TUESDAY, 20 JUNE 2000 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:04.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Mrs A M VERSVELD: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move at the next sitting:

That the Council -

(1) notes the seizure of R1,5 million worth of abalone at Johannesburg International Airport;

(2) welcomes this breakthrough of the national task team formed to clamp down on abalone smugglers; and

(3) calls on the Government -

   (a)  to ensure that those guilty of abalone poaching are not allowed
       to tender for confiscated abalone;


   (b)  to use the profits made from the sale of confiscated abalone for
       the task team fighting this crime; and


   (c)  as a matter of urgency, to make use of legislation providing for
       the seizure of the assets of those responsible for poaching and
       smuggling of abalone.

Mr K D S DURR: Madam Chairperson, I shall move at the next sitting of this House:

That the Council calls upon the Government to -

(1) deal with the fact that President Robert Mugabe is threatening to nationalise South African and other mining and business assets in addition to South African owned commercial farms in Zimbabwe; and

(2) make it known in the strongest possible terms that it will take all necessary steps to, if necessary, protect South African lives and property, including retaliatory action.

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, I give notice that I shall move at the next sitting of the House:

That the Council -

(1) notes with appreciation the work done at G F Jooste Hospital in Manenberg for saving lives at a hospital surrounded by crime;

(2) also notes that in October and November last year 18 people were admitted with stab wounds to the heart, but 15 of those patients survived as a result of the staff’s dedicated commitment to saving lives;

(3) commends this hospital’s good work in catering for the poorest of the poor in the Western Cape, where many of these communities are affected by deprivation, unemployment and overcrowding;

(4) further notes the setting aside of a special room for grieving family members visiting terminally ill patients; and

(5) calls on the Department of Health to show its appreciation in whatever form possible for the good work done by staff at this hospital and in so doing to promote good doctor-nurse-patient relationships.

             VIOLENCE AGAINST BUS DRIVERS IN KHAYELITSHA

                         (Draft Resolution)

Rev M CHABAKU: Madam Chair, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes the violence perpetrated against bus drivers in Khayelitsha; (2) recognises the need to protect the drivers of buses and the public at large;

(3) further recognises the right of commuters to exercise their free choice in selecting a mode of transport;

(4) calls on the Western Cape Government to take appropriate political steps in resolving the conflict in the Western Cape; and

(5) also calls on the above government to adopt a more proactive and urgent approach in resolving this crisis and to establish a stable environment which will ensure the safety of commuters and the public in general.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

   50th COMMEMORATION OF BANNING OF SOUTH AFRICAN COMMUNIST PARTY

                         (Draft Resolution)

Ms L JACOBUS: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  today, 20 June 2000, marks the 50th year since the introduction
       of the Suppression of Communism Act;


   (b)  on 26 June 2000 it will be the 50th commemoration of a strike
       which cost the lives of several workers who protested at the
       banning of the CPSA;


   (c)  20 June 1950 marked the beginning of over 40 years of intense
       repression of all political forces opposed to the heinous
       apartheid system, declared by the UN to be a crime against
       humanity;


   (d)  despite the banning of the CPSA and subsequently the ANC and
       other liberation organisations, political activity continued and
       leaders of the CPSA and the ANC liberation remained in the
       forefront of the struggle;


   (e)  communists such as Joe Slovo, Chris Hani, Yusuf Dadoo, Dora
       Tamana, Ray Alexander, J B Marks, Moses Mabida and others too
       numerous to mention dedicated their lives to a democratic South
       Africa; and


   (f)  despite the implementation of this Act and the intense
       repression and the sacrifices of the members of the South
       African Communist Party and others, they saw their sacrifices
       come to fruition on 27 April 1994;

(2) believes that the basic tenets of democracy are freedom of association and free political activity; and

(3) resolves -

   (a)  that it commits itself to ensuring that never again will
       political parties be banned in the interests of maintaining
       power; and
   (b)  to pay tribute to all those who suffered as a consequence of
       political repression.

[Applause.]

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

               CONDEMNATION OF MATCH-FIXING IN CRICKET

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M I MAKOELA: Chairperson, I give notice without motion:

That the Council -

(1) notes with disappointment and disgust the role of certain South African cricketers in match-fixing;

(2) recognises that this evil practice tarnishes the image of South African cricket in particular and South African sport in general;

(3) is of the opinion that such action undermines the efforts of the Government to eradicate corruption in all spheres of activity; and

(4) unequivocally condemns the immoral conduct of the fallen heroes of South African cricket and urges the United Cricket Board to take strong and appropriate measures against those who violate the code of conduct of international cricket.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Is there any objection against the motion?

Mr M E SURTY: Chairperson, there is no such thing as a notice without motion.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I beg your pardon?

Mr M E SURTY: Chairperson, the member moved a notice without motion. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I noticed that he was standing very still. [Laughter.] That may have been the reason for there being no motion. Is there any objection to this motion without notice? There is no objection.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

USE OF MATERIAL FROM ASBESTOS MINE HEAPS TO REPAIR ROADS IN THE NORTHERN PROVINCE

                         (Draft Resolution)

Dr E A CONROY: Voorsitter, na aanleiding van ‘n berig in die pers vandag stel ek sonder kennisgewing voor:

Dat die Raad -

(1) kennis neem van ‘n berig in die pers vandag, dat daar in die Noordelike Provinsie van die materiaal van asbesmynhope gebruik gemaak word om paaie te herstel wat in die onlangse oorstromings beskadig is en dat padgebruikers en mense wat in die omgewing woon sodoende onwetend aan die gevaar van asbesvergiftiging blootgestel word; en

(2) ‘n dringende beroep op die provinsiale regering van die Noordelike Provinsie doen om ondersoek hierna in te stel en opdrag te gee dat hierdie gebruik, hoewel goed bedoel, onverwyld gestaak word. (Translation of Afrikaans draft resolution follows.)

[Dr E A CONROY: Chairperson, on account of an article which appeared in the newspaper today, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes a report in the press today that material from asbestos mine heaps is being used in the Northern Province to repair roads damaged in the recent floods and that, as a result of that road users and people living in the area are unknowingly being exposed to the danger of asbestos poisoning; and

(2) makes an urgent appeal to the provincial government of the Northern Province to investigate this matter and direct that this practice, although well intentioned, be suspended immediately.]

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

           SOUTHERN AFRICAN ELECTION FORUM HELD IN NAMIBIA

                         (Draft Resolution)

Me E C GOUWS: Voorsitter, ek stel sonder kennisgewing voor:

Dat die Raad kennis neem -

(1) van die geslaagde ``Southern African Election Forum’’ wat vanaf 11 tot 14 Junie 2000 in Namibië gehou is;

(2) van die groot getal afgevaardigdes wat bestaan het uit verkiesingbeamptes, verkiesingdeskundiges, gemeenskapsleiers en parlementariërs van alle SAOG-lande wat byeengekom het om te besin oor vry en regverdige verkiesings in die streek;

(3) dat die forum ‘n eenparige besluit geneem het dat die ontwikkeling van norme en standaarde voorrang moet geniet om demokrasie in Suider- Afrika te konsolideer; en (4) dat die belangrikheid van demokrasie tydens verkiesings aan alle regerings, kommissies en persone gemoeid met verkiesings oorgedra word. (Translation of Afrikaans draft resolution follows.)

[Ms E C GOUWS: Chairperson, I move without notice:

 That the Council notes -


 (1)    the successful Southern African Election Forum which was held in
     Namibia from 11 to 14 June 2000;


 (2)    the large number of delegates, consisting of election officials,
     election experts, community leaders and parliamentarians from all
     SADC countries, who came together to reflect on free and fair
     elections in the region;


 (3)    that the forum unanimously agreed that the development of norms
     and standards must receive priority in order to consolidate
     democracy in Southern Africa; and


 (4)    that the importance of democracy during elections must be
     conveyed to all governments, commissions and persons involved with
     elections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Is there any objection to the motion?

Mr M V MOOSA: Yes, Chairperson.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! The motion has been objected to. It therefore becomes a notice of motion.

PRAISE FOR THE PRESIDENT’S EFFORTS TO PROMOTE DIALOGUE BETWEEN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND AFRICAN CONTINENT

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mrs R A NDZANGA: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) commends the President of the Republic of South Africa for his tireless efforts to set in motion a dialogue between developed countries and the African continent;

(2) recognises the importance of such a dialogue for the elimination of global inequalities among states;

(3) notes that the President’s efforts are steadily being rewarded by expressions of greater commitment towards the developing world such as the Declaration of Commitment made by the heads of the Nordic countries; and

(4) is confident that the President will succeed in getting the same kind of commitment during today’s meeting with European heads of state.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                        MOTION OF CONDOLENCE

               (The late Chief Justice Ismael Mahomed)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes with sadness the passing away of the Chief Justice of the Republic of South Africa, Chief Justice Ismael Mahomed;

(2) recognises that not only has he made an invaluable contribution to the transformation and development of our own legal system, but his contribution to legal development extended far beyond the boundaries of his country of birth;

(3) wishes to convey its deepest sympathy to the family and friends of Chief Justice Mahomed; and

(4) wants to assure his family and friends that -

   (a)  not only have they lost a family member and dear friend, but the
       country and indeed the African continent will feel the void left
       by his premature departure;
   (b)  he will be fondly remembered for his legal genius and the
       passion with which he embraced human rights; and


   (c)  his legacy will forever be remembered and will live on in those
       whose hearts and minds he touched during a long and
       distinguished legal career.

Mnr P A MATTHEE: Voorsitter, ek steun heelhartig die mosie van roubeklag van die Hoofsweep. Ek kan net sê dat ek Hoofregter Mahomed persoonlik geken het. Ons het in my jong dae selfs in ‘n stadium teen mekaar in die hof verskyn. Suid-Afrika verloor hier werklik een van die grootste regsgeleerdes en skerpste regsbreine van ons tyd.

Bo en behalwe die feit dat Hoofregter Mahomed ‘n uitstaande regsgeleerde was, het ek hom ook op ‘n persoonlike vlak geken as iemand wat werklik die land groot diens bewys het gedurende die onderhandelings wat die nuwe Suid- Afrika voorafgegaan het, iemand wat werklik een van die groot seuns van hierdie land was. Ons aan hierdie kant eer sy nagedagtenis en ons wil ons diepste meegevoel met sy naasbestaandes uitspreek. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, I wholeheartedly support the motion of condolence of the Chief Whip. I just want to say that I knew Chief Justice Mahomed personally. When I was younger, we even were opposing counsels in a court case at one stage. South Africa has really lost one of the greatest lawyers and sharpest legal brains of our time.

In addition to the fact that Chief Justice Mahomed was an outstanding lawyer, I also knew him on a personal level as someone who really rendered the country a great service during the negotiations which preceded the new South Africa, someone who was really one of the great sons of this country. We on this side honour his memory and we want to convey our deepest sympathy to his next of kin.]

Mr L G LEVER: Madam Chair, I wish to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the Chief Whip and also to convey to the family of the late Chief Justice the sympathy and condolences of both myself and the DP.

I wish to share with this House that the late Chief Justice was an inspiration to me personally during my studies of law in Grahamstown. At Rhodes University I had the privilege of observing him perform his art in challenging the infamous laws relating to detention without trial. I acknowledge him as a personal inspiration to me in my study of law, and I believe he was an inspiration to many other law students, both long before my time and probably long after my time.

Mr K D S DURR: Madam Chairperson, Judge Mahomed was, above all, a man of principle, who mobilised his huge intellect, ability and skill in playing a vital foundational role in the history of this country at a critical time. We honour his name and will remember him with pride. We extend our deepest sympathies and condolences to his family.

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, the IFP expresses its deepest sympathy on the loss of one of the country’s outstanding leaders. His work and contribution towards nation-building will remain for generations to come. Together with his relatives, friends and the whole country, we feel a great loss.

Mr J O TLHAGALE: Madam Chairperson, I wish to support the motion moved by the Chief Whip in respect of the death of Chief Justice Mahomed. I did not personally know him, but I have read about his astounding work after 1994. My condolences go to his family.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                 COURT APPEARANCE OF ELIAS MAYIMELE

                         (Draft Resolution)

Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes with regret that Elias Mayimele, ousted Hartebeespoort local councillor and ANC organiser, incurred the wrath of the Brits magistrates’ court on Monday, 15 June 2000, when he arrived at court in an ANC T-shirt with a picture of former President Nelson Mandela on it;

(2) further notes that Mayimele, who appeared in court on a charge of organising a political gathering without permission last year in Hartebeespoort, was treated as a criminal and appeared in court with his legs chained;

(3) further notes that during the court session on Monday magistrate Lenie Smith said that she did not think it appropriate for the picture of Mandela’s face to be on the accused’s person and gave Mayimele’s advocate, Nick Potgieter, the opportunity to tell Mayimele to change his shirt, which Mayimele refused …

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Are we not back at the point of order that was raised at a sitting two weeks ago, which concerned a case on which a judicial decision was pending? Has this case been finalised or is there a decision pending? We cannot reflect on the merits or otherwise of a case on which there is a judicial decision pending.

Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, I was referring to the fact that this man was chained. His legs were chained, and the magistrate told him to change the shirt he was wearing. Those are the issues I feel this House should condemn. Mayimele was put in jail because he said to the magistrate, ``you accused me when we were outside, so I do not allow you to pass judgment on me’’. The magistrate then said that this was contempt of court. He was given three months, and when he went on, he was given another three months.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! The question I posed was whether we are dealing with a case on which a judicial decision is pending. If there is still a decision pending, the matter is in conflict with the sub judice rule and I therefore cannot allow it to be discussed. I think I am correct in that regard.

                       COMRADES MARATHON 2000

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr D M KGWARE: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) wishes to express its heartfelt condolences to the Swanepoel family, in the Northern Province, on the loss of Mr Swanepoel during the Comrades Marathon;

(2) notes that the Comrades Marathon was well-organised;

(3) wishes to congratulate KwaZulu-Natal Athletics Club, KZNAC; Comrades Marathon Organisers, CMO; and Athletics South Africa, ASA, on their excellent work;

(4) notes that they succeeded in registering the highest number of participants in the history of the Comrades Marathon; and

(5) wishes to congratulate Poland-based Russian Vladimir Kotov for setting a new record time of 05:25:33, and to encourage South African participants to follow his outstanding performance and to attain gold medals for South Africa.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

         LAND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR DYSSELSDORP COMMUNITY
                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, Thoko Didiza,
       signed a settlement agreement with the Dysselsdorp community in
       the Western Cape;


   (b)  the settlement, amounting to R25 million, will directly benefit
       more than 13 000 people comprising the current community;


   (c)  the community lost their property, including 2 158 hectares of
       fertile land, through dispossession by the apartheid
       government's Group Areas Act in 1966; and


   (d)  as was the practice then, members of the community and their
       families were confined to less productive areas while their land
       was declared white; and

(2) salutes the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs for her efforts regarding land restitution.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

            INTEGRATED LAND DISTRIBUTION AND AGRICULTURAL
                        DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

                      (Subject for Discussion)

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, I must say that it is indeed interesting that today we have many opportunities as a department to discuss this subject for discussion in this Chamber this afternoon. It is an important question, because it does indeed deal with one of our strategic objectives as Government, namely, that of agricultural reform.

It is important for us, as we start this debate, to look at where we come from. Why was there a need for land reform and agricultural development? Looking back at the past five years when we were discussing and debating, as a country, how we were going to restructure and reconstruct South Africa, one of the fundamental questions we had to deal with was the issue of land dispossession, its impact on our society and how one could address the imbalances of the past.

Indeed, as a country, we were mindful of the fact that we would not be able to completely deal with the loss and the pain that many of the indigenous people of this country suffered under the previous colonial and apartheid governments. However, as a sign of reconciliation and as a sign of moving forward, we agreed that it was necessary that we close that chapter. Within the Constitution, we allowed ourselves an opportunity to deal with the matter of land dispossession in South Africa. We put in place a land reform programme which, as we know, has three elements: land restitution, land redistribution and tenure reform. The past five years have given us the basis on which we could put into place mechanisms that would allow us to achieve the land reform programme in South Africa. As members would know, we have moved at a particular pace which may not have been very acceptable to all of us, but indeed, dealing with such a challenge has been an enormous task.

One of our strategic objectives with the land reform programme and with agricultural restructuring was to deal with the skewed ownership of land in South Africa. It was also to ensure that we deracialised the agricultural sector so that it could, indeed, represent the demographics of the country. What we have done over the past five years, in terms of the various programmes that have been put in place, is that we have ensured that we redistributed land to the landless communities through support from the state by working together with the landowners in order to achieve that objective.

We have also been able to deal with land restitution, by bringing back those communities whose land was taken away from them, in areas such as Bloupunt in Dysselsdorp, in Schmidtsdrif in the Northern Cape and many others around the country, such as West Bank KwaNongongo, Payneville and Sophiatown. We are able to say that, even though we might not be able to completely redress what they have lost, we are extending a hand in reconciliation to say that we recognise the pain and the loss, and that we will try and do better.

Through our land redistribution programme, we have also been able to ensure that we assist those communities, both in urban settings and rural towns, to get access to land to enable their livestock to graze, and to enable them to plant their crops for sustenance through our commonage programme, in which we work together with provinces and local councils as well as municipalities. Working together with landowners, we were able to couch a joint partnership between farmworkers and their employers. There are many such initiatives, particularly around this area in the Western Cape, where we have seen a lot of partnerships between farmers and their farmworkers. This has not just been a way of trying to deal with landownership, but also with agricultural enterprise in South Africa.

The question is: Where do we go after five years of implementing our land reform and agricultural development programmes in South Africa? As the political leadership of the agricultural sector, I, as Minister, the Deputy Minister and the members of the executive council met last year and reviewed where we were with land reform, and agricultural development. We agreed that we were still no further in terms of our programme of deracialising the agricultural industry in South Africa. We also acknowledged that we had not made enough dents, in terms of our land redistribution programme, with regard to those who were previously disenfranchised.

Out of that analysis and review, we conceived a joint programme that was compiled by land and agricultural departments. First, there would be a working together of the two departments to target our communities. Second, this would ensure that those people who have always had an aspiration to go into agriculture as an enterprise, would have an opportunity to do so. This programme would help agricultural entrepreneurs from the previously disadvantaged communities get access to land, in addition to receiving support services from the agricultural sector to ensure that they succeed. At the same time, it would allow us, as a state, to diversify our ownership of land to those communities who were previously disadvantaged. It also creates opportunities for us to find a way in which we can promote agriculture in those communities who have been displaced from the land for a number of years. Therefore, this programme offers us an opportunity around which we can bring in various stakeholders, both within Government as well as in our society, to have a focused agenda on agrarian reform in South Africa.

Questions have been asked as to whether Government has the resources to support such a programme. Our answer to that question has been that it is in Government’s interest to ensure that we reconstruct South Africa for the better, and therefore, issues of resources will be looked into in accordance with the programme, as we consider it. Secondly, we acknowledge that it is not only Government resources that will put this programme in place, but also the beneficiaries themselves who, as entrepreneurs, will actually contribute to leverage more support.

State parastatals such as the Land Bank and other partners who are in the industry, such as Capespan, Grain SA and many others would find a way in which they can participate and become partners, as we have seen through our share equity ownership scheme before. Therefore the issues of resources should not only be looked at in relation to finance, but also in relation to human resources which are required in order to make agriculture sustainable. There are key questions that we have to deal with. One is the identification of land that will be made available for settlement. State land, though minimal, will be made available for this programme, and we will be able to deliberately acquire existing farm land for such a programme. We are also open to donations that some of the landowners may want to put into this programme so that it can succeed. In this regard, I would like to thank, in front of hon members, a Dr Hilton of Heidelberg in Gauteng, who is quite old and therefore felt he did not need his farm any more, and who approached us to say that he was willing to donate his farm in order to encourage the success of land reform in South Africa. [Applause.]

I would like to challenge farmers in other provinces to get at least one farmer to make a contribution of this nature, even if it is not more than 200 hectares. I am saying this because land reform and agricultural development are not only an agenda for the state, but also for all South Africans, if we want to deal with the legacy of our past.

Also, if we want to ensure that, as South Africans, we are able to participate competitively with other agricultural producers in the world, we need to increase our production base and therefore, we need to bring in new people into the mainstream.

One of the interesting things that have come up as a result of this programme is the need to have targeted support through training, for those people who will be beneficiaries. First, there has to be training of our own Government officials in order for them to respond to the needs of the beneficiaries, as well as training for beneficiaries themselves so that they can acquire skills as they enter into this programme.

It has also become apparent that we need to ensure that we have good monitoring systems so that we can rest assured that those who enter into this programme will actually succeed, and that we will be able to address difficulties timeously, so that where correction is required, it can indeed happen.

The other matter we have set ourselves is critical in order to ensure that this programme succeeds. This is the issue of financial support.

For the past five years, we have tried to put some mechanisms in place in order to reorientate the Land Bank to address the needs of the entrants. However, we acknowledge that a lot still needs to be done.

We are also encouraged by work that is done by other financial intermediaries such as the village banks in areas such as the North West and elsewhere in the country where communities, on their own, have created financial institutions that can support development at local level, more particularly, agricultural development within their midst.

As a department, we say that for this programme to succeed, we will require beneficiaries to choose, on their own, whether they want to come to this programme as groups or as individuals. In this way, indeed, they can actually raise some contributions that can assist them to leverage state support that will assist in their agricultural development.

Another important element is that for any agricultural venture to succeed, it will have to be supported by infrastructure. To this end, we have been discussing with the Ministry of Public Works how we can find a way through which we will be able to deal with issues of infrastructure in rural communities and bridges which would assist in the marketing of produce for those people who would like to go into agricultural development.

We also say that it is important for us as a Ministry to fast-track the whole issue of tenure reform, particularly so that we can deal with communal land as well as the situation of farmworkers. We are aware that farmworkers and labour tenants in our country are of those vulnerable groups whose security of tenure is not assured. We say that, through this programme, we must find a way of bringing those people as participants into this new programme, firstly through dealing with their security of tenure problem, but, secondly, by supporting them to become farmers in their own right.

We also say that there is a need not to forget that there are those people in our midst who still participate in agriculture at subsistence level. We are aware that it is not as situation of our communities’ making that they continue subsisting, and we are aware that they would actually like to grow. By looking at where they are in the interim, what is it that Government can do? We say we do have a food security programme which is targeted at supporting those communities who may want to improve their production capacity and sometimes even have a surplus that they can sell for income.

Partnership between national and provincial Government on this programme is also necessary. To facilitate particularly the disposal of state land which will assist in this programme, we have actually delegated powers of attorney to provincial MECs. This will be done in accordance with policy, ensuring that targeted beneficiaries are reached and ensuring that this authority is not used for party-political gain. It is therefore important that, when we engage in this programme, we are mindful of who our target beneficiaries are - those who have been previously disadvantaged, the poor and those who are willing to be entrepreneurs.

As a department and Ministry, we are ready to get views from the members but we are also ready to roll out this programme as soon as possible. We take this debate as a forum where the members will be able to sharpen our thoughts on what those critical issues are that we need to be mindful of as we enter into this programme. [Applause.] Rev P MOATSHE: Madam Chair, hon Minister and Deputy Minister, members of the department present here and hon members, our Government has been confronted with the challenge of acquiring land for the purpose of restitution and redistribution. This occurred in terms of the Expropriation Act which relies on the principle of willing buyer-willing seller and relies on the dominant market value.

Section 25 of the Constitution, which is enshrined in the Bill of Rights, guarantees the protection of property against arbitrary deprivation of property. It does, however, permit expropriation in terms of the law of general application for public purpose or public interest.

Public interest in section 25(4) includes the nation’s commitment to land reform and reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa’s natural resources.

Section 25(5) informs the state to take legislative and other measures within its available resources to speed up conditions which will enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis. This provision places a positive duty on the state to take such steps to reduce the inequitable ownership distribution of land under the apartheid regime. While land has been acquired in the past on the basis of reasonable negotiations, there are many instances of an unreasonable reluctance on the part of certain property owners to alienate their land or portions thereof at reasonable and equitable prices, which impedes land reform.

The time has perhaps arrived when Government should give due consideration to implementing the provision of section 25(3) of the Constitution which allows for expropriation in the public interest, and which must be fast and equitable. It does so by departing from the principle of a market-related value and the often initiated willing buyer-willing seller principle by creating a balance between the public interest and the interest of the affected landowners by having due regard to the following factors: firstly, current use of property; secondly, the history of the acquisition and use of the property; thirdly, the market value of the property; fourthly, the extent of direct estate investment and subsidy in the acquisition and beneficial capital improvement of the property; and lastly, the purpose of the expropriation.

This will, in effect, mean that the market value of the property does not become the dominant factor, but one of a range of factors. This will effectively mean that, where land was acquired at a nominal and unrealistic value, is not currently in use and the affected party has made no direct investment in the property, it would effectively reduce the purchase consideration on a just and equitable basis and make the acquisition more just, fair and reasonable.

This will enable the state to move swiftly on land reform. A possible consideration may be to set out these factors as guidelines for negotiations. If there are good factors the existing legislation must be amended in order to bring it in line with the provisions of the Constitution. I think we are dealing with a key problem in South Africa which can bring reconciliation between the nations of South Africa that come from two worlds in order for them to live in one world.

Regarding the question of the landless and landowners, this Government talks of sharing, something which can bring about stability in South Africa. People who are prepared to share what they have can go a long way in creating harmonious coexistence. Landowners who are prepared to share what they have will concretise reconciliation in this world or this country which we love so much. Why must we have market-related prices if this land is unutilised? Why do we not reach a position whereby there can be some kind of sharing so that, together, we are able to move forward as one nation, one people, in one country?

I want to thank the Minister and tell her that she is the right Minister at the right time. Her heart is very close to the land question. I think she is the appropriate person to lead us in this process, especially because so many people in this country are yearning and crying for land. Many people still seem to be living in the past. They have not come to grips with the dynamics of our history.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon member, your time has expired. You can give more praises next time. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, agricultural reform in South Africa must be fast-tracked. Land reform through land redistribution must be fast- tracked. The imbalances of the past must be addressed. But these two actions cannot be separated. They can only be successful if sustainability is the focus, and this can only be achieved with sufficient support at various levels.

As the hon the Minister knows very well, land reform demands thorough planning, or it can do more harm than good. Land reform was boosted in Chile in 1962 and again in 1967. Production plunged by 22,5% and some areas and cities suffered food shortages. Peru’s first phase of land reform started in 1964 and peaked in 1969. Unoccupied farms were simply expropriated, agricultural outputs slumped by 20%, and food imports cost R1,3 billion. In 1970, 80% of Mexico’s traditional ranches were converted into small agricultural units, and conflict and mediocre production became widespread.

I am aware that the hon the Minister has committed herself to accelerated land and agricultural reform. I attended her briefing this morning and felt very privileged to sit there. I think the hon chairperson of my committee should have been there as well. I do not know why it was not a joint sitting at all. I wish the hon the Minister and her department luck with this process. But considering the examples I have quoted, I also want to caution the hon the Minister never to forfeit sufficiency merely for the sake of transformation. Such success would be of very short standing. Food security must never suffer because of agricultural insufficiency or insecurity in the industry.

In the 1920s - my communist friends will appreciate this - Stalin destroyed the kulaks in a bloody massacre to stabilise food security. Land redistribution and sustainable agriculture in South Africa are too important for the people working in the industry and the South African economy for us to play party politics with them. I hope we will not experience that today in this Chamber.

Agriculture in South Africa suffers from a very bad image, and politicians contribute daily towards that. There might still be a ``dop stelsel’’ [liquor wage system] on some farms, there might still be unlawful evictions on others, there might still be some farmers who make use of child labour, and there might still be racism on certain farms. However, now is the time to identify those farms and farmers who do these things and let the law take its course. But, it is unfair to label all farmers with this bad name and, by so doing, create an atmosphere which makes it impossible for black farmers to participate in joint ventures with commercial farmers on the one hand and create an atmosphere in which commercial farmers are skeptical to get involved in joint ventures with black farmers on the other hand.

Worst of all, we create a climate for criminals to murder and rob on farms. This is intolerable and must stop. A total of 800 murders on farms since 1994 is 800 too many. According to the hon the Minister’s programme to create a black commercial farming class as part of the overall strategy of land reform and redistribution, she is promoting public-private partnership projects in which the Government enters into an agreement with agribusiness to establish a number of black commercial farmers, where the Government will provide the necessary budget or an alternative arrangement in which a commercial farmer acts as a mentor to assist her or his farmworkers to acquire a nearby piece of land and manage it as a farm.

The hon the Minister included this in her programme because she knows that there are many willing and positive commercial farmers and organisations that will participate, such as Capespan, Grain SA, the National Wool Growers’ Association and the meat industry. They are all willing and prepared to build South Africa in this way. We as politicians have a responsibility to promote the contributions of our white and black commercial farmers towards a sustainable agriculture through which we can create the circumstances and climate conducive for them to enter into joint ventures.

Threats of the Zimbabwean model for South Africa should be scorned because this would mean economic collapse. That is exactly what started the Zimbabwean situation which has led to the 70% inflation, 50% unemployment, fuel shortages and electricity supply disruptions. The Zimbabwean model in South Africa will result in the bloodshed that was avoided in 1994. [Interjections.]

The hon the Minister has everything it takes to make a success of land redistribution and agriculture in South Africa on her side. She has the Constitution; the Land Settlement Amendment Act which empowers her to give financial assistance; the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which protects those who live on farms; and the Land Restitution and Reform Laws Amendment Act which accelerates the reform process. Above all, there are many people out there who are waiting for land and for assistance in order to become commercial farmers and a large group of commercial farmers who are ready to assist her. She has enough land for the near future in the hands of the Government. She has funds available, and South Africa with all its people is waiting for her to move this process forward. [Time expired.]

Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, hon Minister, colleagues, this debate deals with agricultural development and not urban development or the provision of housing. While urban development and the provision of housing are both important topics, they should not be allowed to cloud the present debate. We need to distinguish between those who simply want land to live on, and those who want land on which to practise productive agriculture.

There are essentially three considerations that cannot be avoided in the context of this debate. Firstly, the systematic dispossession of black farmers and landowners through the Land Act of 1913, the Group Areas Act and a host of other repressive laws is the single greatest cause of poverty and land hunger that we see today.

Secondly, property rights and the rule of law are fundamental principles that underwrite not only the Constitution, but the very basis of South Africa’s international reputation and economic prospects. Finally, the productive capacity of the land must be protected.

It is within the context of these considerations that any policy for the redistribution of commercially viable farmland must be framed. Implicit in the debate on land redistribution and agricultural development is the need to establish a black commercial farming class. The DP welcomes the Minister’s acceptance of the need to establish such a class, and agrees that land redistribution must be addressed in a meaningful way.

Having agreed in principle that redistribution of land must take place, we need to consider where the required land can be obtained. In order to answer this question, land needs to be placed in one of four categories which are, firstly, state land; secondly, commercial farmland; thirdly, tribal and trust land; and fourthly, urban, industrial and other land which falls outside the scope of this debate.

When dealing with state land, according to the Department of Land Affairs, there is an area of approximately 24 333 000 hectares that can be designated as state land. This includes land from the ex-TBVC and self- governing states. We are advised by the Department of Land Affairs that, in its opinion, some 5% to 7% of this land is suitable for agricultural purposes. This suggests that there is an area of approximately 1,5 million hectares which is immediately available for redistribution. This is a significant amount of land, and is certainly sufficient to start the process. Once this land has been identified, a full land use audit will have to be conducted to determine what the land can be used for as well as what will constitute a viable unit for a particular type of land.

As regards the second category, ie commercial farmland, the DP believes that land in this category should only be acquired for redistribution on the basis of the willing seller-willing buyer principle, and that market value should not be tampered with. This source should only be resorted to once all available state and trust land which is suitable for commercial agriculture has been redistributed.

Dealing with the third category, that of tribal and trust land, we feel this is a sensitive issue because it involves peoples’ customs and traditions. But, we need to place on the table and debate whether this form of land tenure serves the best interests of the people who live in traditional communities as well as whether this tenure serves the long-term interest of the country in a changing world. Aside from this form of sensitive issue, which will form a debate in its own right, we are advised that there are 1,18 million hectares of ex-SA Development Trust Land currently held by the national Department of Land Affairs and that much of this land has not yet been allocated to new owners. This land would also be available for immediate redistribution.

The DP believes that the process of land redistribution should be one whereby effective strategies are developed to transfer available farmland to new owners from disadvantaged communities in such a way that the new owners can continue to farm effectively. The DP recognises the important role commercial farming plays in our economy and it recognises the need to produce sufficient food in a cost-efficient manner in order to feed our people and, to this end, the new unit should be economically viable, the unit should be affordable for those who acquire it, the new owner should be suitably qualified in terms of training and/or potential, the productive capacity of the land must be protected, appropriate training and technical support must be made available, at least in the early stages of this project, and appropriate measures should be taken to keep land speculators out of any redistribution scheme, but provision should be made for successful farmers to buy out the unsuccessful farmers where they fail in their enterprise. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Rev Chabaku, it is your turn to speak.

Rev M CHABAKU: Mr Chairperson, I have not prepared a speech.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Sorry, hon member. It is not your fault. It is perhaps the fault of the Whips who have a different list to the one which I have here. According to the new list, the next speaker is Ms B Thomson.

Ms B THOMSON: Chairperson and hon members, the success of the historical struggle against landlessness is long overdue. It is now some six years since the dawning of a democratic South Africa, and the land question is yet to be resolved. Enormous challenges have been faced by the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, rural poverty is rife and the progress of emerging and commercial black farmers remains static. This is in spite of the endeavours of our Government.

How, then, do we move forward? It is in this context that we see the emergence of an integrated programme of land redistribution and agricultural development in South Africa. It is the brainchild of the Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs. This programme seeks to address the inadequacies of the current land reform programme as envisaged in the White Paper on South African Land Policy.

The task, enormous as it is, has not been failed by the proposal in the White Paper, but rather by a seeming lack of co-operation on the part of some stakeholders. As we must have heard, people such as Mr Lever still talk about market-related prices. I would like to say to Mr Lever that that is the problem we are experiencing. As with all democratic South African policies, a reconciliatory balance has to be struck. On the one hand, we have wealthy commercial white farmers whilst on the other, there are the black rural poor. However, within the rural community, there is a small proportion of the people who are promising farmers who strive to make farming their business, although they have not been given the opportunity to do so. The opportunity now arises with the integrated programme on land redistribution and agricultural development. Like other developmental programmes, it is faced with constraints of resources, particularly that of finance. It has therefore become necessary for the grant recipients under the programme to make some form of contribution.

Land is a resource or asset which appreciates in value. With South Africa facing double digit inflation rates, this exacerbates the situation because land value will keep rising, yet the new programme seeks to address the needs of the previously disadvantaged. A sliding scale of grant has been proposed, and this is understandable within the constraints of finance. It is flexible, offering opportunities, namely, for a food safety net, equity schemes and production for markets. Applicants have to make their contribution of R5 000 in the form of cash, labour or material in order to access a grant of R20 000. An opportunity also exists for farmworkers who may enter into equity schemes by buying shares in the farm business. This is where I see white commercial farmers coming in, assisting and reconciling with their workers by educating them about schemes and encouraging workers to enter the schemes. This may go a long way in easing labour unrest as workers would then become co-owners.

Although the new programme is particularly intended for beneficiaries under the redistribution component of land reform, it is an exciting idea that will, however, cater for the restitution and tenure security components. This offers a golden opportunity for beneficiaries of restitution, as the restored land or compensation can form part of their own contribution. Approximately 40% of the land area in KwaZulu-Natal falls under the amakhosi. According to Walter Ntuli, vice-president of Kwanalu, that is, KwaZulu-Natal’s agricultural union, the KwaZulu-Natal Land Affairs Act falls short of the sweeping changes that will see the realisation of the full potential of these lands. If the communities in the amakhosi areas show an intention to farm, then the programme offers prospects of providing a marketable surplus.

At present, commercial farming activities are dominated by whites who were offered various forms of protection under the apartheid regime. With the deregulation of markets and the abolition of protective marketing schemes through control boards, these have fallen away.

During the past two months we have seen a rapid increase in the price of potatoes, onions and tomatoes. This is owing to a shortage of produce, partly as a result of adverse weather conditions experienced in certain parts of our country. This has a serious implication for inflation, because it has the ripple effect of pushing up prices, especially of products made from these vegetables. Obviously, if more farmers enter the commercial field, such a situation of food shortages and high prices can be reversed. If food supplies increase, competition increases and prices become affordable for the consumer.

This does not necessarily mean a detrimental squeeze on prices for the farmer, as innovative farmers are able to exploit the economics of scale. However, the farmers who are able to think progressively are the ones who make it in the marketplace.

Farming requires large capital outlays and is a risky business. Emerging farmers will have to be able to manage risks. [Time expired.]

Mr R M NYAKANE: Chairperson, the magnitude of damage done to the rural communities by the previous agricultural policy of the former apartheid government must not be overemphasised. There were instances in which blacks were forcibly removed from fertile lands and resettled on lands that were semidesert in nature or malaria-infested. The vacated lands were later demarcated into farms and allocated to whites only for agricultural purposes. Blacks had stayed on the land because of the land’s fertility and great agricultural potential. It is for this reason that we sit today with the formidable problems of land restitution and redistribution.

The policy of willing seller, willing buyer is viable because of its bottom- up approach. However, the process becomes abused as exorbitant prices are attached to the land. The willing seller’s knowledge of the Land Bank’s loan facility is another exacerbating factor. The price of the farm has to be equated with its annual yield, especially its turnover. Knowledge of the farm’s performance over the past five years has to be had as well. The Land Bank must not be seen to be facilitating a process in which the buck is passed to the next person. It is for this reason that state intervention is called for.

Concerning the emerging farmers or resource-limited farmers, the current agricultural policy does accommodate and recognise this group. However, there are still inhibiting factors encountered by emerging farmers which need to be addressed upfront, such as the difficulty in accessing production input, eg mechanisation, fertilisers, electricity, etc.

I purposefully depict these factors in order to demonstrate the environment within which emerging farmers operate. In some areas in the Northern Province, farming has come to a halt as a result of some of these problems.

With regard to building competitiveness and growth in agriculture, to achieve this we must create an environment in which there is competition in farming. This can be achieved through, among other things, the introduction of district shows for the display of agricultural products, the establishment of community-based agricultural co-operatives which would provide agricultural inputs at reasonable cost, ready access to mechanisation, etc.

I am also aware of the role of the Agricultural Research Council in our country. We commend them for the services they render. I am aware of an ARC branch in Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. However, the worrying problem is that this particular branch of the institution is still in its embryonic stage. We request that the activities of these institutions stretch their tentacles to reach the peripheral areas. A lot can be achieved from this, taking into account what Infrutec and Buisplaas have already achieved. [Applause.]

Chief M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, I received a directive, which later became a mandate, to say that our ANC-led Government has always been a responsible government and will continue to ensure that the inequities of the past are redressed within the shortest period of time possible.

The redistribution of land is one of the key areas which needs urgent attention. As the Government for the people, the ANC has committed itself to systematically putting in place policies that will ensure that this redistribution of land is done in a cohesive manner.

Without preaching to the converted, we have all read in the newspapers about the difficulties that Zimbabwe is experiencing with land redistribution. This is precisely what we want to avoid in our country. Because Zimbabwe did not, immediately after independence, seek to systematically draft and implement land reform policies that would free those deprived of their birthright by unjust laws in order to finally get what is justly theirs, they now have a crisis on their hands.

Taking the land back ruthlessly is not an option for South Africa, nor should it be an option anywhere else in the world. We must be guided by the needs of our people, especially those who, since the Land Act of 1913, have had their properties forcibly taken away by satanic people.

This integrated programme has been in the pipeline for a very long time. This Government had already done the groundwork for an integrated programme of land redistribution and agricultural development in South Africa in a report entitled, ``Encouraging Sustainable Smallholder Agriculture in South Africa’’ released in June 1998.

We are not content with this programme just to increase access to agricultural land for previously disadvantaged people, but we also believe that we should be empowering these emerging farmers to work the land and earn a decent living through training.

I have some questions for the Minister. Firstly, in the opinion of the hon the Minister, why was the previous government not keen to assist our black emerging farmers from the disadvantaged areas? Secondly, why did only certain groups get assistance from the previous government? Thirdly, in the Minister’s opinion, why are some people who benefited from the previous government now saying that the present Government would be wasting money if it assisted the black emerging farmers? Those are my only questions.

One of the tasks of the department was to do an audit of land and land users. Obviously, this is a necessary exercise to determine how much land we have for redistribution. Unfortunately, this process has not been completed yet, but I hope and believe that the department is well on its way to finalising this enormous task. This should not be seen as a setback to redistribution, because other processes can continue concurrently, such as the ``how’’ of land redistribution.

The article that appeared in the Mail & Guardian on 9 June describes the process better than I am now doing. It talks about a revolutionary plan to transfer a third of all farmland to black people in the coming years. Beneficiaries can purchase land from as little as R5 000 up to as much as R400 000. Tens of thousands of disadvantaged farmers are set to benefit from this plan. Beneficiaries can choose, either on the basis of economical constraints or because of needs, which farming enterprise they wish to embark upon. Some will have the option of commercial farming which is geared towards large-scale projects for large markets. Others, such as emerging farmers, will have the opportunity to cater for the sustenance of the household or small community in the area. However, even if the emerging farmer wishes to venture into large-scale farming, operating facilities will always have to be secured.

The ANC sees this new integrated programme of land redistribution and agricultural development every bit as revolutionary as the newspaper described it. Together with the department, we can endeavour to iron out all the problems of implementation and focus consistently on close monitoring of this programme. I cannot help but thank and congratulate this dedicated, energetic, focused, decisive and very, very humble Minister on a job well done. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Nkk J N VILAKAZI: Sihlalo ohloniphekile, malungu ahloniphekile, boNgqongqoshe abakhona phakathi kwethu kanye nomKhandlu wonke, udaba esiphezu kwalo namhlanje lubalulekile empilweni yawo wonke umuntu, futhi lumayelana nemvelo yethu. Ngisho ezolimo phela. Abantu kuyimvelo yabo nendlela yokuziphilisa ukusebenzisa inhlabathi. Laba nje ababephuca umhlaba wokhokho babo babayisa ezindaweni eziwugwadule, ezinganothile, babagqema udume lwengozi engeqiwa ntwala futhi abangasoze bayikhohlwa nanini.

Inhlabathi ukuze isiphilise kahle, sidinga ulwazi ngayo ukuze isilethele isivuno esihle. Ulwazi lwezolimo ludinga ukuthuthukiswa. Umuntu angaba nawo umhlaba kodwa uma engakwazi ukuwusebenzisa, lokho akuthi shu. Uxhaso siyaludinga ukuze sithuthukise ulwazi esinalo. Abanye abadingi umhlaba omkhulu kodwa badinga indawo abazokwazi ukuziphilisa kuyo. Abanye abanolwazi badinga umhlaba omkhulu abazowusebenzisa. Kodwa-ke, kudingeka imali yokusebenza kahle kubuye futhi kudingeke izimakethe ukuze phela bathole inzuzo, kukhule umnotho wabo kanye nowezwe futhi. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, hon members, hon Ministers who are in this House and the House at large, the issue that we are discussing today is important to the lives of all people. It is also important to our environment. By environment I am referring to agriculture. Naturally, people cultivate the soil in order to make a living. Those who deprived our people of their land and forced them to settle in dry and infertile areas did a terrible and indelible thing in their lives.

We need to know about soil if we want to get the best out of it. Knowledge on agriculture needs to be improved. One can own land but if one cannot use it, it is useless to have it. We need sponsors so that we will be able to increase our knowledge. Some people do not need hectares of land, but a small portion that they can use for subsistence farming. Others who have knowledge need plenty of land. However, there is a need for money to enable farmers to work. There is also a need for a market where they can sell their products at a profit so that their economy and that of the country can grow.]

Farmers who grow maize, soya beans, and farm with cattle, milk, sheep and other perishable crops in order to develop and prosper, will have to form co-operatives. In KwaZulu-Natal we have succeeded in getting the power of attorney to trade on state land. This is not too early, because the people are growing increasingly impatient with the ponderous methods of land restitution which exist.

In the past the IFP in the kingdom of KwaZulu-Natal has put forward schemes in order to address the need to own a piece of land. Once again the concept of satisfying the need to own a piece of land is presented. The provision of land purely for farming purposes will be woefully insufficient and will have to be augmented by privately owned land in order to satisfy the needs of both small commercial farmers and the small land holder.

It is proposed that land should be acquired as commonage for the grazing of livestock for the use of people who have bought a plot in an agrivillage adjacent to it. A prerequisite for such an arrangement would be that this village should be on a main road, so that people’s livelihood would depend upon work found in the main centres, unless light industry could be attracted to the agrivillage.

There is a dire need for land reform to become a reality. Now is the time to see things happening at a greater pace, since Zimbabwe certainly must have woken us all up. Let us stop talking and proceed to do good work. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Rev Chabaku, you must be ready now. It is your turn.

Rev M CHABAKU: Chairperson, hon Minister, and this very august House, first allow me to respond to a poster on which I saw written the following:

ANC without opposition is equal to Zimbabwe.

[Interjections.] This poster was very offensive and racist, and it tarnishes the image of the party which put up such a poster. [Interjections.] Such small-party thinking shames some of its fine members. [Laughter.] How can we project such a statement when South Africa and Zimbabwe are both agonising over a painful transition and changes? The land question is not only an issue in Zimbabwe. We have the same land question in South Africa, and if we do not watch out, we may have an even worse situation than Zimbabwe! [Interjections.]

However, we are here to agonise together with Zimbabweans, because they are our brothers and sisters, and we have to learn from them so that we do not make the same mistakes. We should thank God that we have an organisation like the ANC that turns enemies into friends, that accommodates those who have robbed and exploited us, and given them Cabinet posts. If we did not have an accommodating spirit towards all people, and if we returned evil for evil, imagine where we would be.

This is what we stand for. We will not stoop so low as to present other organisations in that way or label other parties like that. It is a shame that in this day and age people take advantage of the agony and pain of other people. [Interjections.] I hope that those who belong to that party will question that and put it right, because I know that there are some decent people in those parties who would not have made up such a negative poster. [Interjections.] This is not the time for that. It is time to work together, help each other and grow.

I am also very thankful that we have such an hon Minister who has such great ideals and concerns about the land question in South Africa. She has brought about some radical changes in the programme of integration of those who need land. The Government is not going to simply dole out land, but people are going to get training. Not everybody is going to get land. Those who want land will need to undergo training and get tutorial guidance which will be very helpful in order to ensure that this does not happen at the expense of our economy. This is a very progressive way of dealing with the land issue. We commend our Minister, and we want to say that this is very a worthwhile exercise.

The hon Minister has also gone further to ensure that agriculture is not only a rural affair, but an affair that concerns all people everywhere. We are therefore going to encourage men and women, boys and girls, in colleges, schools and universities, to be involved in providing sustenance as well. They must learn how to grow food and plant crops that will provide for them, not only for consumption, but also for profit. Schools, colleges, universities and institutions of learning and religion must be encouraged to begin to see agriculture as the growing of food, and even revolutionising our gardens. Our gardens have lovely ornamental flowers that we cannot eat even when we are starving. People must be taught to grow food and other crops in their gardens so that they can have something to eat, and not just something to admire.

We also look forward to the opportunity that our Minister is giving all the local and provincial governments to go out and encourage colleges, schools and other institutions of learning to train everybody to be involved in agricultural development. We need this, not just for tests, but the people must know that the land belongs to them. They have to nurture it, look after it and protect it.

With this kind of vision that we have, it is everybody’s job. It is not just the job of those people who are in the rural areas on whom we depend, because agriculture affects everybody’s life. If one looks at the economy of any country or at any aspect of life, it is connected to agriculture. Therefore, if we cannot nurse agriculture, we will not survive. All of us are what we are because of agriculture. Let us multiply it. Let us nurture it. Let us make our kids begin to earn a living and respect the land, and not spoil it and poison it. Agriculture is not just for growing food and raising pets, but should also be nurtured for tomorrow.

With these few words I thank the hon the Minister. May the Minister move forward with this wonderful programme of hers. She has our endorsement and our support. Amen! [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I would like to say thank you to the members who have participated in the debate. Indeed, it has raised some of the very critical questions around the issues that we are debating today, namely that of integrated land reform and agricultural development. I think all of us who took part in the debate agree that this is the way in which we have to proceed. Issues and concerns were raised, with hon members saying that we need to do careful planning, and we agree with that.

However, I think it is also important that when we raise such questions, we do not use them as a way to avoid dealing with the problems head-on. There will surely be difficulties. We all agree that there may be unintended consequences, but we have to minimise those. That is why we are allowing for debate and input on this programme. We are also saying that in order to avoid some of the pitfalls which have occurred in Chile, Peru and Mexico, as Mr Van Niekerk highlighted, we will have to work together to find a better way in which we can ensure that we avoid some of those unintended consequences. Clearly that can only happen when there is a broad buy-in into the programme, and that we give clear proposals of what needs to be done. I would welcome that.

Regarding what the hon Mr Lever said, I think that we all agree that the redistributing of state land as a way of redistribution, particularly for agricultural purposes, is the beginning, but not the end. As he himself has said, out of the 24 million hectares of state land available, only 5% to 7% is available for agricultural production. This means that it is very minimal. Our own count tells us that it could be more or less 2 million hectares in all, or 1,9 million hectares, to be more exact. Therefore, it means that we would have to acquire land deliberately which is on the market, and also induce the release of more land onto the market.

There are some proposals that have been made by hon members, such as looking at the Expropriation Amendment Act which is provided for in our own Constitution, and as hon Rev Moatshe indicated, if one looks at section 25 of our Constitution, particularly where we deal with issues relating to property, we acknowledge the fact that we need to balance this with the need for land reform. Therefore, it is very clear that the issue of expropriation must not be handled out of context, but in a manner that satisfies our public interests and in accordance with the law. There are regulations on how that can be done, so that is not an issue for debate.

With regard to the issue of market value for expropriation as a criterion, I also want to say that it is one of the many factors. However, if one looks at the Constitution carefully, it does not even deal with market value. It just refers to equitable redress. That is what it says. In terms of our policy, we then proposed the market value. Now, I think that hon members have raised some of the key questions. How does one value agricultural land? Does one only look at the market value, or does one also factor in the production value? This is the debate that we have to continue having so as to find a better way of dealing with this issue, so that it does not become a hindrance to our land reform objective, but assists us in dealing with the matter in a way that is balanced.

The other very important issue that a number of hon members have touched on is the need for proper extension support, or support services to those people who will enter into the programme. We agree with them that that is necessary. That is why we are saying that, as part of the criteria, our own officials will have to undergo some kind of reorientation, so that the way in which they support the beneficiaries is done in a manner that actually empowers those who want to get into the programme.

Clearly, there are many issues that we need to deal with in terms of how we actually work in partnership within Government and also with other people in the private sector, in order to ensure that as South Africans we undertake our land reform and agricultural development in a way that will make us proud to be South Africans.

I would like to thank hon members for this debate. I am sure that it is not the end. I am sure that we will be able to engage in the portfolio committees, and also in the various fora where hon members themselves can participate. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! That concludes the discussion. [Interjections.] Order, hon Ministers. [Laughter.]

Allow me to take this opportunity to thank the hon the Minister for engaging this Chamber in this lively debate on an important matter. On that note, if you have no questions on the Supplementary Estimate, then you may be excused, hon Minister.

[Order! The following Budget Votes have been amended in the Supplementary Estimate: Votes Nos 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 13, 19, 22, 34 and 35. I have been informed that there are questions to Ministers regarding their Votes as they appear on the Schedule to the Bill. Members will have the opportunity to ask questions of the Ministers responsible regarding their Votes, and I would prefer that each question be asked and answered separately instead of questions being lumped together.

               CONSIDERATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE

Vote No 4 - Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:

Mr A MARAIS: Chairperson, hon Minister, the national Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology will be utilising a proportion of its Supplementary Estimate to stimulate our cultural industries. The department uses the phrase Buy South African'' in its campaign to promote cultural industries. My questions are as follows. Firstly, to what extent is the Buy South African’’ campaign in conflict with the free-trade dogma of the WTO, and, secondly, what monitoring mechanisms are instituted by the department to ensure that the objectives of poverty relief and job creation are realised?

The MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Chairperson, the ``Buy South African’’ campaign is about the branding of South African products and services that we provide to the rest of the world. It is like the stars and stripes of the United States of America, or the Union Jack when it comes to British industry. It is what countries do in order to create a niche for their products in the international market. It is in no way excluding trade or creating nontariff barriers such as those which happen with labour and environmental standards. It is a marketing tool, and we are involved in this with the DTI, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, and as I said, it is imaging our country.

As far as the issue of ensuring that this poverty relief money goes to the people is concerned, we are not focusing here on research or pilot studies, but we are supporting those efforts that are ongoing in creating jobs, particularly in the crafts industry and the music industry. The recording industry here is a powerful tool for bringing new talent into the market and for creating jobs. So far, it has not been handled to the benefit of the people, so we are reforming the music industry through the legislative programme that we are embarking on. Also, in terms of crafts, there are huge possibilities. Already, there are many markets being opened up to our craftspeople. As I am talking here, there has been an order from Seattle to send some young Ndebele women to go and paint murals there and to produce many other craft products. So, we will use this money to assist those processes.

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I want to address the issue of cultural tourism development, as this is a very important developmental area. In the light of the fact that the State Theatre is going to be closed down because of the mismanagement of millions of rands by the board members, I want to know two things from the Minister. The first one needs a little bit of motivation. It is totally heartbreaking that the State Theatre needs to be closed down, and it is not going to be so easy to reopen it after such a dramatic step.

The State Theatre hosted, in one year, more people than did Loftus Versveld, the rugby stadium, in the same city, in the same year. [Interjections.] Yes, the hon member is right. [Laughter.] That was when they could still play rugby.

I want to know from the hon the Minister what steps he is going to take to prevent this from happening again, and, secondly, and more importantly, has he allocated enough money for business management skills development under cultural tourism development?

The MINISTER: As far as training in cultural tourism is concerned, we are establishing a sector education and training agency position for the cultural industries under which we include cultural tourism. We are working very closely with the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism on all the programmes relating to the promotion of tourism. So, it is not just a single-department effort. It is a combined effort which is joined together with the Spatial Development Initiatives which are run and chaired by my colleagues, Minister Valli Moosa and Minister Alec Erwin. There is a broad programme in that respect, and we are making progress.

As far as the issue of the State Theatre is concerned, it is a tragic happening for all of us. It was with a very heavy heart that I took a recommendation to Cabinet to consider this option. We allocated R33 million to the State Theatre, but this year, they would not have been able to have productions up till the end of the year unless we provided another R43 million over and above that R33 million. Now, the question is: Where were we going to draw this money from? Would we close other sections of our department to provide the money? It was an impossible situation.

The mismanagement is related to the arms-length handling of arts in the country. During the Actag process in 1995-6, there was a clear policy recommendation, which we accepted, that there would be an arms-length management of the arts which meant that we would give them the money, they would give us a financial report at the end of the year, and that that would be the relationship. We could not send in inspectors to check their books and their productions in terms of cost and relevance. It was all up to them. Unfortunately, we have seen the results of this policy, but nevertheless, we are working to improve it, and we are setting up a special directorate in the Ministry to deal with the performing arts. We cannot have productions this year, but we are putting together a new board to prepare for the year 2001-2002.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Any follow-up question? Remember, there can only be one follow-up question.

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Thank you. With two subsections or …

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): No subsections. [Laughter.]

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I just want to know something from the Minister. I know that I am misusing the State Theatre issue a bit by putting it on the table. Was it the arms-length policy that failed or was it the board members that failed?

The MINISTER: It was the board members who failed. One cannot tell me that in a department such as wardrobe, one would have a deficit of R4 million. How many costumes can one buy for that amount of money? In every other department in the state theatre, there were deficits of over a R1 million. Where was the board? Where was the management? I am saying that had we obviously been more involved, we would have been warned much earlier. So, we need to revise the nature of the arms-length policy so that there is some oversight and an early warning system in future.

Vote No 8 - Education:

Mr N M RAJU: Chair, my question to the hon the Minister is in respect of the programmes sector - general and further education and training in the Supplementary Estimate. The sector of general and further education and training sees an increase of some R31,295 million from R361,55 to R392,45 million, which is an increase of some 8,67%. My question is: Does this increase cover any special upgrading or in-service training of professional qualifications of those educators who, though inadequately qualified, are nevertheless handling the teaching of subjects such as mathematics and science, and which gives cause for concern when we look at matric results?

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: The answer is no. It does not cover all these areas. The R31,295 million was a special allocation by the Minister of Finance in pursuit of the Government’s policy that we must take the issue of HIV/Aids seriously. But, in the absence of a medical vaccine, we must provide the vaccine through education and training. It is entirely meant for this purpose. About R71 million was made available by a special allocation by the Minister, and out of this, the Department of Education has a large part of it - R31,2 million. An amount of R4,3 million is earmarked for the department for the central direction, the training of trainers and R26,9 million is a conditional grant to the provincial education departments. An equitable share is the usual equitable allocation basis, and the amounts allocated to provinces I will supply to Mr Raju.

The other issue is that Government has allocated more than R270 million this year for management training and for training in the whole school performance aspect. Regrettably, last year, the provinces were not able to put up their projects, and therefore, we could not roll over that amount of money, so it went back to the fiscus and was about 50% of the allocation for this year.

This year, we are paying much closer attention to the project proposals and the release of money, provided the projects have been worked out clearly by the provinces. This is a matter on which, this morning, in the debate on the Sace Bill, we emphasised very much that teacher development, teacher upgrading and teacher retraining is at the heart of progress and development. The Government is very conscious of this need. But, in the end, it is the provinces that have to implement the allocation of resources. That itself raises questions as to the capacity of provinces to do so. It is very much a central part of the development of teaching in our country.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Any follow-up question?

Mr N M RAJU: Yes, sir. However, it does not entirely pertain to that subject.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): I would rather have a follow-up question, hon member.

Mr N M RAJU: I am not going to discuss anything, just raise that particular area of concern.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Yes?

Mr N M RAJU: What I would like to know, through you, Mr Chair, from the Minister, now that Curriculum 2005 has been substituted with Curriculum 21, does this involve any reprioritising of the Minister’s programmes for the year ahead?

The MINISTER: Chairperson, the trouble with the DP is that it subscribes to the ancient principle of uno voce, uno duce [one leader, one voice] … [Laughter] … and they trot out all these extraordinary fusions which are totally unrelated to the matter under discussion. The fact of the matter is that all democratic countries review their policies, for example. The United Kingdom - not a perfect exemplar, I think we do better than the United Kingdom - in fact started a review process two years after the new curriculum was introduced.

Obviously, we must learn from what has happened. For the first time here or in any of the other countries that I know of, we have set up an independent body, which is totally independent of the provinces and of the Government, to review our outcomes-based education. Very important recommendations were made, which we adopted except for one. Obviously, there will be a rearrangement of different matters. The most important rearrangement is that we will give up the 66 outcomes, which are frankly very difficult to understand, and replace them with the national curriculum statement. Prof Linda Chisholm, who was the chair of this committee, is now being brought into the department, paid for by Billiton, with the status of deputy director-general, to deal with this issue of the national curriculum statement. That will result in a simplification of the process.

I hope the DP will pay close attention, and particularly their spokesperson in the National Assembly, to what is actually happening on the ground rather than fighting the tattered battles of 1996 all over again.

Mev J WITBOOI: Mnr die Voorsitter, ek wil graag die agb Minister vra om die toekenning van ‘n bedrag van meer as R3 miljoen in die Aansuiweringsbegroting, wat geoormerk is vir konsultante, te verduidelik. Hoe en vir watter doel is die Minister voornemens om die dienste van hierdie konsultante te gebruik? Sal die agb Minister ‘n verklaring oor die aangeleentheid doen? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mrs J WITBOOI: Mr Chairman, I would like to ask the hon the Minister to explain the allocation of an amount exceeding R3 million in the Supplementary Estimate which has been earmarked for consultants. How and for what purpose does the Minister intend using the services of these consultants? Will the hon the Minister make a statement about the matter?]

The MINISTER: Chairperson, that was the very same question that the spokesperson of the New NP asked in the National Assembly. [Interjections.] [Laughter.] This is quite clearly a socialisation of information, a kind of nationalisation of information. [Laughter.] I like this kind of sharing of information in the two Houses. [Interjections.]

The answer is that my department and I have very little time for consultants. This is a heading, because consultants do not add value. They do not leave anything behind. We know about the Auditor-General’s report of last year pertaining to the dependence of Government departments on consultants. These are not consultants in that sense. They are the implementors of the programmes. A 30-page document outlines exactly how this programme for HIV/Aids will be implemented. We have to treat this with the utmost seriousness, because practice in other countries has shown us that the most vulnerable group is the 15 to 25 year olds. They are the most productive people we are going to have, and I regret to say that the teaching profession, which should not be a vulnerable group, also falls in this category.

Therefore, the programme, as worked out, is a programme which will be centrally directed. These people will be experts, specialists who will help to work out the implementation. We are going to train trainers, and for that one needs trainers to train those trainers. One can call them consultants, one can call them representatives of Beelzebub, but they are necessary to carry out the programme that we have worked out jointly with the provinces. I can assure hon members that we will not waste a single rand on this. There will be value added, nationally and, in particular, in developing capacity in the provinces. In the end, it will be the teachers, the children and the parents who will be reached by this programme. We therefore need people who will carry out the intentions of the Government, which has allocated R31 million for this programme.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Thank you, I take it there is no follow-up question. We come to Vote No 9.

Vote No 9 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism:

Mrs A M VERSVELD: Chairperson, the sins of omission are as bad as the sins of commission.

Die DP is daarom teleurgesteld dat daar geen melding gemaak word van mariene en kusbestuur in die Aansuiweringsbegroting nie, alhoewel daar verwys word na armoedeverligting en werkskepping. Daarom wil die DP graag van die Minister weet: aanvaar sy departement verantwoordelikheid vir die twaalf hawens buite die gebied van Portnet, soos vermeld in die Minister se departementele verslag? Watter stappe beplan die Minister? Dink die Minister die bedrag wat in die aanvanklike begroting begroot is, is voldoende vir die herstel van twaalf hawens? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The DP is therefore disappointed that no mention is being made of marine and coastal management in the Supplementary Estimate, although reference is made to poverty relief and job creation. That is why the DP would like to know from the Minister: Does his department accept responsibility for the 12 harbours that fall outside Portnet’s jurisdiction, as mentioned in the Minister’s departmental report? Which steps are the Minister planning? Does the Minister think that the amount budgeted for in the initial budget is sufficient for the repair of 12 harbours?]

The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Chairperson, I do not know if I am under a misconception as to what the matter before the House is, but I thought the matter before the House was the Supplementary Estimate for 2000-01. We could start discussing matters totally unrelated to this, but I really do not see how this arises out of this matter. If this were a general discussion about any matter, as members know, I would be ready to talk. But it is quite unrelated to this matter.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Hon member, will you please take your seat. Could you please clarify whether or not the question you are asking relates to the Supplementary Estimate.

Mrs A M VERSVELD: Chairperson, as I said, the sins of omission are as bad as the sins of commission. Marine and coastal management have been totally left out of the Supplementary Estimate, although they talk about poverty relief and job creation. Therefore, I am asking why there is nothing for marine and coastal management in the Supplementary Estimate.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Hon Minister, you may use your discretion as to whether you want to respond to that question.

The MINISTER: Mr Chairperson, the manner in which this particular allocation works is that there are allocations from the Poverty Relief Fund which are allocated to various departments, and which go specifically towards job creation projects and projects which are a result of decisions that arose out of the Jobs Summit which took place some time ago.

All of the projects to which we are allocating funds from this particular money that is before us arise out of proposals which we receive from the nine provinces. All nine provinces were asked to submit proposals for projects which could be funded from the funds which are before the House today. We have received about 850 proposals for poverty relief projects from all nine provinces. After the project management unit in the department had put in a lot of work scrutinising them, about 150 projects were short-listed. This week the department, in consultation with the provinces, will finalise the short list.

That is the process of consultation through which allocations are made, and we have not excluded any particular project as such. However, I must say that we do not simply take the poverty relief money and then say that because the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism deals with a particular subject, therefore a certain percentage must go to that subject.

We look at what will make maximum impact on the alleviation of poverty - that is what we look at - and it goes right across the board. We take into account priority areas throughout the country. Certainly those areas which depend on the coast or on fishing, etc, for their income and livelihood are not excluded from the poverty relief projects that we have.

One of the important elements one would see here is a very heavy emphasis on tourism, because we all know that there are quite a large number of communities that have traditionally depended on fishing as a resource and as a source of income. Part of the problem faced by this industry has been the absence of diversification, and we are trying to overcome that problem by creating a diversified local economy in those areas and particularly in coastal towns. Tourism provides us with a wonderful opportunity to create that diversification. Therefore I would like to assure the hon member that no part of South Africa is being left out. We take into account poverty and demographic considerations very carefully when choosing the projects.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Are there any follow-up questions? The DP should please bear in mind that their three minutes are almost over, but I will give the hon member an opportunity to ask a follow-up question.

Mev A M VERSVELD: Dankie, mnr die Voorsitter. Ek sal graag van die Minister wil weet of hy saamstem dat die herstel van hawens ‘n geweldige hoeveelheid armoedeverligting sal teweeg bring, asook werkskepping. Deur werkskepping volg armoedeverligting. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mrs A M VERSVELD: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I would like to know from the Minister whether he agrees that the repair of harbours will bring about a tremendous amount of poverty relief, also job creation. Through job creation, poverty relief follows.]

The MINISTER: Mr Chairperson, there is no question about the fact that a number of harbours, particularly small harbours, need urgent repair and upgrading work in this country. We do not think that we would be able to do that simply through the poverty relief money that we have here.

We are in a process of consultation with other Government Departments, particularly the Department of Public Works, in order to ensure that we can rehabilitate the harbours as much as possible. We are also investigating public-private partnerships for a number of these harbour areas, so as to consider things like waterfront developments, so that we could create diversified use of existing harbours, rather than simply have them for one particular use, which does not make the harbour itself commercially viable.

Dr E A CONROY: Mr Chairperson, part of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism’s Supplementary Estimate is to be used for poverty relief. Irregularities in the department, such as possible corruption, would obviously deplete any and most of the funds available for this laudable purpose.

My question to the Minister is whether he can please indicate when the Trytsman report about alleged irregularities in marine and coastal management will be released, and if the department is not planning to release the report, why not.

The MINISTER: Chairperson, that matter is currently under investigation by the department, and when the investigation is complete, that is when the report has been tabled before me by the department, we will then be able to consider the question of whether to release it or not, etc.

The general approach that this Government has pursued is to release whatever reports of investigations that are conducted, but certainly that matter is being investigated. I must say here, though, that the Mr Trytsman that is being referred to does not work for the department, is not part of the department, and the department has absolutely no relationship with him at this point in time. So any impression that may exist that there is an investigation that is currently being conducted about current possible corruption in the department must be dispelled.

We are not conducting any such investigation, and I am reasonably confident that we have an excellent team of officials in the department who are quite dedicated to the work before them.

Vote No 13 - Health:

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, Minister of Health, I would like to say that the NCOP’s plenary was informed on Tuesday 13 June 2000 that about 60% of hospital beds are occupied by patients with HIV-related infections. The epidemic affects both the young and the economically active populations of the country.

My questions, therefore, are as follows: Firstly, has the Department of Health or Finance done a cost benefit analysis on the investment in HIV education? Secondly, should more financial resources be allocated to research on HIV and Aids vaccines?

The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, no, neither the Department of Health nor the Department of Finance has done a cost benefit analysis on the investment in HIV/Aids education. But it is generally accepted internationally that prevention remains the key strategy in the fight against the epidemic. It leads to public awareness and to behaviour change, particularly sexual and social behaviour. Both these elements depend on appropriate messages which are clear, easy to understand and very sensitive to the cultures of the people, and which particularly target the youth.

With regard to the question of a vaccine, I thought we had already reported to this House that indeed funds have been allocated by Government to finance research into and the development of a vaccine. These funds are from the Department of Health and the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, and they are managed by the Medical Research Council. Obviously we also have support from the private sector, for example Eskom. We also have support from the international community, as well as our co- operating partners. Yes, we are engaged in research into and the development of a vaccine in this country.

Dr P J C NEL: Chairperson, the New NP is pleased that the funds appropriated in the Supplementary Estimate will be used to implement the national integrated plan for children infected with and affected by HIV/Aids. This plan consists of four programmes. I would like to refer to the VCT programme - voluntary counselling and testing programme - which aims to make more counselling and testing facilities available to patients.

I would like to ask the Minister whether the test results, which I presume will be kept confidential and private, will be preserved and processed into statistics which could be used in future in the battle against the monster HIV/Aids?

The MINISTER: Chairperson, just by way of information, I have just come back from the World Health Assembly and I reported about this in this House. The World Health Assembly was in May and we took a resolution there that we would no longer call it VCT, but would refer to it as counselling and voluntary testing. So, could we change that nomenclature? But, yes, we are already doing that. We are using the results that we get for planning, so this is not something for the future, it is happening right now.

Mr I M MAKOELA: Chairperson, a substantial amount of the department’s Supplementary Estimate will be focused on community-based care and support. We are also informed that community-based programmes are to be instituted in six provinces. Therefore the questions I would like to put are: Firstly, which pilot projects in the six provinces will benefit from these programmes? Secondly, what are the key features of community-based care and support? Thirdly, what would the estimated benefits to the department’s budget be if these programmes are introduced? Fourthly, what monitoring mechanisms have been put in place to ensure the success of these projects?

The MINISTER: Chairperson, that was a mouthful, but I will attempt to go through all the questions. The first one was about the pilot projects. As I understand it, the national working group, which consists of the three departments, that is the Departments of Health, of Welfare and of Education, agreed amongst themselves to identify six provinces in which we would run the pilot projects. These six provinces are: the Eastern Cape and its region C East London area and region D Umtata area; the Northern Cape, sited in De Aar; the North West sited in Klerksdorp; the Free State, sited in Thaba-Nchu and Qwaqwa; the Northern Province, sited in Tzaneen; and Mpumalanga, sited in Tonga. Those will be the pilot projects in the six provinces that will benefit from these resources that were generously made available to us by the Minister of Finance.

The next question was about the key features of community-based care and support. There are quite a number of them. Obviously it must have a holistic approach and this must include the emotional, social, economic and spiritual needs of the targeted population. It must be people-centred. It must be sensitive to culture, religion and value systems and respect privacy and dignity. In other words it has to be community-driven.

It must also be very comprehensive and multisectoral in approach, encompassing preventive, promotive, curative and rehabilitative approaches. It must also empower, build, capacitate and promote the autonomy and functioning of the independence of the individual, as well as the family and the community. It should also ensure access to comprehensive support services.

As I said, it is an integrated programme in which the Departments of Health, Welfare, and Education are involved. I guess one of the outstanding benefits would indeed be community involvement, because community-based care and home-based care are certainly going to take place within the families and communities. So one is talking about people taking care of their own health and also of communities being involved in health care services.

However, I also think another important area here is decreasing the stigmatisation of HIV/Aids sufferers, because if people begin to attend to the needs of those who are infected and affected and see them as human beings who should not be discriminated against, the levels of stigmatisation would certainly be brought down.

The last question is about monitoring. The national working committee has agreed that they would develop indicators. They have not developed indicators yet. They are in the process of doing that so that they have these indicators for monitoring and evaluation. It is hoped that the project will be evaluated after three years, but in the meantime, we have, in all the provinces, advertised the posts for co-ordinators who would be responsible for co-ordinating the activities amongst the three departments.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! That concludes the questions I have been notified on with respect to Vote No 13. There are no questions on Vote No 19. We therefore come to Vote No 22 of the Supplementary Estimate!

Vote No 22 - Provincial and Local Government:

Mr C ACKERMANN: Madam Chairperson, in the Supplementary Estimate the Minister made provision for a local economic development fund.

First of all, why is the amount for professional and special services so high in comparison to the personnel expenditure and the administrative expenditure? Then, with regard to the transfer payments, to whom will those transfer payments be made? Will they be made to local authorities? What criteria is the Minister going to use to pay over those transfer payments, if they are going to be paid to local authorities, and when is the hon Minister going to pay those transfer costs?

I see in the Supplementary Estimates that no provision has been made for disaster management. No provision has been made for the coming local elections and no provision has been made for the amalgamation of municipalities and staff transfers and so forth. Where has that been reflected and why is there no Supplementary Estimate for those questions?

The MINISTER FOR PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Madam Chairperson, I will start with the last part of the question. This allocation is intended to facilitate the implementation of projects which would contribute to the implementation of Government’s poverty alleviation programme. Therefore it cannot be for miscellaneous use - elections, disaster management, amalgamation, etc. It has to be targeted.

What we have done in the past financial year, when we received an allocation of R42 million, was to invite municipalities to give us business plans for projects which have the effect, in a long-term and sustainable way, of generating job creation, and those business plans would then be evaluated. This is going to be the approach even in the current financial year. Municipalities will be funded on the strength of the business plans which they submit, which must meet set criteria.

The amount which we are looking at, for professional and special services, is really negligible relative to the total amount of R75 million which has been allocated for this purpose. We do estimate that a lot of consultancy work will have to take place. As municipalities draw up these business plans, they need a lot of professional advice and unfortunately, good quality professional advice does not come cheaply.

Debate concluded.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Could I just inform hon members that I consider NCOP News to be a newspaper and, therefore, those members who are reading it in the Chamber are infringing the Rules of the NCOP. I will not mention them by name because I shall avoid making them uncomfortable in the Council. However, if I observe further reading of this very interesting journal, I am afraid I will have to name the members. APPROPRIATION BILL

          (Consideration of Votes of and Schedule to Bill)

Vote No 1 - Presidency, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mr B WILLEM: Chairperson, informed by the massive challenges faced by this Office, we as the ANC wish to support the Vote of the Presidency.

It is our firm belief that this Budget Vote will greatly enhance the work of the President’s Office and ensure its effectiveness in carrying out its constitutional objectives. These challenges are as follows.

Firstly, co-ordinating the overall work of governance to ensure an integrated approach to reconstruction and development of our society; secondly, the formulation and implementation of an integrated rural development strategy. These are important tasks which would assist in the eradication of poverty prevalent amongst our rural masses; thirdly, the pursuance of the … The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! On what point are you rising, hon member?

Mr C ACKERMANN: Chairperson, could you give your ruling on this matter. If a party supports a Vote, is it allowed to make a declaration of vote? Is the declaration not made when a party does not support a Vote?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: No, there is no distinction drawn in the Rules. A declaration is a statement as provided for in the Rules. You may proceed, Mr Willem.

Mr B WILLEM: May I continue, Chairperson?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Yes, you may.

Mr B WILLEM: The third challenge is the pursuance of the African renaissance. The declaration of the 21st century as the African century is an important challenge facing the Presidency. Fourthly, the leadership of the Aids Council and the campaign to find an appropriate resolution to the Aids pandemic is a continuous challenge facing the Presidency. Fifthly, the location of the Youth Commission, the Gender Commission and other important statutory bodies within the President’s Office is meant to address the fundamental challenges confronting these respective sectors in meeting their mandates.

These and other responsibilities located within the President’s Office are a mammoth task which require all of us to give our necessary support to the highest office in our country. Therefore, the ANC as a carrying organisation with an overwhelming mandate from the majority of South Africans, supports this Vote without any reservation in the interest of a better life for all.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 2 - Parliament, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 3 - Agriculture, put and agreed to.

Vote No 4 - Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 5 - Communications, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, daar is honderde wit en swart akteurs van Suid-Afrika wat werk gedoen het, en steeds doen, vir die SAUK. Die films en videos is intussen hervertoon, en party is binnelands en party buitelands verkoop. Dit het ‘n noemenswaardige inkomste vir die SAUK gegenereer. Die akteurs word egter nie hiervoor betaal nie.

Hulle moet nou hof toe gaan om hulle kontraktueel ooreengekome fooi te beding. Die bedrag word reeds op R30 miljoen bereken en dit groei daagliks, en die akteurs kry by die dag swaarder weens die dubbele standaarde van die departement. Hierdie praktyk is onbillik en grens aan kriminaliteit.

Met bogenoemde in gedagte, as die een rede, sou dit vir my onmoontlik wees om hierdie begrotingspos te steun. Doen ek dit egter nie, sal daar nog minder kans wees dat hierdie kunstenaars betaal word. Daarom steun ek hierdie begrotingspos onder protes en hoop ek dat dit ‘n bydrae sal lewer om hierdie kwessie spoedig op te los. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairman, there are hundreds of white and black actors of South Africa who have worked, and still work, for the SABC. The films and videos have in the meanwhile been rebroadcast, and some were sold on the domestic market and some overseas. This generated a remarkable income for the SABC. The actors were not paid for this, however.

Now they have to go to court to negotiate their contractually agreed fees. The amount has already been calculated at R30 million and it is increasing daily, and the actors are suffering more by the day owing to the double standards of the department. This practice is unfair and borders on criminality.

With the aforementioned in mind, as one reason, it would be impossible for me to support this Vote. If I do not do so, however, there would be an even smaller chance that the actors would be paid. That is why I support this Vote under protest and I hope that it would contribute to resolving this issue expeditiously.] Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 6 - Correctional Services, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, on behalf of the ANC, we would like to indicate that we have witnessed a remarkable progress in dealing with, among other things, the overcrowding in our prisons, the reduction of escapes from prisons, the identifying of and dealing with the blockages, and devising solutions to the problems relating to awaiting-trial prisoners! The strategy is to come up with an alternative to imprisonment which involves serving a sentence within the community under the supervision of that community. Fortunately, this is not what we witnessed last weekend where ET was allowed to spend 12 hours outside.

The fast-tracking of prison construction projects currently under way and the use of public/private partnership initiatives for the provision of additional prison accommodation should also address this problem. We therefore support this Vote. Dr E A CONROY: Mevrou die Voorsitter, korrupsie, swak bestuur en die wanaanwending van fondse het die Departement van Korrektiewe Dienste geskud. Die Nuwe NP het president Mbeki versoek om in te gryp. Ons is bly om te kan sê dat die agb President en agb minister Skosana nie dinge probeer toesmeer het nie, en aan ons versoek om van korrupte en onbevoegde personeel ontslae te raak, gehoor gegee het. Besoeke aan sekere gevangenisse het getoon dat daar reeds merkbare verbeterings is. Daar is egter nog groot probleme in ons gevangenisse, veral ten opsigte van oorbevolking.

Die akkommodasie-kapasiteit van ons gevangenisse is, as ronde getal, 100 000 gevangenes, en volgens die mees onlangse inligting tot ons beskikking is daar, weer eens as ronde getal, 172 000 gevangenes in ons gevangenisse; met ander woorde, ‘n oorbevolking van 72%. Van die 172 000 gevangenes is 64 000 verhoorafwagtend. Hoewel verhoorafwagtende gevangenes ‘n bestuursprobleem van die Departement van Justisie is, is die Departement van Korrektiewe Dienste ook vir hulle fisieke welsyn verantwoordelik. Daarom moet die departement ‘n duidelike plan van aksie hê om hierdie probleem vas te vat aangesien die aantal verhoorafwagtendes ongelukkig nie oornag drasties gaan verminder nie. As die polisie voortgaan met hulle suksesse ten opsigte van Operation Crackdown, gaan hierdie getal trouens drasties verhoog. Ons is bereid om, soos aangetoon, in hierdie stadium die begroting te steun in die lig van die ingryping van die agb President en Minister. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr E A CONROY: Madam Chairperson, corruption, poor management and the misappropriation of funds have rocked the Department of Correctional Services. The New NP asked President Mbeki to intervene. We are glad to be able to say that the hon the President and hon Minister Skosana have not tried to cover things up, and have heeded our request to get rid of corrupt and inefficient staff. Visits to certain prisons have shown that noticeable improvements have already taken place. However, there are still big problems in our prisons, particularly with regard to overcrowding.

Rounded off, the accommodation capacity of our prisons is 100 000 prisoners, and according to the most recent information at our disposal there are, once again rounded off, 172 000 prisoners in our prisons; in other words, overpopulation of 72%. Of the 172 000 prisoners, 64 000 are awaiting trial. Although awaiting-trial prisoners are a management problem of the Department of Justice, the Department of Correctional Services is also responsible for their physical wellbeing. Therefore the department must have a clear plan of action to tackle this problem, as the number of awaiting-trial prisoners unfortunately is not going to be reduced drastically overnight.

If the police continue with their successes with regard to Operation Crackdown, this number will in fact increase drastically. As indicated, at this stage we are prepared to support the budget in the light of the intervention by the hon the President and Minister.]

Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, the budget provides for the incarceration of 150 000 prisoners, and there is already a 17 000 shortfall on the existing number of prisoners, therefore leaving a deficit that is not being catered for in the budget. I would also like to refer to the management audit of the Department of Correctional Services, which levelled major criticism at the department due to lack of proper planning and budgeting, and the overcentralisation of many of its functions. The lack of any official service delivery improvement plan, the overcentralisation of control and the deeply felt sense of unfairness throughout the organisation, which is thought to be riddled with favouritism, cronyism and corruption, were also identified by the audit. In these circumstances we cannot support this Budget Vote.

Vote No 6 agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 7 - Defence, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 8 - Education, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mr D M KGWARE: Chairperson, we support Vote 8 - Education. A defining feature in policy development over the past six years of this Government has been its stated aim of transformation in education. One policy initiative which strengthens our resolve to change the way in which our children are developed into responsible adulthood, is Tirisano. It urges all people in this country to work together towards our stated aim of an equitable, efficient and quality schooling system.

Provincial education budgets include allocations for schooling.

Schooling is a focus area of our nation’s transformation. Support for Vote No 8 of the Appropriation Bill should be based on an analysis of how funds have been allocated to aspects of schooling.

Allow me to refer to some of these aspects briefly. In line with our aim, provincial education budgets are projected to increase slightly over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period to allow for an equitable schooling system. The data generally expresses mixed views in that some of the poorer provinces should experience growth over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period. For instance, the Eastern Cape shows a real growth of 4%, while some of the better-off provinces actually show a small decline over the corresponding period. For instance, the Western Cape has shown a decline of .05%. The North West has shown the greatest decline of 11.7% over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework period. Examination of all other provincial budgets suggests that, apart from the 5.5% real growth for Gauteng and the sharp decline for the North West province, most budgets are projected to remain relatively constant over the next three years.

The Education budget thus clearly attempts to lay a consistent, stable financial foundation for provinces to gather all stakeholders together in the spirit of Tirisano so that they can work together and build strong school governing bodies so that our schools become proud centres in our communities.

It is for this reason that, in the spirit of Tirisano, the ANC supports Vote No 8 of the Appropriation Bill.

Mr N M RAJU: Madam Chair, there are various reasons why the DP cannot support the Budget Vote on Education. Some of these are: Firstly, the textbook debacle in most of our schools is still far from being satisfactorily resolved. There are many schools which, as yet, have not gotten their full complement of textbooks and other facilities. Secondly, we have, of course, the withdrawal of Curriculum 2005. While the step is welcome, this really heralds the waste of the taxpayer’s money. Thirdly, discipline among teachers has deteriorated. We hope however that the South African Council of Educators Bill will address this, and bring some sanity to this area of concern. Fourthly, the governance and management of schools is an area of concern to the DP. School discipline and the handling of instances of indiscipline by principals and school governing bodies has become serious. Fights and shootings, some resulting in killings, seem to continue unabated. Educators and learners need a more tranquil and placid environment that is conducive to better education and better learning. [Interjections.]

Mr M BHABHA: Madam Chair, on a point of order: What has this declaration to do with the budget?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Mr Bhabha is saying that the declaration may not be relevant to the budget. Is that so, Mr Raju?

Mr N M RAJU: Madam Chair, we are just declaring our objection to this Vote.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I will allow you to proceed, but could you keep it brief? You have just a few seconds left.

Mr N M RAJU: Madam Chair, I was talking about the concept of school governing bodies which are an innovation in our schools, yet they seem to be floundering in a sea of uncertainty and lack of proper guidance.

Accusations of favouritism and nepotism in appointments and promotions seem to be the order of the day. When principals are alleged to be colluding with the school governing bodies … [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Mr Raju, I shall now stop you because you are now reflecting on various policy matters which you could raise in a debate on education. You are not speaking to the national Education budget. I shall therefore stop you at this point, because what you are saying is not relevant to the budget.

I have, in fact, hardly heard members refer to the actual national Budget in the declarations that they have made. I am concerned as to whether we are addressing the subject matter that we should be, which is the national Budget.

We move on. We seem to have had an indication from Mrs Witbooi.

Mev J WITBOOI: Mevrou die Voorsitter, die Nuwe NP het besluit om die begrotingspos nie te steun nie, en wel om die volgende redes wat ek kortliks sal noem.

Die Regering het Kurrikulum 2005, nieteenstaande die waarskuwings van die Nuwe NP dat dit nie kán werk nie, op ons kinders en leerders afgeforseer. Duisende onskuldige kinders in ons skole was die prooi van ‘n genadelose maatskaplike eksperiment wat nie geslaag het nie. Miljoene rande van die belastingbetalers se geld in hierdie begroting sal steeds in hierdie bodemlose put verdwyn, want daar is geen sekerheid wanneer die mislukte Kurrikulum 2005 met Kurrikulum 21 vervang gaan word nie.

Ons kan hierdie begrotingspos dus om hierdie en nog ander redes nie steun nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mrs J WITBOOI: Madam Chair, the New NP has decided not to support the Vote, for the following reasons, which I shall briefly mention.

The Government forced Curriculum 2005 on our children and learners, despite the warnings of the New NP that it simply could not work. Thousands of innocent children in our schools fell victim to a merciless social experiment which did not succeed. Millions of rands of taxpayers’ money in this budget will still disappear into this bottomless pit, because there is no certainty when the unsuccessful Curriculum 2005 is going to be replaced by Curriculum 21.

For this and other reasons, we can therefore not support this Vote.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 9 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mev A M VERSVELD: Mevrou die Voorsitter, alhoewel die DP hierdie begrotingspos steun omdat ons glo die Minister het ‘n goeie taak verrig, wil ons graag ons teenkanting uitspreek ten opsigte van program 3 in hierdie begrotingspos, naamlik Mariene en Kusbestuur, en wel om die volgende redes.

Alhoewel daar eerstens geen korrupsie in hierdie departement gevind is met betrekking tot die finansiële bestuur nie, is wel gevind dat daar wanbesteding van ongeveer R24 miljoen in die departement was. Dit is die een rede. Tweedens is die uitreiking van twee verslae wat gedoen is, die een intern, en die ander deur die Kantoor vir Ernstige Ekonomiese Misdrywe, oftewel Keem, nie aan ons bekend gemaak nie, asook die Trytsman-verslag, wat R558 000 beloop. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs A M VERSVELD: Madam Chairperson, although the DP supports this Vote because we believe the Minister has done a good job, we would like to express our opposition with regard to programme 3 in this Vote, namely Marine and Coastal Management, and for the following reasons.

Although, firstly, no corruption was found in this department with regard to financial management, it was indeed found that misappropriation of approximately R24 million had taken place in the department. That is one reason. Secondly, the publication of two reports which were produced, one internal and the other by the Office for Serious Economic Offences, or OSEO, was not made known to us, as well as the Trytsman report, which amounted to R558 000.]

Thirdly, we are unhappy with the fact that the operation and maintenance of three research vessels and four patrol vessels, outsourced since 1 April to Smith-Pentow, are still highlighted under the expenditure in the programme of the Marine Living Resource Fund.

Vir my lyk dit asof sake ‘n bietjie deurmekaar is, en daarom wil ek net graag my teenkanting teen program 3 van hierdie begrotingspos uitspreek. [It seems to me that matters are a bit muddled, and I would therefore like to express my opposition to programme 3 of this Vote.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting). Vote No 10 - Finance, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mr A MARAIS: Chairperson, my declaration is on Vote 10. This department has delivered to the nation and that is an indisputable fact. It has departed from the orthodox mindset in the area of public finances and has taken us into a new era of transparent, accountable and stable management of the nation’s financial resources. The department has turned the often conflicting objectives of tax liability, investment growth and expansion of consumer purchasing power into mutually reinforcing objectives. It begs the question, how did the department achieve such a daunting task?

It is set out by, inter alia, reducing the burden of tax and simultaneously increasing the population of taxpayers. It has put into the back pocket of taxpayers approximately R10 billion by reducing the tax rate of low and middle-income citizens, thereby enhancing the purchasing power of consumers.

It has further increased the interest exemptions to R3 000 per year for taxpayers under the age of 65. This initiative demonstrates the Government’s intention to stimulate household savings. Ordinarily, higher savings should result in higher domestic investments.

The department has also achieved parity with international norms in the following areas: The South African income tax system will be transformed to a residence-based system whereby dividends accruing to local residents from sources outside South Africa will be taxed as normal income. Secondly, the levying of capital gains tax is also commensurate with international norms if one notes that many of South Africa’s trading partners elected to go this route decades ago. The capital gains tax will be introduced from 1 April 2001.

Since the department has timeously informed us of this tax before its implementation, taxpayers are in a position to restructure their financial matters ahead of the impending new tax regime. The early warning signalled by the Department of Finance should be viewed as an extension of courtesy to taxpayers. How more democratic! [Interjections.] The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! You are also making a policy speech. You are not speaking to the budget. Therefore, I am going to stop you. I would want you to address the budget.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 11 - Foreign Affairs, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mr K D S DURR: Madam Chairperson, I would like to make a brief comment on Vote No 11 to express my reservations and objection. On the Foreign Affairs Vote, may I say, at once, that I must not be misunderstood. We are not against transformation, empowerment or upliftment at all. But we find it disturbing that the director-general of the department seems to have declared war upon the distinguished and well-qualified officers of the foreign service by saying that he is forming six task teams to work on their replacement.

Even our President, in his normal mild way, rebuked the director-general. The most important expenditure item on the account of the Department of Foreign Affairs is that of personnel and travel. If one demoralises, the results will be bad. The only way one gets value for money for one’s budget expenditure, is for one’s public servants to be working well, confidently and efficiently. If one has a director-general saying that he is going to replace them, because they are white, and forming task teams to replace them, the results cannot be good.

Then we have the Minister adding insult to injury by casting aspersions upon their experience and upon the skills of the entire staff, speaking in Spain. This threatens to demoralise them even further. The comments of the Minister were neither true, nor wise, nor productive, nor motivating, nor necessary. We will not vote against the item purely because we do not want to frustrate the good efforts of the President who is effectively happily and fortunately, our de facto Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Mr M V MOOSA: Mr Chairperson, I wish to address the manner in which the budget for the Department of Foreign Affairs has been designed. This department, and this Budget Vote, represent probably one of the most significant Budget Votes that we will ever pass since our election into the democratic Government in 1994. It is a Budget Vote that is designed, and its programmes are designed, to take our country into a global environment where economic affairs and foreign policy are becoming key issues.

The six committees that the hon member Mr Durr referred to are committees that are designed to ensure that our foreign missions and foreign offices become conversant with the new trends internationally and with transformation inside our own country and on the ground. For the ACDP to require the department not to do such things is for the ACDP to … [Interjections.]

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Madam Chairperson, on a point of order: This is becoming a debate and not a declaration on the vote.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I would think that it is much more of a dialogue, and I am about to stop it. I am aware. [Laughter.] Mr Moosa, could you confine yourself to the Budget Vote.

Mr M V MOOSA: Madam Chairperson, the issue is that the department has a number of programmes in place to ensure that it spends money in a way that makes its mission abroad a mission that is necessary for the economic challenges we face in this country. It has 40-odd foreign offices that are concentrating only on economic missions. It is trying to attract investment into this country. So the programmes of the Foreign Affairs office and the way in which it has designed its budget, currently, for the 2000-2001 financial year, are very relevant and very appropriate.

Over and above that, this department, apart from the big expenditure it has on personnel and so forth, has to do a whole range of other things. This department has to spend money to ensure that we are doing the right things in sport internationally. The Department of Foreign Affairs had to get involved in something like the ``Hansiegate’’ affair. The Department of Foreign Affairs is involved in attracting technology to this country, so it uses its budget on the whole range of things and not only on personnel. The ANC supports this budget. [Time expired.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution. Vote No 12 - Government Communication and Information System, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 13 - Health, put.

Declarations of vote:

Ms L JACOBUS: Chairperson, I wish to make a statement on Vote 13, but in the light of what you said earlier on, what I want to say will perhaps be out of order. I am going to say it anyway, and you can rule me out of order, if you think that is the case. [Laughter.]

On behalf of the ANC, I rise to support Budget Vote No 13. In supporting this Vote, I would like to highlight the following. What I am about to highlight, I think, impacts directly on the budget, and that is why we thought we should highlight a few of these things. These are: The continuing work in the important areas of women’s health, violence against women and the contribution in ensuring that, as a country, we meet the obligations of the Beijing Platform; the introduction of the patient’s charter to give expression to the principle of Batho Pele and the restoration of human dignity to all South Africans in the delivery of health care services, the building of a truly integrated and unitary health system based on a comprehensive primary health care approach, the commitment and vigour of the department and the various initiatives embarked upon in the fight against HIV/Aids; and, lastly, the formulation of our strategic framework, also known as the Ten-point Plan, in collaboration with the nine provinces, that will guide the work of this department for the next four years.

Mr K D S DURR: On Vote No 13 - Health, we simply want to make two points. One is that the cost of medicine has been much in the news and much debated, and is a major item in the budget. I would suggest that the actions of the Minister are such as to drive up the cost of medicine up and not drive it down. If one has a situation where people are poorly clothed, one does not then put the burden of clothing them upon the textile industry. If people are badly housed, one does not put the burden of the lack of housing upon the housing industry. So, when people are ill and medicines are expensive, one does not try and shift that burden on to the purveyors or the manufacturers of medicines. The impact of the hostile attitude of this Minister and the previous Minister, which is misdirected to the pharmaceutical industry …

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: How is that expressed in the budget?

Mr K D S DURR: It has a direct impact on the budget. It is the reason we are opposing the budget.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Which aspect of the budget?

Mr K D S DURR: The Minister’s salary. [Laughter.] So the impact of the Minister’s actions has caused 30 of the major who’s who pharmaceutical industry in South Africa to stop manufacturing in South Africa. We are losing skills, exports and jobs.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Mr Durr, you have exhausted your time. You are, in fact repeating a subject that has been debated in the House, and using the very words you used during that debate.

My concern and my intervention, hon members, relate to the fact that I do not see you addressing the various budgets and what the budgets intend to do in our provinces. I would have anticipated that in the National Council of Provinces this is what we would be doing when we declare, that we would have looked carefully at what the intentions are, perhaps even what the allocations are with respect to the provinces, and what plans those allocations relate to.

That is what I would think you would support or express concern about where plans are not addressed, but we are not hearing that. Hence, the uncalled- for interventions by the presiding officer, which are very unusual. I would like to express concern as to whether we are relevant to the task that we have before us.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 14 - Home Affairs, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 15 - Housing, put.

Declaration of vote:

Dr P J C NEL: Mevrou die Voorsitter, die Nuwe NP is bekommerd oor die feit dat daar nie behoorlik kontrole deur die departement uitgeoefen word oor die toekenning van huissubsidies nie. [Madam Chairperson, the New NP is concerned about the fact that the department does not exercise sufficient control over the allocation of housing subsidies.]

In the report of the Auditor-General on the accounts of the Free State provincial housing board, it is stated, regarding the approval and payment of subsidies, that the requirements of the implementation manual with regard to housing subsidy schemes have not been complied with.

Strydig met die vereistes van hierdie handleiding is groot bedrae vir behuisingsubsidieskemas deur die behuisingsraad aan die betrokke ontwikkelaars uitbetaal sodra die skema deur die raad goedgekeur is. In baie gevalle is sertifikate waarin die betrokke begunstigdes sertifiseer dat die projek tot hul bevrediging voltooi is, nie aan die raad voorgelê nie. Sommige van die sertifikate is selfs geteken voordat die projek begin is, waarná die bouer dan net eenvoudig verdwyn het.

Voorts beskou die Nuwe NP die Regering se aankondiging in Januarie 2000 dat subsidies vir huisvestingsprojekte in stedelike gebiede besnoei gaan word en dié geld aangewend gaan word om projekte in die platteland te bevorder, as onregverdig. Provinsies wat in die afgelope boekjaar daarin geslaag het om nie te onderbestee nie, naamlik die Wes-Kaap, die Noord-Kaap en Gauteng, word hierdeur benadeel.

Verstedeliking vind voortdurend plaas omdat daar meer werkgeleenthede in die stedelike gebiede is. As daar nie huise is nie, word mense gedwing om in plakkerskampe te woon, terwyl huise op plekke gebou word waar mense nie wíl of kán woon nie, weens die swak ekonomiese vooruitsigte. Die Nuwe NP kan dus nie vir dié begrotingspos stem nie, omdat te veel geld wat vir behuising bedoel is, nog steeds as gevolg van swak kontrole en korrupsie in die verkeerde hande beland, en omdat die voorsiening van behuising nie gepaard gaan met die nodige ekonomiese ontwikkeling en grondhervorming op die platteland nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[In contravention of the requirements of this manual, large amounts were paid out by the housing board to the relevant developers for housing subsidy schemes as soon as the scheme was approved by the board. In many instances certificates in which the relevant beneficiaries certify that the project has been completed to their satisfaction, were not submitted to the board. Some of the certificates were even signed before the project began, after which the builder simply disappeared.

In addition the New NP views as unfair the Government’s announcement in January 2000 that subsidies for housing projects in urban areas will be cut and this money utilised to promote projects in rural areas. Provinces which have succeeded in not underspending during the past financial year, namely the Western Cape, the Northern Cape and Gauteng, are detrimentally affected by this.

Urbanisation takes place constantly because there are more job opportunities in the urban areas. If there are no houses, people are forced to live in squatter camps, while houses are built in places where people do not want to live, or cannot live, as a result of the poor economic prospects. The New NP can therefore not vote in favour of this Vote, because too much money which is intended for housing still ends up in the wrong hands as a result of poor controls and corruption, and because the provision of housing does not go hand in hand with the necessary economic development and land reform in rural areas.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 17 - Independent Complaints Directorate - put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 18 - Justice and Constitutional Development, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (African Christian Democratic Party and Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 19 - Labour, put.

Declaration of vote:

Dr P J C NEL: Mevrou die Voorsitter, dit is ‘n algemeen aanvaarde feit dat werkloosheid die vernaamste oorsaak van armoede is in ons land. Die hoë misdaadsyfer kan ook grootliks toegeskryf word aan die hoë werkloosheidsyfer. Die rigiede bepalings van die arbeidswetgewing wat geskep is deur hierdie departement is een van die oorsake van werkloosheid. In 1999 alleen het meer as 120 000 werkgeleenthede verlore gegaan. Geen wonder dat die agb Minister van Finansies onlangs in ‘n onderhoud gesê het dat die Regering se beleid tot op hede nie werk geskep het nie en dat ‘n beleidsverandering nodig is. ‘n Mens kan maar net hoop dat die agb Minister van Arbeid hiervan kennis geneem het.

Tot dusver wil dit egter nie so voorkom nie, want die agb Minister hou vol dat die probleem nie die arbeidsbeleid is nie, maar dat dit bloot ‘n persepsieprobleem is. Die feit dat nie net die private werkgewers nie, maar ook die staat, al hoe meer ernstige probleme ondervind met die toepassing van die arbeidswetgewing, is ‘n bewys van die departement se onvermoë om die werkloosheidsprobleme van ons land aan te spreek. Solank as wat die werkloosheidsyfer so onaanvaarbaar hoog is, kan die Nuwe NP nie vir hierdie begrotingspos stem nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr P J C NEL: Madam Chairperson, it is a generally accepted fact that unemployment is the main cause of poverty in our country. The high crime rate can also largely be attributed to the high unemployment rate. The rigid provisions of the labour legislation created by this department constitute one of the causes of unemployment. In 1999 alone more than 120 000 job opportunities were lost. No wonder the hon the Minister of Finance recently said in an interview that the Government’s policy up to now had not created jobs and that a change of policy was needed. One only hopes that the hon the Minister of Labour has taken cognisance of this.

To date this does not seem to have been the case, since the hon the Minister maintains that the problem is not the labour policy as such, but that it is merely a problem of perception. The fact that not only private employers, but also the state, are, to an increasing extent, experiencing serious problems with the implementation of the labour legislation is proof of the department’s inability to address the unemployment problems in our country. As long as the unemployment rate remains unacceptably high, the New NP will not be able to support this Vote.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 20 - Land Affairs, put.

Declaration of vote:

Dr E A CONROY: Chairperson, the New NP agrees with the Minister that the people who should benefit from an organised and well-managed system of land distribution, and especially from the disposal of state land, are the people who, through their being previously disadvantaged, suffered socially and economically, and that the disposal of state land should be the key to the improvement of their quality of life.

The New NP therefore urges the Minister to do everything in her power to speed up a well-organised and strategically managed system of sustainable land redistribution. It would appear that sufficient state-owned land is still available for this purpose and that it would be the more affordable option when making land available for redistribution.

Restitution still causes a great deal of uncertainty and concern to claimants and those landowners against whose land claims have been registered. More than 63 000 claim forms had been lodged with the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights by 31 December 1998, and approximately 4 000 claims, with a total of close to 81 000 restitution beneficiaries at a total restitution award cost of R180 million, had been settled as of 7 March this year.

Although the pace may seem very slow, the Minister and the department are to be commended for the thorough and efficient research utilised in the process of claims investigation to eliminate duplicated and unfounded claims. It is nevertheless our considered opinion that the department should apply the resources and measures at its disposal and any new ones, if necessary, to hasten the process.

I do not think that the land issue in Zimbabwe will manifest itself in the same way in South Africa as it did in Zimbabwe, because I do not believe that our President will expropriate farms and take 30 of those for himself, give 15 to our Deputy President, some to his Cabinet Ministers and, finally, take only a few and divide them up between a few thousand previously disadvantaged persons. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Mr Manuel, would you want the President to give you a farm? [Laughter.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 21 - Minerals and Energy, in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution put and agreed to (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 22 - Provincial and Local Government, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mnr C ACKERMANN: Mevrou die Voorsitter, hierdie begrotingspos speel ‘n uiters belangrike en leidende rol om ons land se staatkunde oor twee sfere van regering te orden en te ontwikkel. Die begrotingspos is meer beleidsgerig, naamlik oor hoe dienslewering op provinsiale en plaaslike vlak moet geskied. Dus val die klem op die beleidsraamwerke wat dan noodwendig die sienings en die visies van die regerende party weerspieël.

Die Regering is ten gunste van meer sentralisasie en minder devolusie van mag na die provinsiale en plaaslike vlak, en hierdie kernuitgangspunte word gemanifesteer in hierdie pos se begroting. In die praktyk het dit gestalte gekry in, onder andere, die Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill, die Local Government: Municipal Structures Bill, die Transfer of Staff to Municipalities Amendment Bill, die Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act en die voorgestelde Property Rates Bill, wat bestaan en ook nog nie bestaan nie, aldus die voorsitter van ons komitee.

As ‘n mens al hierdie wette in ag neem, wat voortspruit uit die begroting van dié pos, dan kan die Nuwe NP nie hierdie pos ondersteun nie. Hierdie wette het ‘n geweldige impak op die hele Suid-Afrika en op wat vir ons voorlê - veral ook die wetgewing oor eiendomsbelasting, wat eenvoudig in ‘n donker wolk gehul is en by Salga in werkswinkels bespreek word. Dit sal eindelik daartoe lei dat die demokratiese proses in Suid-Afrika misken word. Verskeie van hierdie wette is heeltemal ongrondwetlik, en derhalwe sal ons nie hierdie pos kan ondersteun nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr C ACKERMANN: Madam Speaker, this Vote plays an extremely important and leading role in arranging and developing our country’s statecraft across two spheres of government. The Vote is more policy-directed, namely the way that service delivery should take place at the provincial and local levels. Emphasis is therefore placed on the policy frameworks that necessarily reflect the views and visions of the governing party.

The Government is in favour of more centralisation and less devolution of power to the provincial and local levels, and these key points of departure manifest themselves in the budget of this Vote. In practice this has found substance in, inter alia, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill, the Local Government: Municipal Structures Bill, the Transfer of Staff to Municipalities Amendment Bill, the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act and the proposed Property Rates Bill, which exists, but at the same time does not exist yet, in the words of the chairperson of our committee. When one takes into consideration all these Acts, which emanate from the budget of this Vote, then the New NP cannot support it. These Acts have a tremendous impact on the whole of South Africa and what is waiting on us - in particular with regard to the legislation pertaining to property tax - is simply a dark cloud and is coming under discussion at Salga’s workshops. It will eventually lead the democratic process in South Africa being disregarded. Various of these Acts are entirely unconstitutional, and as a result we will not be able to support this Vote.]

Mr M BHABHA: Chairperson, the ANC believes that the Vote is designed to sustain what is perhaps the most transformatory legislation to come out of this Government since the Constitution was passed. It is also designed to sustain what is perhaps the most extensive restructuring of any sphere. The ANC is quite encouraged to see that the budget has been appropriately allocated to try and maintain this.

Secondly, the budget also has factored into it an allocation which takes into account and allows for organic development between provincial and local government and the different spheres of government. The ANC supports this Vote. Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 23 - Public Enterprises, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 24 - Public Service and Administration, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 25 - Public Service Commission, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 26 - Public Works, put.

Declaration of vote:

Dr P J C NEL: Voorsitter, ek verwys na begrotingspos 26. Daar is ‘n duidelike gebrek aan verantwoordbaarheid in verskeie bestuurstrukture van die Departement van Openbare Werke. Die nuwe direkteur-generaal het onlangs erken daar is ‘n gebrek aan toesig en beheermaatreëls ten opsigte van projekte. Dit is ook nie aanvaarbaar dat die gebrek aan interne beheermaatreëls soms as verskoning vir die tekortkominge in die departement aangebied word nie. Die totale onkunde wat die bestuur van die departement openbaar ten opsigte van die staatstenderraadprosedures, is verstommend. Dit is dan ook geen wonder dat die Komitee oor Openbare Rekenings besluit het om voortaan nie meer te wag op die volgende verslag van die Ouditeur- generaal nie, maar om op ‘n gereelde basis interne inspeksies te hou om te bepaal of die departement se bestuursmaatreëls wel in gebruik is.

Indien soortgelyke optrede deur die Komitee oor Openbare Rekenings alreeds in die afgelope boekjaar uitgevoer is, sou dit dalk voorkom het dat die bedrag van R226 miljoen, wat bestem was vir armoedeverligting, nie deur die betrokke direktoraat van die departement bestee is nie. Dit was ‘n growwe en onvergeeflike fout. Dit dui alles op algehele onbekwaamheid by die bestuurskader van die departement in die afgelope boekjaar. Die Nuwe NP sal om dié rede teen die begrotingspos stem. Ons hoop dat die nuwe Minister baie beter sal vaar in die huidige boekjaar. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Dr P J C NEL: Chairman, I want to make reference to Vote No 26. There is clearly a lack of accountability in various management structures of the Department of Public Works. The new director-general recently admitted there was also a lack of supervision and control measures in respect of projects. Nor is it acceptable that the lack of internal control measures is sometimes used as an excuse for the shortcomings of the department. The complete ignorance displayed by the management of the department in respect of the state tender procedures is amazing. It is then no wonder that the Committee on Public Accounts has decided in future not to wait for the next report of the Auditor-General, but to hold regular internal inspections to determine whether the department’s management measures are in fact in use.

If the Committee on Public Accounts had already taken similar action during the past financial year, it might have prevented R226 million that was intended for poverty relief from being spent by the directorate of the department. That was a grave and unforgivable mistake. All this points to complete incompetence on the part of the management cadre of the department during the past financial year. The New NP, for this reason, will vote against this Vote. We hope that the new Minister will perform much better in the current financial year.]

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (New National Party and Democratic Party dissenting.

Vote No 27 - SA Management Development Institute, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 28 - SA Police Service, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, the ANC votes in favour of this Vote, since we have all witnessed that this department has been able to deploy the resources placed at its disposal at strategic places. We have also witnessed that, as a result of the deployment of resources, we have been able to bring down the level of violence in our country.

I agree with the hon member here, who said that Correctional Services has been overcrowded as a result of this department having utilised its resources appropriately. We therefore support this Vote.

Mnr J HORNE: Mnr die Voorsitter, die begroting dui daarop dat die beskerming van die veiligheid en sekuriteit van ‘n land se inwoners die mees fundamentele plig van enige demokratiese regering behoort te wees. Dit behoort daarom die hoogste prioriteit van die Regering te wees. Die ernstige tekort aan behoorlik opgeleide personeel, voertuie en ander toerusting het egter ‘n baie belemmerende uitwerking op die polisie se stryd teen misdaad. Hierdie begroting is, onses insiens, geheel en al onvoldoende om die tekorte van ten minste 700 opgeleide personeellede, 7 860 voertuie en ander toerusting ter waarde van R885,2 miljoen aan te spreek. Die R928 miljoen wat hiervoor benodig word, behoort, onses insiens, onmiddellik beskikbaar gestel word. Die gevolge word ook in die Noord-Kaap ervaar.

Hierdie begroting maak ook nie genoegsaam voorsiening vir die verhoging van ons polisielede se salarisse en die verbetering van ander diensvoorwaardes nie. Ons kan dit nie goedkeur dat daar onder hierdie omstandighede miljoene rande begroot word vir die nuwe wet op die beheer van vuurwapens, wat nie nodig sou gewees het indien die polisie in staat gestel word om die bestaande wetgewing behoorlik toe te pas nie. Onder hierdie omstandighede kan ons ongelukkig nie hierdie begroting ondersteun nie, omdat dit, soos reeds aangetoon, onvoldoende is. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr J HORNE: Mr Chairperson, the budget indicates that the safeguarding of the safety and security of the citizens of a country should be the most fundamental duty of any democratic government. Therefore, this should be the highest priority of the Government. However, the serious lack of properly trained staff, vehicles and other equipment has a very obstructive effect on the fight against crime by the police. This budget is, in our opinion, totally inadequate to address the shortfalls of at least 700 trained staff members, 7 860 vehicles and other equipment to the value of R885,2 million. The R928 million which is necessary for this should, in our opinion, be made available immediately. The effects are also being experienced in the Northern Cape.

This budget also does not make sufficient provision for an increase in the salaries of our police members and the improvement of other service conditions. We cannot approve of the fact that under these circumstances millions of rands are being budgeted for the new Firearms Control Act, which would not have been necessary if the police had been enabled to properly enforce the current legislation. Under these circumstances we unfortunately cannot support this budget because, as has already been indicated, it is inadequate.]

Mr J L THERON: Chairperson, the reason why the DP cannot support the SAPS budget is that while we are talking about the empowering of people, due to manpower and resource shortages we are disempowering the very people that must keep us safe - the bobby on the beat.

At every police station, we hear the same story: at least 50% understaffed, vehicle shortages and a lack of other resources. The budget makes provision for 300 new personnel for the gun Control Bill and millions of rands for the administrative implementation of the Bill, but does not address its enforcement at all. Where are the police officers to go around ensuring compliance? The DP, therefore, cannot support this Vote.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Vote No 29 - Sport and Recreation, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 30 - State Expenditure, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 31 - Statistics South Africa, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mr J L THERON: Chairperson, on Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry, the Democratic Party knows that the Department of Trade and Industry is undergoing restructuring because of inefficiency. We will only be able to support the work of this department if the restructuring is proving to be fruitful and starting to deliver more positive results. We therefore cannot support this Vote.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I feel and sound like an auctioneer at this point. [Interjections.]

Vote No 33 - Transport, put.

Declaration of vote:

Mr N M RAJU: Chairperson, I wanted to make a declaration, but I do not wish to incur the admonition of the Chair, considering that my declaration might fall outside the confines of the budget. I therefore kindly request that you note the objection of the DP.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Thank you, Mr Raju. I did not want to intimidate anybody. If there is an aspect of the budget of Vote No 33 that you want to object to, support, etc, certainly that declaration must be tabled. But if it is a policy speech, we do have other opportunities for that. So this is really the matter I am attempting to clarify.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party dissenting).

Vote No 34 - Water Affairs and Forestry, put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 35 - Welfare, put.

Declarations of vote:

Mev E C GOUWS: Mevrou die Voorsitter, my stemverklaring sal seker ook nie die begroting direk bespreek nie, maar die DP kan nie vir die Welsynbegrotingspos stem nie, want daar is nog te veel geld geoormerk vir die armes, wat deur swak administrasie en geen konstruktiewe beplanning nie by die noodlydendes uitkom nie. Die verantwoordelike departement moet meer verantwoordbaar wees vir hulle begroting. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mrs E C GOUWS: Madam Speaker, my declaration of vote will probably not discuss the budget directly, but the DP cannot vote in favour of the Welfare Vote, because there is still too much money which has been allocated to the poor that is not reaching the indigent owing to poor administration and no constructive planning. The responsible department must be more accountable for their budget.]

Mev J WITBOOI: Mevrou die Voorsitter, die Nuwe NP kan hierdie begrotingspos nie steun nie, om die volgende redes. In die vorige boekjaar is R203 miljoen wat bedoel is vir armoedeverligting nie bestee nie. Dit beteken dat R516 miljoen van die departement se geld weens swak administrasie nie bestee is nie. As die departement dus 78% van sy totale begroting nie gebruik nie, is dit onlogies om meer geld aan die departement te gee. Die Nuwe NP steun dus nie die begrotingspos nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mrs J WITBOOI: Madam Chairperson, the New NP cannot support this Vote, for the following reasons. During the previous financial year R203 million, which was intended for poverty relief, was not spent. This means that R516 million of the department’s money was not spent owing to poor administration. If the department has therefore not used 78% of its total budget, it is not logical to allocate more money to it. The New NP therefore does not support the Vote.]

Mr K D S DURR: Madam Chairperson, because of the dismal distribution and delivery record of this department, we have no option but to oppose the Vote.

Ms L JACOBUS: Madam Chairperson, on behalf of the ANC, I once more rise in support of Budget Vote No 35. In doing so, I would like to point out the following, and I might as well say that we also adopted the same approach with Vote 13 where we decided to highlight issues that impact on the budget and that speak to transformation.

Firstly, we have the introduction of policies and legislative changes as embodied in the White Paper on Social Welfare; secondly, the systematic approach of the department to uproot inefficiency, corruption and fraud; thirdly, the continued pursuance of the implementation of an integrated poverty eradication strategy with a view to sustainable development; fourthly, the provision of social assistance to the most needy and especially the grant to children under the age of seven which has more beneficiaries now than its predecessor, the maintenance grant, which benefited only a few; fifthly, the establishment of a committee of inquiry into the abuse of the elderly and the collaboration between the department and the Department of Safety and Security to ensure the protection of elders at pension paypoints and, lastly, the response of the department, in collaboration with other departments and NGOs, towards children infected with and affected by HIV/Aids.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (African Christian Democratic Party, Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).

Schedule agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Question put.

Declaration of vote:

Mr J L THERON: Madam Chairperson, the DP objects to this Bill because, firstly, we asked for growth rates of up to six per cent, which we cannot get from the ANC. Secondly, we asked that South Africa be made attractive for both domestic and foreign investments, and we are not getting this. Thirdly, we asked for rapid privatisation, and we are not getting this. Fourthly, we need a deliberate campaign to increase the supply of skilled people and we are not getting this. Fifthly, we asked for greater labour market flexibility and we are not getting this. Therefore, we oppose this Bill.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                     PROTECTED DISCLOSURES BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, it is said that one ought to believe in something in life, and believe in it so fervently that one would stand up for it to the end of one’s days.

We are also told by the men of old that when evil men plot, good men must plan; when evil men burn and bomb, good men must build and bind; when evil men shout ugly words of hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love; when evil men would seek to perpetuate an unjust status quo, good men must seek to bring about a real order of justice.

Indeed, the Bill serving before this House seeks to bring a real order of justice and change the status quo. This is a product of our initiative to transform both our society and our institutions, because of our belief in transformation. This is, indeed, a ground-breaking initiative in the area of open society.

When we passed the public disclosures Bill, popularly known as the Open Democracy Bill, in January this year, we indicated that we had omitted part 5 of the Bill, which sought to provide protection against victimisation of employees in both the private and the public sector, that is employees who disclose information with regard to unlawful and irregular conduct on the part of the employer or any other employee of the employer.

All the parties represented in the Open Democracy Bill were unanimous in the view that given the vital nature of this legislation in the fight against crime, it was not appropriate to include a chapter on the protection of whistle-blowers in the legislation dealing with access to information. We were also unanimous in our intention to enact this part as legislation very soon. Today we present to this House a Bill that has been passed by the National Assembly and has been amended by the National Council of Provinces.

This Bill seeks to make provision for the procedures in terms of which employees, in both the private and the public sector, may disclose information regarding unlawful or irregular conduct by their employers or other employees. It also provides for the protection of employees who make a disclosure which is protected in terms of this Bill.

This Bill, amongst other things, recognises that criminal and other irregular conduct in government and private bodies is detrimental to good, effective, accountable and transparent governance and can endanger the economic stability of the Republic, and also has the potential to cause social damage. All laws passed previously and currently, including our common laws, do not make provision for mechanisms or procedures in terms of which employees may, without fear of reprisal, disclose information relating to suspected or alleged criminal or other irregular conduct by their employers.

Many employees have witnessed a lot of misbehaviour, including criminal behaviour, by their employers, their seniors or their colleagues. However, because of fear of victimisation - as there is no protection provided for in legislation - they have decided to keep silent. We hope that those with information about irregularities will, from now on, come forward with information and disclose such information to the relevant bodies as envisaged by this Bill.

I believe that if this country had had this kind of law, we would not have bred people-turned-monsters like the De Kocks and Bassons, who used, or continue to use, either state or private resources to engage in irregularities, including criminal activities.

The Bill, as it was passed by the National Assembly, made a presumption that labour legislation provided for a general remedy for a variety of unfair employment practices, which it does not. For instance, labour legislation does not provide remedies in areas such as the unfair conduct of employers relating to promotion, demotion or training of employees, the unfair suspension of employees, etc.

With this amendment we believe that we have tied up the loose ends, and that our people will benefit from this legislative product. We believe that we have been able to provide an accessible mechanism that ensures fair and justifiable practices.

In conclusion, I would like to indicate that the parties have given an undertaking that they will not misbehave during this debate, and I hope that they will keep their word. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Was that a protected disclosure, Mr Mahlangu?

Mr J L MAHLANGU: It was very transparent, Chair.

Mr L G LEVER: Madam Chair, colleagues, this is an important weapon in the fight against corruption and there is a lot of confusion amongst people as to what this Bill actually entails. Its focus is on protecting the employee in his or her employment relationship with his or her employer. It does not go any further than that at this stage. This Bill protects state employees as well as employees in the private sector who come forward and blow the whistle on corrupt practices.

There are five categories of persons to whom disclosures can be made. Each category has its own requirements for the disclosure to qualify as a protected disclosure. A disclosure made to a legal adviser for the purpose of obtaining advice is a protected disclosure and this has the least onerous requirement to establish it as a protected disclosure. The requirements get more onerous for each successive class of persons to whom a disclosure may be made.

There was a great deal of debate as to whether the Bill should go further than just protecting the employee in so far as his or her job is concerned. Although the DP pushed for the extension of the Bill to protect other relationships or persons, such as a pensioner reporting a corrupt official who seeks a bribe or a company reporting a member of the tender board who also seeks a bribe, we accept that some research still needs to be done in this regard because as the department had done some substantive research the international best practice has not yet gone that far and we would be breaking new ground if we did seek to extend it beyond the scope that it has presently attained.

Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, die Nuwe NP wil die hoop uitspreek dat die beskerming van werknemers wat bekendmakings doen, wat in gevolge hierdie wetsontwerp beskerm word, grootliks sal bydra om die euwel van korrupsie in beide die private en openbare sektor uit te roei. Die Nuwe NP ondersteun hierdie wetsontwerp, asook die wysigings wat aangebring is. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, the New NP wishes to express the hope that the protection of employees who make a disclosure; and who are protected in terms of this Bill, will contribute significantly to the eradication of the misdeed of corruption in both the private and public sectors. The New NP supports this Bill, as well as the amendments made.]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, the ACDP supports the Bill. We supported the draft whistle-blower provisions in the select committee, but we recommended that they be removed from the then Freedom of Information Bill, to be taken up as a stand-alone measure to be renamed to dignify the Bill. We do not think that distinguished public servants would like to be known as whistle- blowers. It is reminiscent of stoolpigeons or singing like canaries and the like. But protecting the public interest by protected disclosure, as I have said, lends the proper tone to an honourable action.

We often hear others say: If only they would do something, orWhy do they not do something?’’ Now, if we hear of corruption or of a serious misdemeanour, we can no longer join that chorus. This Bill should thus be called the I-can-do-something-about-it Bill, because it gives a shield of protection to employees against possible reprisal after disclosing information relating to alleged criminal or other irregular conduct whether in the public or the private sector.

The Bill is also a deterrent to those who would commit wrong, and we believe will promote confidence in Government and in business alike. A role model for the future perhaps should be Mr Christopher Mile, a Swiss security guard, who made public the shredding of Swiss archive documents relating to holocaust victims. He was dismissed and condemned for his act. His selfless act did not relate to having any prior Jewish or holocaust connections. He was simply motivated by a shared horror all decent people feel and by the public interest.

We therefore trust that this Bill will empower the public to play an active role in ridding our society of creeping corruption and crime. We have pleasure in supporting this Bill. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Rev Chabaku, that was very enthusiastic applause. [Laughter.]

Debate concluded.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

The Council adjourned at 17:29. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                       WEDNESDAY, 14 JUNE 2000

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 14 June 2000 in terms of
     Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill as a money Bill:


     (i)     Taxation Laws Amendment Bill [B 38 - 2000] (National
          Assembly - sec 75) - (Portfolio Committee on Finance -
          National Assembly).

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces: Papers:

1. The Minister of Finance:

 Explanatory Memorandum on the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2000 [WP 1-
 2000].

                       THURSDAY, 15 JUNE 2000

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. 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
     Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation:


     (a)     Government Notice No 207 published in Government Gazette
          No 20945 dated 1 March 2000, National Policy for designing
          school calenders for ordinary public schools in South Africa,
          made in terms of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act
          No 27 of 1996).


     (b)     Government Notice No 208 published in Government Gazette
          No 20945 dated 1 March 2000, School calender for public
          schools for the 2001, made in terms of the National Education
          Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (c)     Government Notice No 252 published in Government Gazette
          No 20994 dated 24 March 2000, Appointment of a replacement to
          serve as a member of the South African Qualifications
          Authority, made in terms of the South African Qualifications
          Authority Act, 1995 (Act No 58 of 1995).


     (d)     Government Notice No 400 published in Government Gazette
          No 21093 dated 20 April 2000, Revision of the policy document:
          Norms and standards for instructional programmes and
          examination and certification thereof in technical colleges,
          Report 190 (92/04), made in terms of the National Education
          Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (e)     Governmenmt Notice No 401 published in Government Gazette
          No 21093 dated 20 April 2000, Provisos for the Senior
          Certificate programme, made in terms of the National Education
          Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (f)     Government Notice No 402 published in Government Gazette
          No 21093 dated 20 April 2000, The deletion of the category
          providing for foreign candidates as contained in the policy
          document, a Résumé of instructional programmes in public
          schools, Report 550 (97/06), made in terms of the National
          Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (g)     Government Notice No 449 published in Government Gazette
          No 21143 dated 4 May 2000, Appointment of persons to serve as
          members of the Review Committee to review the National
          Outcomes-based Curriculum and Progress with its
          implementation, made in terms of the National Education Policy
          Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (h)     Government Notice No 404 published in Government Gazette
          No 21093 dated 20 April 2000, The inclusion of a continuous
          assessment component in the final Senior Certificate
          examination at Grade 12, made in terms of the National
          Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


 (2)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation.
     It is also referred to the Joint Monitoring Committee on
     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women for comment:


     Government Notice No 448 published in Government Gazette No 21143
     dated 4 May 2000, Call for comments on the draft document -
     National Curriculum Framework for further Education and Training,
     made in terms of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No
     27 of 1996).


 (3)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation.
     It is also referred to the Joint Monitoring Committee on
     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Children, Youth and
     Disbaled Persons:


     Government Notice No 403 published in Government Gazette No 21093
     dated 20 April 2000, Approval of an extension of the Gauteng Youth
     College Programme, made in terms of the National Education Policy
     Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


 (4)    The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Communications and to the Select Committee on Labour and Public
     Enterprises:


     Report of the Government Communication and Information System for
     1999 [RP 58-2000].


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


     (a)     Regulation No R.14 published in Government Gazette No
          20997 dated 24 March 2000, Establishment of Investigating
          Directorate: Corruption, made in terms of the National
          Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 (Act No 32 of 1998).


     (b)     Regulation No R.16 published in Government Gazette No
          21039 dated 31 March 2000, Commencement of certain sections of
          the Witness Protection Act, 1998 (Act No 112 of 1998).

National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson:

 Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces:


 Bill passed by National Assembly on 14 June 2000 and transmitted for
 concurrence:


 (a)    Appropriation Bill [B 7 and 7A - 2000] (National Assembly - sec
     77) - (Select Committee on Finance - National Council of
     Provinces).

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Appropriation Bill [B 7 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 15 June 2000:

   The Select Committee on Finance, having considered and examined the Appropriation Bill [B 7 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77) and other papers referred to it, reports that it has concluded its deliberations thereon.

2. Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Supplementary Estimate [B 7A - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 15 June 2000:

   The Select Committee on Finance, having considered and examined the Supplementary Estimate [B 7A - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 77), reports that it has concluded its deliberations thereon.

                     MONDAY, 19 JUNE 2000
   

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 Assent by the President of the Republic in respect of the following
 Bill:


(1)     National Youth Commission Amendment Bill [B 25 - 2000] - Act No
       19 of 2000 (assented to and signed by President on 15 June
       2000).

National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson:

 (1)    The following private member's legislative proposal was
     submitted to the Chairperson on 9 June 2000, in accordance with
     Rule 178:


     (i)     Pan South African Language Board Amendment Bill, 2000 (Mr
          A E van Niekerk).


     The legislative proposal has been referred to the Select Committee
     on Members' and Provincial Legislative Proposals by the
     Chairperson, in accordance with Rule 179.


 (2)    Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces:


     Bills passed by National Assembly on 19 June 2000 and transmitted
     for concurrence:


     (i)     Taxation Laws Amendment Bill [B 38 - 2000] (National
           Assembly - sec 77) - (Select Committee on Finance - National
           Council of Provinces).


     (ii)    Meat Safety Bill [B 29B - 2000] (National Assembly - sec
           76(1)) - (Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs
           - National Council of Provinces).

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Protected Disclosures Bill [B 30 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 19 June 2000:

 The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs, having
 considered the subject of the Protected Disclosures Bill [B 30 - 2000]
 (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the
 Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with
 proposed amendments, as follows:


                              CLAUSE 4


 1.     On page 6, from line 47, to omit subsection (1) and to
     substitute:


       (1) Any employee who has been subjected, is subject or may be
     subjected, to an  occupational detriment in breach of section 3,
     may-
     (a) approach any court having jurisdiction, including the Labour
          Court established by section 151 of the Labour Relations Act,
          1995 (Act No. 66 of 1995), for appropriate relief; or
     (b) pursue any other process allowed or prescribed by any law.
       (2) For the purposes of the Labour Relations Act, 1995,
     including the consideration of any matter emanating from this Act
     by the Labour Court-
     (a) any dismissal in breach of section 3 is deemed to be an
          automatically unfair dismissal as contemplated in section 187
          of that Act, and the dispute about such a dismissal must
          follow the procedure set out in Chapter VIII of that Act; and
     (b) any other occupational detriment in breach of section 3 is
          deemed to be an unfair labour practice as contemplated in Part
          B of Schedule 7 to that Act, and the dispute about such an
          unfair labour practice must follow the procedure set out in
          that Part: Provided that if the matter fails to be resolved
          through conciliation, it may be referred to the Labour Court
          for adjudication.


                              CLAUSE 10


 1.  On page 12, in line 10, to omit "subsection (1)" and to substitute
     "paragraph (a)".