National Assembly - 31 October 2000
TUESDAY, 31 OCTOBER 2000 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:03.
The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - col 000.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Ms D P S JANA: Madam Speaker, I hereby 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 recommendations to appoint Judges Edwin Cameron, Mahomed Navsa, Lex Mpati and Ian Farlam to the Supreme Court of Appeal; (2) recognises that these appointments are significant in the process of transformation of the judiciary;
(3) welcomes the recommendations of the Judicial Service Commission; and
(4) commends the members of the Judicial Service Commission for their diligence and dedication to a task of extreme importance to the nation.
[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) welcomes the ``DA Rescue Plan for Johannesburg’’ which was unveiled yesterday …
[Interjections.]
(2) notes that - (a) the Democratic Alliance will lure business back into the city and clamp down on crime so that all the people can feel safe and benefit from an investor-friendly city; and
(b) when the ANC took over the local government in 1995 -
(i) the city had 90 ambulances; now there are only 26;
and
(ii) there was a budget surplus of R92 million, now there
is a deficit of R354 million with unpaid bills of
R3,5 billion; and
(3) urges the citizens of Johannesburg to vote for effective management on 5 December for the benefit of all the people.
[Interjections.]
Mr J H SLABBERT: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) congratulates the principal of Roshnee Primary School in the Vaal Triangle, Mr Sheik Hoosen Kassim, for winning the lifetime achievement category at the National Teacher Awards ceremony in Pretoria;
(2) wishes to see other school principals and educators emulating the dedication displayed by Mr Kassim; and
(3) hopes that nonmanagement educators will also receive such awards in future.
Mr M M CHIKANE: Madam Speaker, I hereby 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 Minister Trevor Manuel announced yesterday in the House that taxpayers can expect substantial tax cuts in next year’s Budget, accompanied by increased capital investment in public services;
(2) acknowledges that since the ANC came into power, both personal and corporate taxes have been lowered while social spending has increased;
(3) believes that such tax cuts are the result of sound fiscal policies and financial management, despite difficult global conditions; and
(4) commends the Minister and the Government for the sound management of the South African economy.
[Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, you are being commended! [Laughter.]
Mr D M BAKKER: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the New NP: That the House -
(1) notes -
(a) the shocking figures of reported cases which indicate that 61
910 children were raped in South Africa between 1994 and 1998;
(b) that this shows an increase of 108% in just four years; and
(c) with concern that children have become soft targets for killers
and gangsters;
(2) therefore urges the Government to protect our children by imposing the most severe punishment on anyone who is guilty of committing a crime against a child; and
(3) appeals to the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that children are brought up in safe environments, so that we can give every child the future he/she is entitled to, instead of him/her becoming another crime or rape statistic. Mr S ABRAM: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:
That the House -
(1) recognises -
(a) President Mugabe's role in the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe;
and
(b) his role in the development of SADC;
(2) nonetheless condemns -
(a) President Mugabe's role in fanning political violence prior to
the parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe earlier this year; and
(b) his recent racist comments that whites in Zimbabwe can forget
about reconciliation;
(3) welcomes -
(a) President Mbeki's assurance at the Sacob Conference last week
that Zimbabwean style land-grabs will not happen in South
Africa; and
(b) his condemnation of political violence prior to the Zimbabwean
parliamentary elections; and
(4) implores President Mbeki -
(a) as a respected leader, to display statesmanship in the weeks
that lie ahead, as threatened demonstrations in Zimbabwe
escalate; and
(b) in view of his stature and involvement in helping to resolve
disputes, to enter into talks with the official opposition in
Zimbabwe for that purpose.
Mrs R R JOEMAT: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes with shock the comments by Mr Peter Marais that Christians should choose between the Constitution and the Bible and that the Constitution was written by communists under the cloak of democracy;
(2) believes that these comments are inaccurate and irresponsible;
(3) reminds Mr Marais that the Constitution was written by a duly-elected Constitutional Assembly in which all parties elected to Parliament in our first democratic elections of 1994 were represented; and
(4) calls on the DP and the New NP to distance themselves from this statement.
[Applause.]
Mrs P DE LILLE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) notes - (a) the report and recommendations by the Standing Committee on Public Accounts released on 30 October 2000 regarding the Auditor-General’s report on the armaments acquisition package; and
(b) that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts recommends that a
forensic investigation should be carried out by the following
agencies:
(i) Heath Special Investigating Unit;
(ii) Auditor-General;
(iii) Public Protector;
(iv) the Investigating Directorate of Serious Economic
Offences; and
(v) any other appropriate investigative bodies;
(2) further notes that the Heath Special Investigating Unit is the only agency that requires a special Presidential Proclamation, and calls on President Thabo Mbeki to issue the proclamation without further delay … [Interjections.]
(3) since the committee’s report is a complete vindication of a motion that I moved in this House on 21 September 1991 calling for a judicial commission of inquiry into the arms acquisition, it is appropriate that all members of the executive and ANC parliamentarians apologise for the personal attack on my integrity.
[Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, take your seats. [Interjections.] Are you rising on a point of order, Mr Landers?
Mr L T LANDERS: Madam Speaker, yes, I am rising on a point of order. I ask that you rule that the hon De Lille was out of order when she pointed to a member of this House and said: ``You are corrupt. You are corrupt.’’ [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Ms De Lille, did you say that? Mrs P DE LILLE: Madam Speaker, it was in response to the member calling me an opportunist.
The SPEAKER: Ms De Lille, did you say that?
Mrs P DE LILLE: I said that, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Would you please withdraw that comment?
Mrs P DE LILLE: I will withdraw now, but I will say it outside again.
The SPEAKER: Ms De Lille, I take it you did not move a motion in 1991, which is what you said?
Mrs P DE LILLE: No, I moved the motion in 1999. They were making a noise.
The SPEAKER: I misheard you. I wanted to correct you if that was the case.
Someone else stood up on a point of order. Was it you, Mr Oliphant? Is it the same one?
Mr G G OLIPHANT: Yes.
Dr P W A MULDER: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die VF sal voorstel:
Dat die Huis -
(1) sy simpatie uitspreek teenoor die Geldenhuys-familie met die wrede en sinlose plaasmoord op dr Jurie Geldenhuys van Hartbeesfontein in Noordwes;
(2) die plaaslike gemeenskap, die Kommando en die Polisie loof vir die flinke wyse waarop die vyf verdagtes in hegtenis geneem is;
(3) daarvan kennis neem dat die Noordwes Landbou-unie alle samewerking met staatsdepartemente opgeskort het totdat ‘n ooreenkoms bereik kan word oor wie toegang tot plase kan kry en wie nie; en
(4) sy afkeer uitspreek van dubbele standaarde by die media en by openbare verteenwoordigers waardeur elke wit moord op swart voorbladnuus is en as rassisme veroordeel word maar swart moorde op wit nie meer nuuswaardig geag word nie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the FF:
That the House -
(1) expresses its condolences to the Geldenhuys family on the vicious and senseless farm murder of Dr Jurie Geldenhuys of Hartbeesfontein in the North West;
(2) praises the local community, the Commando and the Police for the swift manner in which the five suspects were arrested;
(3) notes that the North West Agricultural Union has suspended all co- operation with state departments until an agreement can be reached on who may gain access to farms and who may not; and
(4) expresses its disapproval of double standards on the part of the media and public representatives in that every white-on-black murder is front-page news and condemned as racism, while black-on-white murders are no longer considered newsworthy.]
Mr I VADI: Madam Speaker, I hereby 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 behaviour of Mr Mario Ambrosini in a meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, and his recording of the proceedings without appropriate arrangement with the committee or its chairperson;
(2) believes that his behaviour was unprofessional and undermined the integrity of democratically elected public representatives, and is a blatant flouting of the rules of Parliament; and
(3) calls on the Presiding Officers to investigate this matter.
[Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon member, if there is evidence of what you have stated, regardless of the notice of motion, would you kindly inform the presiding officers and provide them with that.
Adv P S SWART: 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 that -
(a) 85 violent crimes are committed every hour in South Africa;
(b) 150 rapes occur every day;
(c) 65 people are murdered every day; and
(d) 267 robberies take place every day in South Africa; (2) recognises that the ANC is incapable of protecting South Africans
from crime; and
(3) welcomes the commitment of the Democratic Alliance to set up metropolitan police forces in all the local authorities it controls after the elections to ensure that there are more police patrolling the streets of our cities, towns and neighbourhoods for the benefit of all the people.
[Applause.]
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) notes the spiralling costs of medical schemes;
(2) calls on the Ministers of Health and of Finance to -
(a) conduct an audit into the number of people in the country who
subscribe to registered medical schemes;
(b) reconsider the introduction of a national health insurance
whereby the Government offers a basic package of health
services;
(c) remove the onerous burden placed on medical schemes and regulate
them only to ensure safe practice and the provision of a
reasonable minimum service package;
(d) allow free and open competition and choice by members of the
public between national health insurance, pay-as-you-go schemes,
managed care schemes and medical insurance schemes; and
(e) revise the Medical Schemes Act of 1998 so that it can fulfil its
stated aim of increasing the number of people who subscribe to
medical schemes.
Mr J J KGARIMETSA: Madam Speaker, I hereby 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 water restrictions are about to be implemented in the southwestern part of the Western Cape;
(2) recognises that the conservation of our most precious and scarce resource is critical for the survival of our nation; and
(3) calls on all the citizens of the country, in general, and the southwestern Cape, in particular, to conserve water, to recycle and to recognise that every drop counts.
[Applause.]
Mnr C M MORKEL: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die Nuwe NP sal voorstel: Dat die Huis -
(1) kennis neem van die absolute dilemma wat die arbeidsmark in SA beleef in die lig daarvan dat -
(a) die nuwe casino-ontwikkeling by Langebaan ongeveer 8 000
aansoeke ontvang het vir 90 geadverteerde poste; en
(b) situasies soos hierdie 'n hartseer weerspieëling is van die feit
dat Suid-Afrika met 5,88 miljoen werklose mense sit wat die wil
en die vermoë het om tot die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie en hul eie
lot by te dra, maar dat die geleentheid daarvoor nie bestaan
nie; en
(2) ‘n beroep op die ANC-regering doen om hul verkiesingsbelofte van 1994 van ``Jobs for All’’ gestand te doen en te erken dat hul nuwe verkiesingsbelofte om armoede te beveg, nooit sal kan realiseer alvorens hulle werkloosheid in Suid-Afrika aanpak nie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Mr C M MORKEL: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the New NP:
That the House -
(1) notes the absolute dilemma being experienced by the job market in South Africa in the light of the fact that -
(a) the new casino development at Langebaan has received
approximately 8 000 applications for 90 advertised posts; and
(b) such situations are a sad reflection of the fact that South
Africa has 5,88 million unemployed people who have the desire
and ability to contribute to the South African economy and their
own destiny, but that they have no opportunity to do so; and
(2) appeals to the ANC Government to honour their 1994 election promise of ``Jobs for All’’ and to admit that they will never be able to achieve their new election promise of combating poverty until they have dealt with unemployment in South Africa.]
Mr M E MABETA: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:
That the House -
(1) notes with sadness the razing of the homestead of Mr Tsengwa, the aspirant mayoral candidate of the UDM for the Bashe municipality;
(2) condemns the firing of ammunition into the homestead as it burned down;
(3) notes that while no deaths were incurred, the UDM condemns the fact that its members have to jump over corpses to exercise their rights to free political activity; and
(4) calls on Government to protect opposition candidates, particularly those from the UDM, who appear to be targets for attack in the run-up to the municipal elections.
Ms M C LOBE: Madam Speaker, I hereby 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 -
(a) the United States has failed to pay its debt of two billion
dollars to the UN;
(b) the US share of the UN budget is 1,11 dollars per citizen, while
that of a very small country such as San Marino is 4,26 dollars;
and
(c) the US debt is more than the total GDP of some of the poorest
countries; and
(2) calls on the US to set the correct moral example by paying and honouring its commitments to the UN.
[Applause.]
CONGRATULATIONS TO BREYTON PAULSE
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that the Springbok winger Breyton Paulse was named Player of the Year at the Sandton Convention Centre last night;
(2) concurs with commentators that Breyton is a gifted sportsperson with great speed, vision and anticipation; and
(3) joins his family, friends, colleagues and all South Africans in commending and congratulating Breyton on this celebrated award, which will serve to inspire more and more black players to emulate him.
Agreed to.
POSTPONEMENT OF SECOND READING DEBATE ON REDETERMINATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF CROSS-BOUNDARY MUNICIPALITIES BILL, ABOLITION OF LEBOWA MINERAL TRUST BILL AND CHIROPRACTORS, HOMEOPATHS AND ALLIED HEALTH SERVICE PROFESSIONS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That, notwithstanding Rule 253, the Second Reading debate on the Redetermination of the Boundaries of Cross-boundary Municipalities Bill [B 69 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), the Second Reading debate on the Abolition of Lebowa Mineral Trust Bill [B 49 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75) and the Second Reading debate on the Chiropractors, Homeopaths and Allied Health Service Professions Second Amendment Bill [B 66B - 2000] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76) be conducted on Wednesday, 1 November 2000, and Friday, 3 November 2000. Agreed to.
DISMISSAL OF MS N M SOMDAKA AND MR D C COOK
(Announcement)
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, before we proceed I have two announcements to make. On 24 March 1998 the House, on the recommendation of the Presiding Officers, approved the appointment of Ms Nomsa Somdaka as Division Manager: Institutional Support Services of Parliament. On 26 October 2000 Ms Somdaka was summarily dismissed after a disciplinary hearing.
The facts of the matter, which are generally not in dispute, are that five staff members performed tasks of a private nature at the house of Ms Somdaka during official hours, after being transported to her house in an official vehicle. [Interjections.] Thereafter Ms Somdaka authorised overtime payment for the staff members. She was found guilty of failing to exercise due care when approving overtime payment and also for failing to exercise proper control over the institution’s vehicles entrusted to her care. Although the chairperson of the disciplinary committee hearing recommended that she be demoted, the Presiding Officers were of the view that summary dismissal was the only appropriate penalty. [Interjections.] Mr Cook, the Superintendent: Property Services, was also summarily dismissed for his role in the misconduct. Both parties have the right to appeal within five days of the imposition of the penalty.
IRREGULAR USE OF TRAVEL FACILITIES BY MR I Z NCINANE
The SPEAKER: Before proceeding with business, I want to deal with a disciplinary matter concerning the irregular use of travel facilities by a member of this House. I have asked the member concern to be present. He is the hon … I am sorry, I have been practising this: He is the hon Ncinane. Is he in the House? [Interjections.]
Allegations of the abuse of air travel vouchers by the member first appeared in the media. When the allegations were published I called the member to my office and invited his response to the allegations. I was satisfied that the allegations warranted further investigation, and accordingly requested the disciplinary committee, chaired by the Deputy Speaker, to investigate the alleged infringements and advise me on the appropriate action. I am grateful to the media for their vigilance in bringing the matter to public notice.
The disciplinary committee conducted a very thorough investigation. I want to thank the committee and the Deputy Speaker for their work. My decision in regard to this case is based on the findings and recommendations of the committee.
Hon member, will you please stand while I address you?
The disciplinary committee found that between May and August this year you, on 10 occasions, travelled using warrants issued to your children. In respect of a further seven journeys this year, Parliament paid the full cost although the journeys were undertaken on travel warrants of minors under the age of 12. You acknowledged to the committee that you had made mistakes and that on at least one occasion you knowingly misused travel warrants issued to your dependants.
Travel benefits are made available to members at public expense, to facilitate members carrying out their duties and responsibilities as public representatives. Hon member, I view your deliberate abuse of your travel facilities in a very serious light. Your conduct is reprehensible in the extreme. You have abused the public’s trust and in the process brought Parliament into disrepute. In this public forum, I issue a severe reprimand to you for your inexcusable and reckless conduct.
As there is prima facie evidence of fraud in respect of the identified 10 trips you undertook on your children’s travel warrants, I am referring the relevant information and documentation to the Director of Public Prosecutions for further investigation. You will repay the cost to Parliament for the 10 journeys for which you used travel warrants of your children. You will also repay to Parliament the difference between the costs to Parliament for the seven journeys ostensibly by adults and the costs of a journey for a child under 12 years. The moneys involved are to be paid by 31 December this year. Furthermore, you will forfeit 10 tickets from your allocation between now and the end of 2001, and the travel warrants for your dependants are immediately withdrawn for the remainder of the current year.
Hon member, do you wish to make any statement?
Mnu I Z NCINANE: Somlomo, umBhexeshi weQela elikwisiNinzi nabaBhexeshi bamanye amaqela, amalungu onke ale Ndlu yoWiso-Mthetho yesizwe, njengoko sele ethethile uSomlomo, mna ke ndibeka ubhontsi nocikicane, ndaleka umsundulo. Ndiyazandlala okokhuko lomhambi, ndicela uxolo ngesi senzo ndisenzileyo. Esi senzo, asele esixelile uSomlomo, esibonakala sinuka umzondo, isankqanga, iqaqa nesabhongo, bendingasenzi ngenjongo yokunyelisa le Ndlu, njengomntu olilungu layo nam. Andizi kungena nzulu ke kwizizathu, koko ndingathi ibe yimpazamo yenene.
Njengoko enqabile amathuba okuba ndithethe kulo mboko ndithetha kuwo ngoku, ngekuba ndiyavuya, kodwa andivuyi kwaphela, ngenxa yesenzo esibi esibangele ukuba ndibe ndithetha kuwo ngalo mzuzu. Ngako oko ke ndicela uxolo ngokungazenzisiyo. (Translation of Xhosa speech follows.)
[Mr I Z NCINANE: Madam Speaker, Chief Whip of the Majority Party, Whips of the other parties, hon members of the National Assembly, Madam Speaker has already spoken and made her point. I only stand up to apologise for the serious act that I committed. I am very ashamed of what I did. I do not, in any way, wish to undermine the National Assembly, of which I am also a member. I do not wish to dwell on what prompted me to commit this serious act, but I can only say that it was a grievous mistake.
One does not often get an opportunity to address you, but I am happy to have to do that today. However, that does not suggest that I underestimate the seriousness of the act I committed.]
The SPEAKER: Hon members, in conducting its investigations, the disciplinary committee learned that members’ use of travel warrants is open to abuse. The committee has, therefore, put forward various proposals to regulate these facilities more effectively and to control related costs. I am referring to the committee’s findings and proposal to the Joint Subcommittee on Support for Members that they urgently undertake the revision of travel facilities to avoid future abuses. I am also requesting the management of Parliament to look into the procedural and administrative aspects that open the way for abuse. I am sure that, in the circumstances, members will wholeheartedly support the need for such a revision.
Hon members, the House is about to discuss the steps to be taken to restore the moral fibre of South African society. It should be clear that the first such step must be for public authorities to demonstrate, in word and deed, their commitment to upholding and nurturing a moral society. We can now return to the item on the Order Paper regarding the steps to be taken to restore the moral fibre of South African society. I call upon the Deputy President. [Applause.]
STEPS TO BE TAKEN TO RESTORE THE MORAL FIBRE OF SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIETY
(Subject for Discussion)
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker and hon members, I rise to introduce a discussion on a topic that is of great concern to all of us in the country
- the issue of moral degeneration. Moral degeneration is one of the biggest challenges facing us, and it is at the core of many of the ills in our society. This House has, since 1994, abolished various laws that were premised on the wrong, the bad and the unjust, and championed those that are right and just. Members of this House have passed laws that ought to contribute to the consolidation of the fight against moral degeneration. These ranged from laws dealing with crimes against women and children such as the Domestic Violence Act of 1998 or the Maintenance Act of 1998, to various other pieces of legislation aimed at eliminating conditions where immorality can thrive.
It is therefore appropriate that, as public representatives, we should lead an attempt to find solutions to this problem. This House has also put instruments in place to fight corruption, both in the private and the public sectors. Despite all these and various other endeavours, it is clear that more still needs to be done as we continue to see signs of moral decay in our midst.
During the course of this year, the Cabinet discussed this issue and recognised that many of our socioeconomic problems result, to a large extent, from moral degeneration. It was decided that the matter should be addressed as a matter of urgency, and that the Leader of Government Business should request the Speaker to allow time for this debate. I thank Madam Speaker for allowing this long-overdue debate to take place.
It is my belief that for us to be able to do justice to this debate, we need to contextualise the origins of this problem properly. We cannot resolve it if we treat the symptoms only, and fail to look at the root causes and the background against which it came about.
To be able to address this challenge as a country, we cannot ignore the impact that our past has had on our present, for the apartheid legacy not only dehumanised some communities and individuals, but also caused untold damage in many other ways. Apartheid created a particular value system designed to deepen and perpetuate a twisted understanding of values and morality. It created its own way of interpreting differences between right and wrong, bad and good, just and unjust, and eroded respect, in general, and respect for life and property, in particular. It introduced extreme intolerance, and because it had to be maintained through extreme violence, it encouraged violence at every level of society. Apartheid introduced racist policing and training that changed what was normal to become abnormal. Our history is full of records of how the apartheid system went to the extent of using criminals for its defence and maintenance, and how it brutally eliminated opponents, thereby entrenching a culture of violence. It transformed education into an instrument of subjugation. It also destroyed good human relations between the different racial groups and communities in our country.
It is important, in this debate, to recall some of this history and the fact that as a result of these activities, apartheid was declared by the UN as a crime against humanity, and by the World Council of Churches as a heresy. We cannot, therefore, ignore this bitter past when we debate moral degeneration and when we seek to work for moral renewal.
However, much as we could blame the past as having contributed, to a large degree, to the moral degeneration of our society, it is important to note that correcting these wrongs is now a responsibility of all of us in this House and everyone in our country, South Africa. It is clear that there is a lot that we need to do to address this as a matter of urgency. To some of us society seems to have succumbed to low moral values and the symptoms are there for all to see: disregard for the value of human life and property; lack of respect and compassion; illegal self-enrichment in both the public and the private sectors; and other despicable forms of crime such as sexual abuse of children, particularly by people who are their own flesh and blood.
We should be grateful that our new laws and the transparency brought about by our young democracy have encouraged the reporting of sexual crimes, a social illness that was swept under the carpet in the past. This, of course, means that democratic South Africa, as distinguished from apartheid South Africa, has established a firm foundation upon which we can now correct the wrongs of the past. The greatest concern is that, as South Africans, we recognise that our value systems have degenerated seriously. But, at the same time, we seem to find it difficult to act and resolve the problem.
The intelligentsia in our country, who would normally be expected to lead in influencing and shaping how we see the world around us, appear to have fallen victim to the times. They are not all playing their role constructively. As South Africans, we have come to view as entertainment some of the negative and immoral depictions of life. For example, some serialised dramas by some of our broadcast media glorify violence and criminal activity, giving an impression that this is an acceptable way of life. These dramas are very popular with thousands of South Africans and are often their only source of entertainment and information.
The long-term effects of glorifying violence in the mass media are cause for concern. As parents, we allow our children to listen to and watch these dramas without guidance, thereby contributing to the perpetuation of this culture. Our failure to realise the impact of our actions indicates the level to which we have succumbed to abnormal values. Broadcast and print media have a tremendous influence, especially on young people. Given this reality, the media has a crucial role to play in restoring the moral fibre of our society and should seriously consider the impact of messages that are being sent out to the public.
The pressure put on children by our permissive and fast-modernising society cannot be overemphasised. I recall the painful incident in Chatsworth where the lives of young children came to a tragic and premature end in a night club. I am haunted by the words of an 11-year-old girl told to me by a police officer who was at the scene. Moments before she died she pleaded with him, and I quote: ``Uncle, please do not tell mummy that I was here.’’ Those were her last words. As parents, we now compete with many negative social influences as we try to mould the adults of the future. The words from this young child indicate that at home they do not encourage her to do what she did. The question is: What can we do to restore the moral fibre of our nation and to restore the type of values that would hold our families and communities together?
Members of this House, the provincial legislatures and local government must lead the nation in debating this issue. We must declare the moral regeneration campaign as a major national campaign. All political parties represented in government at all levels and in this House must give this matter the urgent attention it deserves. It must become a major priority in our constituencies. This campaign should aim at reaching out to the very soul of our nation. It is important therefore that we should agree in this House to drive it jointly and not use it for political point-scoring.
We also need to mobilise all sectors of our society to work jointly with us to eradicate this moral decay. We invite the religious sector to play a leading role in providing a spiritual and moral revival. After all, this is their main mission in society. Let our pulpits, synagogues, mosques and temples intensify the preaching of the message of a moral rebirth and renewal in South Africa.
South Africans in general cannot escape this responsibility either. There was a time in our history when people would provide guidance to children they did not even know, when the ruling ethic was ``Any child is my child’’. We need to revive that spirit. When one sees children loitering in the streets during school hours, what does one do as an adult? Does one ask them why they are not in school or does one simply walk away as if nothing has happened? Awu Bakithi, lafa elihle kakhulu. [Oh my countrymen, cry the beloved country.] What will happen to these children in the future?
Our young people are more vulnerable to the demands of this new era, and the popular culture of the time does not promote good morals. Hon members, one need only watch the youth music programme, Channel O, and other hugely popular prime time programmes, to see the particular culture that is being promoted among our youth. It is one that continuously promotes sex and violence.
The values we teach to our children will determine the kind of society we will have in future. For this reason, we need to start in our homes and schools to develop new South Africans who understand what it means to be respectable and respectful citizens. A youth that is patriotic and has national pride and self-respect is less likely to engage in immoral and antisocial activities.
This is a challenge for youth organisations in our country to begin to instil a new moral ethos in their members. Political youth organisations must give the lead in this regard. They need to promote moral renewal amongst their members and potential members, and make it fashionable, once again, to be morally upright. It is clear that there is a lot that we need to do to ensure a moral revival and the nurturing of a new South Africa with good values of self-respect, respect for the next person, respect for human life and property, and most of all, national pride. This debate is a milestone that adds value to our nation-building efforts. I would therefore like to make an earnest appeal that we give the matter serious thought, and that a way be found to concretise our conclusions. If we all agree that it is important to take visible action, we need to pass resolutions and embark on a programme of action that will enable us to fulfil this responsibility. We must not disappoint our fellow South Africans. [Applause.]
Sister B NCUBE: Madam Speaker, hon Deputy President and the House, the Collins English Dictionary describes morals as the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. This definition does assist to determine the solution to the issue of moral decay in our society.
My focus, in this debate, will mainly seek to highlight a few positive suggestions in the struggle to build our country’s moral fibre by a mass educational campaign. Amid much doom and gloom, there is still hope. Schools, roads and clinics continue to be built, housing subsidies are issued, electricity and telephone lines are connected, and water taps are installed. These achievements, however, must not let us be complacent for if the moral fibre continues to fall apart, our young democracy could also be on the road of little reason for optimism for the future.
The greatest challenge that our society is facing is to deal effectively with poverty at the economic and social levels, and to build a moral fibre to strengthen the moral responsibility in all our societal sectors of life. The nation needs moral guidance. Society looks to the governmental institutions, religious institutions and the industrial organisations of society, specifically in the midst of our present moral decay, for moral guidance. However, none of these social institutions can go it alone. They need a collective approach to have a comprehensive impact to embrace the whole of human life for development, empowerment and sustenance.
In order to provide moral guidance, these social institutions must make their stands and intentions clear, and never tire of explaining and dialoguing about the methods of building the moral fibre in our South African society. They must help people to understand their constitutional rights and their obligatory duties towards those rights. There must be no misunderstanding about the moral duty of all South Africans in the building of a new value system of ubuntu, for ``motho ke motho ka batho’’.
These social institutions, over and above their specified regular business activities, would need to have special programmes, projects and campaigns of special needs of the struggle to build the country’s vision of a nonracial, nonsexist and democratic South Africa. Nothing could be more relevant and more necessary, at this moment of moral crisis and decay in our society, than a message of hope to restore courage and fearlessness that the vision of a better life for all will be fulfilled as the psalmist, in Psalm 9:18 says: ``… the hope of the poor is never brought into nothing’’.
Finally, I am asking everybody in this House to recommit themselves to the RDP of the soul, as called for by our former President, Nelson Mandela, to lead the way by starting initiatives to entrench morality as a way of life. It is not enough to make public statements on the matter. Actions speak louder than words!
In die weskant van Gauteng glo ons in die slagspreuk van die ANC wat sê: Al die mag vir ons mense! [Applous.] [In the western part of Gauteng we believe in the slogan of the ANC which states: All the power for our people! [Applause.]]
Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, hon colleagues, surely, the question that we need to ask this afternoon is why we are debating the subject of morality in our Parliament six years after 1994. Let me take hon members back to about 1993 when many of those who are here now as members of Parliament were locked in negotiations, attempting to dream a dream for South Africa, and attempting to have a vision of where we would like to be as a people and as a group in five or six years’ time.
Surely, today we can stand here and ask ourselves: Regarding those dreams and visions that we had and where we expected to be, have we, at this juncture, arrived at that point where we should have been, or have we slipped or fallen back in many respects? And, regarding the many things that we hoped to be able to achieve as a result of those negotiations, did they come to pass or did we fail?
This question is important because it goes to the heart of what the new and modern South African society is about. There is no point in attempting to moralise in a top-down fashion. We need to look at what is happening in a bottom-up fashion, if we need to regenerate society. If, at the bottom, the situation is as dismal as it was six or seven years ago, if those who suffered the ravages of disenfranchisement and lack of opportunities and resources during the period of apartheid are still experiencing these things, and if the rural hinterland of South Africa has not experienced any substantial changes, then we have not achieved our goal.
Sister Bernard Ncube spoke of the RDP of the soul. Did that change materialise in South Africa or has self-interest once again become the dominant moral tendency within the nation, where so long as the individual is well-off, it does not matter what is happening to the remainder of society? Now, if that situation continues to prevail, no matter how much we moralise from here, and if our efforts make no impact or change in the lives of ordinary people, then the ordinary people have no reason to buy into the new philosophy and the new democracy, because they have no further virtue in respect of ordinary people.
This question therefore needs to be looked at very profoundly, because we go back again to the question of ubuntu. If my peace, my happiness and my family are going to have any future, that future, surely, cannot be a right on its own, but has to be interlinked with that of someone else’s. The fact that our President has continued to characterise our society as two societies, namely one that is well-off and one that is struggling and poor, raises the question of morality again.
Why is it that six years after the new democratic Government the poor continue to remain poor? Why is it that the uneducated continue to remain uneducated? Why is it that the benefits of technology, which is the most important tool in the hands of modern human beings, are in the hands of a dominant few? When will there be a transfer of skills, resources and knowledge to those who have not had them in the past, in order that they can build, on the basis of what they have, a new society which is more equal. So long as society remains unequal, so long as that happens, we will not be in a position to preach morality because the ordinary person will still ask: What benefits have flowed out of what you have done for me?
Now for the forthcoming election the Democratic Alliance has the theme: ``For all the people.’’ We need to ask whether that, in fact, will materialise, and whether it is going to mean a good education for all the people, including the people in the rural areas. Will it mean good housing? Many of these people were the people who had ample opportunity over 40 or 50 years, when they were in government, to make sure that black people, coloured people and Indian people would have been able to get these benefits. [Interjections.] [Applause.] Did we get those benefits? That is the question we need to ask. [Interjections.]
What was the quality of education that was given to us? If today there are people who are not able to enjoy good jobs and not able to get into top positions, it is simply because of what they inherited.
Now here we have Douglas Gibson. Let us take Douglas Gibson, for example. Should Douglas Gibson … [Interjections] … should he … [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, order! Would you please take your seat? Mr D H M GIBSON: Madam Speaker, may I ask the hon member where the jobs are that his Government has promised? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Mr Gibson, would you take your seat please? [Interjections.]
Mr M F CASSIM: The question I would like to ask the hon …
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr Gibson, I am not recognising you. When I did ask you, you could have risen on a point of order. I am not recognising you. [Interjections.] Please proceed, hon member.
Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, the question that I would like to ask … [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, are you only rising on a point of order?
Mr C AUCAMP: I rise on a point of order, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Yes, Mr Aucamp.
Mr C AUCAMP: I just want to ask whether it is appropriate, in a debate on the moral values of our country - the Deputy President asked us not to politicise this, and I do not see any morality issue in this – to … [Interjections.] I want to say it is not in order. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, you may make that point in your speech. Please proceed, hon member.
Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, now the question that I am addressing is a
question of high morality. When one says publicly: For all the people'',
we need to ask the question here honestly whether it is going to be for all
the people, and what it is that is going to be delivered to all the people.
[Interjections.] Can we get an assurance from the hon Douglas Gibson, when
he comes here, that, indeed, when he says,For all the people’’ and
wishes to embrace all the people, that it is not merely hypothetical, but
genuine embracing of all the people? [Interjections.]
Now, particularly in this country, we need to look at the disadvantaged black community. In that community the suffering is intense and it is immense. [Interjections.] What is the Government doing? We are all part of Government. [Interjections.] Now, let me tell the hon Douglas Gibson …
Mr D H M GIBSON: [Inaudible.]
Mr M F CASSIM: … if the hon Douglas Gibson would listen to this. In Malaysia the opposition parties have an agreement with the ruling party that, because they want to build Malaysian society and uplift the poor, in five areas of human endeavour, which include education, health and housing, they will work together. [Interjections.] Now, what has the hon Douglas Gibson done here this afternoon? [Interjections.] He has created a division.
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Mr Cassim, would you take your seat?
Mrs S A SEATON: Madam Speaker, I would ask you to rule that the hon …
The SPEAKER: Are you rising on a point of order?
Mrs S A SEATON: Yes, on a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would ask you to rule that the hon Douglas Gibson give our speaker an opportunity to speak. He can speak when it is his turn. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon member, would you take your seat? Order! I want to say to this House that what is happening now does not add to the decorum of the debate, nor does it indicate any seriousness. The Chief Whips, if I may say so, ought to lead the way in setting the tenor of the debate. [Applause.] Hon member, will you please resume your speech.
Mr M F CASSIM: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The question that was addressed by the hon Douglas Gibson to me is a fair question. His question was: What is your Government doing? My answer is that where people are committed to uplifting the poor, they do not apportion responsibility to someone else. [Interjections.] What they do is say: I am also willing to come in and assist in this most important task, in order that people believe us, not because of what we say to them, but because of what we do. [Applause.]
If, therefore, people are in privileged positions, to the extent that I, as an Indian, am privileged and in a position of having had more benefits than others, the question that should then be posed to me and my group of people is: What are you now going to contribute in order that your relationship with the rest of the people of South Africa can be built up on the basis of not only promising, but standing side by side with them and saying, ``Together we shall build. Together we shall set off upon the road that we would like to travel on.’’ [Applause.] When we do that, we make the highest statement of morality, and that is that when I have something to give I offer it willingly and freely, because I know that if our society builds up on the basis of equal strength, then all of us are liberated, then all of us are delivered.
At the moment, freedom has come to our country, but who is it that is really free. Who is enjoying economic freedom and still enjoying the total freedom and luxury of the best education, the best housing and the best medical care? Can that situation prevail? Can we say to other people: Let us believe in morality, but for you there must be second-class health, education and whatever else, and it is fine for someone else to enjoy those things at a much higher level. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M C J VAN SCHALKWYK: Madam Speaker, 1994 heralded an era in which South Africans would be able to make their own choices, where before there had been laws and rulebooks which dictated our every action. Today we live in a world where people question long-held beliefs, question certain aspects of their own faith and, generally, take more responsibility for their own choices and decisions.
However, in this new environment, we also find disturbing trends. We often find that respect between individuals and communities is the victim. The well-known philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville remarked: ``Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.’’
When debating, in the political arena, the issue of moral fibre in the South African society, one has to establish the boundaries of this debate. Firstly, no individual or party can claim exclusive ownership of morality. We will get much further with the debate if we accept the notion that decency and morality, and also sometimes the lack thereof, exist in all parties. What is absent in South Africa is the willingness to accept, recognise and acknowledge decency across political and other dividing lines. Our public discourse will be much more constructive if we accept that to acknowledge that in the other camp one can also find decency and morality is a strength and not a weakness.
Secondly, indicators which prove conclusively that we live in a country whose values are steadily turning upside down, are becoming too many to ignore. With regard to crime against children, rape has increased by 108% since 1994. Assault against children … [Interjections.] I can tell the Minister that I get these statistics from his own department’s reports. Assault against children increased by 111%. These are the statistics. Behind these statistics lurks the ugly face of what is increasingly happening to many children in our country.
Just last week a newspaper reported the story of little Manual Makwe’s first five years of hell before he died of abuse at the hands of, inter alia, his own mother. The court found that Manual had had a piece of flesh removed from his groin while he was still alive. He had been battered, pulled by his hair and legs for distances and burnt with open flames. He was bashed against a wall, leaving him unconscious, and for this had water poured over his face to wake him up. The boy was even force-fed an unidentified liquid that had made his stomach swell. He had been beaten to a pulp at intervals, leaving him with broken bones which were never treated.
It is when the statistics are given faces and names, and their stories are told, that people can begin to understand what is happening out there. There are many Manual Makwes out there, from poor families and from affluent families. I want to tell Mr Cassim that when one is confronted with experiences like these, the question of DA or ANC or IFP fades into the background.
People simply want to know what is happening to our country. What are the political leaders doing to rectify the situation. And the question is: ``What are we doing?’’ Are we having another debate trying to apportion blame, or are we taking concrete action which will save many Manual Makwes in future?
Moral decay cannot be seen as a cause; it is instead a symptom of deeper social and community problems. If we are to address moral decay, we must first understand the underlying social causes.
Let us look at what poverty is doing to the moral fibre of our society. In our country one in four children goes to bed hungry. Even more of their mothers are starving because they sacrifice the little food they have to feed their children. One in four households spends less than R50 a week on food. Many of us who come from communities which were once poor grew up with the advice of our elders that one can be poor, but one can be proud and decent at the same time.
Poverty cannot be an excuse for being morally corrupt, but it is presumptuous to preach to people who are living in abject poverty, going to bed hungry almost every night, about abstract moral values without offering them hope. When people are poor, they must be given hope that there is a way out. When one has to figure out every day how to keep body and soul together, but more than that, how to devise a plan to ensure that one’s children do not go to bed hungry, then concepts such as Government corruption, accountability and nepotism sound as if they refer to another planet.
Providing real hope in the sense of concrete job opportunities is the only answer to the endemic poverty in our country. Poor people are proud people who aspire to a decent living. They want to trust the undertakings of politicians of all persuasions.
Daar is talle gevalle waarin staatsamptenare en politieke ampsdraers aan korrupsie skuldig bevind word deur kommissies of regeringsondersoeke, maar dit word nooit verder gevoer tot in die hof en tot by skuldigbevindings nie.
Daar is ‘n gees los dat mense geregtig is op wat hulle wil vat. Daar is talle voorbeelde, maar as ons in ‘n land sienderoë toelaat dat ‘n provinsiale premier soos in Mpumalanga mense aanstel as ministers wat deur ‘n kommissie van ondersoek ongeskik bevind is om ‘n openbare pos te beklee, dan moet ons vra hoeveel van die skade aan moraliteit nie dalk selfaangerigte skade is nie.
Geen party is vry daarvan dat mense op ‘n onbehoorlike wyse optree nie. Die vraag is hoe daar in sulke gevalle opgetree word. Word dit weggepraat? Word verskonings daarvoor gesoek? Of word daar moeilike besluite geneem en opgetree, selfs al is daar politieke skade? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[There are many instances of public servants and political office-bearers being found guilty of corruption by commissions or government investigations, but the culprits are never taken to court and convicted.
The general attitude is that people are entitled to take what they want. There are many examples of this, but if we as a country blatantly allow a provincial premier, as in the case of Mpumalanga, to appoint people who have been found unfit to hold public office by a commission of inquiry as Ministers, we have to ask ourselves how much of the damage to morality may not be self-inflicted.
There is no party in which people are not acting in an improper way. The question is what action is being taken in such cases. Is it being explained away? Do people try to find excuses for it? Or are difficult decisions and steps being taken, even if there is political damage?]
In conclusion, there are no magic formulas to restore the moral fibre of our society. The essence in restoring the moral fibre lies in respect between individuals and communities. It is the absence of respect which leads to our children being abused, women being raped, Government money being stolen, and poor people being exploited and used as political fodder.
The answer lies in a government whose institutions can deliver justice, courts which are working, a well-functioning police force and a government that is responsive. But the picture can only be complete when there is a strong civil society guarding that which is good. But the key to all of this is leaders in government who show the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, and to act upon that knowledge. [Applause.]
Mr R JANKIELSOHN: Madam Speaker, hon members, unlike the Deputy Chairperson of Committees, I will try to behave myself this afternoon.
Many of us may recall the story of a naval battleship that came across a light directly in front of it during a storm in the middle of the night. After numerous attempts to persuade the other vessel to change course, the captain sent a message informing the crew of the other vessel that he was the captain of a battleship, maybe a new corvette, and would ram them out of the way if they would not change course. The reply that he received from the crew of the other vessel was: ``We are a lighthouse.’’
Just as a lighthouse protects ships during darkness and storms, when they are in danger of losing direction and landing on the rocks, so too do the norms and values that make up the moral fibre of society protect it from decay and ruin. In this respect, South Africa has a dismal history. Our history conjures up images of places such as Robben Island, Vlakplaas and Quatro, and names such as, among many others, Steve Biko, Hector Petersen and Stompie Seipei.
After years of institutionalised discrimination and terror, the country looked forward in 1994 to a future in a society, and here I would like to quote former President Mandela’s inaugural speech -
… of freedom in such a manner that it guarantees the political liberties and the human rights of all our citizens.
Instead of this vision, we have a society that is drifting around perilously in a sea of crime, corruption and immorality.
In South Africa, 2 058 violent crimes are committed daily. This amounts to 85 violent crimes every hour. In 1998, 49 280 rape cases and 4 851 sexual assaults were reported - a total of about 54 000 incidents. Many such cases still go unreported owing to fear of reprisal and shame.
In 1999, 23 810 murders were reported - 65 per day. Between 1994 and 1999 the reported cases of robbery increased by 121,2%, with about 11 robberies with aggravating circumstances taking place every hour. Many of these incidents are carried out against the most vulnerable of our society, the aged, the disabled and minors. It is such people that need our protection the most.
The primary task of any government is to protect its citizens. But how does a government do this? A government protects its citizens by drawing up and implementing policies through legislation, if necessary, that create an environment in which the constitution, and specifically the bill of rights, is nurtured and protected. In other words, it creates a moral society with discipline and respect for law and order and a society that caters for and protects diversity of religion and culture. With this in mind, our Constitution seeks to establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights.
It is, however, values, justice and human rights that have been abused in our society, not necessarily by government, but by the lack of it. A survey by the Institute of Security Studies indicates that while 10% of South Africans felt unsafe in society in 1994, this figure grew to almost 50% in
- This figure, in fact, implies that almost 50% of South Africans do not believe that Government is able to carry out its basic task of protecting them. With the high rates of crime, corruption and nepotism, the latest decision to release instead of incarcerate and rehabilitate prisoners, the President’s attitude to the views of democracy in Zimbabwe and the whole approach to HIV/Aids, this Government is to morality what Colonel Saunders is to chickens. [Interjections.]
What is more worrying than just crime is the breakdown of the family and the status of our youth. [Interjections.] Our future lies in the hands of our youth, many of whom are on the streets sniffing glue, begging and committing some of the most heinous crimes. Those who are fortunate enough to have homes spend hours watching television advertisements, programmes and films that are often violent and obscene. It would seem that the valueless and immoral words of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies and Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange have become a reality among our youth.
We are aware that South Africa is a society in transition. We are between traditional and modern worlds. While traditional societies are disciplined, with strict values and morals, and modern societies have stability and agreements over these aspects, a transitional society is characterised by the lack of consensus over issues of morality, values and rules of behaviour. Such societies need guidance and discipline from their governments if they are to move forward and transform themselves.
Up until now governments in South Africa, both past and present, have been unable to transform our society and establish acceptable rules of behaviour. Instead, they became and have become absorbed by that which they were meant to transform. On the other hand, individuals and institutions in South Africa do a great deal to uphold our religious and civic values. Every institution that instructs citizens on their democratic rights and responsibilities, every parent and teacher who takes the time to discuss religious and moral issue with our children, every person that reports a crime, every young person that remains faithful or abstains instead of using a contraceptive device to prevent Aids, keeps morality alive in South Africa. These are the people that we must emulate, and these are the people that we salute this afternoon. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The hon Grové will speak from his seat at the back of the House.
Mr S P GROVÉ: Madam Speaker, what distinguishes people from animals is the fact that we have an inner thought world that is as real to each of us as the physical world in which we live. In that thought world we create perceptions of everything around us, and that is the way we perceive life. These perceptions are very important things, as whether we realise it or not, they dictate the way we behave and therefore our morals. There is a saying that goes: ``You are what you think.’’
One aspect of moral behaviour is, to my mind, a relatively simple concept, and that is the respect or lack thereof for the dignity of one’s fellow human beings. What then, in one’s thought world determines whether one has respect for the dignity of others? The answer to that question can only be that I will respect the dignity of others if I have the perception that others respect mine. That is the way human beings behave and have behaved since the beginning of time.
What this whole argument amounts to is that our relationships with our fellow citizens, with Government, with our employers, with everybody around us with whom we interact in our daily lives, will to a very large extent determine our moral behaviour. That is also the reason it will never be possible for the Government alone to reverse or solve the moral decline. It is the responsibility of every person in this country to re-examine their relationships with their fellow citizens and do their utmost to treat those with whom they interact with respect and dignity.
I want to look briefly at some tools that we can use to repair our interpersonal relationships and to restore respect for the dignity of other persons. First of all, is surely the concept of reconciliation. This must be one of the most important and also one of the most misunderstood concepts in South Africa. I fail to understand why so many white people in South Africa think that reconciliation is something that black people must do after white people have said that they are sorry. If that does not work in my marriage it will definitely not work in the country. I cannot, after years of abusing my wife, go to her and simply say that I am sorry and thereafter think that everything will be all right from that moment onwards.
Reconciliation is something that must be lived. It is a process. I am not suggesting that one group should grovel before another - far from it. I am suggesting that for reconciliation to work people need to experience it from both sides, and we have to live reconciliation and prove it in our daily actions. That is the moral way in which to behave and the way in which we will create dignity for ourselves.
The second issue is that of redress. We live in one of the most unequal societies on earth, a situation which is in itself immoral. There is without doubt a moral obligation on those who benefited from the past to contribute to the redistribution process to redress this inequality. That act in itself will go a long way in giving people back their dignity and hope, and stop them feeling like second-class citizens.
The third issue is rebuilding. There is an obligation on the whole country, on every person, to rebuild this country. That not only means that all of us must have equal access to education, to the economy and to land, but also that we have to recreate the will to do things for ourselves. Too many of us are sitting around waiting for the Government, or some or other person, to do something for us. It is time that we all get stuck in and do some honest work to rebuild not only our nation but also our own lives. The satisfaction of achieving some goal, however modest, is a sure way of restoring our own dignity.
Lastly, I want to say, regarding the election, that it seems to me that once again some groups in the opposition parties have a tendency to cause polarisation among voters. To erect once again quixotic windmills in the form of some or other kind of ``gevaar’’ to attract voters, is not going to do our nation any good and it is in no way going to contribute to the restoration of dignity. [Laughter.] [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M E MABETA: Madam Speaker, the Deputy President’s decision to invite a debate on the challenge of moral renewal in our society is a proper recognition that all is not well in our country. We commend him for his insight, honesty and candour and hope that the Government and opposition parties alike will welcome this and will contribute in a constructive manner.
Our point of departure is an acknowledgement that our society carries the scars of an immoral legacy which spawned antisocial attitudes and tendencies, the suffocation of the human spirit, the stifling of free thought and expression, and constrained the full development and flourishing of the talents of our youth. This suppressed energy found an outlet in self-destructive social aberrations and nurtured a noxious violent spirit and nihilism.
In case people from the ranks of the opposition parties have not read much on this aspect of how the youth in our country in the run-up to 1976 was forced into a very painful situation, I would like to recommend a piece by the late Ruth First in the journal Review of African Political Economy, and a reply to this analysis by a noted South African black scholar, Prof Archie Mafetje. Prof Ruth First argued in that article that the youth responded to the painful oppression in this country because of specific directives from a particular political party. She is partially correct. Prof Archie Mafetje, in a rebuttal to this, argued that the youth, as part of a broader liberation movement, responded to directives from a particular political party, but went beyond this. It is highly recommended reading.
Our democratic Constitution provides a framework for the seeding and flourishing of human values. Our Bill of Rights, which is enshrined in this Constitution, is the guiding beacon which should keep us on the straight road and never again should we relapse into the quagmire of our past.
Alas! If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. The Constitution and its democratic institutions alone are inadequate to guarantee the growth of a culture founded on sound moral values. It will take a collective team of leaders in Government, the private sector and our communities, who possess unquestionable integrity and the moral fibre to rise above the murky waters of an acquisitive and self-aggrandising society. We have to exalt the primacy of the universal and timeless values of selflessness, generosity, honesty, uprightness and dedication to duty. We must be a hard-working and proud people who do not seek hand-outs and unprincipled opportunities for self-aggrandisement.
These values cannot flourish in a vacuum. Government and the private sector must create an empowering economic environment which generates job creation and effectively eliminates conditions which breed crime and the erosion of moral values. The economic policies pursued currently by Government are not designed to achieve these objectives. Leaders in Government, parastatals and the private sector have developed a culture in which the leadership scrambles for the acquisition of existing wealth without creating more for redistribution amongst the historically marginalised poorest of the poor.
The UDM believes that the restoration of the culture of learning, for example, is a very important priority in the renewal of moral values in society, and the reprioritisation of the fight against crime is the first priority of the Government and all stakeholders in society, including the opposition parties, so that our society can be seen as a safe place to visit.
We must engage law-enforcement departments to ensure that they restore civil order and security to a society that is besieged by unprecedented levels of crime, which have earned South Africa the unacceptable and uncoveted title of ``world crime capital’’. We must take all necessary practical measures to empower civil society to reclaim the streets in our neighbourhoods and make them safe havens where people can raise their children without fear.
Rev K R J MESHOE: Madam Speaker, I want, firstly, to echo what the Deputy President said as he opened this debate. Secondly, I want to propose eight steps that should be taken to restore the moral fibre of South African society. Firstly, the church leaders, especially, must be told to stop trying to be politically correct. They should start confronting evil without fear or favour, telling the truth even when it hurts and leading our communities by example.
Secondly, we must acknowledge that the problems of moral decay are too big and complex to solve without the help of Almighty God. Without Him, Government cannot change the moral rot that we now have, and without His help even moral summits that we call all the time will not help.
Thirdly, we have to admit that radical change has to take place in the hearts of individuals and that only Jesus Christ has the power to change our hearts thus enabling us to change our attitudes and immoral behaviour.
Fourthly, we should ensure that this Parliament passes legislation that promotes morality and not immorality. Fifthly, we must review legislation that has legalised deadly and addictive pornography that encourages promiscuity. Sixthly, we should instruct all levels of Government to stop legitimising immorality by attempting to legalise prostitution.
Seventhly, we should be proactive by using television to educate our people about the dangers of immoral living and the advantages of clean moral living. Eighthly, we should encourage the SABC to show more programmes with a strong moral content than programmes that glorify sin and immorality.
King Solomon once said that righteousness exalts the nation but sin is a disgrace to any people. South African politicians must heed the words of King Solomon if they are serious about tackling the moral decay that is fast destroying the foundation of this nation.
The ACDP wants to see morality and righteousness restored in this nation, that is why we will always oppose the glorifying of sin and the immoral laws that are either passed or contemplated by this Parliament. We will, instead, support and promote righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ at all levels of society.
This Parliament must resolve to make a u-turn and start leading our people by example in the ways of righteousness. If we want to secure the future of our children we have no option but to take drastic steps to reverse the unacceptable downward moral trend in our society. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Dr E E JASSAT: Madam Speaker, hon Deputy President and hon members, may I say ``Amen’’ after the Rev Meshoe’s sermon.
On the morning of 10 May 1994 the Republic of South Africa irrevocably entered a new phase of history when the first democratically elected President was inaugurated at the Union Buildings in Pretoria. The world acclaimed the bloodless revolution that had taken place at the southernmost tip of Africa.
In the years that followed, a Constitution was drafted, a Constitution considered to be one of the best in the world, and this Constitution was adopted on 8 May 1996. This was the first phase of our revolution, a transfer of political power from the minority to the majority. The second phase was to undo the decades of injustice, oppression and degradation of our people. A phase of transformation and consideration had to take place, perhaps a much more difficult task than we had anticipated.
We are now challenged by the third and, perhaps, the most difficult phase of our revolution, the restoration of the moral fibre of South African society. If we are going to be faithful to our wonderful Constitution, can we applaud those individuals who defraud the state by evading paying taxes, smuggling goods and selling addictive drugs? Can we permit stealing, hijacking and murder? Can we tolerate parents forcing their young daughters to sell themselves for the sexual gratification of others? Can we condone the gang rape of innocent girls and elderly grandmothers? Can we be comfortable and sleep soundly when defenceless children are brutally assaulted by drunken parents? The answer is an emphatic ``No’’.
If we allow the above we will become part of a sick and decadent society, a society not fit to survive. We will be dishonouring those valiant boys and girls, men and women who so heroically struggled to bring about the just, fair and free society that we live in today. No particular group or party has a monopoly on maintaining moral, ethical and spiritual values, and here I agree with the previous speaker. Individually and collectively, we must engage in a soul-cleansing exercise. In the words of John Adam, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate of 1931, and I quote: In his own way each man must struggle lest the moral law becomes a far- off abstraction, utterly separated from his active life.
In addition, our criminal and justice systems must be invigorated so that those elements in our society who indulge in deviant behaviour will think twice before participating in immoral and antisocial acts, particularly if these arise not out of necessity, but from pure greed and self- gratification. Each individual in South Africa who values life, liberty and decency must become a crusader to regenerate the moral fibre of our country by joining and strengthening the local community police forums and blowing the whistle when there is corruption, crime and nepotism in any form whatsoever. Let us all apply ourselves to the sacred task, whether we are Jews or Christians, Hindus or Muslims, Buddhists or Zoroastrians, agnostics or atheists. We are all humans. [Applause.]
Mrs B N SONO: Madam Speaker, hon Deputy President and hon members, the post- 1994 democracy for which many South Africans struggled and sacrificed their lives brought about many challenges, including re-entry to the global political and economic playing fields. This debate is long overdue and, in my own humble opinion, should have taken place long before 1999. [Interjections.] Ideas flowing from this debate could have been used to inform policies … [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, is that a point of order?
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, I have a question for you. Why do you allow all this rowdiness in the House?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I request you, please, to give a chance to the speakers to be heard. Proceed, hon Sono.
Mrs B N SONO: Madam Speaker, Deputy President, in my humble opinion, this debate is long overdue. It should have taken place long before 1999. Ideas flowing from these debates could have been used to inform policies to create the basis for focus on marshal plans for the reconstruction and development of our communities. This debate is about a call for national consciousness. National consciousness and its spread in this country has to work against a number of factors. Yes, we agree that when the new Government took over there were problems already, but, to qualify my first statement, if this debate had occurred earlier we would have been able to inform the policies, particularly because we wanted certain expected outcomes.
First, there are traditional complexities. There was the problem of poverty, which is still with us. There is the problem of the skewed education our people got. The problem of crime is still with us. Globalisation is not new; it has always been there. Then there is the dislocation of the African historical culture and, lastly, the question of racism.
In the 1994 elections, the overwhelming majority of blacks voted for liberation. In 1999, they voted for a better quality of life. They want to uplift themselves. They prefer to own their own homes and property, to have employment, education, individual rights, freedom, security of person and so on.
This national call, if endorsed by all, provides the strategic possibility of addressing the current socioeconomic and developmental morass. South Africa should enter into a new phase of dialogue through citizen empowerment by informing the policies that will best serve its collective interests.
The most treacherous development after 1994 has been the characterisation of democracy as a colonialist intervention and imperialist dogma. One would have expected the ANC-led Government to show a much deeper operational understanding of their own indigenous political heritage, which brings us to the question of leadership. [Interjections.]
There has to be moral leadership that is courageous enough to employ political and intellectual discourse; leadership that can deal with problems head-on and have insight into dealing with the dislocation of the African culture. [Interjections.] Fortunately, I knew politics even before that member got involved. [Interjections.]
Our culture must be defined in concrete terms. We must relate the past to the present and demonstrate an historical evolution of the modern African. It is not solely westerners who need to be educated about the indigenous African political culture. [Interjections.] It is also the new liberators who are shamefully ignorant of their own political heritage. Unfortunately, such leadership in South Africa is lacking. [Interjections.]
With regard to racism, it is apparent that we have not succeeded, as a country, in correctly analysing and developing a strategy that bonds us together as a nation. Leadership should educate and services the public interest without pandering to popular whims. Political leaders should be exemplary in ethical and moral conduct. Unfortunately, politicians in today’s era, by and large, display dishonesty, unreliability and even eschew morality. [Interjections.] [Laughter.] Churches, synagogues, mosques and other temples must play a visible role in moral redemption. [Interjections.]
Teachers are particularly important since they are in daily contact with the youth, and must become moral guides rather than moral reprobates as some of them are. Today one reads stories in national publications of teachers forcing scholars to have sex in classrooms or about teachers raping students. Schools must also be moral sanctuaries. They must guide and lead. Importantly, parents are the anchor of morality and guidance to their children. [Applause.]
Gen C L VILJOEN: Madam Speaker, Deputy President, in the First World War, a British medical officer researched a similar subject. He asked the question: What criteria does one use to select, from civilians, the best material to be trained as military leaders, and to be sure that such leaders will show courage in war and not collapse under the strain of battle?
Lord Moran produced a booklet, the Anatomy of Courage, from which I gathered some wisdom that I find very true; and one guideline that I find very applicable. He found that the man of character in peacetime is the man of courage in wartime, for character enables the control of fear.
That is a simple truth that can be applied very much in the same way to this subject, because character determines conduct. Moral fibre therefore is directly proportionate to the sum of the qualities of character of all the individuals in the communities of South Africa. Therefore, to restore the moral fibre of our society is to rebuild the characters of individuals and communities.
Hierdie land van ons het nie baie fisieke oorlogskade oorgehou nie. Tog is die gees en die sedelike karakter van baie mense beskadig. Die talle kere wat ongeregverdigde metodes gebruik is om ‘n regverdigbare doel te bereik het gewetes doodgeskroei. Die herstel hiervan moet ‘n nasionale prioriteit wees. Dit kom nie vanself nie. Dit moet bestuur word.
Ek noem net ‘n paar stappe: die Regering moet die voorbeeld stel deur volledige eerlikheid in elke opsig, en hulle by akkoorde hou. Tweedens moet ouers spesiaal aangemoedig word om kinders se integriteit te ontwikkel - dit is ons toekoms. Derdens is godsdiens en kerkvastheid baie belangrik. Openbare televisie- en radiodienste se hoë sedelike standaarde moet gehandhaaf word of hulle moet gedwing word om dit te handhaaf. Elke gemeenskap moet sy eie gebruike en kultuur ontwikkel en toegelaat word om so sy eie gewyke en gemeenskapdissipline toe te pas.
Die VF steun hierdie onderwerp en ons sal saamwerk in die bereiking daarvan. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[This country of ours does not have a lot of physical war damage left. Yet the spirit and moral character of many people have been damaged. The many instances in which unjustified methods were used to achieve a justifiable objective deadened people’s consciences. The restoring of this must be a national priority. It will come of its own volition. It must be managed.
I shall mention just a few steps: Government must set the example by being totally honest in every respect and upholding agreements. Secondly, parents especially must be encouraged to develop their children’s integrity - they are our future. Thirdly, religion and attachment to the church are very important. National television and radio services must maintain high moral standards or they must be forced to maintain them. Every community must develop its own character and culture and must be allowed to apply its own practices and community discipline.
The FF supports this subject and we will co-operate to achieve this.]
Mr I S MFUNDISI: Madam Speaker, the moral fibre of South Africa is at its lowest ebb, and it is not difficult to find where the fault lies. The country comes from a past fraught with distrust, contempt for authority, disdain and outright disregard for the basic laws of life. In striving to restore morality, South Africans have to be tolerant of one another. They should accept each person as unique and worthy of a place under the sun. They should see in each person somebody created in the image of God, worthy of respect and deserving to be treated humanely in a dignified manner.
The restoration of morality can be enhanced by giving honour to all, doing to others as we would like them to do unto us. We can restore the moral fibre by cultivating trust, co-operation and goodwill. As people, we have to accept that people are unlike rivers that flow in the same direction depending on the topography of the location. Different opinions have to be respected.
Some of the evil things that we are stuck with are the aftereffects of the conduct of the past. Some people were brought up to know that anyone of a different skin colour should never be trusted, while others grew up preaching disregard for authority and all institutions that have to do with authority. Some people rose to high positions by jumping over the corpses of others.
High-ranking people in Government and administration never cease to boast about how they brought down past authority through mutiny, eavesdropping and in some cases blatant refusal to carry out lawful instructions. They are surprised when the work ethic and productivity are low. All these are the fruit of what was sowed in the past. Standing up and pontificating on how public servants are not productive is one thing, but getting them to do the work for the nation is another. Shakespeare said: ``Talkers are not good doers.’’
Religious institutions, as called upon by the Deputy President this afternoon, are also calling out like prophets of old. These places of worship are invariably empty as political leaders feel too important to be listening to one man or woman speaking from the pulpit without letting others talk. The church is ready to take all people on board if this has to do with the enhancement of moral standards. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr K M N GIGABA: Madam Speaker, I should like to thank the Deputy President for initiating this important debate. It is appropriate that we should, as society, persistently reflect on some of the tenets that should make up the basic feature of the democratic society we are creating, because the Constitution of such a democratic society must be a consequence of the reconstruction and development of both the material and the spiritual lives of our people.
Equally important is the need for the generation of the future - the very custodians of the future - to themselves deliberate on this all-important question. If we are to succeed in achieving our objectives, we must confront and change the old mores of society to address the political, socioeconomic and spiritual morass of that society. In societies driven by economic exploitation and inequalities, those that have care very little for the disadvantaged and vulnerable and instead deify selfishness and greed and put profits before people.
In such societies, moral values such as those to which we aspire, are elusive. Surely, we will all agree that the mammoth task of regenerating our moral values requires the creation of a new cadre, a new person and a new patriot that must epitomise this change. This new person must become a genuine patriot for the reconstruction and development of the socioeconomic and spiritual fibre of our society and an antipode of all that apartheid represented. Such a person necessarily possesses the moral values consonant with the new society that is being created. She, because she represents the best and most noble of values, refuses to condone wrong things, such as those we mentioned above. This is the morality of caring, the working people and the rural poor, and the women who are the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in society. Accordingly, the substance of the moral regeneration of our nation must be the reconstruction and development programme and the creation of real equality and justice.
This is a particularly mammoth challenge for the youth of our country who must now shoulder the responsibility of building and living in this future better society we are today battling to create. They, more than anyone else, should do this, because building the future requires that they are morally and psychologically prepared. It must be their belief that freedom and a better life constitute the divine destiny of their people. They must aspire to the best human ideals and values, and their ranks must be the grinding stone of the best youth in society. We raise this question fully conscious of the fact that the overwhelming majority of our youth are very moral.
The national liberation struggle occupied a moral highground among them, and for its success, they always volunteered to make enormous sacrifices, believing, as they did, that apartheid was both amoral and immoral. Because of their leading participation in the front ranks of the struggle, they were singularly targeted by the apartheid regime, seeking to destroy them materially and spiritually. A chain of laws and institutions, including Bantu education, were established to destroy their moral fibre and turn them into zombies with no intellectual, material and spiritual values to stand on, except the most perverted.
Accordingly, the moral question in South Africa is not separable from our past, present and future. The success of the consolidation of the democratic society depends on this very question of high moral standards and values. In an era of transition from the old society to the new, young people must receive special attention, particularly for the reason that they are the torchbearers of the new society. Everyone must pronounce their role in moulding great human beings among the ranks of the youth. This includes parents, teachers, leaders and even the media. Sadly, many are often found wanting. Moral renewal does not mean that all youth must be compelled to be religious. It only means that they must adopt and assimilate ethical values which are consonant with the ideal of a caring, nonracial, nonsexist, democratic and united society. Practically, each person must shoulder this burden of our moral renewal. In this effort, we who are young and who, together with Parks Makanhlana, fought for the creation of the new society, swear never to fail our nation. May his soul rest in peace and may his ideas strike even harder. [Applause.]
Dr M S MOGOBA: Madam Speaker, we welcome this debate which hopefully will help us to reflect on the state of our nation. We share the deep concern that we have become a nation which is on the slippery slope of moral decadence.
The basis of a moral society is a moral God. Without this important point of departure, a nation is like a ship sailing over rough seas without a compass. Secularism has led to the collapse of our moral system and has caused us to aspire to be ultramodern and to want to compete with all societies on things that are not essential, not basic and not a priority, such as pornography, abortion and the choice of sexual orientation. The shocking statistics on crime, violence, murder, armed robbery, rape, and child and woman abuse and molestation confirm, without a doubt, that we are suffering from a terminal moral disease.
No economy can develop if crime and violence are rampant. No investors will put their money in such a country. No country in the world has been able to develop by allowing senseless violence to dominate and by surrendering its power and freedom to criminals and thugs.
Grinding poverty is haunting us in the midst of obscene wealth, greed and corruption. There is even a proliferation of superfluous luxuries instead of the basic needs of the needy. Charles Birch’s pithy statement bears repetition: ``The rich must live more simply that the poor may simply live.’’
We entered the new South Africa on the crest of a wave of freedom. Unfortunately, that wave has thrust us deeper and deeper into a mania of freedom. We have, for instance, a culture of rights without responsibilities. This has created a monstrosity of a nation. We need to revive an ethic of hard work. In the past, we targeted apartheid and the apartheid regime. Now we are the Government. We are demonstrating against ourselves.
We must have a sense of ownership of this country and its Government. We must develop an ethic of sharing to counter greed and selfishness. We must share land, wealth and opportunities. If we hoard, there is not enough for all of us.
The churches and other religious institutions are the conscience of the nation. The voice of prophecy should be heard again. Otherwise, as a nation, we will perish. [Time expired.]
Mnr C AUCAMP: Mevrou die Speaker, vergun my net om ook eers my eie standpunt te stel. ‘n Hoë etiese moraal kan nie van buite afgedwing word nie. Dit kan nie eens uit die mens self kom nie. Ons weet dit is die werk van God deur sy Woord in die lewe van mense. Daarom is dit ook vir my van besondere betekenis dat hierdie debat plaasvind op 31 Oktober, Hervormingsdag, 2000.
Ons is hier besig met die taak van die staat en ons as openbare ampsbekleërs. My eerste oproep is dat ons deur voorbeeld en opregtheid en toewyding die morele standaard in ons land ophef. Kom ons los ‘n bietjie in hierdie Huis die gevry na die massa en wees ‘n slag eerlik, en mense sal weer na ons kan opsien. Die staat is nie die primêre handhawer van sedelike norme nie, maar hy moet die samelewing so orden dat mense rustig en stil tot eer van God kan lewe.
In dié verband moet ek sê dat ‘n eensydige klem, ook in die Grondwet, op die regte van die individu sonder inagneming van die verpligtinge van die individu ‘n teelaarde is vir losbandigheid. Verder lê die kern van ‘n gesonde morele peil in die bemagtiging van gemeenskappe en van instellings, en nie net van individue nie. Sentralisme ontmondig gemeenskappe en instellings. Vandaar die pleidooi van die AEB vir ‘n pluralistiese bestel waarin gemeenskappe, volke en instellings groter verantwoordelikheid neem vir hulle lewenspeil. Ek dink die tradisionele leiers is vir ons ‘n baie goeie voorbeeld daarvan, en ook die kerk as gemeenskapinstelling.
Daarom betreur ek die feit dat ons vandag in die pers, en in die besonder in die Afrikaanse pers, altyd die afwykende teologiese standpunte kry en dat die sekerheid van mense onder hulle weggeneem word. Verder werk maatskaplike omstandighede, armoede en morele peil negatief op mekaar in. Kom ons pak dit aan, kom ons pak die faktore aan wat dit aanmoedig en laat ons almal saamwerk om nie net lippediens te bewys nie, soos miskien ook vandag baie in hierdie debat gebeur het, maar om werklik die morele peil van ons land en mense op te hef. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, allow me first of all to express my own point of view. High ethical morals cannot be enforced from outside. They cannot even come from within mankind. We know that this is the work of God through his Word in the lives of people. Therefore, I also find it extremely significant that this debate is taking place on 31 October, Reformation Day, 2000.
We are dealing here with the task of the state and ourselves as public office-bearers. My first appeal is that we uplift the moral standard of our country by way of example and honesty and dedication. Let us in this House for a moment cease courting the masses and be honest for a change, and people will again be able to look up to us. The state is not the primary upholder of moral norms, but it must order society in such a way that people can live peacefully and quietly in honour of God.
In this regard I have to say that a one-sided accentuation, also in the Constitution, of the rights of the individual, without taking into consideration the obligations of the individual, is a breeding ground for licentiousness. Furthermore, the key to a sound moral standard lies in the empowerment of communities and institutions, and not only individuals. Centralism disempowers communities and institutions. Hence the plea from the AEB for a pluralistic dispensation in which communities, peoples and institutions take greater responsibility for their living standards. I think the traditional leaders are a very good example of this for us, and also the church as a community institution.
Therefore, I lament the fact that today in the press, and in the Afrikaans press in particular, one always has divergent theological points of view and the certainty of people is thus taken away from them. Furthermore, social conditions, poverty and moral standards affect one another negatively. Let us address this, let us address the factors that encourage this and let us all work together so as not only to pay lip service, as may have happened frequently in this debate today, but to truly uplift the moral standard of our country and our people.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Chairperson, Deputy President and hon members, it is part of South Africa’s good fortune that our President and Deputy President play a leading role in our quest for morality in our country. We send our appreciation to them. Our gratitude goes, as well, to the hon members of this House for their contribution, both directly and indirectly, to today’s debate.
Indeed, the moral trajectory we chart as a nation should be dependent neither on racial nor on cultural lines, not on ideological nor, yet, on political beliefs, not on class and, certainly, not on economic positions. In the words of the famous song by the O’Jays, ``We’re all in this thing together. We’ve got to work it out. We’ve got to work it out.’’
Such is the gravity, such are the implications, such is the magnitude and such are the consequences of ethical indifference that our economic standing, internationally, can be adversely affected. A few weeks ago, business publications reported on the ranking of nations in terms of corruption. It is instructive to note the emphasis they placed on the correlation between domestic and foreign investment in a country and perceptions, valid or unfounded, of corruption.
It is thus in the interests of all South Africans that we be an honest and a caring nation and that we become hardworking people, respectful of one another, and fight crime. There is a time in the history of societies when the common good has to precede all else. I believe that that time is here for us in South Africa. I believe that history has presented us, as leaders, with an opportunity to collectively make a mark on the moral landscape of our country.
Next year we shall be launching the moral regeneration movement. The launch is planned to be a national event, bringing together all sectors of our society in a collective pledge to build moral values and a moral society. We have already consulted a cross section of South African leaders, businesspeople, religious organisations, NGOs, CBOs, academics, unions, the media and other sectors.
The process of consultation continues apace with the Department of Education, the SABC and the South African Chapter of the African Renaissance as the co-ordinating committee. The SABC’s active involvement is particularly gratifying, for, as the Deputy President has observed, the media have no small role in the construction of ethical and moral value systems.
Our public and private media organisations have a patriotic duty, as do virtually all individuals and organisations, to promote a social morality whose ultimate goal is a nation of dignified people. We have produced a report on moral regeneration. It is a philosophical exposition including, as it does, the economic aspects of morality. Of course, it is taken for granted that, in today’s world, one cannot really ignore the influences of globalisation and poverty on people’s ethics and behaviour.
A business plan is in its final stages. Resources have to be mustered for this historic mission, viz the launching of this movement. We ask for hon members’ unstinting support and other forms of encouragement. As individual political parties, we have to encourage our constituencies to continually debate and act upon issues of moral regeneration. We shall soon be presented with an opportunity to sign a moral code of conduct as our own pledge to morality and good ethics. Let us go on to ask our constituencies to support the unfolding of the moral regeneration movement by attending the various youth camps, workshops, debates, seminars and conferences that will be taking place in order to promote this movement.
The ANC-led Government has a proud tradition of moral and ethical practice. The most seminal document in the history of South Africa, the Freedom Charter, is a document that is based very heavily on morality. Its offshoot, our highly prized Constitution, is universally acclaimed as a moral legal framework. After our experience of decades of moral bankruptcy under apartheid, all the parties in this House will attest to the critical need for a new soul and morality for our nation.
The ANC’s Commission for Religious Affairs further demonstrates the majority party’s commitment to the practical infusion of morality into our social transformation agenda. As it addresses matters of spirituality, it deals with the crux of morality, namely the development of a mindset and a consciousness that improves people’s conduct.
I would like to address one or two issues that were raised by hon members. The hon Cassim said that we should not moralise from the top to the bottom. He is quite right, because certainly we are not moralising. Moralising implies a better-than-thou attitude, talking down to people on matters of morality.
However, ours is a call to everybody, every sector in our community, a call and a challenge to fight the scourge of the degradation of the moral fibre together. I also agree that any discourse on morality cannot take place in a vacuum. Material conditions are central to any such discussion.
It was very interesting to listen to the hon Van Schalkwyk who spoke of statistics on child abuse and so forth. Obviously those statistics have a role to play, but the danger is that they can be easily manipulated to suit people’s agendas. It is also very important to make sure that the statistics one uses, have a very sound basis.
I am certainly not going to condone criminal actions, but I want to remind the hon member that crime in South Africa did not start in 1994. We inherited a rotten system which, as a matter of fact, is responsible for the moral decadence that we experience in our country today. That is why we have decided that, as the ANC-led Government, we are going to take up that challenge head-on.
That is why we are very transparent, we do not sweep under the carpet evils that afflict society. The wonderful hon Mr Jankielsohn also spoke very interestingly about a number of statistics. That is right, but what I find very interesting is that he gave the impression that morality only has to do with violent crime.
Yes, violent crimes are certainly immoral but, of course, he did not say anything about racism, about white-collar crimes, about cheating and underpaying workers. He did not say anything about bribery, about selfishness and individualism, he did not say anything about the manipulation of the media, he did not say anything about pyramid schemes. Very interesting. [Interjections.]
I was not going to make any reference to the HIV/Aids debate in this particular instance, but unfortunately I have to respond to what the hon gentleman said. Hon members will agree with me that it is very easy to be in the opposition because one has the opportunity and the right to engage in irresponsible, wild and misleading vote-catching election gimmicks. One has that opportunity. [Interjections.]
Of course, some of these empty promises to the voters are financially unsound. [Interjections.] That is why I say that it is very irresponsible of opposition parties to make such wild promises to people, knowing quite well that they are not going to be in a position to deliver on those promises.
I am not going to respond to my good friend the hon Rev Meshoe, because he was his usual predictable self. I do not think it is worth responding to what he said, save to say that none of us in this House or outside this House can arrogate to himself or herself the right to be the tsar on morality. None of us has the right to do that.
My good friend the hon Mrs Sono was saying nothing but mouthing her master’s pronouncements that are very well known. The hon Gen Viljoen said something about the importance of rebuilding individual characters. That is correct. But I would like to go further and say that we also need to collectively build a society or create an environment in society which allows zero tolerance of any socially destructive or antisocial behaviour.
Various organs and sectors of society have their own responsibilities, such as government, for instance. Government has the authority to punish perpetrators and criminals. Religious institutions and other socialising institutions such as schools and families have the right to change the behaviour of people through persuasion, by socialisation, conscientisation, etc. Parents, unions, businesses and academics, jointly and individually, also have a very important role to play.
Once again, I would like to thank the hon the Deputy President for having given us the opportunity to have this debate today. [Applause.]
Debate concluded. The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order, hon members! I notice a discussion going on across the floor there. I do not know what it is that is so exciting this afternoon.
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: He wants to cross the floor.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: He wants to cross the floor? I do not know which member wants to cross the floor. [Interjections.] Order! Order!
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: But we are trying to prevent it.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon Minister! I am going to give you a chance right now with the hon Marthinus van Schalkwyk at the podium.
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: There is no justice in what the Minister has said. [Laughter.]
REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Introduction) The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, hon members, the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill represents an important step in our economic transition from an isolated past to a more global and dynamic future.
This Bill is the second legislative instalment of the tax proposals tabled in the 2000 Budget. It is one of the steps we are taking to thrive in the new economic environment. The source-plus basis of taxation is a relic of the colonial past. The change to a residence-minus system gives our sovereignty real meaning, and it secures our tax base.
However, like all changes, it has sparked some unhappiness. Partly, this was because we were up against aggressive avoidance, made possible in the old system. But partly, too, there were many genuine concerns articulated by groups in our society.
Before I go any further, allow me to thank all those who have participated in this wide consultative process - groups which range from the Association of Black Accountants of SA, the Association of Unit Trusts of SA, Cosatu, the JSE, the Life Offices’ Association of Southern Africa and the SA Association of Mining Contractors, to name but a few.
Allow me also to sincerely thank the Portfolio Committee on Finance, both for investing time and work in understanding this Bill and for facilitating dialogue about it. The fruits of this engagement are, we hope, reflected in the Bill.
We have adopted legislation which we believe is both pragmatic in terms of attracting investment, and yet, at the same time, constructs a barrier to avoidance. The Government’s overall policy, as we spelt out again yesterday, is to broaden our tax base and so allow us the latitude to lower taxes. We also need, though, to encourage South Africans and international companies to use South Africa as a base for their operations and expand globally. We believe that this Bill is consistent with both these principles.
Allow me to touch on three areas of the new residence base of taxation: firstly, the reason for changing the system; secondly, some of the factors taken into consideration in drafting this Bill; and, thirdly, some of the main features of the new system.
Let me first discuss the reasons for changing. The current source basis of taxation originates from the time of colonialism and in essence narrows a country’s taxing rights to income that is derived from inside the borders of the country. But as exchange controls have been relaxed, and as our citizens and businesses have engaged more with the world, this type of taxation has become increasingly inadequate.
Why? Firstly, because it does not offer our fiscus sufficient protection against international transactions whereby profits are diverted from our local tax base. Secondly, it does not deal effectively with e-commerce transactions and, thirdly, most of our trading partners have moved to a residence basis of taxation. Most importantly, moving to a residence basis widens the tax base, providing room for further tax reductions.
Regarding factors considered in the new Bill, I have spoken about the broad consultative process we engaged in over this proposed law. It involves meetings, workshops, interaction on the SARS website and parliamentary hearings. We believe this legislative package represents a balance of differing interest in our country, and also keeps in mind the unique circumstances of South Africa.
Some of the factors we have taken into consideration are the potential revenue that may flow from the new system; the economic impact of this transition; South Africa’s international competitiveness; SARS’s administrative capacity; and the international legitimacy of the proposed system.
The legislation we have put on the table is testimony to the earnestness with which we have considered objections. The proposed law imputes, in other words, assumes, foreign income in only a limited number of instances.
How will this work? Firstly, the law rests on the definition of a resident. Who is a resident becomes critical, as residents will be taxed on their worldwide income. Nonresidents will remain taxable only on their South African sourced income. Residents will be defined in terms of the well established international rule of a person who is ``ordinarily resident’’, and a time rule in certain circumstances. In the case of companies, residency will be determined on the basis of incorporation or effective management.
The proposed system will have its biggest impact on the taxation of controlled foreign entities. An entity such as this is a foreign company controlled by South African residents. In such instances, the Bill provides that the income of such an entity can be included in the income of the South Africa residents. However, income will not be imputed if the profits were generated in a country that taxes income at a rate of at least 27% on a similar basis to South Africa.
Moreover, even if the income is generated in a relatively low-tax country, it will only be taxed on its distribution to South Africa in the form of foreign dividends. But we will tax certain passive income, such as interest, rental, royalties, etc, as well as income that is diverted away from South Africa through the system of transfer pricing. We believe that transfer pricing is possibly one of the most dishonest and manipulative ways of eluding tax. It is also a less than candid way of treating customers. One of the main targets of the Bill is precisely such transfer pricing practices.
Residents who operate businesses abroad in their personal capacity will be taxed in South Africa, unless their income is earned in a country with similar taxation to South Africa and at a rate of at least 27%. Income of South Africans who earn money abroad will also be taxed in South Africa, but full credit will be allowed for foreign tax paid. However, there are important exclusions to this rule. We listened carefully to those who were concerned about the issue of South Africans working abroad on contracts. This particularly affects construction workers and engineers. They were concerned that taxing these workers could jeopardise the international competitiveness of South Africans involved in offshore projects.
To accommodate these concerns, the Bill now proposes that any resident working outside South Africa for a period exceeding 183 days in total during a 12-month period will not be subject to tax on that income. However, residents must also be outside South Africa for a continuous period of 60 days within that year to qualify for this exemption.
We are mindful that our country needs foreign direct investment. We also believe that our country offers an attractive base from which to do business in the region, the continent and the world. For this reason, international companies who wish to establish their headquaters in South Africa will be subject to several exemptions. These include not being taxed on their foreign dividends; not being taxed on income of their Controlled Foreign Entities; not being subject to secondary tax on dividends that flow through as a conduit to its foreign shareholders; and not being taxed on other sources of foreign income. But companies qualifying for these exemptions must be completely foreign owned and 90% of assets must be held offshore.
There are other exemptions in the Bill too, specifically for bona fide projects run by South African companies in, for example, the SADC region where the host country offers tax incentives. Lastly, the Bill is also changed to accommodate the increased access to US markets that some of our exporters will realise in terms of the African Growth and Opportunities Act.
Taxes are always a source of unhappiness for those on whom they are imposed. A big change such as the rebasing from source to residence clearly made some people very unhappy. We hope now that through engagement we have made more people less unhappy. Happiness itself, though, is not a function of tax policy.
We have delivered on our promise to cut both corporate and individual rates. We will continue to deliver on that promise because we believe it is good for the economy, for our citizens and for our companies.
Chairperson, I hereby introduce the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill and its attached memorandum. [Applause.]
Bill, together with the introductory speech, referred to the Portfolio Committee on Finance for consideration and report.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON DIRECTORATE OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS BILL
Order disposed of without debate.
Report adopted. NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF JUSTICE: Chairperson, Deputy President and hon members, by means of the Bill before this House we are seeking to create the Directorate of Special Operations, popularly known as the Scorpions.
We are deliberately and purposefully creating a highly skilled, highly competent and unique unit to complement our existing law-enforcement agencies, as part of our concerted effort to combat crime and to ensure that criminals meet with the full force of the law. The prey of these Scorpions will not be spiders and insects, but rather the plague of organised criminals and terrorists who have become the scourge of our young democracy and who, by the very nature of their criminal activities, are remorselessly undermining and even destroying those fundamental rights which we have struggled so hard to achieve. The principal objective of the Scorpions will be to inject into these criminals the venom of criminal law to attack and paralyse the nervous system of organised crime and terrorism as effectively and efficiently as possible. The Directorate of Special Operations will be unique in the sense that it will form part of the prosecuting authority. It will provide it with the finely tuned investigative capacity which will focus on prioritised criminal offences and conduct, with the overriding objective of instituting appropriate proceedings against the perpetrators involved in such activities.
The directorate’s activities will relate firstly to offences or any criminal or unlawful activities committed in an organised fashion and, secondly, to other offences or categories of offences as determined by the President in his capacity as head of state. The directorate’s aims will be in relation to these matters, to conduct the necessary investigations to gather, keep and analyse information, and, where appropriate, to institute criminal proceedings against the perpetrators in question.
The directorate will be headed by a Deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions, who will perform his or her powers and functions subject to the control and direction of the National Director of Public Prosecutions. The head of the directorate will be assisted by the following persons: investigating directors who are directors of public prosecutions appointed to the directorate; prosecutors, including deputy directors of public prosecutions; special investigators, this being a newly created category of persons to be appointed in terms of the Bill; persons who are seconded to the directorate; and other persons whose services are obtained by the directorate.
It is important to note that the Bill makes provision that the existing investigating directorates of the prosecuting authority, namely the Directorates for Serious Offences, Organised Crime and Corruption, will, upon the commencement of this legislation, become part of the Directorate of Special Operations. The proclamations issued in respect of those directorates will be deemed to have been issued in respect of the Directorate of Special Operations.
The Directorate of Special Operations will, therefore, have a clearly defined mandate right from the word go, so to speak. This mandate will, of course, be found in the new section 7(1)(a), and the proclamations which I have just referred to. It is common cause that we are passing this legislation in order to provide a legal framework for the Directorate of Special Operations, which was launched in Guguletu in September 1999.
We have had the benefit, in considering this legislation, of being able to look back at the experience of the functioning of the directorate in just more than one year. We realise that one cannot, on paper, foresee all the difficulties that might arise in practice. Neither can we hope to solve all possible problem areas through legislation. The successful application of this legislation, and the functioning of the directorate of special operations will largely depend on those entrusted with the execution thereof.
The directorate will rely on full partnership with communities, the national prosecuting authority, the SA Police and the National Intelligence Agency. The Bill makes provision for the establishment of a ministerial co- ordinating committee comprising the Ministers responsible for the administration of justice, who is the chairperson thereof, correctional services, defence, intelligence services, safety and security and any other Minister designated by the President from time to time.
The principle function of the committee is to co-ordinate the activities of the Directorate of Special Operations and those of other government institutions involved in the investigation of crime. It will be the task of this committee to determine policy guidelines in respect of the functioning of the Directorate of Special Operations, to determine procedures to co- ordinate the activities of the directorate and other relevant government institutions, and to determine, when necessary, the responsibility of the directorate in respect of specific matters and the further procedures to be followed for the referral or assigning of any investigation to the directorate.
The successful operation of the directorate will largely depend on the levels of skills, commitment and competence of the special investigators. Two factors are essential in order to ensure that we achieve the necessary degree of excellence in this regard. Firstly, the strictest recruitment and vetting procedures must be used to ensure that we recruit special investigators of a high calibre, persons with flawless integrity who are capable of performing their functions without fear or favour.
Candidates for appointment will be properly vetted in order to establish their proficiency and competence for the functions they will carry out, their commitment to the Constitution of the Republic and loyalty to the Republic, their foreign travels and contacts, drug use, financial obligations, hobbies and other related issues. It will, furthermore, include intensive interviews, psychometric tests, medical tests and polygraph tests.
The Bill also makes provision in the proposed new section 19B for repeated security screening of special investigators, and if a security clearance certificate of a special investigator is withdrawn, he or she must be discharged from office. There is no discretion involved.
The second factor entails that we must ensure that persons with the proper public personal profiles aspire to appointment as special investigators. Furthermore, once we have succeeded in appointing the best of the best, once we have established this core of highly skilled and competent special investigators, we must ensure that we retain their services. We must ensure that their remuneration packages are commensurate with the degree of skills, competence and commitment required of them, and that their other conditions of service are conducive to a sound labour environment.
At the same time, it is important for the administration to ensure that the disparity between the packages of members of the SA Police and the Scorpions does not become or remain so large that it saps the morale of the members of the one law enforcement agency and undermines the very purpose of the establishment of the Scorpions. The President of the Republic, in his speech in this House, on 25 June 1999, indeed did say that the conditions of service of police officials should be reviewed and improved. This process has yet to be completed.
I believe that I cannot overemphasise the importance of the common denominator which is central to the directorate of special operations and all other institutions which may contribute, in one way or another, to its successful functioning, namely the combating of the crimes falling within the range of matters in respect of which we are creating the directorate. This is underscored by the fact that this legislation, I believe, carries the support of all parties in this House.
I am particularly appreciative of the hard work which the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development has put into this legislation. Given the amount of publicity, both positive and negative, which the directorate has elicited prior to and even subsequent to the introduction of this Bill, and the importance of the subject matter in question, the committee was confronted with a daunting task in considering this legislation.
The committee also carefully considered the issue of constitutionality that was raised on some aspects of the Bill and obtained a legal opinion from the Chief State Law Advisor in which he expressed the view that the Bill is constitutionally sound. In my view, the committee has produced a balanced piece of legislation which carefully addresses all possible areas of concern. The committee deserves to be commended for its work in this regard.
I have been assured by the National Director of Public Prosecutions that the vision of the directorate is to be a world class unit that is loved by the people, feared by criminals and respected by its peers. In this regard, particularly, I lend them my total and unstinting support. [Applause.] Adv J H DE LANGE: Mr Chairperson, Deputy President, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, I rise on behalf of the ANC in unconditional support of these amendments to the National Prosecuting Authority Act, a Bill which commenced its life in Parliament as the Directorate of Special Operations Bill.
I am particularly happy to stand here today and say to members that this Bill has been passed with the unanimous support of all the parties that participated in the committee. I think it is a very important aspect that we were able, as a Parliament, to sit down, work out where the differences are and agree on a piece of legislation which is very important in our fight against crime.
It is very important that we do not politicise the issue of, particularly, crime in this country and that we can send out one clear message to the criminals in this country that we will keep on chasing them, keep on hunting them down, not haunting them - if we can haunt them, that will be good, but if we can hunt them down, that will also be good - and get rid of them as soon as we possibly can in this country.
I particularly think it is important that we mentioned the milestone for the Department of Justice. It is important to realise, when we pass these two Bills, that it is the 75th piece of legislation the Department of Justice is passing through Parliament since 1994, 75 pieces of legislation that the department has brought here. Those metrics of legislative enactment that formed the 75 pieces of legislation have irreversibly transformed our Department of Justice.
There are still hiccups - there are still problems with implementation, with funding and all those matters - but that should never detract from the immense amount of work that both our Ministers, who have headed that department, namely, Minister Maduna and Minister Omar, have put in to transform what was one of the cornerstones of apartheid in this country. Many South Africans, particularly black South Africans, felt the sharp end of the apartheid stick through the Department of Justice, and I think that has changed forever and irreversibly and we owe a debt of gratitude particularly to our two Ministers that oversaw this process.
Let me also start with a few `thank yous’ for the people who have actually put this legislation, the Scorpions legislation, before Parliament. Firstly, we have to thank the interministerial committee. I think we speak on behalf of everyone whom we say that they established the Scorpions structure, they have overseen it in its infancy and guided it and have actually drafted legislation to formalise that structure in Parliament. This structure, as members know, has been headed by our President who has been actively involved, and our two Ministers, Tshwete and Maduna, have been in the forefront of being the midwives of this institution in our country. I think we owe all of them a debt of gratitude. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Midwives, Johnny?
Adv J H DE LANGE: Midwives, Minister.
Secondly, I want to thank the various departments that have been involved - Safety and Security, Intelligence, as well as the Department of Justice, and in particular the prosecuting authority that is headed by Mr Bulelani Ngcuka. I want to particularly recognise him - I see he is in the House today. As hon members know, I think that the prosecuting authority, since we established it a year or two ago, has become one of the real success stories in the country, particularly under the able leadership of Mr Ngcuka. It is very important that we have placed the Scorpions, which is the structure with which we hope to really fight the most prioritised national crimes in our country, under his able guidance. I wish him well and I want to congratulate him and his staff on what they have achieved so far.
I also want to thank the Department of Justice, particularly Adv Johan de Lange, who has worked tirelessly to make sure that we have this piece of legislation. That De Lange is the intelligent one. I see all hon members are smiling. I am not congratulating myself.
Lastly, I also want to thank the two justice committees, particularly my counterpart in the other House, Mr Jabu Mahlangu. We dealt with this Bill jointly, and they have contributed as much as our committee has and we want to thank them for that.
As I have said, I really want to thank the leaders of the opposition parties in both committees. There were some elements in the media who were very positive towards this legislation, but some of them, for example as shown in one of the Pretoria News editorials, were very antagonistic towards this legislation. From the outset I was very worried that this issue would become politicised, but I can assure this House that not one of the political parties in the committees tried to make a political football out of this. We sat and looked at this carefully and as mature people, and we were able to reach consensus. I really want to thank the leaders of the opposition parties for the way they have conducted themselves in this matter.
Just a little bit about the history of the Bill. As hon members recall, this legislation has gone an unusual route in the sense that we have created the institution administratively first, and we are now formalising it through legislation. This flowed from a need expressed by our President in his first speech in Parliament when he was appointed, in which he indicated that a decision had been taken to create a specialised unit, and that this specialised unit would concentrate particularly on national priority crimes. Thereafter, administratively, with the staff and resources of the three departments I have mentioned, the Scorpions got off the ground and I think they have achieved some very important successes.
They then drafted the legislation and the legislation that reached us created a stand-alone institution separate from those three departments I mentioned. We were worried about this as a committee, across party lines. We were worried that it created certain artificialities, that it was difficult to understand with regard to the lines of accountability and where the control and supervision would be within this structure of the Scorpions. We sat down and called in the three departments and after hearing them thoroughly, after a whole day of debate and inputs, we then sat down as a committee and worked out that the best way to deal with this was not to do it as a stand-alone structure, but actually to establish the Scorpions within one of the structures that already existed in terms of the Constitution.
Because the Scorpions has been created on a troika principle, that is, that it should consist of intelligence capacity, investigative capacity and prosecuting capacity, with the prosecuting authority driving that process, it was very obvious to us that what needed to be done was that this Directorate of Special Operations had to be established within the prosecuting authority. Once we had taken that decision and spoken to the Minister and they were happy to do that, many of the problems of control, supervision and accountability fell away, because all those aspects are very clearly spelt out in the Constitution - that the Minister of Justice has the final responsibility for the prosecuting authority and that the National Director is in charge.
In the previous Bill we passed on the National Prosecuting Authority the lines of control were clearly drawn. All we had to do was create an investigating capacity within the national prosecuting authority. Once we had done that, and once we had provided for a separate budget for the Scorpions, driven by an accounting officer within the Scorpions, many of the problems that we had and many of the complaints that we heard, particularly through the media, seemed to fall away.
It was actually amazing that, after the first week of dealing with the legislation, there were no further adverse comments in the media about this matter. I hope now that we have passed the Bill, and unanimously, there are going to be some positive comments in the media. That, of course, is wishful thinking sometimes. Let us just hope that that will happen.
I am not going to deal with the different aspects of the Bill. I think the Minister has dealt with that and I should, at least, leave something for the other members to deal with. I do want to mention that some issues of constitutionality were raised. We looked at the issue of constitutionality very carefully and, as the Minister pointed out, we received opinions in this regard.
We are clearly of the view that nowhere in our Constitution does it state that the investigating powers that have to be exercised in this country should be the exclusive preserve of the policing authority. In fact, if that were the case, many pieces of legislation in this country would be unconstitutional. The TRC has its own investigating capacity, the Public Protector has its own investigating capacity, the so-called Heath Commission has its own investigating capacity, Customs has its own capacity, and Environmental Affairs has its own investigating capacity.
Clearly, at no stage did we ever intend to pass a Constitution that gave that capacity solely to the policing authority of this country. We found nothing in the Constitution that would suggest that to be so. In fact, to tell the truth, no one came and seriously gave us such an opinion, either in the committee or in writing.
Secondly, there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits us from giving a limited investigating capacity, in very specialised areas of crime fighting, to the prosecuting authority. So, in respect of both those principles, we have found no prohibition in our Constitution which does not allow us to give the prosecuting authority the kind of powers that we have given it in this regard.
It seems to me that the next phase now is probably the most important one, and that is implementation. It is now left to the Minister, and particularly to Mr Ngcuka in the prosecuting authority, to try to get the structure off the ground, in line with this legislation, as quickly as they possibly can.
I want to point out - I think I am doing this on behalf of all parties - that sometimes there is a big misunderstanding in the psyche of our nation that crimes somehow just resolve themselves. In other words, one just puts people in prison and that is the end of the story. That is how one fights crime.
In any civilised society, one can only convict people on credible evidence. Evidence is not something that one can write on a piece of paper or suck from one’s thumb. Evidence is something that people have to provide to our police force.
It is very important for us to get the message across to our people that we can only really fight crime, and the Scorpions can only really be successful, if ordinary people in South Africa stand up and turn their backs on crime, because the authorities in this country can only fight crime if there is credible evidence on which they can, firstly, arrest people; secondly, refuse them bail, and, thirdly, convict them. Only then does the issue of sentencing come in, once we have a conviction. All that can only happen based on credible evidence.
Now that we have the Scorpions, we want to call on the public and tell them that they can show trust in this structure. The Minister has shown how we are creating special screening mechanisms so that the wrong people do not get into that structure. We call on the people of South Africa to bring evidence forward, particularly on organised crime, so that we can put these criminals away once and for all, and live that better life that we want to live. [Applause.]
Dr J T DELPORT: Mr Chairperson, I rise, on behalf of the DP and the DA, to support this Bill. I hope the fact that the opposition supports the Bill will not cause concern in the ranks of the majority party, so that they doubt their own judgment in introducing it. We do support the Bill and want to work with the Government in this respect.
I also wish to address the broader context which made it a necessity to have this Bill. But, first of all, I want to add the name of the chairperson, Mr Johnny de Lange, to the list of people who should be thanked. He has omitted his own name from the list, and yet he played an extraordinarily important role in the formulation of what we have before us today. As he pointed out in the portfolio committee, this is a stand-alone Bill. He was the first one to point out a number of unacceptable features. He was the one who came up with the idea of fitting it into the existing legislation, as we are doing today.
The Directorate of Special Operations is a very special tool that has been given to South Africa. They are an elite organisation called the Scorpions. I want to wish them well today. But I want to call upon them to earn the name ``Scorpions’’. They have to be true to their name. Secondly, they must earn the reputation of being scrupulously fair, disciplined, diligent and efficient. One cannot be made great, one has to achieve greatness.
I think that this is a first in Africa, in South Africa and maybe in the world, to a certain extent. They have a very special task. Earlier on in the deliberations we agreed that the first task and the main objective would be to fight organised crime, and between the chairperson and myself we agreed that there is a fine line: If one kicked one’s dog, that may be a crime, but if one kicked all of one’s dogs, that may be an organised crime. [Laughter.]
I also want to call on the Ministers involved to use the Scorpions with discretion, to earn that trust of the public. I want to call on the public to give the Scorpions a fair chance to prove their value and their worth, as well as to support them by coming forward with the necessary evidence. The Scorpions will have to be managed carefully, and should not cause friction between themselves and the SA Police Service, or create an aura of arrogance that they are the better people. They need to work with the police. After all, my number one hero is still the bobby on the beat who has never claimed to be a hero, but day after day does his duty.
I want to point out one aspect of an existing section that we have not dealt with. Section 28(8) says that in the interrogation, a person investigated -
… shall not be entitled to refuse to answer any question upon the ground that the answer would tend to expose him or her to a criminal charge.
This will have to be judicially managed by the unit. I have no doubt that the rule against self-incrimination is so strong that, despite this, whatever a person says in such an interrogation could not be validly tendered as evidence against such a person in court.
Ek wil graag iets meer sê oor die wye konteks. Ons gaan deur ‘n moeilike tyd ten opsigte van misdaad. Ons het onlangs by die regscolloquium gehoor dat minder as 10% - ek dink dit is 8% - van alle klagtes wat ingedien word uiteindelik in ‘n skuldigbevinding eindig. Dit is te laag! As ons in hierdie land net 8% van alle misdade uiteindelik op die punt bring waar die misdadiger aan die man gebring word, stuur ons af op ‘n ramp. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[I would like to say something about the broader context. We are going through a difficult time with regard to crime. We recently heard at the law colloquium that less than 10% - I think it is 8% - of all charges laid eventually end in a conviction. This is too low! If we in this country only bring 8% of all crimes to a point where the offender is brought to book, we are heading for a disaster.]
May I refer to what is said in the recent edition of the Nedbank Crime Index. During 1999 the levels of reported crime increased at a faster rate than in any other year since 1994. Violent crime increased by almost 10% between 1998 and 1999 - more than any other crime category. During 1999 every third crime reported to the police involved violence or the threat of violence. The question is: Is South Africa losing the battle against violent crime? According to the survey, between 1994 and 1999, violent crime increased by 21,6%.
Dan verwys ek na Die Burger van vandag wat sê nagenoeg 900 Suid-Afrikaanse boere het nou reeds sedert die politieke transformasie in 1994 in plaasaanvalle landwyd gesterf. Negehonderd in meer as tweeduisend aanvalle! Dit beteken dat 274 boere per elke 100 000 jaarliks koelbloedig vermoor word. Tweehonderd vier-en-sewentig per 100 000, en weet agb lede wie kom tweede? Dit is net so ontstellend.
Wetstoepassers word vermoor teen ‘n jaarlikse koers van 153 per 100 000. Vir elke 100 000 wetstoepassers in Suid-Afrika word 153 per jaar vermoor.
Vergelyk dit nou met die wêreldgemiddeld, waarvolgens 5 uit elke 100 000 mense vermoor word per jaar. In die VSA is dit 6 uit elke 100 000. Hier praat ons van 274 boere per 100 000 per jaar en 153 wetstoepassers per 100
- Dit is te hoog.
Ek wil die Minister die onderneming gee dat hy op die volle samewerking van die hele Huis kan reken as ons nou as ‘n tweede stap nadat ons nou hierdie eerste stap doen, het met ‘n daadwerklike plan teen geweldsmisdade kom. Ons kan nie toelaat dat ‘n boerebevolking - boere met ‘n kleinletter, ``farmers’’- koelbloedig uitgeroei word in Suid-Afrika.
Ek het pas weer die inligting gekry van ‘n boer wat vermoor is. Volgens mediese getuienis is hy ses uur lank gemartel. Al sy vinger- en toonnaels is uitgetrek met warm tange. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dit is dinge wat skokkend is! Dit is dinge wat roep om die Minister se aandag. Dit is sake waarin ons die Minister wil help om werklik met ‘n plan te kom teen alle vorms van geweld, en ek noem voorbeelde wat blykbaar nie oral gewild is nie. Ek kan ander voorbeelde ook noem. Ons kan soveel gevalle van gewelddadige, wrede verkragting opnoem. Is ons dan werklik die geweldshoofstad van die wêreld? Ek wil pleit by die Minister. Ons het ‘n eerste belangrike stap gedoen. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[I would now like to refer to Die Burger of yesterday which says that approximately 900 South African farmers have already died in farm attacks countrywide since the political transformation in 1994. Nine hundred in more than 2 000 attacks! This means that 274 farmers per 100 000 are murdered in cold blood annually. Two hundred and seventy-four per 100 000, and do hon members know who comes second? That is just as upsetting. Law- enforcement officers are murdered at an annual rate of 153 per 100 000. For each 100 000 law-enforcement officers in South Africa, 153 are murdered annually.
Now compare that with the world average, in terms of which 5 out of every 100 000 people are murdered annually. In the USA it is 6 out of every 100
- Here we are talking about 274 farmers per 100 000 annually and 153 law- enforcement officers per 100 000. That is too high.
I want to give the Minister the undertaking that he can count on the full co-operation of the entire House if, as a second step after we have taken this first step, we produce a decisive plan against violent crimes. We cannot allow a farming population to be cold-bloodedly eradicated in South Africa. I recently again received information about a farmer who was murdered. According to medical evidence he was tortured for six hours. All his fingernails and toenails were pulled out with hot pliers. [Interjections.] These are things which are shocking! These are things which cry out for the Minister’s attention. These are issues with which we want to assist the Minister in truly producing a plan against all forms of violence, and I am mentioning examples which are apparently not popular everywhere. I could also mention other examples. We could mention so many instances of violent, cruel rape. Are we then truly the violence capital of the world? I want to appeal to the Minister. We have taken an important first step.]
We have given the hon the Minister the tools to fight organised crime and what we call ``white-collar crime’’. Let us now come with a plan that will work, a plan to fight violence in South Africa. We promise the Minister our support. [Applause.]
Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, Ministers, hon members, the Bill before us today comes at a time when South Africa is faced with a plague of violence and crime. Criminals are becoming more and more sophisticated and leave no stone unturned to reach their nefarious goals. Our normal police force agencies have perhaps reached the limits of their capacity to combat crime, lawlessness and corruption - a monster that needs to be rooted out by force. Now is the time for the Scorpions to act.
I think any government would welcome any elite force such as the Scorpions to combat crime. Such a force will have a unique style and method of operation as it is not a law enforcement agency that is identical to the SA Police Service. It will operate in terms of the legislation that we are debating here today and will fall under the jurisdiction of the national prosecuting authority.
Another factor that should be taken into account is that the Scorpions will have guidelines setting out the scope of their work. They will investigate cases stipulated in their work guidelines, so as not to clash with the functions of existing bodies such as the SA Police. Whether it will work in practice remains to be seen.
In general, the IFP supports the idea of an elite force in the crucial fight against all forms of crime, particularly sophisticated syndicate crimes. However, we should not lose sight of the practical problems that have resulted and will, in future, result from the creation of the Directorate of Special Operations, the so-called Scorpions.
These problems are related to the fragmentation of law enforcement agencies in South Africa, jurisdictional uncertainty and conflict between the SAPS and other law enforcement agencies, such as the Scorpions, and duplication of effort in a situation where we have scarce resources. It is, therefore, vital that the interministerial co-ordinating committee, consisting of the Ministers of Justice, Correctional Services, Defence, Intelligence and Safety and Security, plays the role envisaged for it in the Bill, in other words, co-ordinating the activities of the Scorpions and other law enforcement agencies. Without a strong oversight and co-ordinating role being played by this committee, it is almost certain that the fight against crime will become mild, and jurisdictional clashes, professional jealousy and operational inertia will only benefit the criminals.
The IFP welcomes the fact that the Scorpions will not be allowed to embark on industrial action, in other words, strikes. To the best of my knowledge, the criminals do not belong to a trade union and, therefore, do not go on strike. There is one factor, however, that I wish to bring to the hon the Minister’s attention in this regard: The notion of strike action has been endorsed, but what about the notion of a go-slow? Surely this form of protest will not be tolerated? The IFP will vote in favour of this Bill.
Okumele kube mqoka kuNgqongqoshe ngukuthi amacala enkohlakalo ngamacala afuna izincelebana eziyizinhlabamkhosi ngokwenzekayo ezweni sakhile. Inkinga-ke ngukuthi, kulezo zinhlabamkhosi, kuyothiwani uma kutholakala ukuthi kuyenzeka inhlabamkhosi iyinye isetshenziswe ngabaseshi bama-CID, ibe futhi isetshenziswa ngama-Scorpions? Lokho kusho ukuthi kuyoba khona ukungqubuzana okungadala ukukhwabanisa nokulahlwa komkhondo wokuphenya icala. Kungenzeka futhi ukuthi icala ebelilandelwa ngama-CID kubonakale ukuthi liyicala lama-Scorpions. Ngabe kuyokwenzeka yini ukuthi lumiswe uphenyo ukuze lelo cala lidluliselwe kuma-Scorpions na?
Okunye engifuna ukukhuluma ngakho yimivuzo ezonikezwa ama-Scorpions. Ngokubona kwami kuyothi lapho sekuqansa khona, amaphoyisa e-SAPS, athi: Sebenzani nina ma-Scorpions ngoba phela uHulumeni unibonelele kangcono ngokuthi aninikeze nina kuphela imivuzo efeza izidingo kangcono. Kodwa thina, abayizingqalabutho ezingamaphoyisa akudala, akazange asibonelele ngemivuzo engase ibe ngcono, okuyinto ebeyingasenza nathi sikhuthale.
Lokho kungase kusidalele inkinga. Ngibhekisa kuNgqongqoshe wezokuPhepha nokuVikeleka ukuthi akubhekisise lokho ngoba kuyomdalela inkinga. Phela amaphoyisa azobona ukuthi laba abanye ngabangcono kunawo, bese ethi ngakho- ke kuyofuneka kusebenze bona kuphela. Ngithi-ke kuNgqongqoshe naye makabhukule aphakamise. Amaphoyisa akhe kudingeka athi ukuwaphonse-phonsela uhlamvana ukuze sikhande isimo sokuthi kungabi ngama-Scorpions kuphela angcono futhi azokhokhelwa iholo elingcono. Kufuneka kubonakale ukuthi nawo amaphoyisa siyawacabangela ukuze akwazi ukusebenza ngendlela yokuthi afike kuleliya zinga lama-Scorpions ukuze kube khona ukuncintisana. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[What should be important to the hon the Minister is that criminal cases require spies who will reveal things that are happening in the country. The problem is, what will be done in a situation where one spy has been working for the CID and the Scorpions simultaneously. This means that there will be trouble. That trouble will cause misappropriation and the lose of the case’s track. It can happen that a case that is being investigated by the CID is a case against the Scorpions. Will it be possible to stop that investigation so as to transfer it to the Scorpions?
Another issue that I want to raise is that of rewards which will be given to the Scorpions. As far as I am concerned, when things get tough, the SAPS will say: ``You, the Scorpions, work because the Government provides you with things that enable you to be more efficient. We, the old police force, have never been provided with better things that will motivate us.’’
This might cause us problems. I am directing my speech to the hon the Minister of Safety and Security to look at this issue seriously because it might cause him trouble. The SAPS will think that the Scorpions are better than them. They will say the Scorpions are the only ones who must work. I would like to warn the hon the Minister that he must be aware of this. He must give the SAPS a salary increase so as to avoid a situation where only the Scorpions are given better salaries and attention. We must show that we also take the SAPS seriously. This will encourage them to perform at the same level as the Scorpions so that they will compete with them.]
Mrs S M CAMERER: Chairperson, the Scorpions will have been operating free of any specific legislative framework or constraint for almost 18 months by the time Parliament passes this Bill - clearly not an ideal situation from the point of view of Parliament’s important oversight role in relation to holding the executive and its initiatives accountable.
The Scorpions are the brainchild of President Mbeki. He announced the establishment of this new group of supercops in July 1999. The idea of creating a group of supercops, who would operate in close conjunction with the country’s prosecuting authority to target and tackle particular categories of high-profile crime and criminals, especially organised crime and crime syndicates, is a good one. However, the questions of where to situate such an elite group of cops, their reporting lines, authorities, liaison with other police units, ministerial responsibility and so on were never going to be easy.
The way these questions were tackled in the first Bill approved by Cabinet and tabled in Parliament earlier this year was downright problematic. The first Bill raised many questions, not the least of which was related to its constitutionality. In addition, the structure the executive proposed to us in the committee was thoroughly confused and top-heavy with several Ministers given a finger in the pie.
We, in the New NP and the DA, believe that the reworked concept, as included in this redrafted Bill before us today, has largely eliminated these problems, and we support the Bill. Much credit for this vast improvement to, not only the concept, but also the structure, must be given to the chairperson of the Justice portfolio committee, the hon Johnny de Lange, who, it must be said, was fully supported in his initiative by members of the committee, regardless of their political affiliation, and, of course, ably assisted by the department.
I believe that the goal for all of us was to achieve the best possible legal structure for the Scorpions, because I believe we would all like this presidential initiative to succeed. There is no doubt that an effective crimebusting capacity is desperately needed in our criminal justice system. The latest statistics give a totally gloomy picture of the growth in serious and violent crime since the democratic Government took over in 1994, and the failure of that Government to successfully combat crime and secure convictions for criminal acts.
The latest Government official to put the naked truth about crime in South Africa today on the table, apparently ignoring the officially decreed blackout, was no less a figure than the Scorpions’ supreme boss and head of the national prosecuting authority, Adv Bulelani Ncguka, at the justice colloquium less than two weeks ago, when he pointed out that reported serious crime has increased by no less than 37% since 1994. The number of cases going to court has increased by 8%, but, while just over 29% of criminal cases were closed as undetected in 1994, five years later, in July 1999, when the President announced the formation of the Scorpions, a whopping 48,2% had been closed as undetected.
During that period, the number of cases withdrawn increased by 32% and the offender population in our country increased by 47%. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to deduce from these figures that something is terribly wrong with the way this Government administers the criminal justice system or attempts to combat crime or bring offenders to justice.
Adv Ngcuka’s figures have been reconfirmed, as was pointed out by my colleague in the DA, as recently as this week, by independent data, according to the Nedcor Institute for Security Studies index. The number of reported violent crimes was greater last year than in any other year since
- In 1994, 30% of all reported crimes were violent and last year this figure was up by 32%, the worst figure ever. A particular phenomenon which my colleague highlighted, was the high and growing incidence of violent crime on farms. He pointed out that there had been over 2 000 attacks on farms during which nearly 400 people had been murdered between the beginning of 1997 and the end of 1999.
These figures are testimony to failure and there is cold comfort in the projected amounts to be spend on criminal justice in terms of the Medium- Term Expenditure Framework presented to Parliament yesterday by the hon the Minister of Finance, Mr Trevor Manuel. An increase of R5,2 billion over the three-year period represents a year-on-year increase, apparently, of only 6,6%, barely keeping up with inflation. In other words, it seems there will be little or no extra money for the criminal justice system.
All parties in Parliament welcome any attempt by Government to tackle the problem of crime. The Scorpions is surely not the whole answer, but it is clearly an attempt by Government to do something about the problem. According to the hon Minister Manuel, the Scorpions will get increased funding in the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework. The main target of the Scorpions is organised crime, but in terms of the Bill before this House the President may, by proclamation, determine that a particular category of crime should be investigated by the Scorpions. Perhaps farm attacks and murders should be a case in point.
Prior to this legislation being passed, the various components of the Scorpions functioned under seven pieces of legislation. The new Bill places the directorate squarely under the National Prosecuting Authority and this Bill, as has been said, is an amendment to the National Prosecuting Authority Act.
The Minister of Justice is the responsible Minister and the President is no longer directly involved. The relationship with other criminal justice departments, and particularly the SAPS, is catered for through a ministerial co-ordinating committee which may determine policy guidelines in respect of the functioning of the Scorpions.
The secret of a successful formula for the Scorpions is the close co- operation between the police and the prosecutors; hence the need to situate the elite police unit within the NPA and under its control. This has been tried with good results in other investigating directorates. There is therefore no reason why it should not work here.
However, the birth of the unit has not been unproblematic. Problems include the fact that, although the new recruits are better educated than normal SAPS officers because tertiary education is a must, they are mostly young and inexperienced. The point that they get twice the pay of an equivalent SAPS officer is also a problem. [Time expired.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, there are some members in the House who are showing their backs to the speaker.
I think that while it is permissible for members to converse with those seated next to them, it could not be appropriate, in Parliament, for members to be conferencing over their shoulders. If hon members therefore would like to have the support of the Chair for continuing their conversation, let it be done seated next to each other.
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Chairperson, hon members, the passage of this Bill into an Act of Parliament gives legal backing to the existence of the Scorpions as a national specialist unit against organised crime.
As we all know, it was the hon President himself who last year announced in this House that, in order to reinforce conventional policing, which remains the primary responsibility of the South African Police Service, we also needed an agency which would focus on certain specific crime types. That vision remains in force to this day, as an expression of the Government’s commitment to bringing down the levels of crime in our country. The resources that have been availed to the Scorpions and the SA Police Service, by both the Government and our friends abroad, clearly indicate to all and sundry our firm resolve to deliver the safety and security which is the birthright of all South Africans.
With the Scorpions coming of age, the SA Police Service can only grow stronger. Already, the marked improvement in the quality of investigation and prosecution of crime confirms the fact that in an environment that is properly managed, the coexistence of the SA Police Service and the Scorpions can be mutually reinforcing.
It is, of course, common knowledge that sharp contradictions developed between the SA Police Service and Idoc, the Investigative Directorate on Organised Crime, here in the Western Cape, especially in Cape Town, around the ownership of dockets and leadership of various investigations. But the Minister of Justice and I were, and still are, ready to intervene and push professional jealousy to the periphery. We are succeeding, and very happy to indicate to the House that the desired co-operation between the SA Police Service and the Scorpions is, indeed, in place.
We hope that the passage of this Bill will help consolidate the idea in the minds of both the SA Police Service and Scorpions investigators that at stake is not just their individual glory, but the salvation of this country and its citizens. I speak with a great deal of conviction when I say that the SA Police Service and the Scorpions will not let us down.
Another issue of tension that has surfaced recently is the salary discrepancies between the two. I am not bothered by the way the print media handled this very sensitive matter. They reserve the right to keep the public informed about a whole range of topics, including those that might compromise the integrity and morale of the state’s security organs. What concerns me most profoundly are the utterances of some politicians who pronounced on this issue with both eyes focused on the forthcoming elections.
We have always argued, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and I, that the fight against crime is not the exclusive responsibility of the SA Police Service and the Scorpions, and that every one of us in this House and outside this House has the responsibility to define for and arrogate to themselves responsibilities in the area of strengthening the hand of both the Scorpions and the SA Police Service. Without the active mobilisation of the greatest number of our people in the fight against crime, there is absolutely no way that we can get to where we want to be pretty soon.
It is on that score that I would, once again, urge hon members not to see the fight against crime as something to politick about, something to score cheap political points on, but rather to see it as a collective responsibility demanding a collective response from all of us. We need to take the water and leave the fish to drown in a dry pond, and that is when we begin to do this extensive work in our own respective constituencies.
I would like to say to the hon member Mzizi that the Government is doing its level best to raise the profile of the SA Police Service so that it becomes the pride of the nation and not the Cinderella profession that it had been reduced to in the past. Right now, and over and above what has been agreed to in the bargaining chamber, the Cabinet has by resolution recommended a special dispensation around the service conditions of members of the SA Police Service. When the nitty-gritty has been finalised, we shall have been able to further improve the salary packages of the SA Police Service members. We hope that by so doing we shall have travelled quite a long distance in addressing the issue of the discrepancies that have been pointed out.
I am also happy that the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development has just indicated in this House today that the department which he leads is also taking the matter of closing this gap as seriously, so that there is no situation that develops in which members of the SA Police Service are drawn this way or that way because of these discrepancies in terms of salary packages. It is the responsibility of the two of us, as a matter of fact, to carry the Cabinet with us towards the fulfilment of that resolution that sought to address the issue of salary discrepancies. In the meantime, let us not fan the fires. Elections come and go, but policing will remain with us at all material times. [Applause.]
This Bill appeals in a special sense for the closure of ranks between the SA Police Service and the Scorpions. On both sides we are blessed with good officers, and a good officer is one with an abundance of patience. Let us give this Bill a chance. The Department of Safety and Security supports its passage. [Applause.]
Mr M E MABETA: Chairperson, hon members, the UDM fully supports this Bill. This Bill is important to us because, for the first time, the mandate for special investigations is clearly defined and the existing uncertainties on specific conditions of employment, the powers of the unit and the relationship between this body, the police and the National Prosecuting Authority are properly spelt out.
We wish particularly to commend the hon De Lange for the special efforts he made to ensure that these uncertainties were promptly addressed so that fears that the Directorate of Special Operations was a disguised extraconstitutional special force could be shown to have been groundless once and for all. The unit will also conduct credible investigations and ensure that prosecutions of high quality take place and justice, in the end, will be seen to be done on behalf of all victims of crime, both black and white, and not for one racial group only and to the detriment or neglect of the other.
The Bill concentrates the prosecuting and investigation operations of crime under one national authority command structure, and no doubt the current pattern of mysterious loopholes in the investigation and prosecution of criminals will come to an end. We would like to urge the Government to make crime a number one priority in South Africa, even if it means cutting down on other priority areas.
It is, however, hoped that the unit will not be corrupted like other Government institutions and, in this respect, the strict control measures such as the requirement for the Auditor-General to audit the finances of the unit and the regular screening and use of lie detectors will go a long way towards making the process a useful and successful tool in addressing crime, which is the number one scourge in our society. This Bill is an important piece of ammunition in our war against crime. Let us all play our parts earnestly and honestly. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson and hon Ministers, as already indicated, the aim of the amending Bill is to establish a specialised unit to gather intelligence and to ensure that investigations and prosecutions of serious offences are carried out in the best possible manner.
Section 179 of the Constitution provides for the establishment of a single prosecuting authority in the Republic. For reasons of clarity, the ACDP was one of the parties which recommended that the existing National Prosecuting Authority Act be amended to include provisions relating to the Directorate of Special Operations, as opposed to the initial suggestion of a separate Bill creating a stand-alone structure.
In the case of State v Botha, the High Court stated that modern society is so specialised that no police force can by itself investigate and prevent all crime. This philosophy underpins the provisions of section 205 of the Constitution which, whilst dealing with the South African Police Service, does not prohibit the creation of other investigating bodies such as the Directorate of Special Operations.
The National Director of Public Prosecutions, Adv Ngcuka, furthermore recently stated that perhaps one of the most disturbing features of criminal justice was that whereas in some areas criminals were developing and mastering novel and sophisticated means of plying their trade, police officers, prosecutors and judicial officers were falling behind. We in the ACDP are similarly concerned about high levels of crime, including the murder of police officers and farmers as referred to by previous speakers. In this regard, last year our Constitutional Court, in upholding stricter bail legislation, agreed with the state’s submissions that there could be no quibble that over the past few years our society has experienced a deplorable level of violent crime, particularly murder, armed robbery, assault and rape, including sexual assault on children. The court went on to say that there could be no doubt that the effect of widespread violent crime was deeply destructive of the fabric of our society and that, accordingly, all steps that could reasonably be taken to curb violent crime should be taken. This makes the effective combating of crime particularly urgent, and is the reason why the ACDP supports this amendment which establishes the Scorpions.
As far as jurisdiction is concerned, clauses 7(1) and 26(2) are important inasmuch as they allow for the concurrent jurisdiction of the directorate with the South African Police Service. Should there therefore be any conflict regarding so-called turf related to dockets referred to the hon the Minister, clause 31 kicks in, providing the necessary deadlock-breaking mechanism through the Ministerial Co-ordinating Committee.
The ACDP also welcomes the requirement that special investigators should regularly undergo security screening to ensure that the directorate is kept clean from all infiltration. We also welcome provisions prohibiting strike action by the investigators. In conclusion, the ACDP supports this legislation and wishes to thank the portfolio committee chairperson, Adv De Lange, for his dedication in steering the Bill to finality. [Applause.]
Mr L T LANDERS: Chairperson, I participate in this debate with the honour and privilege that it deserves.
In his input today, the hon Delport said that the Ministers must use the Scorpions with discretion. We want to say that the Scorpions are not a political tool, and I think it would have been more appropriate to call on the National Director of Public Prosecutions to use the Scorpions in the interests of the public. I think the hon Delport does not have a problem with that, except that the hon Mike Ellis has, as usual. [Interjections.]
The activities of the Scorpions essentially involve three institutions, namely the national prosecuting authority, the South African Police Service, and our intelligence services and agencies. These three will co- operate and work together in a co-ordinated fashion in the war against organised crime and terrorism. The investigation of organised crime and crime lords will be prosecution-led and backed up by the expertise and experience provided by our police and intelligence services.
The reason for this prosecution-driven integrated approach can be found in the fact that our Constitution does not provide that the prevention, combating or investigation of crime is the exclusive function of any single institution. This point has already been highlighted by the hon chairperson, and it is also contained in the preamble to the Bill and does not require further elucidation.
It must be stated that, from certain quarters, our Constitution has been cited as an impediment and obstruction to investigations and the successful fight against crime because, according to these critics, our Constitution is too liberal. On the other hand, the Scorpions have been described variously as loose cannons operating outside the ambit of our Constitution.
Neither of these criticisms is valid. Indeed, at the very outset, it must be stated that all investigations and actions by the Scorpions are carried out within the parameters of our Constitution. It cannot be otherwise, because such actions and investigations risk being struck down as unconstitutional and illegal by our courts.
In other countries where units similar to the Scorpions have been established, the success of such units is based on a successful, integrated approach and on the fact that investigations are focused on crime syndicates and terrorist organisations, their leaders and their methods. Moreover, the success of such units derives from the fact that investigators work in highly skilled teams.
Presently the police utilise what we refer to as the ``single docket system’’ to which one investigator may be appointed. At the end of the process, someone may be arrested and this docket will be handed to a prosecutor, who, de novo, must then familiarise herself or himself with the details of the case. Without being overly critical of the system, the major crime syndicates and terrorist organisations have easily found their way around it and have developed loopholes which they exploit with impunity. The Scorpions’ approach to organised crime is to use the project or operational approach which focuses on the strategic planning of investigations. Most importantly, this strategic planning is a collective effort involving the prosecuting authority, the police, and the intelligence services. So, it is not unusual for the Scorpions to have a multiplicity of documents, all of which may be related to a particular project or operation.
This strategic planning will, amongst other things, focus on all facets of a crime syndicate, namely the syndicate heads, the lieutenants and the foot soldiers, as well as all its criminal activities. In this way, successful cases will be built against members of that syndicate. If all else fails, of course, the information gained by the Scorpions could be passed on to our friends, the Asset Forfeiture Unit and, of course, the SA Revenue Service for further action by those institutions.
An example of the success achieved by this approach can be found in the Scorpions’ ``Project Perlemoen Poaching’’. Acting on intelligence received, divers were arrested for poaching perlemoen for shipment to the Far East. The Scorpions decided to conduct an in-depth investigation which resulted in the arrest of another four people, two of whom were foreign nationals and syndicate bosses. Further investigations resulted in the arrest of 12 more persons. Whilst this matter is still before our courts, it does not end there. An interim order was granted to the Asset Forfeiture Unit, allowing them to seize assets to the value of R1 million.
For some time now, the ANC has expressed concern at the disparate nature of our criminal justice system. The police have seen their role as basically ending when an arrest is made and the docket is handed over to the prosecutor. Many of us in the ANC have expressed our concern at this approach which is not targeted at achieving convictions, but rather at achieving arrests. It is also true that most police investigators arrest a suspect in order that they may carry out further investigations into a crime.
It has also been the ANC’s view that intelligence or information per se is useless unless that intelligence or information can be put to worthwhile use. Consequently, the ANC has called for intelligence which can be converted into credible evidence in court cases. It is our view that this Bill helps achieve these goals. Consequently, clauses 22 to 25 of the Bill provide for amendments to the Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act, 127 of 1992. In terms of these amendments the head of the Directorate of Special Operations is empowered to make applications to a judge for directives with which he or she can intercept, monitor and tap communications of terrorist organisations and crime syndicates. We are informed that as a result of the successes already achieved by the Scorpions the SAPS is currently reviewing their single docket approach.
It is the view of the ANC that the advent of the Scorpions and the approval of this Bill will revolutionalise this country’s approach to the war against crime, syndicates and particularly crime in general. Accordingly, we look forward with great enthusiasm to the further successes of the Scorpions and we welcome the fear that this Bill strikes in the hearts of terrorists and crime syndicates as we commend this Bill to the honourable House. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, while most of you are co-operating, it is from a certain section that I continue to have a problem, and I am restraining myself from mentioning you by name. But I do hope that you do give attention to the person who is up here at the podium.
I think it is totally unfair and unacceptable for you to be carrying on with conversation regardless of what is going on in the House. So, short of calling you by name I would like the co-operation that is being extended by the rest of the House to be given to the speaker at the podium.
Adv H C SCHMIDT: Mr Chairperson, now that I have all the attention I thank you.
As stated by the hon Dr Delport, the DP supports the amendments to the National Prosecuting Authority Act, providing for the establishment of the Directorate of Special Operations. These amendments seem to effect co- ordination in the investigation of certain specified types of crime. This ensures a unified approach towards organised crime and attempts to focus combined efforts on pre-determined priorities. Unco-ordinated attempts to fight crime in the past have led to allegations of corruption and complicity in crime. The Bill seeks to prevent this.
The crux of the Act is found in section 7 which provides for the Directorate of Special Operations to investigate and to carry out any functions incidental to investigations; where appropriate, institute criminal proceedings and carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
The appointment, remuneration and conditions of service of special investigators will be determined by the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development in consultation with the National Director and with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance. This is intended to result in special benefits to these investigators.
Special investigators of the directorate will furthermore be issued with certificates by the National Director to serve as proof that the employee is a special investigator enabling him to fulfil the functions as set out in section 7, thereby ensuring a high calibre of investigators. It is also reassuring to note that no special investigator may strike, induce or conspire with any other member of the directorate to strike. For purposes of the Labour Relations Act of 1995 they are deemed to have been designated as an essential service in terms of section 71 of that Act. Political responsibility has been placed with the Interministerial Co- ordinating Committee, consisting of the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development as the chairperson, and the Ministers of Correctional Services, Defence, Finance, Intelligence, Safety and Security and other members designated from time to time by the President. This co- ordinating committee is responsible for the co-ordination of the activities of the directorate, including the communication and transfer of information regarding matters falling within the scope of the directorate and the transfer of investigations to and from the directorate.
Except for the powers bestowed upon a peace officer referred to in the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977, such special investigators have such other powers as specified by the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development in consultation with the Minister of Safety and Security. It is, however, alarming to note that such powers may be specified by notice in the Gazette. However, such notice must be referred to and approved by the National Assembly before publication. Some form of scrutiny by Parliament therefore exists in determining which additional powers the special investigators will have. The fact that regulations will be issued in terms of clause 37 of the Bill makes it clear that the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development will have wide-ranging powers relating to the practical and day-to-day issues of the directorate. The scope of clause 37 and the 21 subsections relating to this proposed section leaves the responsible Minister with little if any scope to deny responsibility for the proper and responsible functioning of this directorate in the fight against crime.
The community has a right and is entitled to demand that this directorate contributes substantially to the fight against and eradication of crime within our society. Whatever excuses the hon the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and the hon the Minister of Safety and Security had for not combating crime, they have all been addressed. [Applause.]
Dr P W A MULDER: Mnr die Voorsitter, ek dien nie in die portefeuljekomitee nie, en ek maak verskoning vir genl Viljoen wat nie vanmiddag hier kan wees nie. Die VF het vanmiddag ‘n voorstel in hierdie Raad ingedien oor nog ‘n boer wat vermoor is.
Ons het vanmiddag die syfers hier gehoor van vorige sprekers dat daar gemiddeld 5 uit elke 100 000 mense in die wêreld vermoor word teenoor die syfer in Suid-Afrika net ten opsigte van boere, wat 274 uit elke 100 000 is. Die afgelope vyf jaar pleit ons - die VF spesifiek, maar ook almal in die Raad - dat daar drasties teen misdaad opgetree moet word. Dan bedoel ons alle misdaad, en nie net dié teen boere nie. Sonder twyfel is dit een van die ernstigste …
‘n AGB LID: Alle misdaad!
Dr P W A MULDER: Ek het gesê alle misdaad, en u het netnou daar anderkant ‘n ding oor boere gesê wat my baie warm gemaak het. Ek hoop ek het u verkeerd gehoor toe u misdaad teen boere anders gehanteer het as alle misdaad. Die syfer van 274 moorde per 100 000 boere, die hoogste in die land, is ‘n baie ernstige syfer.
Ons pleit reeds jare lank dat die Polisie meer geld, meer mannekrag en meer opleiding moet kry om hierdie probleme op te los. Tot nou toe het dit egter nie gebeur nie. In plaas daarvan is in Julie aangekondig dat hierdie elite- eenheid, die Skerpioene, gestig gaan word. Ons het destyds by monde van genl Viljoen ons besware daarteen geopper. Om byvoorbeeld die elite-eenheid buite die Polisie te stig werk nie na ons mening nie, want dit is ‘n klap in die gesig van die Polisie.
Die Regering sê eintlik daarmee dat hulle nie hul werk goed genoeg doen nie. Miskien kan ‘n mens nog binne in die Polisie so iets kry, maar daarbuite sal dit spanning skep. Veral die kruisbeheer, het ons gesê, gaan lei tot chaos in plaas daarvan dat dit misdaad sal bekamp. Die Polisie se reaksie op die Skerpioene was ook nie positief nie. Veral as na salarisse gekyk word, skep dit groot spanning, en ons voorspel dit gaan vorentoe nog meer spanning skep.
Wat ons betref, is hierdie probleme ongelukkig nie voldoende in die wetgewing opgelos nie. Die VF verwelkom maatreëls wat help om misdaad uit te roei, maar ons is bevrees dat hierdie nie die antwoord gaan wees nie en dat dit ongelukkig in die lang termyn so bewys sal word. Die VF gaan teen die wetgewing stem. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER: Mr Chairman, I do not serve on the portfolio committee, and I want to apologise for Gen Viljoen, who cannot be here this afternoon. The FF submitted a motion in this House this afternoon about another farmer who has been murdered.
We heard the figure here this afternoon from previous speakers that on average 5 out of every 100 000 people in the world are murdered in contrast to the figure in respect of farmers alone in South Africa, which is 274 out of every 100 000. For the past five years we have been appealing - the FF specifically, but also everyone in the House - that drastic action should be taken against crime. Then we mean all crime, and not just that perpetrated against farmers. Without a doubt this is one of the most serious …
An HON MEMBER: All crime!
Dr P W A MULDER: I did say all crime, and just now you said something about farmers over there that made me very hot under the collar. I hope I heard you incorrectly when you dealt with the murder of farmers differently from that of all crime. The figure of 274 murders per 100 000 farmers, the highest in the country, is a very serious figure.
We have already been appealing for years that the Police should be given more money, more manpower and more training to resolve these problems. As yet this has not happened. Instead the announcement was made in July that an elite unit, the Scorpions, was going to be established. At that stage, we voiced our objections to this through Gen Viljoen. For example, to establish the elite unit outside of the Police in our view does not work, because it is a slap in the face of the Police.
The Government is, in fact, saying that they are not doing their job properly. Perhaps one could still establish such a unit in the Police, but out there it will create tension. The cross-control in particular, we have said, is going to cause chaos instead of combating crime. The reaction of the Police to the Scorpions was not favourable either. When one looks at salaries specifically, great tension is created, and we predict that this is going to create more tension in the future.
As far as we are concerned these problems are unfortunately not resolved adequately in the legislation. The FF welcomes measures that help to eradicate crime, but we are afraid that this will not be the answer, and that in the long term this will unfortunately be proved to be correct. The FF will vote against the legislation.] Mr M T MASUTHA: Chairperson, Ministers of Safety and Security and for Justice and Constitutional Development, colleagues and friends, allow me first of all to thank the opposition parties, including the DP and the New NP, for supporting this Bill, which I think is a good and a positive message that we as South Africans are united in the fight against crime.
Section 1 of our Constitution stipulates that the Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign democratic state founded on, amongst other values, the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law. Section 2 takes the matter even further by stating that law or conduct inconsistent with the Constitution is invalid and that obligations imposed by the Constitution must be fulfilled.
One of these obligations is contained in section 179 (2), which grants the prosecuting authority -
… the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the state, and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
The Bill before us, popularly known as the ``Scorpions Bill’’, is a clear and firm note to those criminals who seek to undermine and exploit our newly founded democratic and human rights-based state so as to advance their own selfish and narrow interests, that our patience has run out.
Indeed, hon members will recall that the President, in his address to this House at the opening of Parliament on 25 June 1999, announced the establishment of a special investigation unit to deal with national priority crimes. To achieve this, he reported that he had directed the Ministers of Safety and Security, Defence, Intelligence, Justice, Home Affairs and Finance to finalise the activation of this unit as a matter of urgency. In July 1999, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and the Minister of Safety and Security announced the creation of the Directorate of Special Operations, which was officially launched in September 1999.
The Bill before us is intended to provide the necessary legal framework that will enable this directorate to perform its task effectively. For this proposed new law against crime to sustain any constitutional challenge before our courts, however, it has to be shown that it does not in any way undermine the letter and the spirit of the Constitution.
In view of the doubts that were expressed by some commentators regarding the constitutionality of this Bill when it was introduced in Parliament, the committee requested a legal opinion from the Chief State Law Adviser whose kind response has provided useful guidance on the matter. At issue was whether this Bill would not have the effect of exceeding the institutional and functional boundaries set out in the Constitution, if any, between the prosecuting authority established under section 179, on the one hand, and the police under section 205, on the other. More specifically, it was contested by some that section 205(3), which explicitly states that ``the objects of the police service are to prevent, combat and investigate crime’’, was intended to accord these powers exclusively to the police.
In this regard, it must, from the very outset, be stated that neither the aforesaid provision nor any other provision of the Constitution goes so far as to establish these powers as the exclusive preserve of the police. If this was the case, innovative crime prevention mechanisms such as citizens arrests would be rendered unconstitutional and, therefore, unlawful, more so, the entire private security industry which is a significant part of our security services in this country would be rendered illegal.
A counterargument to this proposition is based, amongst others, on the ground that the ultimate battle against crime is fought in court before a judge or a magistrate by a team representing the state and led by the prosecution on whose shoulders rests the ultimate responsibility of securing the conviction of the perpetrator of the crime. Moreover, the provision in the Constitution, as I have indicated, does not restrict the power of the prosecuting authority only to instituting criminal proceedings on behalf of the state but, on the contrary allows it to carry out any necessary functions incidental thereto.
This Bill grants the prosecuting authority greater latitude to deal more effectively with serious crimes such as organised crime, in particular, within the framework of its constitutional responsibilities. Such latitude includes the power to conduct investigations and to perform other related functions.
Once again, it can never be said loudly enough that our crime prevention and crime combating strategies are under constant challenge by the ever elusive acts of those who are inspired by the evil one. For us to stay ahead of this race, we need to be constantly innovative and smart. [Applause.]
Ms F I CHOHAN-KOTA: Mr Chairperson, I have with me a number of newspaper articles which deal with this Bill that was initially tabled in the portfolio committee.
Human Rights Lawyers were suggesting all manner of things such as that the Bill contained draconian provisions which gave investigators wide and awesome powers of search and seizure and interrogation. Pretoria News, The Star and other newspapers ran editorials that suggested that the Government wanted ``a Presidential police force’’, to use the unfortunate words of an hon member of this House - and he knows who he is. The Pretoria News editorial went on to prophesy the return of the state security machinery under the resurrected P W Botha era. There appears to be an overreadiness on the part of some people in our society to infer the worst of intentions on the part of this Government. The same commentators cry foul at every opportunity, particularly when it pertains to the fight against crime. When the Government puts its money where its mouth is, suddenly there are visions of the reign of terror and the resurrection of the P W Botha era. People are all too ready to forget that this Government, unlike the P W Botha government, was elected into office on the strength of the majority of enfranchised South Africans who expect it to take decisive measures in dealing with crime.
Just in case there remains any lingering doubt on the part of anyone as to the need for the Scorpions, as we have heard today that there appears to be some of that, I wish to point to some of their successes. Because of the lack of time I will try and confine myself to the Western Cape Province, save to point out that within two weeks of their deployment in the Eastern Cape the Scorpions managed to decisively quell the taxi violence there.
In this province, some of the priorities include gang-related violence, taxi violence and the urban terror campaign that has been raging here. In regard to gang-related violence, let me allude to one of the many success stories. A gang operating in and around the Belhar and Elsies River area, called the Sexy Boys, has engaged in a number of atrocities, including murder, attempted murder and other serious crimes. Currently 15 accused are before a court and bail has been refused in 10 instances. In the matter of the attacks on the Golden Arrow buses, five key arrests have been made, and collectively these people face 38 counts of murder and attempted murder.
In the matter of urban terror in this province, there have been a total of 18 timer-device pipe bombs over the period 1998 to 2000. Included in this figure are the well-known attacks on Planet Hollywood, the Blah Bar and the New York Bagel. Less well known are the attacks on Campwell Hardware Store in Grassy Park; Data Trading in Rylands, Athlone; O&J Car Sales in Athlone; Toyo Retreaders in Athlone and a few other attacks on private residences, again, in the same communities.
What is interesting is that the attacks in traditionally black communities have received less press coverage than those in urban Cape Town. There have been seven cellphone-triggered pipe bombs and - wait for it - 151 striker pipe bombs during the period 1996 to 1999 in Athlone, Mitchells Plain and Grassy Park. It remains a mystery to me as to why no media prominence has been given to these 151 attacks. I leave it to the House to ponder.
Since Idoc began its investigations into urban terror in 1998, 35 people have been taken off the streets of Cape Town and are in custody and have been denied bail. An additional 20 people have been granted bail, but are facing charges relating to urban terror activities. There are altogether 78 matters before court. To give members an idea of the amount of work involved, in just one of these cases, the accused faces 147 charges. Other matters currently before the court include individuals charged with the bombing of the Wynberg synagogue and another case involving the person who stands accused of killing four-year-old Sedicka Hendricks, in an apparent vigilante attack.
Internationally urban terror has proved to be more difficult to combat than other crimes. It is true that much remains to be achieved and we certainly believe that the Scorpions will prove themselves even more worthy than they already have within the formal structures provided for in this piece of legislation. They deserve our unwavering support, they deserve the unwavering support of the media, who constantly call on this Government to do more to fight crime, and they certainly deserve the support of all law- abiding citizens.
I trust that the FF, despite the fact that they do not actively engage in the portfolio committee deliberations, will actually reconsider their stance in this light. It is quite important that we in this House are all seen to be supportive of these very tough measures to fight crime. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Before giving the floor to the hon the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development, may I remark, for those who are astrologically minded, that the Scorpions’ star sign is Scorpio. [Laughter.]
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, the only thing I want to say to this House is that I am very happy and that I wish to thank and commend all the hon members who participated in this debate and the parties that they represent for the generous spirit in which they conducted this debate. As the last speaker has indicated, with the birth of the Scorpions, we are much stronger in the fight against crime.
I can only add one or two very interesting cases which suggest that, indeed, the battle against crime is not lost. It is true that a couple of weeks back we arrested one of the major gangsters involved in the international illicit drug trade, a man popularly known in those circles as Pappas. He is behind bars. He and others had brought into our country about 4,5 tons of Mandrax. He is behind bars, and our courts have refused him bail. [Applause.]
This could only be done because of the approach that is being adopted, not by the Scorpions alone, but by the Scorpions, the police, the National Intelligence Agency and the prosecuting authority, to the work that they are doing.
I can only say, also - it is true, is it not? - that last week, again through properly co-ordinated work, including proper gathering of information - or intelligence, to sound a bit more sophisticated - we were able to pick up 8,5 tons of hashish, as a ship was about to leave Durban. Again, it is success. [Applause.]
We were asked, in the course of the debate, to consider coming up with a strategy to combat crime. I would beg to differ with the hon member and say it is not necessary for us to come up with yet another strategy. We have the National Crime Prevention Strategy, which is being implemented. Of course, hon members are free to proffer ideas and suggestions, if only to strengthen, not only the NCPS, but also the way we are implementing it. We do not have to reinvent the NCPS.
We have said, and I think we need to stress this, that there will not be any Scorpions police stations, but the Scorpions are actually going to be called upon to perform special tasks with particular regard to organised crime. So one will not be able to go to a particular place to report a particular crime, but one will have to go to one’s police station to report an offence. It is only then that we will be able to evaluate whether or not what we are grappling with is part of organised crime or an ordinary crime.
Again, the question of professional jealousy has been mentioned. I think, in this regard, I need only say that we depend, as I did say in my remarks, on leadership and on people, eventually. In the USA they always remind us of the FBI under J Edgar Hoover. They say that for a very long time indeed the Hoover FBI put more emphasis on quantity rather than on the quality of the investigations. They would target just anybody who had committed any offence, including breaking a small window to steal a little radio. They regarded that as FBI work. We have no intention of repeating that. I think we have learned from the experiences of others.
I also have to say that in the whole country, the experience of the past year, indeed, has been that there has been more co-operation between the Scorpions and the national prosecuting authority on the one hand and the SA Police Service on the other. That is why we have been able to do so much already.
I only want to say to the criminal element, in the few seconds left for me to speak, that the battle against them and their nefarious activities has been joined. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND
CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON JUDICIAL MATTERS AMENDMENT BILL
Order disposed of without debate.
Report adopted.
JUDICIAL MATTERS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
Order disposed of without debate.
Bill read a second time.
The House adjourned at 18:04. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 31 October 2000 in terms of
Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bills as money Bills:
(i) Second Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 67 - 2000]
(National Assembly - sec 77) - (Portfolio Committee on
Finance - National Assembly).
(ii) Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 70 - 2000] (National
Assembly - sec 77) - (Portfolio Committee on Finance -
National Assembly).
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
The following papers have been tabled and are now referred to the
relevant committees as mentioned below:
(1) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Finance and to the Select Committee on Finance:
(a) Economic Report of the South African Reserve Bank for
2000.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
Reserve Bank for 1999-2000 [RP 32-2000].
(c) The South African Reserve Bank Governor's Address on 29
August 2000.
(d) Framework Agreement for Financial Co-operation between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Investment Bank, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(e) Rider Number Three to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning Technical Assistance Consultancy
Programme, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(f) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
Republic of South Africa and the Commonwealth Secretariat with
respect to Technical Co-operation Activities, tabled in terms
of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(g) Arrangements between the Government of the Republic of
South Africa and the Minister for Development Co-operation of
the Netherlands concerning Sectoral Budget Support (2000-
2003), tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution,
1996.
(h) Rider Number One to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning the European Programme for
Reconstruction and Development (EPRD) Information and
Communication Programme Fund, tabled in terms of section
231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(i) The Intergovernmental Fiscal Review for 2000 [RP 170-
2000].
(j) Medium Term Budget Policy Statement - 2000 [RP 171-2000].
(2) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Water Affairs and Forestry and to the Select Committee on Land and
Environmental Affairs:
Exchange of Letters between the Government of the Republic of
South Africa and the Government of the People's Republic of China
concerning the Provision of Water Supply Materials, tabled in
terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(3) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Environmental Affairs and Tourism and to the Select Committee on
Land and Environmental Affairs:
(a) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark on
Financial Assistance to the Regional Training and Technology
Transfer Centre for Implementation of the Basel Convention in
English Speaking Countries, tabled in terms of section 231(3)
of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
concerning Financial Co-operation for the Study and Expert
Fund Project, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(c) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of Spain on Grant Assistance for the
Establishment of a South African Tourism Institute, tabled in
terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(4) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Agriculture and Land Affairs and to the Select Committee on Land
and Environmental Affairs:
(a) Rider Number One to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning the participation in the SADC Regional
Food Security Training Programme, tabled in terms of section
231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Rider Number Three to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning the Land Reform Pilot Programme, tabled
in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(c) Statements in terms of section 65(2) of the Land Bank Act,
1944, of the Assets and Liabilities and the Profit and Loss
Account of the Land and Agricultural Bank of South Africa as
at 31 December 1999.
(d) Statements of the Assets and Liabilities and the Profit
and Loss Account of the South African Mortgage Insurance
Company Limited of which the Land and Agricultural Bank of
South Africa is the sole shareholder.
(5) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Safety and Security and to the Select Committee on Security and
Constitutional Affairs:
(a) Financing Agreement between the Government of the Republic
of South Africa and the European Commission concerning the
SADC Regional Drug Control Programme, tabled in terms of
section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Financing Agreement between the Government of the Republic
of South Africa and the European Commission concerning
Capacity Building and Institutional Development for the South
African Police Service (SAPS) and the Department of Safety and
Security, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(6) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Housing and to the Select Committee on Public Services:
(a) Financing Agreement between the Government of the Republic
of South Africa and the European Commission concerning the
support to the Social Housing Programme, tabled in terms of
section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of Switzerland concerning support to
the Greater Tjoksville Upgrading Project in Port Elizabeth,
tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(7) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Education and to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises. It
is also referred to the Select Committee on Education and
Recreation and to the Select Committee on Labour and Public
Enterprises:
Rider Number Three to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning the Non-grid Electrification Programme,
tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(8) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Water Affairs and Forestry and to the Portfolio Committee on
Provincial and Local Government. It is also referred to the Select
Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs and to the Select
Committee on Local Government and Administration:
Rider Number Three to the Financing Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the European
Commission concerning the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation in the
Eastern Cape, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(9) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Arts, Culture, Science and Technology and to the Select Committee
on Education and Recreation:
Rider Number One to the Financing Agreement between the Government
of the Republic of South Africa and the European Commission
concerning the Conference, Workshop and Cultural Initiatives
(CWCI) Fund, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(10) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Health, the Portfolio Committee on Water Affairs and Forestry, the
Portfolio Committee on Housing, the Portfolio Committee on Trade
and Industry and to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and
Constitutional Development. It is also referred to the Select
Committee on Social Services, the Select Committee on Land and
Environmental Affairs, the Select Committee on Public Services,
the Select Committee on Economic Affairs and to the Select
Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs:
Multi-Annual Indicative Programme: A Framework for Co-operation
between South Africa and the European Community, tabled in terms
of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(11) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation:
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa
and the Government of the Republic of Finland on Finnish
Assistance to the Education Sector, tabled in terms of section
231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(12) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Provincial and Local Government and to the Select Committee on
Local Government and Administration:
(a) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
concerning Financial Co-operation for Municipal
Infrastructure, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(b) Specific Agreement between the Government of the Republic
of South Africa and the Government of Sweden on support for a
project on a Partnership between the Municipalities of Port
Elizabeth and Goteborg, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of
the Constitution, 1996.
(13) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Foreign Affairs and to the Select Committee on Economic Affairs:
(a) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of Spain on Grant Assistance for
Protocol Training in the Office of the President and the
Department of Foreign Affairs, tabled in terms of section
231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Co-operation Accord between the Government of the Republic
of South Africa and the Government of the United States of
America, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
TABLINGS: National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister of Finance:
Explanatory Memorandum on the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill, 2000 [WP 2-
2000].
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Second Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 67 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 27 October 2000:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered and examined the Second Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 67 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a money bill, reports that it has concluded its deliberations thereon.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government on the Redetermination of the Boundaries of Cross-Boundary Municipalities Bill [B 69 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 31 October 2000:
The Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government, having considered the subject of the Redetermination of the Boundaries of Cross-Boundary Municipalities Bill [B 69 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendment.