stresses and strains of the impoverishment and suffering of these masses of landless and homeless people. It makes good sense, therefore, to empower the relevant MEC in each province to take decisions for the complete amelioration of this destitution. The IFP endorses these new measures, trusting that they will be accompanied by steps to foster development and the provision of relevant financial packages for carrying out all the necessary duties.

Moving now to land tenure reform, a draft Bill originally completed in June 1999 is currently being reviewed. The hon the Minister has directed that the Department of Land Affairs should produce a consolidated and rationalised land administration system and so transfer land in the relevant areas to the tribes or communities who have occupied or used the land.

One expected outcome of these planned strategies would be to deal effectively with present overcrowding in the former homelands. This, again, gives us hope. That we are thus appreciative of the new approaches adopted by the Minister and her department does not mean however that the IFP no longer views with concern the basic policy from which land legislation derives.

Land Affairs is the only governmental portfolio dealing entirely, and exclusively, with one racially defined section of our population. Ironically, this section comprises three-quarters of the population of the country. The roots of this anomaly lie in section 25 of the 1996 constitution which says:

A person or community dispossessed of property after June 1913, as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices, is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of Parliament, either to restitution of property or to equitable redress.

I shall make a point of reminding this House that the only people deprived of their land before June 1913 were Africans. Section 25 of the 1996 Constitution thus endorses that exclusion and deprivation. The direct beneficiaries of that clause are, essentially, members of the other racial groups, who were particularly targeted by the Group Areas Act of the apartheid government.

Having been quite genuine in commending the Minister’s efforts, it is with some reluctance that I persist in emphasising these inescapable facts, nevertheless. South Africa has been described as a country of two nations by none other than our own President. Others, for instance the well-known historian, Terence Ranger, described this country as one which combines a minority more privileged than almost anywhere in the world, with a majority more deprived than anywhere else in Africa, where there have been no devastation of wars.

What must be underlined is that this Third World, which is represented by the internal majority, is racially defined and it is administered by the Department of Land Affairs. This task of administering the lives of three- quarters of the population is ranked so low that the department gets less than 1% of the country’s Budget. All of this raises embarrassing questions about our professed concerns in this House about human rights.

We, in the IFP, shall continue to support the Minister when she seeks forthright and practical solutions to these very sticky problems. In the shorter-term, we shall strive with her to harness and support indigenous knowledge in all relevant spheres, especially in order to foster self- respect among possessors and users of this knowledge and promote cultivation and use of indigenous crops through continuing research. We shall also support the use of indigenous forms of storage of crops and foodstuffs whereby people can be self-reliant and feed themselves. We shall promote crop and livestock production and protect marketing, assisting the Minister in this effort. In the long-term we will also continue to support the Minister in her quest for bringing about equity in land matters. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, the next speaker, Ms O Kasienyane, is making a maiden speech. Please be courteous to her. [Applause.]

Ms O R KASIENYANE: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister, colleagues and friends, the land question is no doubt central to all issues which involve correcting injustices of the past, affirming the dignity of every citizen in this country and reconstructing our lives. The Constitution of our country states very clearly that the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis. It is therefore our constitutional obligation, as well as our political and moral responsibility, to address the sad legacy of years of dispossession and denial of land rights.

From time immemorial we have seen a bitter and brave struggle for land, from King Galeshewe to King Shaka, from King Hintsa to King Makgoba. Land, and its availability, is still a major challenge to our people today. When our forefathers said ``Mayibuye iAfrika!’’ they were calling for the return of their land. [Interjections.] Our hard-won democracy will be meaningless to many people unless the land which was taken from them is restored. [Applause.] Millions of our people who live in the rural areas are crying out for secure land rights and access to land. For many, many people it is their only source of livelihood. Although we all know that the land question is still a complex and difficult one to resolve, we cannot run away from it. We owe it to our people to find an effective and creative solution to the problem.

On 6 March this year, the Deputy Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, Adv Du Toit, visited my constituency in Taung on a fact-finding mission about the deterioration of the Taung irrigation scheme. He was greeted by farmers who immediately said ``Re batla title deed go lema! [We need title deeds for farms.’’]

The MEC for agriculture explained to the Deputy Minister about the huge debts which farmers incurred. All avenues have been explored, but the only remaining solution is in obtaining loans from financial institutions. However, the banks are not prepared to provide them with loans, because they do not own the land, they are farming on the tribal land.

This Taung case raises a number of important questions. Who actually owns tribal land? What are the rights of occupants and landowners on such land? Should home owners in the former Bantustans not be able to obtain title deeds to their homes if that is what they want? Should farmers not be able to get title deeds or at least a form of tenure which would allow them to get bank loans? And what about the land rights of women? Are these rights properly respected under the existing traditional systems? The fact remains that customary law and practices do continue to prevent women from securing land tenure.

Clarity is urgently needed on this question as to who actually is the owner of this so-called tribal or communal land. Some say the Government is the owner. Some traditional leaders claim that the land belongs to them. There have been calls for all this land to be transferred to traditional authorities. Meanwhile, in the absence of clear answers to these questions, people on the ground are confused. Investors are not investing. Farmers and home owners are not able to get bank loans. These areas remain relatively undeveloped and impoverished.

It is true that we are still facing mammoth challenges if we are to meet the expectations of our people in the rural areas. Some are saying ``ilizwe lethu [our land].’’ Whereas we are addressing the problems in our townships, it is in the rural areas that our people are crying out for us to help. Our people still do not even own the houses which they built themselves in the rural areas.

We cannot obtain loans from a bank to improve our houses or to expand them. It surely cannot be right that our own houses do not belong to us. It surely must be possible for farmers who have been farming a piece of land for generations to get ownership of that land. That does not mean that we want to privatise all communal land or that we do not appreciate the value of traditional systems and the important role of traditional leaders. We must get real investment and development in our rural areas. Our rural people must enjoy the same rights and opportunities as other citizens of our country.

The good news is that the Department of Land Affairs has been looking carefully at these complex issues for some time now. They will soon be releasing draft legislation which will address a number of these issues. The Department of Housing has also made it possible for our people in rural areas to get Government subsidies for low-cost housing. For instance, in Pilanesberg and Taung in North-West, we will be getting construction of 2000 houses next year.

The land reform programme has also allowed our people, who have never had access to land, to become owners of productive farms through their community properties associations. We are thankful for that.

Lemme ga le bolae, go bolaya lefifi. [Half a loaf is better than no bread.]

In dealing with the land issue, we gain strength from our experiences and we are motivated by the will of our people who drink from the cup of encouragement, a cup of our forefathers who said nko ya kgomo mogala tshwara thata, e se re o utlwa sebodu wa kgaoga. [Nako e fedile.] [Legofi.] [when things do not go well, one should not give up hope.] [Time expired.]] [Applause.]

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Mr Chairman, I would like to congratulate the previous speaker on her maiden speech and I wish her a long and satisfying parliamentary career.

Die samevoeging van landbou en grondsake in een portefeuljekomitee was ‘n logiese stap en dit word verwelkom. Omdat grond soveel emosie ontketen, word dit verwelkom dat die voorsitter, die agb Patekile Holomisa, se benadering een van konsensus is. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The consolidation of agriculture and land affairs in one portfolio committee was a logical step and it is welcomed. Because land is such an emotive issue, it is welcomed that the approach of the chairperson, the hon Patekile Holomisa, was one of consensus.]

We have appreciation for his approach of consensus seeking.

Ooglopend sal hy nie altyd daarin slaag nie, maar die manier waarop dit gehanteer gaan word, gaan in ‘n groot mate bepaal of ‘n volwasse en bevredigende oplossing bereik gaan word. As alternatief is die Zimbabwe- model ons voorland. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Obviously he will not always succeed in that, but the way in which this is going to be dealt with will, to a great extent, determine whether a mature and satisfactory solution will be found. Alternatively, the Zimbabwe model lies in store for us.]

I am confident that we have the imagination, ability and resilience in this country to avoid replicating Zimbabwe. Of course, there is an imbalance in the present distribution of land and this has to be rectified. Government- related institutions such as the Land Bank and the commercial farming sector have a vital role to play in this regard, but we must always remember that it must be essentially a market-driven process. The yearning to own one’s own bit of God-given earth is basic to each of us and if we do not recognise that need, we are courting disaster. Maybe this relates to the fact that the Bible teaches us that God moulded man from clay according to His own image, but it is also a fact that He mutilated man to create woman. [Interjections.]

Providing land might satisfy a spiritual need, but it is not a passport to wealth and happiness. It is of no use to set targets of 15% and 30% for land redistribution if there is not at least some reasonable assurance that those persons who have been settled have an equal or better chance of attaining economic viability through the practice of sustainable agriculture. The latest figures supplied by the hon the Minister indicate that 1 047 farms benefiting 34 597 households have been purchased with the aid of the R15 000, and now the R16 000, grant scheme. Total expenditure since 1994-95 for redistribution has been R470,85 million.

The annual Quality of Life Survey, first published in 1998, indicates an overall bleak picture, showing projects being assembled and transferred by the Department of Land Affairs, leaving beneficiary communities without access to basic services and little likelihood of any improvement in their economic circumstances. The report identifies a key problem facing the land reform programme as the way in which it fails to integrate properly with local planning and other development processes.

It also suggests that decisions about land use are made by a select few. The general institutional framework was identified as being weak. The report points to the fact that in many cases projects are placed out of the reach of services provided by the Department of Agriculture. Generally the contribution of agriculture to projects is seen as minimal, and a need to boost this area is identified. Water is identified as the major constraint facing agricultural projects.

It is to be welcomed that in the 1999 Quality of Life Survey specific farming activities are monitored, and when this is published it should give an even more accurate indication regarding the constraints of the process. I would like to call on the Minister to look again at the desirability of setting surface area targets for redistribution. Owing to the drastic difference in land potential from east to west, it would be far more realistic to use agricultural potential as a parameter.

Cognisance must also be taken of the revolutionary agricultural production breakthroughs achieved by resource-poor countries such as Israel. Let us move forward, establishing more and more successful farmers from our previously disadvantaged communities in a sensible and credible way.

Nkskz A N SIGCAWU: Mhlalingaphambili, inguqu eyenziwe luhlelo lokubuyiselwa kwemihlaba kwabo babewuhluthwe ngooRhulumente bengcinezelo, kuqukwa nabamaphandle, ayinakulityalwa kwimbali yeli lizwe.

Kukho umahluko omkhulu empilweni yabo bantu banikezelwe imihlaba yabo ngulo Rhulumente weANC. Le mihlaba ibuyiselwe kubantu eyayihluthwe kubo de banikwa nemali yokuyiphuhlisa. Aba bantu baye bafumana imihlaba yokwakha amakhaya abo neyokuvelisa ngokwezolimo, kwatsho kwadaleka imisebenzi.

Mandicacise malunga neemeko ezigquba ezilalini, ngakumbi xa zithelekiswa nezo zasezidolophini okanye ezifama. Mkhulu umahluko phakathi kweendawo ezichazwa ngegama elithi ``rural’’. Eli gama liyasetyenziswa ukubhekisa kwiindawo ezizilali, iindawo ezizifama nakwiindawo ezizilokishi.

Xa ndicacisa ndingathi uphuhliso luyathothoza ezilalini ngenxa yemithetho elawula usetyenziso lomhlaba. Imihlaba ekhoyo yileyo kuthiwa yeyabantu abalima amasimi okanye amadlelo, kodwa awukho umhlaba onokunikezelwa kubantu abafuna uphuhliso. Noxa le mihlaba ingalinywanga, abantu eyayinikwe bona basemi kwelithi yeyabo. URhulumente akanakho ukuyinika abantu abanqwenela ukuyiphuhlisa ngenxa yemithetho yomiwo-mhlaba engekalungiswa. Nokuba umhlaba lowo uphantsi kukaRhulumente okanye uphantsi kolawulo lweenkosi, into ebalulekileyo yeyokuba loo mihlaba ayifumaneki. Abantu kufuneka behle besenyuka beze neziqinisekiso phambi kokuba bafumane uncedo lwemali ukuze baphuhlise, ngelo xesha ikati ilele eziko imisebenzi ayikho ikhonjwa eGoli naseKapa.

Ngoku ndiza kuthetha ngokunqongophala komhlaba neendlela ezilalini. Xa abantu basezilalini bebenokufumana le mali ifunyanwa ngabantu ezidolophini ukuze bakhelwe izindlu baze bona bayisebenzise ekuphuhliseni le mihlaba kuthiwa yeyamadlelo okanye amasimi, bebenokuba nayo indlela yokuguqula impilo yabo. Bangakwazi ukuthenga izixhobo zokulima nembewu. Bangagxotha ikati eziko, bathengise, baze ngentsalela bakwazi ukufundisa abantwana babo bahlawule neenkonzo, ngokukodwa xa abantu bekhuthazwa ukuba baseke iikomiti zolawulo lwemihlaba yabo. Kungalula ngokunjalo xa besebenzisa iinkundla zolawulo-mihlaba ukuze bakhawuleze bafumane amaphepha-mvume okusebenzisa loo mihlaba.

Ndithetha nje kwezinye iingingqi azakhiwanga izindlu zabantu ngenxa yamabango phakathi kweelali needolophana zasemaphandleni, oko kubangelwa kukungacaci kwemithetho elawula imihlaba ezidolophini nasezilalini. Le ke yintlungu kwabo bafuna izindlu. Kukho ithemba elikhulu lokuba ukusekwa koomasipala ezilalini nokudityaniswa kweedolophana ezisezilalini zibe ntonye, kuya kwenza umahluko ekukhawuleziseni uphuhliso neenguqu. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa speech follows.)

[Mrs A N SIGCAWU: Mr Chairperson, the change brought about by the land restitution programme to those who were deprived of their land by apartheid governments, including homeland governments, cannot be forgotten in the history of this country.

There is a big difference in the lives of the people who were given back their land by the Government of the ANC. Land has been given back to those from whom it was taken, and they have also been provided with funds to develop it. These people obtained land to build their homes and make produce, resulting in job creation.

Let me explain the conditions prevalent in rural areas, more especially in relation to those in urban areas and on farms. There is a big difference between the areas defined as ``rural’’. This word is used to refer to villages, farms and townships.

Furthermore, I can say development is very slow in rural areas because of the laws governing the use of land. It is said that the only land available is arable land and land for grazing, but nothing for development purposes. Even though this land remains uncultivated, the people to whom it was given insist that it is theirs. The Government cannot give this land to people who want to develop it because the laws governing landownership have not yet been amended. Irrespective of whether it is state land or traditional land, what is important is that it is not available. People have to go up and down trying to come up with security before they can get loans for development, whereas they are unemployed and jobs are said to be in Johannesburg and Cape Town.

Now I am going to address the scarcity of land and lack of roads in rural areas. If people in rural areas could get the housing development subsidies received by those in urban areas and use them for the development of the so- called arable and grazing land, they could transform their lives. They could buy agricultural equipment and seed. They could eradicate hunger, sell their produce, and educate their children and pay for their school fees, particularly when encouraged to set up land management committees. Things could be easy if they made use of tribal authorities so that they could get title deeds for such land.

Right now in some areas people’s houses have not been built due to claims involving villages and rural towns, which is caused by the lack of clarity in the laws governing the use of rural and urban land. This is a source of sadness to those who want houses. There is a great hope that the establishment of municipalities in rural areas and the integration of small rural towns will speed up development and transformation. [Applause.]]

Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, hon members, the Government’s programme of land reform, among other things, aims at extending security of tenure and providing land restitution to all South Africans, something which the ACDP supports. We are, however, very aware of the fine balance that must be found between the rights of the landless and those of landowners.

Land reform and capacity development of the people who need it the most are under threat. In the first instance, the progress in land reform is too slow. There have been 63 455 land claims lodged and about 785 settled. Since 1994 Government has promised up to 1,8 million hectares of land to previously disadvantaged people as part of their land reform programme. When the process is caught up in long legal disputes, and lacks the necessary momentum, this inevitably leads to frustration of the landless and the dispossessed. Zimbabwe is an example of what happens when a government neglects or postpones the land issue.

How long must the people of District Six wait? Another millennium? Justice delayed is justice denied. The Government has recently stated that it aims to redistribute 15% of farm land. The Minister has stated, however, that Government is still busy trying to come up with a coherent policy on state land disposal. The Government must speed up on this issue. The longer Government takes, the more impoverished the landless communities will become.

The quality of the land is also deteriorating as Government delays. In the long run erosion of natural resources occurs and the land is designated as waste land. We need to be serious about poverty alleviation, and land reform can make a contribution towards this end. The ACDP supports this Vote, but we do want to caution Government to speed up the process of land redistribution.

Gen C L VILJOEN: Chair, I think we all can admit that ownership of land is indeed an emotional issue. It is a real issue and we have to address it. We cannot run away, as was previously said. I think we can also all agree that the Zimbabwean way is the wrong way. It is a violation of human rights. In fact, it comes down to ethnic cleansing. It justifies action in terms of the African Charter on Human Rights and People’s Rights.

Yesterday my party approached Foreign Affairs in a formal letter, asking the South African Government, in terms of article 47 of the said charter, to take this matter up with Zimbabwe and also with the OAU. By fighting this violation of human rights in Africa, this Government can demonstrate two things to all the people of South Africa: firstly, a genuine commitment to the human rights of all people in South Africa and, secondly, a guarantee that this programme of land reform - a very sensitive one - will be carried out in a responsible way, without prejudice and with a fair and unbiased attitude.

What is the right way? We think that a process should be instituted - proper, fair and open - with detailed consultation, especially with everyone in organised agriculture, moulded together in partnership to achieve this important aspect in the most peaceful way possible, and jealously caring for the scarce agricultural land of our country to ensure that the land redistribution programme is carried out in such a way that agricultural resources are wisely and effectively utilised and not wasted for the sake of the future of our people.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, the next speaker, Z Kotwal, is making his maiden speech. Please be courteous to him. [Applause.]

Mr Z KOTWAL: Chairperson, hon members of the House, land ownership in South Africa has long been a source of conflict. Our history of conquest and dispossession, of forced removals and a racially skewed distribution of land has left us with a complex and difficult legacy. This legacy has caused major instability in the lives of millions of rural people, who were forced to live under insecure arrangements on land belonging to others. Kunzima uma uhleli endaweni yomunye umuntu. [It is difficult when one is living on someone else’s land.]

They had and have no alternative place to live and no alternative means of survival. This situation is the result of hundreds of land-related racially discriminatory laws, laws introduced and enforced under colonialism and apartheid, the most infamous of these being the Land Act of 1913. I mention these facts, not because I like to dwell on the past, but rather so that we can understand why so many land owners evicted our people from their farms after the 1994 elections.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, this is a maiden speech. Please, continue.

Mr Z KOTWAL: It is unfortunate that some sectors resorted to these actions, and even more saddening that some of them are still clinging to this laager mentality. [Interjections.] Families who have been living in harmony with landowners were mercilessly dumped on the roadsides.

Abelungu bamapulazi babefika nogandaganda badilize imizi yabantu. Babebathwala babalahle emigwaqweni, izimvula zibanethe futhi balahlekelwe nayimfuyo yabo. [White farmers came with tractors and destroyed people’s homesteads. They carried them off and dumped them at the roadside. The rain fell on them and they also lost their livestock.]

These evictions led to the mushrooming of squatter settlements around our cities and towns. Our people look to the branches of the ANC for help and guidance. Our branches were inundated with calls, especially from our youth, for permission to fight back, to attack the farmers, to burn their houses down and to evict them - an eye for an eye. I thank God that the local leadership comes from a family of tolerance and maturity; a family that did not want our beautiful country to go up in flames; a family that I am proud to be a member of; my family, the ANC. [Applause.]

We kept our people at bay by preaching reconciliation and assuring them that our Government, led by the ANC, would come to our rescue. And come to our rescue they did by enacting the extension of Security of Tenure Act. When this House debated this Act in 1997, the opposition parties vehemently opposed it. Nevertheless, this Act provides tenure security in two ways. Firstly, by helping people living on rural or peri-urban land to obtain stronger land rights to the land on which they are living. Secondly, by laying down certain criteria that landowners must follow before they can evict people. This Act is enforceable by the magistrates’ court and the land claims court.

Ngifuna ukuthatha leli thuba ngibonge le Ndlu ngokushaya le miThetho evimbela ukuxoshwa kwabantu emapulazini. [I would like to take this opportunity to thank the House for passing the laws that prohibit the eviction of people from farms.]

Ake ngiphaphathe. [Ihlombe.] [Let us applaud.] [Applause.]]

Although we have this good and just Act in place, certain landowners continue to intimidate our people by making life unbearable. To illustrate this, I would like to cite a few examples. In my home town, Piet Retief in Mpumalanga, which is a predominantly forestry area, farmers plant trees on the doorsteps of our people’s homes. [Interjections.] Can one imagine opening one’s door in the morning and being greeted by a pine tree? Another example would be where they deprive our people of a very basic need such as access to water. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Sadly, local government cannot intervene as government funding cannot be used on private property. All our councillors can do is to plead for the mercy of the landowners. Furthermore, landowners do not respect our culture, as they denied our people permission to bury their dead next to their ancestors. One such case is in the farm Diemagrati in the Ermelo district, where the Nkosi family were denied permission to bury one of their sons on the farm. In conclusion, I would like to give a bit of free advice to the SA Agricultural Union, especially their subsidiary, the Transvaal Agricultural Union. [Interjections.] Instead of collecting millions of rands to fight land claims in Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal and the Northern Province, the union should rather spend the money on the development of the rural poor. Farmers or groups such as the Transvaal Agricultural Union should get away from their laager mentality. This ``us against them’’ attitude is not conducive to the upliftment of the rural poor. [Interjections.] A better life for all …

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEE: Order!

Mr Z KOTWAL: … should not only be a process driven by the ANC, but all should claim ownership of it so as to contribute to the socioeconomic upliftment of all the citizens of South Africa.

In closing, I would also like to take this opportunity to wish all my Muslim brothers and sisters across the world a happy Eid Mubarak. [Applause.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Chairperson, hon members, the Department of Land Affairs has as its aim the equitable distribution of land within the context of reconstruction, growth and development. It is not surprising that the Budget shows a 22% increase on last year’s, and this is most welcome.

Restitution of land may tend to be a double-edged sword, as it brings about displeasure in some areas. Some people in a particular area may decide to leave after having been forced to occupy a place, while others may decide otherwise. The leader of the community, a kgosi in this case, then gets torn between two factions: those who want to go and those who want to remain. Eventually the community straddles two pieces of land. This is one matter that has to be addressed, and a policy on this matter has to be developed so that in the end we do not have people eating their cake and still having it.

The communities of Bakubung and Bakwena who straddle Lledag and Boons, Taaiboschkein and Ratsegaaistad respectively, are the closest examples in this instance. The hon the Minister has just referred to the Batloung of Putfontein, who, in a way, would also decide to leave or to go to either Ramatlabama or Putfontein, as the case may be.

The 18% increase in land reform will be felt by those who have for a long time yearned to have land and use it profitably. It is common knowledge that blacks were hard-pressed to occupy land in the past. We believe that in some instances consideration has to be given to affirmative action in land tenure.

Black farmers in some provinces have had seven-year lease contracts with their respective governments. Added to the contract was the option to buy, but the uncertainty that prevailed in the wake of the 1994 elections resulted in some farms being abandoned, and these farms have since deteriorated in value through disuse. The matter has to be revisited and deliberated on so that more land could be made available for the previously disadvantaged people.

In order to make people good land users, they should be exposed to land; they should have access to land. And with this in mind, land could be put aside for young people who want to follow a career in agriculture to practise on. Finally, the land reform programme will be long and tiresome, but in cases where victim compensation is feasible, this should be done without any delay before people lose patience. Land distribution should be mounted with the greatest circumspection to avoid a blindfolded payment to Peter while robbing Paul. The land tenure reform will be debatable for a long time to come, as evidenced currently by the situation surrounding the Municipal Demarcation Board. [Time expired.]

Dr M S MOGOBA: Chairperson, hon Minister, the PAC will support this Vote, but we feel that we have to go to the heart of the matter. Not to do so would be a betrayal of thousands of fellow countrymen and women who have suffered pain, humiliation and death since the struggle for land and freedom began.

We have crossed the Rubicon of political independence, against the wishes, hopes and expectations of many in the country and in the world. Six years after the election of a democratic, nonracial and nonsexist Government, we have political power, but no land.

Millions of Africans live in filthy squatter camps which are unsuitable for human habitation. Out of 63 000 land claims lodged between 1998 and 1999, only 795 settlements were made during that period. There is not enough land for Africans. There is not enough land to claim. Recent floods have put a spotlight on the misery of millions of our people even in the richest province of Gauteng.

Landlessness has become so acute in recent years and squatter camps are mushrooming everywhere. We are really sitting on a time bomb that could go off at any time. I was involved in a few cases where squatter camp dwellers invaded a beautiful college campus. No one from Government downwards seemed able to help. In the end, squatters took the land, demolished the buildings and helped themselves to the roofing-iron, the wood, the windows, the doors, the mats, the plumbing and electrical fittings.

Those of us who are laughing at the plight of Comrade Mugabe in nearby Zimbabwe, would be well advised to examine our situation here. It may be a case of: ``He who laughs last, laughs best’’. We urgently need to amend section 25 (7) of our Constitution. We have a long overdue indaba to review land redistribution. The shameful 87% to 13% ratio is our albatross. This must be changed, so that we have a South Africa that all South Africans can be proud to belong to, and defend, if need be.

I repeat, and will do so ad nauseum: Landownership is the basis for nationhood. Land is the foundation for wealth. Land is the source of mineral and agricultural products and all kinds of raw materials for human use and development. Land is the source of food, houses, employment, means of education, pastures and graveyards. A landless nation is no nation.

Izwe lethu! [Ihlombe.] [It is our land! [Applause.]

Awasabeli amalungu. Ngabe kutheni? [You do not respond. Why?]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairman, let me just finish off the point which I started earlier this afternoon. What I was suggesting was that if one gets a diesel rebate on the tax value that is being paid at the moment, would it not be a good thing if that could be coupled with job creation? One could get this diesel rebate if some new employment is created and, in any event, this could make provision for increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural sector. Then one creates an incentive and, if one loses the tax on the diesel, at least in this instance, one can, at the same time, create employment. That is possible, and I think it is something that has to be looked at.

We have a way of talking quite glibly when we talk about land reform, but what are the facts? I want to tell the House that if one looks at how land was distributed in this country when the ANC came into power in 1994, one sees that the average amount held per person in South Africa was 1,3 hectares in the case of blacks, compared to 1 570 hectares per person in the case of whites.

Now, clearly, as hon Mogoba has just said, that cannot be sustained and it cannot be accepted in any way. The 7,7% originally allocated in 1913 under the Native Land Act was also the heart of the problem and that is why, when the hon Schoeman, who is not here now, says that one should use agricultural potential as one’s criterion for measuring if we should go ahead with land reform, it cannot be accepted. Then it shows that he does not know the history in terms of which the land question operated in South Africa.

‘n AGB LID: Jy moet dit in Afrikaans sê!

Die ADJUNKMINISTER: Ek wil dit vir die boere en vir almal in die land sê. Ons kan nie sê grondhervorming is ‘n saak wat ons vir die mense van die ANC kan los nie. Grondhervorming ter wille van die stabiliteit in hierdie land is ‘n nasionale saak wat elke mens in hierdie land ten nouste raak, ongeag watter kleur hy ook al is. Ons kan nie sê ons gaan ‘n bietjie grond hier herverdeel en ‘n bietjie grond daar herverdeel nie, en dan ontdek ons tot dusver is daar 8% sedert 1994 slegs 0,8% herverdeel.

Die departement is nou gerat, ná ‘n redelik stadige aanloop - ons gaan ‘n nuwe direkteur-generaal ook kry - om te lewer, maar dan moet dit elke mens in die land wees, ook die rykste boer. [Tussenwerpsels.] Andries Botha het dit ook gesê. Ek weet hy dink so, alhoewel ek nie weet van sy party nie. Dit is egter in ons almal se belang dat hier moet herverdeling kom, en daardie 30%-mikpunt in die HOP moet nog behaal word! Ons kan nie vir ewig wag nie, want waarom moet ons? Dit is ‘n kwessie van armoede ook. Laat ek almal net weer eens herinner aan die syfers oor armoede in hierdie land en waar die armoede lê. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[An HON MEMBER: You must say that in Afrikaans!

The DEPUTY MINISTER: I want to tell the farmers and everyone in the country this. We cannot say that land reform is a matter which we can leave to the people of the ANC. Land reform for the sake of stability in this country is a national matter which very closely affects everyone in this country, irrespective of their colour. We cannot say that we will redistribute a bit of land here and a bit of land there, and then we discover that since 1994 only 0,8% has been redistributed.

The department is now geared up, after a fairly slow start - we are going to get a new director-general too - to deliver, but then it must be everyone in the country, including the richest farmer. [Interjections.] Andries Botha also said that. I know that is what he thinks, although I do not know about his party. However, it is in the interests of everyone for there to be redistribution here, and that 30% objective in the RDP must still be achieved! We cannot wait forever, and why should we? It is a question of poverty too. Just let me remind everyone again of the figures on poverty in this country and where the poverty lies.]

About half of South Africa’s population can be classified as poor, but the point is that most of the poor live in the rural areas. The poverty share of rural areas, that is the percentage of poor individuals that live in rural areas, is 72%. The poverty rate in rural areas, that is the percentage of individuals classified as poor, is about 71% compared to 29% in urban areas. So the point is that if one combines the the high poverty rate and the depth of poverty, that is a measurement of the amount required to move all individuals above the poverty line, one will see that poverty in rural areas is of such a magnitude that 76% of the total poverty gap in South Africa is accounted for by rural households.

Now, the poverty gap in South Africa is the main problem in the country and 76% of the poverty gap is accounted for by rural households, that is the depth of poverty and the rate of poverty combined, although they make up only 50% of the population. Now that is why one must have land reform at an accelerated pace. That is why it is at the forefront of the national programmes of South Africa. That is why I think we still have too little money. That is where our department is going to make great strides. Watch us! Watch this space. [Applause.]

I am sure we are going to move on with it, because if we do not move quicker, this country is in trouble, serious trouble, and then everyone is in trouble, even the big farmers, and they know it! We will have to redistribute more. We cannot continue with the the slow progress we have made. It was an extremely difficult process to get to where we are now. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! The Deputy Minister does not need any help. Please continue, sir. [Laughter.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER: Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to whoever it was for the support.   That is why land reform, land redistribution and land restitution are at the heart of Government’s policies. They are part of our drive towards poverty reduction and asset redistribution, and should be seen as such. There are a few key design elements of the redistribution programme that will have to be addressed from time to time, which are being addressed by our Minister now with very strong leadership and will lead to further success.

Let me just mention a few of the main design elements that are being looked at continually at the moment. When we started originally, the idea was that the programme, instead of being a supply-driven one, should be demand- driven. There were some doubts about the possibilities of Government expropriation and what that would do to land prices. It was decided that there would be independent encounters of buyers and sellers in the market coming to Government and getting help.

It was thought that using expropriation was inconsistent with the protection of private property rights. That is not a true view on what expropriation is. Expropriation, in fact, is a necessary adjunct of all highly capitalised societies for the simple reason that one cannot put a railway down at a place. A farmer may not want to have the railway going through his farm, so the line has to go around it.

An HON MEMBER: Householders too.

The DEPUTY MINISTER: Exactly. Expropriation correctly used, sensitively used, used as our Constitution says it must be used, is in the public interest and is something which can be used extensively in South Africa for very sensitive purposes if there is no other way around the markets. The point is that land markets will not automatically work effectively for the poor. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr D K MALULEKE: Chairperson, hon Ministers, Deputy Minister and colleagues, it is gratifying to hear the Deputy Minister talking about the accelerated pace at which they are going to be operating. We certainly will be watching them. My colleague the hon Seremane stressed the importance of moving towards a modern system of land holding for those who until now have been denied this privilege. At the same time, he did not deny the importance of traditional systems of land tenure, which have existed until the present time.

I should like to explore a few options which are open to the hon the Minister and which could be explored. However, we note with concern the 15,9% decline in the estimated expenditure for the year 2000-01 in respect of land reform, with the focus shifting from land redistribution to restitution. While we fully support the restitution programme as mentioned by my colleague, it must be seen as a separate exercise to land redistribution. Redistribution of the 25 million hectares of state land must be seen as a specific and focused programme of settling significant numbers of able and competent landless farmers in our country. Those hon members are the Government today. They have the power. They are sitting with 25 million hectares of land and they must do something about it. They must distribute to those landless people.

We do not want land to lie idle. This invites land invasion, such as that we have recently seen in Zimbabwe, vandalism of infrastructure and, more importantly, the failure to maintain and promote sustainable agricultural production. We need to address urgently the upgrading of commercial systems of land ownership. Under current tribal land tenure systems, little incentive exists for occupants to invest capital and sweat equity to develop such land. This has lead to overgrazing, poor management and low productivity, resulting in serious soil erosion and environmental degradation.

In order to reverse this poverty trap, land use and ownership patterns need to be changed drastically. However, this legal and structural change needs to be executed in a way that is sensitive to the views and perceptions of those people who still value traditional practices, so that they understand why reforms are necessary and how they should benefit from that reform. One innovation could be to introduce amendments to the current Companies Act to make it possible for rural tribal communities to form companies. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member Gogotya and hon member Magazi, I know it is towards the end of the debate, but please allow the member to have his say at the podium. [Interjections.]

Mr D K MALULEKE: Chairperson, we are aware of the chatterbox Gogotya.

The DP recognises the complexity associated with the administration of communally owned land. We will consequently await the outcome of a comprehensive and fully consultative study due to be undertaken into this issue in the near future. The most important consideration in any outcome will be the protection of the natural resources, together with the optimal utilisation of the land concerned.

Let me remind some of those chatterboxes on the backbenches … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Confine yourself to your debate, sir. [Interjections.] Order! Your speaking time has expired, sir. [Laughter.] [Interjections.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I think the enthusiasm of the Deputy Minister is quite appropriate in respect of the topic he addressed. Successful land reform is an important point in our total endeavour to create a peaceful future in South Africa. If we do not succeed in this, the future in South Africa will not be peaceful. We can look at examples around us where that has not happened and what the result is. Successful land reform can only take place if the right principles and methods are implemented.

There are many role-players involved, not single role-players or any one idea. Co-operation between the role-players will eventually determine success or failure. Each role-player in South Africa has, over time, in South Africa, learned a lesson. We must take heed of the many lessons, not only in South Africa, but also beyond our borders, in terms of land reform.

The important lesson from Riemvasmaak, as put forward in a study by the School of Government of UWC, should be noted in any future resettlement. It has been shown that individual title deeds to land should be favoured above collective title deeds. The breaking up of valuable land into plots for subsistence production should be avoided. Thorough planning, involving all facets, is always of paramount importance.

We must also take heed of the lessons learned from Zimbabwe. The question of certainty of title deeds and ownership of land must be handled with care. It is important, not only for the commercial farmers, but also for the small farmer who, for the first time, gets access to land. He wants to know how certain he is of the land. Then there can be development. The comments made by the acting director-general on expropriation to obtain land for land reform purposes in South Africa were disturbing. Fortunately, the Deputy Minister immediately responded and placed a better perspective on the matter. In fact, expropriation of land for reform purposes is not high on the agenda of the department. There is a nervousness amongst landowners in South Africa in the wake of what is happening with farmers in Zimbabwe. [Interjections.] It is necessary to again confirm, in clear terms, the position, intention and protection by Government of title deeds, and thus ownership of land in South Africa. This will help to keep emotions under control. The response by farmers in South Africa to situations similar to those in Zimbabwe could be quite different. [Interjections.]

Clarity and certainty of ownership of land will stimulate co-operation by the farming community in South Africa to successfully implement land reform. If the Minister could remove this uncertainty, she would cause a breeze of well-intended goodwill and co-operation to blow from all sides to facilitate land reform. Land reform cannot go on for ever … [Time expired.]

Mr M A MANGENA: Mr Chairperson, an indication of the existence of a more just society would be a more equitable and fair land ownership and occupation pattern. Inequality among the races in our country has always manifested itself in landownership, and it still does.

Anywhere one goes in our country, whether it is the urban or rural areas, one sees this. If it is in the rural areas, we are crowded together in the villages. The yards are small, the fields are small and the number of stock is small, whereas white people occupy large farms. One sees them as one drives on the national roads. Sometimes one cannot even see their houses. One just sees the gate saying Van der Merwe'' orViljoen’’, and so on. [Laughter.] However, there is none that says Mangena'' orMdadana’’, and so forth. [Laughter.]

If it is in the urban areas, the same thing happens sixinene ndaweninye [we are packed in one place] in the townships. If it is Cape Town, we are in Langa, Crossroads and so forth. White people are in Sea Point, Constantia, Bloubergstrand and similar areas. [Interjections.] That is why black people are the only people who are squatters. By definition, a squatter is someone who has no land and settles on somebody else’s land. That is why, in our pursuit for a more just and truly democratic society, we must embark on a rigorous land reform and redistribution strategy.

At the moment, we are not doing very well. An indication of that is land restitution. Restitution is a small part of the land reform and redistribution programme, yet five years after the establishment of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, only about 1% or so of more than 60% of land claims have been settled. At this rate, it will take us something like 30 years just to settle restitution claims.

We understand that by the end of this month more claims will have been settled. I wonder what percentage this will represent. The rural development strategy we have just been talking about in this House must mean, amongst other things, that greater redistribution of land takes place, otherwise what are we talking about when we talk about rural strategy.

However, we know that it will not come cheaply. I wonder whether the Minister has considered the introduction of land tax, for example, for absentee landlords or people who have two large tracts of land. Land beyond a certain percentage, or land that has been lying fallow for a certain period could be taxed. The money that is obtained from that could be used to finance this land reform.

In fact, considering the enormity of her task, I wonder why the Minister is not perpetually on her knees, begging the Treasury to toss more millions into her lap so that she can pursue land reform with greater oomph and energy. [Applause.]

Mr M A MAPHALALA: Chairperson, hon members, Madam Minister, thank you.

Ngikhuluma lapha ngingumuntu ophuma emakhaya. Ngikhulele lapho uthi uma ukha amanzi okuphuza kufuneke uwabange nezimbongolo nezinkomo, ngoba engekho amanzi ahlanzekile. Ngiphuma emakhaya lapho kuphila khona abantu abampofu.

Uma sikhuluma ngokuthi le ndaba yokwabiwa komhlaba iyindaba ethinta imizwa yabantu, kuliqiniso. Ithinta imizwa yabantu njengendaba yokuba sibe lapha ePhalamende okukade kuyindaba ethinta abantu abaningi abangafuni ukuthi iningi labantu baseNingizimu Afrika babe kuleli Phalamende, bazocabanga bakhulume ngokuthi izimpilo zabantu kufanele zibe njani. Nale ndaba yemihlaba-ke nayo injalo. Ukuhlukana kwethu phakathi kusekutheni abanye badla imbuya ngothi kanti abanye bangamabhuhuza, i-bourgeoisie. Yilapho lapho sibanga khona. Wonke umuntu othanda ukuthi kube nempilo enhle kubo bonke abantu eNingizimu Afrika uthi yebo, umhlaba mawabiwe kabusha.

Namuhla, njengoba sikhuluma lapha akekho umuntu ofuna ukuthi: Yimi engenza ukuthi kube khona lokhu kuhlupheka okukhona eNingizimu Afrika. Sonke nje sesithi kufanele kulungiswe. Sonke sesithi uHulumeni noMnyango wezoLimo nezemiHlaba mawusheshise ulungise. Ngubani owayonile? [Ubuwelewele.]

Kunenkinga-ke yokuthi kukhona abantu abaqhamuka ekuhluphekeni, njengoba ngisho, asebekhuluma namhlanje ngama-chatter boxes. Ngabe ayazi amalungu ukuthi i-chatter box iyini? Iwuhlobo oluthile lukathelefoni. Uthelefoni awuzicabangeli ukuthi uma ushaywa uzokutshela ukuthini. Uthelefoni uphinda le nto ekade ishiwo ngumuntu obewushaya. Bathi-ke kukhona ama-chatter box ngapha, kodwa ngibona sengathi bona bangama-chatter box impela ngoba abanawo nalawo mapulazi lawo esikhuluma ngawo njengoba sebethi abanye abantu bangama-chatter box. [Ihlombe.]

Ngithi labo abanohlevane namuhlanje, lokuthi kungaphindi lokho okwenzeke eZimbabwe, mabakhululeke. Ngeke kwenzeke lokho lapha eNingizimu Afrika ngoba sinoHulumeni oholwa nguKhongolose. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.) [I speak here as a person who comes from the rural areas. I grew up in an environment where one had to drink water from streams together with donkeys and cattle. There was no drinkable water. I come from an area that is populated by poor people.

If we say that the issue of land redistribution touches people’s emotions, it is true. It touches people’s emotions exactly the same as our presence here in Parliament, which has touched the emotions of many people who do not want the majority of the South Africans to be represented in this Parliament, because they will think and speak about how the lives of our people should be improved. It is the same thing with the land issue. What divides us is that some of us are poor people while others are bourgeois. That is where we differ. All those who wish a better life for all the people of South Africa are in favour of the redistribution of land.

As we are speaking today, nobody wants to say: “I am the cause of the people’s misery in South Africa”. Now we are all saying that things must be rectified. We are all saying that the Government and the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs should rectify the situation without delay. Who messed up the whole thing in the first place? [Interjections.]

There is the problem of people who come from poor families and who are now talking about chatterboxes. Do members of Parliament know what chatterboxes are? It is a type of telephone. A telephone does not know what to say to you whenever it rings. It just passes on the message of the caller. They say there are chatterboxes here. I think that the real chatterboxes are they themselves, because they do not own any farms, while they call other people the chatterboxes. [Applause.]

I would like to say that those who fear what is happening in Zimbabwe might happen here should relax. Such a situation will not take place here in South Africa, because we have the ANC-led Government.]

Since 1912, the ANC policy has been one of making a better life for all in South Africa; not for blacks, not for whites, but for every South African - a better life. [Applause.]

Ngakho-ke ngeke kwenzeke ukuthi kuphindeke esaseZimbabwe. Ngiqhamuka kwisizinda sabavoti engingaso lapha. Yisizinda leso esinamakhosi kanye nabantu nje. Athe amakhosi ayahambisana nohlelo lukaKhongolose lokwenza ngcono umhlaba. [Ihlombe.] Bathe abantu besizinda engibuya kuso bayahambisana nohlelo lukaKhongolose lokwenza imihlaba ibe kubantu bonke ukuze kube nempilo enhle kuwo wonke umuntu.

Manje ngubani-ke lowo osezokwenza isimo saseZimbabwe? Ngizowatshela amalungu ukuthi ngubani. Umuntu ozokwenza ukuthi kubuye isimo saseZimbabwe lapha eNingizimu Afrika yilaba bantu abathatha abantu babalayishe kogandaganda, njengoba elinye ilungu kade lisho, babalahle emgwaqeni. Nabo- ke abantu abafuna ukwenza isimo saseZimbabwe. [Ihlombe.]

Abantu abafuna ukwenza isimo saseZimbabwe lapha eNingizimu Afrika yilaba bantu abenza ukuthi umnyango ukhulume ngokuchibiyela imithetho ngaso sonke isikhathi ngoba bengafuni ukuthi badedele umhlaba ukuthi nabantu abampofu bakwazi ukuwusebenzisa. Nabo-ke abantu abafuna ukwenza isimo saseZimbabwe. [Ihlombe.] Ngeke uHulumeni ayenze leyo nto. UHulumeni oholwa nguKhongolose uthe asizukuwuhlwitha umhlaba kubantu noma ikanjani. Kufanele kuxoxwe ukuthi kufanele abantu bawuthole kanjani umhlaba. Akakaguquki kuleso simo uKhongolose.] (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Therefore, what is happening in Zimbabwe will not happen here. I come from an area whose voters I am representing here. It is an area that consists of the amakhosi and the commoners. The amakhosi said they were in favour of the ANC’s plan to improve land. [Applause.] People of the area where I come from say they are in favour of the ANC’s plan to give landownership to people so that everybody will have a better life.

Now, who will cause the Zimbabwean situation here? I will give hon members the names of the people who will cause that situation. The persons who will cause it are those who load their workers on tractors as one of the hon members has just said, and dump them at the roadside. Those people are the ones who want the Zimbabwean situation to take place here. [Applause.]

People who want to cause the Zimbabwean situation are those who make the Department of Land Affairs talk about amending laws, because they do not want to give up their land so that poor people will be able to make use of it. Those are the ones who will cause the Zimbabwean situation in South Africa. [Applause.] The Government will not allow this to happen. The ANC- led Government has said that it will not take land from people anyhow. There should be some negotiations as to how people will be given land. The ANC has not changed in respect of that situation.]

A better life for all. That is what we want.

Ngithi kuNgqongqoshe bathi laba bantu engibuya kubo, endaweni yaseBergville, kwafakwa amanzi. Awafakwanga nguKhongolose. Lawo manzi, agcwele umhlaba wonke, athatha umhlaba okufanele ngabe abantu bayawusebenzisa aya kubantu bamapulazi. Awabasizi laba bantu abakuleyo ndawo. Bathe sicele ukuthi asheshise ukuthi lo mhlaba siwuthole ukuze sikwazi ukuthi silime.

Bathi abantu bangapha eMsinga bayalima. Batshala amaklabishi notamatisi ezindaweni ezincanyana. Abanayo indawo eyanele yokuthi bakwazi ukulima. Bacela ukuthi kusheshiswe ukuthi laba bantu bawuthole umhlaba. Nazo izinto abazishoyo abantu basemakhaya.

Bathi abantu basemakhaya, cha, uma umuntu ekhuluma ngabantu abampofu ukhuluma ngabantu abansundu nje kwaphela. Leyo nto yenziwe nguhulumeni wobandlululo. Labo bantu bakahulumeni wobandlululo, okade ukhona izolo, bakhona lapha namhlanje. Kufanele-ke siyiguqule leyo nto.

Bathi bona bangabalimi abancane, hhayi ngoba bethanda. Bangabalimi abancane ngoba abanazo izinto zokwenza ukuthi bakwazi ukusebenza. Bangabalimi abancane ngoba imihlaba yabo ayithuthukisiwe. Bathi-ke bacela lezi zimpiko zikaNgqongqoshe, ezingo-ARC no-NAMC nezinye, keziguqule ukubuka kwazo zibheke ukuthi ngubani impela okunguyena osele emuva ngentuthuko. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[I say to the hon the Minister, the people of the area where I come from, Bergville, say water was installed. It was not installed by the ANC. The water that is found all over the country and with which farms are supplied, has occupied the land that people should have been using. People who stay near farms have no access to the water that goes to the farms. They have requested us to ask the hon the Minister to speed up the process so that they will be given land so that they can start ploughing.

Every time the people of the Msinga district plough, they grow cabbages and tomatoes on a small piece of land. They do not have enough land to cultivate. People want the process to be accelerated so that they will get land. Those are the grievances that are aired by the rural people.

People in the rural areas say if one is talking about poor people one is obviously referring to black people. That situation was caused by the apartheid regime. Those who supported it, who were in power a few years ago, are in this House today.

People in the rural areas say that it is not their will to become small farmers. It is because they do not have the things that will help them to work more efficiently. It is because their land is not developed. They ask if the ARC and the NAMC,, which are the arms of the ANC, can change the way they look at things and look at who were left behind when it comes to development.]

Yes, the ARC is doing wonderful work, but their focus must be changed. There is a degree of development among the commercial white farmers as compared to the black farmers. Black farmers do not want to be subsistence farmers; they want to be commercial farmers like everybody else. [Applause.] Black farmers want to be big commercial farmers, not small farmers all the time. They do not want to be emergent forever, but want the Government to refocus resources. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOLIMO NEZEMIHLABA: Sihlalo, ngiyabonga kakhulu ngaleli thuba osunginike lona manje. Ngiyazi ukuthi isikhathi sesidliwe yinja, nabaningi bethu sebefuna ukugoduka. Izisu seziyakhala. Kulabo abafana nami nje abaphethe nabantwana sekukubi impela. [Uhleko.]

Mangithi qaphuqaphu nje kancane ukuphendula ngoba izinto eziningi ezishiwo ngamalungu ngeke sikwazi ukuthi siziqede zonke namhlanje. Engizokusho ngukuthi mayelana nesiphakamiso esishiwo ngomunye wamalungu ePhalamende mhlawumbe kuzofuneka sibe nenguyazana sike siwuxazulule lomuba esibhekene nawo ngoba phela yindaba le ekuyiyona eyinkinga. Ngabe asizange sizabalaze ukuba umhlaba wethu wawungathathwanga. Yikho futhi nalokhu kuxazululwa kwale nkinga kulukhuni kangaka. Kuthinta imimoya nemiphefumulo, kuvuse nosinga kwabanye. Kodwa engikuthandayo ngukuthi abantu bakithi nanamhlanje basazimisele ukuxoxisana, abakangeni ezikhalini. Lokho akusho ukuthi ngoba beziphethe kahle belungile ababuzwa ubuhlungu. Mhlawumbe kufuneka sazi ukuthi nalaba ababekezelayo kuba khona isikhathi lapho kuthi xhifi khona.

Ngizozama ukuphendula ezinye izinto esezishiwo. Mangibonge kuMagwaza, Maphalala! Lubalulekile lolu daba alushoyo lokuthi abalimi abancane abamnyama abazange bazikhethele ukuthi bafuna ukuba bancane. Abazange futhi basho ukuthi bona bafuna ukuhlala bebancane. Bayayifuna intuthuko futhi bayayifuna nenqubekela-phambili. Njengongqongqoshe-ke we ANC omele lolu phiko, sethembisile ukuthi sizoguqula isimo, senze ukuthi iminyango kaHulumeni yenze loko efanele ikwenze. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, thank you for giving me this opportunity. I know that time has been eaten by the dog and many of us want to go. We are hungry and people like me, who have children to look after, are restless. [Laughter.]

Let me briefly explain, because many of the things that hon members have said cannot all be covered today. What I want to say is that regarding the proposition made by one of the hon members, perhaps we will need to hold a bosberaad so as to solve the problem we are facing, because it is crucial. We would not have fought for freedom if our land was not taken from us. That is why the solution to this problem is so difficult to find. It touches the spirit and the soul and caused an uncontrollable impulse to other people. What I like is that even today our people are prepared to negotiate, they are not in a fighting spirit. That does not mean that they are calm, because they do not feel the pain. Maybe we need to know that even those who are tolerating the situation sometimes do lose their tempers.

I will try to give answers to some of the issues that have been raised. I would first like to thank Magwaza, oh! Son of Maphalala! The issue that you have raised is important, especially the one that says small black farmers did not choose to be small. They did not even say that they wanted to remain small. They want development together with progress. As an ANC Minister who represents this arm, we have promised that we will change the situation so that Government’s departments will do what is appropriate.]

Kubo bobabili umntfwanenkhosi babe Ginindza, kanye nababe Kotwal baseMpumalanga, ngitsandza kusho ku kutsi loku lebakushoko vele kubuhlungu. Nasibuka simo sebantfu basemapulazini kuyabonakala kutsi nalamhla nje bondlebezikhanyilanga laba basasitsatsa njengebantfu labafanana netimaku, bantfu labangenawo emalungelo. [Tandla.] Kucoshwa kwebantfu emapulazini akubonakalisi kutsi loluntjintjo lesalutfola nga 1994 lukhona nakubo.

Angisho kutsi ngekumisa kwe-Mtsetfo weKwelulwa kweKuvikeleka kweliGunya leKuhlala, kutawufanela kutsi kube nemigomo letakwenta emaBhunu lahlala emapulazini abekelwe imigomo yekutsi ngembi kwekutsi asuse bantfu kufanele kubukwe kutsi labo bantfu batawubekwa kutiphi tindzawo. [Tandla.] Mine ngekwami kubona ngitsi, kutawufanela kutsi nasibuka kutsi bantfu sibanika njani imihlaba, sicale sibuke bantfu labafana nalaba labahlala emapulazini, lekungabo labahlupheke kakhulu kwendlula labanye. LiSekela lami Babe du Toit ukhulumile impela nakatsi umtsetfo lesinawo lesisengakawulahli lobitwa ngekutsi ngumtsetfo weKwemuka, uma usetjentiswa ngendlela lengiyo ungakwati kusisita kutsi sifeze leyo miphumela lefunwa nguHulumende. Kuze kube ngunyalo besisancenga sitsi, chabo, asikakafuni kutsi size sifike lapho. Kodvwa nangabe kukhona bontsamolukhuni, loku kutawusenta-ke, natsi singuHulumende kutsi siphindze sicalate, sitsi: ``Hhayi bo, kantsi lamandla lesiwaphetse ngewekwentani?’’ Ngitsi-ke nasingafuni kutsi size sifinyelele lapho, kutawufuneka kutsi kubekhona nekubambisana, ikakhulukati kulabo labaniketwa lilungelo lemhlaba lowawutsetfwe kubantfu labamphisholo.

Babe Seremane utsi Hulumende akaphucuke, abonise tinhlelo letinsha tekwenta kutsi labo bantfu labasemaphandleni, etindzaweni tabo baniketwe ema- individual title deeds ematayitela amuntfu ngamumye, kute-ke neligama lesiSwati laloku - kumbe tigcebhezana temhlaba labangasho ngato kutsi ngewabo lomhlaba. Mhlawumbe kutawufuneka sisho kutsi cha, luhlaka lwemgomo weMhlaba lwetfu lusho kukhanye nje kutsi bha, kutsi la kulengabadzi sitatibukisisa tonkhe timo tekutsi imihlaba lekhona iye kubantfu. (Translation of Swati paragraphs follows.)

[I would like to say that what both the hon Mr Gininda and the hon Mr Kotwal from Mpumalanga said is very painful. When one looks at the living conditions of people on farms it is obvious that even today those people who refuse to change still regard us as dogs, and that is people who do not have rights. [Applause.] The eviction of people on farms is not a reflection of their acceptance of the change that we brought about in 1994. Let me point out that in terms of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, we are required to put in place policies that will prevent farmers from evicting people before such people have been provided with an alternative place to live. [Applause.]

It is my personal opinion that when we address the question of land restitution, the first people to be considered should be the people who live on farms because they are the most vulnerable.

My deputy, Mr Du Toit, made a valid point when he said that if applied correctly, the Expropriation Act, which we still have not repealed, would assist us in achieving Government’s goals. Until now we have been patient because we did not want to go to extremes. However, if people refuse to change, we as Government will be forced to review the situation because, after all, we have the power to enforce the law. What I am saying is that if we do not want to go that route, we have to start co-operating with each other. I am specifically addressing this to those who were given land rights of the land taken away from black people.

Mr Seremane said that Government should improve itself and introduce new programmes to ensure that rural communities who own land are awarded individual title deeds - there is no siSwati word for this - or special land permits which will be regarded as proof that such land belongs to them. Maybe we need to indicate that our draft land policy it very clear with regard to this issue. We will consider all the different ways in which we can ensure that people do get land.]

In other words, we said that our tenure security would be extended to all South Africans under diverse forms of tenure.

Sikwenta loko ngobe siyati kutsi kukhona tidzingo letehlukene kubantfu kuletindzawo lesihlala kuto. Loko akusho kutsi emalungelo entfutfuko akanganiketwa kuze labo bantfu labahlala etindzaweni temakhosi bangatfutfukiswa. Kodvwa, mhlawumbe kutawufuneka siphindze sibute kutsi laba lababamkati betimali bona yini bangantjintji. Yini kufaneleke kutsi kuntjintje bantfu kuphela? Futsi nangikhumbula kahle, angati-ke labanye. Mine ngitalelwe endzaweni yakaMsane mine, kaMaphumulo. Nangikhumbula kahle

• ngingati-ke labanye - kutsiwa umhlaba wemakhosi ngumhlaba webantfu. Inkhosi libamba. Kodvwa-ke tintfo toniwa boSomtsewu labefika batibekela emakhosi, nawo ase atibona kutsi ngiwo laphetse umhlaba. Umhlaba ngewebantfu! [Tandla.]

Uma sitsi-ke umhlaba ngewebantfu, nangu Nkhosi Holomisa uvumile lapha, kantsi nalabanye ku IFP batsite bayavuma. Kutawufuneka bantfu nemakhosi bahlangene naHulumende babonisane kutsi ingabe tindlela tini letincono tekwenta kutsi imihlaba yabo lapho bahlala khona iyakwati kubaniketa ematfuba ekutitfutfukisa. Uma sibuka simo njengobe sinje lamuhla nje, mine ngiyiNdvuna yeTekulima neTemihlaba nje ngiseloku ngiphatsele bantfu labahlala etindzaweni tasemakhaya umhlaba. Umbuto utsi: Kantsi tsine siyawudzimate sikhululeke nini?

Tsine-ke singuHulumende sitsite sitakwenta loku. Sitawukhulumisana sibone kutsi umtsetfo lesitawushaya uwavikela njani emalungelo ebantfu kuleto tindzawo, ikakhulukati bomake bona lebebatsatfwa njengebantfu labangenalo lilungelo lekuba nemhlaba. Ngiyabonga kulona wakaKasienyane ngekubeka kwakhe loludzaba. Lubaluleke impela loludzaba ngobe phela siyati kutsi bomake ngabo labangumgogodla walelive.

Ngitsandza kusho kutsi ngiyabonga nakubabe Mangena nakatsi kutawufuneka ngempela kutsi sisheshise kubuyisela umhlaba webantfu kubanikati. Sitakwenta loko, futsi tinyenti tindlela lesesitibekile. Sifuna futsi kubuka nasibuyisela lomhlaba, ikakhulukati etindzaweni tasemakhaya lapho sitawukwati kuwubuyisela khona, kutsi singabelekelela kanjani bantfu, kungabi kubaniketa umhlaba nje kuphela, kodvwa sibuke nekutsi batawutfutfukisa njani lowo mhlaba ngendlela letabaphilisa. Uma sibuka ibhajethi yekubuyiselwa kwemhlaba iyabonakalisa kutsi cha, sekuyakhanya kutsi tsine njengaHulumende sesisitsatsile sinyatselo sekusebenta ngekusheshisa. (Translation of Swati paragraphs follows.)

[We are doing this because we know that people have different needs in different areas. This does not means that the right to development will be withheld until the people who live on land belonging to amakhosi have been developed. Perhaps the question we should be asking is: Why are our financial institutions not changing? Why is it that only people are expected to change?

I was born at Msane in Maphumulo. If I remember well - I do not know what others know - it is said that land belonging to amakhosi is the people’s land. However, things went wrong when the colonisers arrived, because they appointed their own amakhosi who regarded themselves as the rightful owners of the land. [Applause.]

Nkhosi Holomisa agrees that land belonging to amakhosi is the people’s land, so do some members of the IFP. It is going to be necessary for the people and amakhosi, together with Government, to come together and try to find the best methods to develop their land. As things stand today, I as the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs am still holding land in trust for people in the rural areas. The question is: When are we going to be free?

We as Government are going to do this. We are going to negotiate and see to it that the laws that we pass protect the rights of people in such areas, especially women who were regarded as people who did not have the right to own land. I would like to thank the hon Ms Kasienyane for raising this issue. This is a very important issue because we know that women are the backbone of this country.

I would also like to thank Mr Mangena for suggesting that Government fast- tracks the process of returning land to its rightful owners. We are going to do that, and there are a number of mechanisms that we have already put in place in this regard. We want to make sure that when we restitute land, especially when we do so in rural areas, we do not only give people land, but also assist them to develop that land in a sustainable manner. Looking at the land restitution budget, it is clear that we as Government have taken a step to fast-track this process.]

Chairperson, I share some of the views expressed by hon members during the debate on the Agriculture Vote, particularly the concerns around flood assistance to victims in the Northern Province and Mpumalanga. The continued rain has also affected other provinces such as the North West, even though to a lesser extent. We have had discussions at Cabinet level, and have agreed that it is necessary to give the necessary support to ensure that those farmers in particular can go back into production.

The Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs has had consultations with the agricultural unions, both Nafu and Sawu, and we agreed on a particular process. We decided that we needed to set up a task team to properly assess flood damage on various farms in the affected provinces. We also agreed that the key to this problem is to look at recovery measures immediately. These measures will be defined on the basis of correct assessment, which will enable us to determine where we can intervene immediately to deal with the situation.

Aid will, however, not stop there. The Land Bank, together with the IDC, has also put in place immediate support for farmers. The Land Bank has committed an amount of R20 million towards soft loans and the IDC has committed about R170 million for the recovery of agricultural infrastructure. It is, however, important that financial institutions with clients in the affected areas should not shift the entire burden onto Government. They must also join the efforts of the other parties and provide resources so that farmers who are clients of FNB or Standard Bank can get assistance from them and not merely be shifted to Government immediately.

I think the challenge of disaster or risk management is a challenge that all of us, as a nation, have to share. We are formulating a long term national agricultural risk management strategy which will cover all farmers and which will ensure that all risk takers share the risk. Such a strategy would also ensure that Government contributes. Some members said blindly that we need to bring back the drought assistance system. I do not agree with that. What we need to look at is how we can prepare ourselves for the various risks that impact on the agricultural sector, and find a better way in which the various resources that can be contributed, either by Government, farmers or insurance industries, can be administered correctly.

We do appreciate the concerns raised by MaNtuli around the accessibility of the Land Bank. The Land Bank is doing everything in its power to ensure that they again abide by the Strauss Commission which challenged the bank to strengthen other rural finance associations which will become subsidiaries where money can be loaned in order to ensure that those farmers who stay away from the centres where money is currently being lent, can actually afford to get support. One of such instruments is the village bank system.

I must say to uBaba uHolomisa that we will ensure that the bank does not become umashonisa. If one were to take the experience of the North-West Village Bank, who have had some years of experience, it has never become umashonisa because of the commitment and the participation of local communities. The moneys for setting up those banks came from the local communities. All the state did was to give technical support so that they could function properly. If that is the way in which such institutions can be run, we will avoid having fly-by-night institutions.

I must say that if we had enough time - and were not as hungry as hon members all look now - we would have gone into various discussions on various issues that hon members have raised. However, I do commit myself and the department that, in the policy discussions that we will have with the hon members in the portfolio committee, we will take up some of these issues so that, as we move forward, we can indeed move together. Amandla! [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, on behalf of the House, I wish all Muslim members and their families a happy Eid Mubarak.

Debate concluded.

The House adjourned at 18:47. ____ ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Minister of Labour on 15 March 2000 submitted a draft of the
     Unemployment Insurance Bill 2000, and a memorandum explaining the
     objects of the proposed legislation, to the Speaker and the
     Chairperson in terms of Joint Rule 159. The draft has been
     referred by the Speaker and the Chairperson to the Portfolio
     Committee on Labour and the Select Committee on Labour and Public
     Enterprises, respectively, in accordance with Joint Rule 159(1)(a)
     and (b).

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


 (3)    The following paper is referred to the Standing Committee on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report and to the Portfolio
     Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development and the Select
     Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs for information:


     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the
     Truth and Reconciliation Commission for 1998-99 [RP 38-2000].


 (4)    The following paper is referred to the Standing Committee on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report and to the Portfolio
     Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs and the Select Committee
     on Land and Environmental Affairs for information:


     Report of the Auditor-General on the Liquidation Account of the
     Tobacco Board for the period 1 January 1997 to 31 March 1999 [RP
     202-2000].


 (5)    The following papers are referred to the Standing Committee on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report and to the Portfolio
     Committee on Labour and the Select Committee on Labour and Public
     Enterprises for information:


     (a)     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
          of the Unemployment Insurance Fund for 1996 [RP 37-2000].

     (b)     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
          of the Mines and Works Compensation Fund for 1998-99 [RP 195-
          99].


     (c)     Report of the Department of Labour for 1998-99 [RP 61-
          2000].

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 Reports of the Board on Tariffs and Trade on the -

 (a)    Rebate of duty on biaxially oriented polypropulene film used in
     the manufacture of self-adhesive tape, Report No 3873;

 (b)    Rebate of the duty on textile fabrics impregnated, coated,
     covered or laminated with polyurethane, for fishing, Report No
     3874;

 (c)    Reduction in the rate of duty on "Agarbatti" other odiriferous
     preparations which operate by burning, Report No 3875;

 (d)    Withdrawal of items under rebate items 307.04 of Schedule 3 to
     the Customs and Excise Act, 1964, Report No 3877;

 (e)    Withdrawal of the provision under rebate item
     313.04/26.10.01.00, Report No 3878;

 (f)    Rebate of full duty on vinyl, chloridevinyl acetate copolymers,
     for the manufacture of floor coverings, Report No 3880.

1. The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs:

 Report of the Department of Agriculture for 1999 [RP 59-2000].