TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 2001 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:01.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Rev A D GOOSEN: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that this week marked the launch of National Water Week, which started yesterday with events in KwaZulu-Natal;

(2) believes that access to water is a basic human right, which is contained in our democratic Constitution;

(3) supports the water awareness campaign; and

(4) welcomes the announcement by the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry that the bulk of the funds voted by Parliament will be used by the department to provide water and sanitation.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes with astonishment that the running of next year’s Earth Summit will cost South Africa between R300 and R400 million;

(2) further notes that approximately R30 to R50 million has been budgeted for in the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework;

(3) recognises that although this summit is important to South Africa and to international environmental issues, this cost cannot be defended in view of the other priorities this Government must address; and

(4) calls upon Minister Valli Moosa to explain the direct cost for South Africa and its taxpayers, and to inform the South African public how he intends raising the difference without an added burden to the taxpayer.

[Interjections.]

Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP: That the House -

(1) notes the skills shortage in mathematics and science in the South African school system;

(2) welcomes the agreement reached by the education Minmec to urgently lure back retired mathematics and science educators and those who took voluntary severance packages while teaching these subjects, as part of Government’s strategy to promote such subjects as a matter of national priority;

(3) believes that proactive measures should be taken to prevent a recurrence of the same situation in future;

(4) hopes that the labour movement will not derail the process as there are a number of schools that are without science and mathematics teachers; and

(5) urges the Ministry of Education to rally the support of the labour movement to prevent unnecessary delays and bottlenecks.

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

That the House -

(1) notes with pleasure the decision by British business people and politicians to erect a larger-than-life sized bronze statue of former President, Nelson Mandela, in Trafalgar Square;

(2) further notes the role played by the British Anti-apartheid Movement and the special place that Trafalgar Square continues to hold in South Africans’ hearts;

(3) believes that erecting a statue of Madiba befits a man of his stature;

(4) commends the Mayor of London and his team for keeping the spirit of freedom alive; and

(5) calls on all the people of the United Kingdom to support this noble initiative. [Applause.]

Mrs S M CAMERER: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes the suggestion in last weekend’s Sunday Times, by the Eastern Cape Premier, Makhenkesi Stofile, that the powers of provinces should be stripped down;

(2) further notes that the Eastern Cape government has gone from bad to worse under his custodianship with hundreds of ghost workers still being paid, chronic failure to pay pensions on time and collapsing hospital services;

(3) believes that the premier’s suggestion is an admission of failure by an ANC politician who has made a mess of running his province …

[Interjections]

(4) congratulates the DA-run Western Cape which has, for several years, won the prize for the best-run province, proving that provincial government can work very well in competent hands; and

(5) calls on President Mbeki and Minister Mufamadi to distance themselves from Mr Stofile’s suggestions, which would be tantamount to tearing up the historic constitutional settlement reached in 1993 at Kempton Park.

[Interjections.]

Dr G W KOORNHOF: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) encourages our nation to celebrate Human Rights Day tomorrow, viz 21 March 2001, in a spirit of pride and joy that we have managed to establish a new culture of human rights since 1994;

(2) congratulates millions of South Africans who respect the rights of people in our country and who affirm, on a daily basis, the democratic values of human dignity, equality and freedom;

(3) calls on Government and our citizens to root out with vigour all remaining violations of human rights, especially against women and children; and

(4) expresses the hope that South Africa will become a shining example of a country that leads the world in respecting human rights.

Mr M U KALAKO: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that tomorrow, 21 March, marks Human Rights Day;

(2) further notes that Human Rights Day was born in the struggle that led to the birth of the new South Africa;

(3) believes that the restoration of the dignity of all our people means that we must succeed in the struggle for freedom from poverty, and that our people live a decent life; and

(4) calls on our people to dedicate themselves to the struggle to achieve freedoms, which are additional to political freedom, to fulfil the task that the people shall govern.

[Applause.]

Rev K R J MESHOE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes the motion that was moved by the hon Xingwana in this House, urging SABC1 to stop further broadcasts of Yizo Yizo; (2) further notes the public outrage, especially from concerned parents, who object to the series that glamourises gangsters and the culture of skipping school;

(3) questions the commitment of the Department of Education to the campaign of moral renewal that was championed by former President Mandela and Deputy President Zuma;

(4) rejects the Council of Education Ministers’ approval of Yizo Yizo, believing that it created an opportunity to discuss issues ``openly and frankly’’;

(5) reminds the Council of Education Ministers that some school children engage in bestiality, prostitution and gang rapes during school hours, and that it would be wrong to show that on TV in the hope that these barbaric acts will create an opportunity to discuss such issues; and

(6) therefore calls on the Council of Education Ministers to stop endorsing wickedness and barbarism, and to start promoting programmes that positively influence our children to be morally upright, responsible, respectful …

[Time expired.]

Mnr C AUCAMP: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die AEB sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis -

(1) met groot kommer daarvan kennis neem dat -

   (a)  die VN se spesiale gesant oor die onafhanklikheid van die howe;


   (b)  die voorsitter van die International Bar Association; en


   (c)  die regterpresident van Transvaal,


   die Minister vir Justisie en Staatkundige Ontwikkeling gewaarsku het
   dat sy beoogde instelling van 'n beheerraad oor lede van die
   regsberoep en die beoogde samestelling van so 'n raad die
   onafhanklikheid van die regsberoep in gevaar stel;

(2) ernstig daaroor sal waak dat die beginsel van die skeiding van magte, wat ‘n hoeksteen is van die demokrasie, nie aangetas sal word deur die aanstelling van politici as waghonde oor die regsberoep nie;

(3) die feit verwelkom dat die Minister onder internasionale druk ingestem het tot ‘n spoedberaad oor die aangeleentheid; en

4) ernstige kommer uitspreek oor die feit dat internasionale druk en
   die gepaardgaande negatiewe buitelandse publisiteit ontlok word deur
   dwalinge wat ten oorvloede toe reeds deur opposisiepartye uitgewys
   is, en daarop wys dat groter erns teenoor die standpunte van die
   opposisie die land en die Regering groot verleentheid kan bespaar. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the AEB: That the House -

(1) notes with great concern that -

   (a)  the United Nation's special envoy on the independence of the
       courts;


   (b)  the chairman of the International Bar Association; and


   (c)  the Judge President of the Transvaal,


   have warned the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development
   that his envisaged establishment of a board of control over members
   of the legal profession and the planned composition of such a board
   will jeopardise the independence of the legal profession;

(2) will earnestly guard against the principle of the division of powers, which is a cornerstone of democracy, being jeopardised by the appointment of politicians as watchdogs over the legal profession;

(3) welcomes the fact that the Minister has, under international pressure, agreed to urgent deliberations on the matter; and

(4) expresses serious concern at the fact that international pressure and the accompanying negative foreign publicity are being invited through misconceptions which have already been indicated in profusion by opposition parties, and points out that more seriousness regarding the opposition’s points of view can spare the country and the Government great embarrassment.]

Dr B G MBULAWA-HANS: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes the correct response by the Department of Health in rejecting the loaded offer of Aids test kits by Guardian Scientific Africa Incorporated;

(2) further notes that the Democratic Alliance condemned Government for turning down this offer;

(3) believes that the Democratic Alliance’s stance on this matter is opportunistic, short-sighted and ill-informed;

(4) further believes that access to medicines by the poor and people living with HIV/Aids is the priority, and not profit;

(5) condemns this drug company for embarking on a marketing ploy which puts profits before the wellbeing of our people; and

(6) calls on the Democratic Alliance to stop being a lapdog of pharmaceutical companies at the expense of the poor and to join the partnership to eradicate the scourge of HIV/Aids.

[Interjections.] [Applause.]

Adv H C SCHMIDT: Mevrou die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag namens die DP sal voorstel:

(1) kennis neem van -

   (a)  die beroep op die Minister van Justisie deur die Internasionale
          regsgemeenskap teen regeringsinmenging in die Suid-Afrikaanse
          regspleging;


   (b)  spesifiek die briewe van Param Cumaraswarny, spesiale VN-gesant,
          Dianne Kempe, voorsitter van die International Bar
          Association, en regter  Ngoepe, regter-president van
          Transvaal;

(2) kommer uitspreek dat die VN se basiese beginsels en ander internasionale standaarde aangetas word met groot skade aan die onafhanklikheid van die regsberoep van Suid-Afrika sou die regering voortgaan met die instelling van ‘n beheerraad oor regslui; en

(3) ‘n beroep op die Minister van Justisie doen om te besin oor die voorgestelde wetgewing. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Adv H C SCHMIDT: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House -

(1) notes -

   (a)  the appeal by the international legal community to the Minister
       for Justice and Constitutional Development against Government
       interference in the administration of justice in South Africa;
       and


   (b)  specifically the letters from Param Cumaraswarny, UN special
       envoy, Dianne Kempe, chairperson of the International Bar
       Association, and Mr Justice Ngoepe, Judge President of the
       Transvaal; and

(2) expresses concern that the UN’s basic principles and other international standards would be tampered with, to the detriment of the independence of the South African legal profession, were the Government to proceed with the introduction of a board of control for legal practitioners; and

(3) appeals to the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development to reconsider the proposed legislation.]

Prof L B G NDABANDABA: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) regrets the incident that befell Ms Babalwa Ntsokolo, the accountant of the Nelson Mandela Children’s Fund, in which she was assaulted by a white man at Sandton Shopping Mall;

(2) notes with sadness that there are still large traces of racial intolerance in South Africa;

(3) pleads with the general public to respect the human rights culture that the country wishes to foster; and

(4) hopes that the police are going to spare no effort to investigate the matter and thereby allow the law to take its course.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  this week is National Water Week;


   (b)  Cape Flats residents are marching on the offices of DA mayor,
       Peter Marais, in protest against water and electricity cuts; and


   (c)  the DA was voted into power on the back of a promise of free
       water;

(2) reminds the DA that - (a) the right to water is a basic human right; and

   (b)  the people of Cape Town will remember this gross abuse of their
       human rights in the next elections; and

(3) calls on Mr Marais, in a show of unprecedented compassion and respect for human rights, to use National Water Week to restore the right to water of all Capetonians.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the report on the investigation from the Department of Public
       Service and Administration regarding maladministration and
       corruption in the Department of Correctional Services was
       eventually submitted to Parliament; and


   (b)  the findings are shocking and we call for immediate action to be
       taken against the guilty parties by ensuring that the
       recommendations identified are implemented;

(2) expresses its concern that these findings could be a reflection of further problems in other state departments, and this is clearly a sign that the Government is not tough enough on corruption; and

(3) urges the ANC Government to get its house in order by rooting out corruption in all state departments.

[Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mr J T MASEKA: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) notes with concern the frequent disruptions to communication facilities in Heidelberg, in the Western Cape, which are caused by the theft and vandalism of telephone wires and cables;

(2) recognises that communities in many areas across the land endure similar interruptions to their services and that this abuse of facilities is evidently on the increase;

(3) condemns the selfish and destructive actions of the perpetrators of these deeds; and

(4) calls on Telkom to take decisive action as a deterrent, by employing teams of special investigators to work with communities on a random basis to bring the offenders to book.

                          CHILD ABDUCTIONS

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr D H M GIBSON: Madam Speaker, I hereby move without notice: That the House-

(1) notes that two incidents occurred in the past couple of days in which children were abducted and that Nadia Neethling of Pretoria and David September of Westlake were safely reunited with their parents;

(2) congratulates the SAPS, which did outstanding work in recovering these missing children;

(3 expresses grave concern that approximately 800 children a year go missing and that sexual abuse and molestation sometimes play a role in the disappearance of these children; and

(4) calls on the authorities to ensure that the abductors and perpetrators meet the full force of the law to serve as an example to other criminals and to prevent these crimes as far as possible.

Agreed to.

ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:

That the House, subject to the concurrence of the National Council of Provinces, establishes a joint committee in terms of Joint Rule lll to consider the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2001.

Agreed to.

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

                (Resumption of First Reading debate)

Prof B TUROK: Madam Speaker, last Friday was an extraordinary day in the history of South Africa. As I was preparing my notes for this speech, I noticed that the front page of Business Report, which I wanted to display, stated that that day was a black day for markets in South Africa. It was a black day because the Johannesburg Stock Exchange fell 3,5% and, indeed, the stock exchange fell 8% on the week.

However, on the same page it was stated that Anglo American Corporation’s headline profits had risen 53% and 26% over the year. That rise in profits for Anglo American was largely to the extent of 70% on operations within South Africa, and not because it had listed overseas.

I mention this data because this Budget debate has seen very little reference to the international environment in which South Africa tries to operate. Yet last week saw a terrible hammering on world stock markets. Nasdaq Technology Stocks lost 60% of their value, Tokyo hit its lowest point in 16 years, London is at a two-year low, the USS&P fell 20% and so on.

Some of us have been tracking this in the local and international press and there is no doubt now that the stock exchange markets are more volatile now than they have ever been. The New York Times, a very conservative newspaper, recently said that markets have more in common with Alice in Wonderland than the real world. A correspondent, Robert Shiller, said that economic theory has never achieved any consensus on what makes stock markets rise or fall and what ultimately causes recessions.

I mention all this because on my left the DP, which is muttering, keeps urging us to base our economic policies on what the markets want. This is the path of surrendering to volatility and instability, where stock exchange values are more important than the real economy. As I have shown, on the very same day that the South African stock exchange and world stock exchanges fell, Anglo American recorded profits and they were not the only ones. I could mention others.

The DP has its origins in liberalism. This included humanism, concern for the common good, for a welfare state. But now it has, in the new form of the Democratic Alliance, fallen under the influence of a new kind of liberalism which people call neoliberalism.

Mr G B D MCINTOSH: That is Marxist.

Prof B TUROK: This neoliberalism is based on economic licence where governments disappear, where markets do it all, and its ideology is that of competition and not solidarity. It upholds the values of privatisation and not the possible usefulness of privatisation.

This Government is committed to the restructuring of certain public assets, but it has not fallen for the idea of neoliberalism and the values that the DP puts into their ideas of privatisation. I am very pleased that the hon Dene Smuts has arrived. Speaking in this Budget debate she said that Telkom should be sold off: open up, let competition roll and let us be like Europe. I repeat: sell off, open up, compete and be like Europe. These are the slogans of the DP. [Interjections.]

The policies of our Government could not be more different. It is far more sophisticated in its approach to restructuring and total economic policy. Our policy is to create a sound environment for the economy, with the Budget policy setting the tone. Fortunately, the foundations for a sound economic policy are there and, as I have indicated, Anglo American has performed exceptionally well right at the very time when stock markets are crashing.

What is important is that our Budget measures introduce measures to expand the real economy. That is the foundation of our future. What happens on the stock exchanges is not in our control, but what happens in South Africa is very much within our control. That is what the Budget is all about. What we want is to see real growth in the real economy, that is in industry, services, rural development and all the other sectors where people work and contribute to the economy. If that works, foreign direct investment will follow. They want to see things humming in the real economy, and business confidence will follow. That is our concern.

Growth can be achieved in many different ways. One can have jobless growth and this is now understood internationally. The IMF, World Bank and all other institutions have recognised that in many countries, one has growth but it is jobless growth. The DP does not understand that. In the finance committee, they keep calling for growth without the additional elements which will make growth valuable in South Africa.

One can have jobless growth, growth by the rich and even illusory growth. If one builds 100 casinos, one will see growth, but it is an illusion. It does not create jobs and wealth. The DA has a blind faith in growth no matter what. And yet we all understand - those who read economic theory and text - that in many countries, there is growth which is jobless producing no benefits to the majority of the population.

There are two essential elements to growth: firstly capital investment and secondly, social investment. Both are equally important. I want to stress that in our discussion on the Budget, we must remember that capital investment is not enough. We must have social investment because these are two sides of the same coin. On capital investment, we have to concede that in recent years there has been a standstill on allocations, especially on infrastructure, the maintenance of roads and buildings. Now, in this Budget, capital spending will rise at 20% over three years, although from a low base.

Parliament must keep an eye on this, particularly the finance and other economic committees, and capital spending because we have been told that in some national and provincial departments they have fallen behind with their spending. This has been discussed in this debate on more than one occasion. We ask Parliament to keep an eye on capital spending, but it is in the Budget and must happen. The concentration on infrastructure is important for a number of reasons. Firstly, roads and buildings have to be maintained because if not, they fall to pieces and rebuilding them becomes a costly exercise. Infrastructure is also important because it is often - and properly applied

• the foundation for labour-intensive methods. There are many ways of doing the same job. One of them is by using machinery and the other one is by using labour. Infrastructure spending is a wonderful opportunity to use our imagination and innovation in order to use labour-intensive methods. Infrastructure is also important because it builds productive capacity for the future and lowers the costs of production, transport, communication and so on.

The Black Business Council made representations to the finance committee, particularly on this point. They said that we must have infrastructure because this will make life easier for black and small businesses in general. However, the role of the state is crucial and here again we are in conflict with the DP because they disagree. They want a minimalist state, and want the state to disappear in line with neoliberal thinking internationally. Our President said in his introductory speech in this House that the Government and the private sector must make a decisive contribution in the coming years. I think that is totally at odds with the kind of positions that the DP have been putting forward.

I repeat again: the hon Dene Smuts in her speech in this House a few days ago said: sell up, open up, leave it to competition, and be like Europe. Well, we are not like Europe. We have a legacy here of forced cheap labour which created a kind of society which requires that we must take actions which are not like Europe. We cannot simply sell off, open up, rely on competition and their friends in the private sector and be like Europe. We cannot do it. We are part of Africa, have underdevelopment here and need to take other measures. [Applause.]

The second arm of policy in this Budget and in the President’s speech, is the social element of investment. I use the word social investment and not social spending because what we do with human beings is an investment for the future and not just spending for welfare and charity reasons. It is an economic programme, an understanding of where we have to go. That is an investment in human beings. It can be for economic or welfare reasons. I just want to repeat that we cannot follow the road of selling off, opening up, relying on competition and being like Europe. [Applause.]

Mr R J HEINE: Madam Speaker, hon Deputy President and hon members, President Thabo Mbeki in a recent interview in Rapport, said that he planned to meet all the big companies in South Africa to establish why they do not invest in this country. He speculated that the business sector’s low level of investment could be because of their fears of the continued uncertainty about the future. But he declared that he did not know what this doubt and uncertainty was about and gave the assurance that he did not expect any crisis in the future.

The President is right; big and small business people are uncertain about the future. Let me explain why the President appears to be blind to the obvious. Last year, in February, he said that the unintentional consequences of inappropriate labour legislation would be revised. Subsequently, his Minister of Labour announced that some changes to labour laws would be brought before Parliament during the last quarter of last year. On 29 January, Deputy President Jacob Zuma said again that labour problems could be a potential deterrent to investors. Clearly, the ANC-led Government is well aware that rigid labour laws are one of the major reasons why investors are shy. This is moreover constantly emphasised in reports and studies by economists and bankers, the most recent one being the Royal Bank of Scotland in January 2001, and by a group of economists, among them the IMF deputy Eduardo Aninat and World Bank President James Wolfensohn in November 2000. Mr Danny King, the group economist for PSE Investment Bank, says unequivocally that the expected clash between the Government and its alliance partners over the proposed amendments to labour laws and privatisation proposals weighs heavily on investors’ attitude towards investing in this country.

We are now in March 2001, these amendments to labour laws have been discussed in the Millennium Council and will now go to Nedlac. According to the programme of the Portfolio Committee on Labour, public hearings on these amendments will only take place in August. So, the chances that these amendments will be tabled in Parliament this year are now remote. It is two years since the President identified the problem which was created by his Government and there has been no remedial action yet. The question therefore is, how serious is Government about allaying the fears of investors and what has this delay caused the country in terms of rising unemployment and all the social costs associated with it?

Let me raise another major problem in asserting the question of overregulating. Dr Brian Benfield of Wits University, in a paper on barriers to entrepreneurs’ success, says:

If you were a South African entrepreneur, would you consider investing your skills and savings in a new life assurance company? Although life assurance companies are usually well known for their employment and capital creating nature, would you risk running a company which today must comply with no less than 43 Acts of Parliament? Of these, 15 have appeared in the past 24 months. This is a 54% increase in regulation in two years. This could easily exceed 30% of your total operating expenses.

Since 1994, labour laws have come thick and fast. For business to comply with all of them, is very difficult and expensive. That is why 400 companies have applied for exemption to certain clauses under the Basic Conditions of Employment Act. If this exemption is not granted, more jobs will be lost immediately, and reduced investment prospects will hamper future job creation.

Business is sometimes blamed for being obstructive and unwilling to co- operate with the social objectives of Government. But let us look at the facts. In two years, the Business Trust has raised R1 billion to be used to create employment opportunities. There are already 600 projects in place that are financed by this trust. This is a business initiative that is underway and working.

In contrast, almost R1 billion in tax was collected by the Minister of Finance, on the demutualisation of Sanlam and Old Mutual, for job creation. Two years later, not one cent has been spent for this purpose. Cosatu has accumulated R80 million for the same purpose. How much has been invested in job creation? According to information that I have, nothing.

On the issue of privatisation, Government has been timid in the extreme for far too long. Investors do not believe any longer that it will happen. Any delay in Telkom’s plans will reinforce those doubts and lead to a further flight from the rand. President Mbeki does not have to scratch his head in puzzlement. If he gets on with privatisation and removes labour and other regulatory barriers, business would invest immediately. [Interjections.] But if he just sits on his hands, business will do the same. [Applause.]

Mme P K MOTHOAGAE: Modulasetilo, Tautona Thabo Mbeki, maloko a a tlotlegang, borra le bomme, le metswedi ya dikgang, go kgoba marapo go sala morago sebui se se sa tswang go tswa fa. Fela ke tlotla mo go nna go fiwa sebaka sa go latlhela tlhware legonyana mo Molaotlhomong o o abang matlotlo go mafapha ka go farologana.

ANC e ema Molaotlhomo o nokeng. Fa Tona Manuel a ne a eme Kokoano Bosetšhaba ka lefoko, o re bontshitse gore meruo ya rona e a gola le ekonomi ya rona e ya tlhatlhoga le go gola, le fa boleng jwa ranta bo wa le go tsoga. Seo re ne re sa se itse ka nako ya dipuso tsa maloba tsa tlhaolele, fa borre ba le bomme ba, ba ne ba re eteletse pele.

Komiti ya madi e ne e biditse ditheetso mme mekgatlho e le mentsi e bontshitse gore mo dingwageng di le lesome tse di fetileng, e simolola go bona tswelelopele e re leng mo go yona fa. [Tsenoganong.] (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)

[Ms P K MOTHOAGAE: Madam Speaker, hon Thabo Mbeki, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, and the news media, it is discouraging to speak after the previous speaker. However, it is an honour for me to be given an opportunity to say a few words on this Bill, which allocates funds to different departments.

The ANC supports this Bill. When Minister Manuel addressed the National Assembly, he indicated that our wealth was increasing and our economy was also growing, even though the value of the rand was continuing to fluctuate. That did not happen during the time of the apartheid governments, when these men and women were leading us.

The finance committee convened hearings at which many organisations indicated that in the past 10 years they had begun to see the progress we were making. [Interjections.]]

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, there is no interpreting service.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Mothoagae, if you do not mind, we will arrange interpretation. Therefore, you may leave the podium for now and come back once we have arranged it. You are right to speak in your language. It is your right. However, you must make the proper arrangements for members to hear what is said.

Mr J W LE ROUX: Madam Speaker, hon President, colleagues, Minister Manuel might be interested to hear what advice was given to Gordon Brown, the British Chancellor of the Exchequer:

Minister Brown is blinded by his own cleverness. He believes that the truth is always complex. He cannot see that there is a simple explanation for America’s economic success, namely: government’s role in the economy must be minimal; government must curb its appetite for taxpayers’ money; government must avoid fuelling inflation; and government must resist the temptation to interfere in the labour market.

There is no doubt that, since 1996, Minister Manuel and his team have done sterling work. Keeping inflation in check and driving the controversial deficit reduction programme has been significantly important. Locally and internationally, there is recognition that Mr Manuel has managed to achieve most of the goals he set for our macroeconomic plan. The question is: Why has our economy not responded sufficiently? Why is our growth rate stuck at 3%? Why are we still shedding jobs? Why are young entrepreneurs still leaving the country? Why are we financially worse off than seven years ago? Why is the gap between the rich and the poor getting even wider? The real problem is that both local and foreign investors are worried that things are going wrong in South Africa. [Interjections.]

It is sadly true that all the good work done by Minister Manuel and his department has been undone by the actions and utterances of some of his colleagues. [Interjections.] Investors believe that Minister Penuell Maduna’s handling of Judge Heath and Henry Kluver is a clear sign that the ANC pays only lip service to our Constitution. [Interjections.] Investors believe that the handling of crime and especially the issue of crime statistics is ample proof that Minister Tshwete has lost control. [Interjections.] Irrespective of all the excuses and explanations we hear every day, investors have taken a hard look at South Africa and have said: No! [Interjections.]

I would like to touch on two further issues that have made investors think twice. The handling of the Aids problem was particularly damaging to our country. It started with Sarafina 2 and ended with our President’s unconventional stance regarding HIV. [Interjections.] The whole world knows that the Aids epidemic will wipe out any economic recovery in South Africa. Investors know that we have the highest incidence of Aids in the world. Investors believe that Government will shed its responsibility and that business and industry will carry the main burden.

A recent survey reported in the press says that at the present rate of infection, one in two South Africans under the age of 15 is expected to die of Aids-related causes in the next 10 years. These are the very people that must drive our economy into the next decades. Yet our President hardly mentions this danger in his address to the nation. Even worse is the fact that foreign investors believe that our President does not even understand this problem.

The Minister of Finance barely touched on the issue. One got the impression that it was brought into the Budget as an afterthought. It is amazing that the whole world realises that Aids will devastate South Africa, yet our Government handles this major threat in a flippant manner.

Another reason why we are not getting nearly enough fixed investment is the way in which the vision of an African Renaissance has been marketed. Our President must be congratulated on the fact that he has placed the revival of Africa on the centre stage. As South Africans, we have a duty to support all efforts to achieve the revival of Africa. Unfortunately, the handling of this vision has been totally counterproductive.

The Renaissance in Europe started in Italy in the latter part of the Middle Ages. Historians agree that it started in Italy because there was tolerance, stability, wealth and civic pride. These are the prerequisites for a renaissance.

What we need in South Africa is to create a climate of tolerance. We need law and order. We need to create wealth and civic pride. We have the potential to make South Africa the success story of the century, but we must first prove that we, as South Africans, are capable of unity and success. Only then can we talk of a South African Renaissance, and only then can we use our success as an example for the rest of Africa.

Unfortunately, what has happened is that we have been sucked into Africa’s disasters. The Zimbabwean fiasco is probably the best example of what we do not need. We are fuelling the perception that there is no difference between us and the rest of Africa. We all know that our destiny is linked to Africa. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr L M GREEN: Madam Speaker, hon President, Ministers and members, I would like to dedicate this speech to Phumla Lolwana and her three children, two- year-old Lindani, three-year-old Andile and four-year-old Sisanda. I would also like to concentrate on the important role the national Budget must play to eradicate poverty.

There might be members who may ask me why I should dedicate my speech to a mother and her three children who are virtually unknown to this august House. The plight of this impoverished, destitute and desperate mother was brought to my attention by a Cape Town journalist, Eric Ntabazalila, who wrote about the plight of Phumla Lolwana in the Cape Times, dated 13 December 2000. Allow me to tell the members this story, to illustrate the awesome responsibility that rests on us to ensure that the Budget adequately provides for poverty relief, and I quote from Eric’s article:

God will help. God will find the way.

These were the last words Phumla Lolwana spoke to her sister-in-law, Nontobeko Ndilinga, before she took her three children to the railway line between Philippi and Nyanga in Cape Town, pulled them together, turned her back to an on-coming train and was run down and killed last Friday. She and her children -Lindani, who was semiparalysed, Andile and Sisanda - died when a Khayelitsha bound train hit them.

Lolwana was driven to suicide by financial problems, unemployment, lack of family support and because she was tired of surviving on other people’s charity. Lolwana stayed in eNgcobo. When her in-laws buried her son in Cofimvaba about four months earlier, she learned that her husband was dead and had been buried.

While in eNgcobo, Lolwana became desperate as her children were hungry and had no clothes to wear. Lindani was two years old, but could not even crawl. Doctors said she was malnourished. Lolwana was planning to leave the children with her in-laws and come to look for a job in Cape Town, but she did not have money for bus fare. She arrived in the city last October, but the dream for greener pastures for herself and the children became a nightmare as she could not find a job and had no money to look after her children.

She was staying in the Samora Machel informal settlement and frequently visited Ndilinga in Guguletu. This is the advice given by Ndilinga. In fact, these are Lolwana’s words:

We will never solve our financial problems, but I am sure God will find the way.

On Friday afternoon, of course, Lolwana took her children, stood in front of this train and committed suicide.

This story is an indictment against all of us. What a tragedy. It is an indictment against the family structure which was unable to support Phumla in a time of need. It is an indictment against community structures which were not there when she needed them. It is an indictment against the church and ministers of religion who preach long sermons on loving one’s neighbour, but do nothing to promote poverty relief, even within their own congregations.

It is an indictment against the Western Cape Provincial Government and the CMC, who pay lip service to poverty relief. They have millions of rands available to promote Cape Town as a tourist attraction for gay people, but they have no money to spend on a destitute mother and children. It is an indictment against national Government, who sit with an annual roll-over of up to R500 million in the coffers of the Department of Social Services for poverty relief, but who fail to provide adequate infrastructure for poverty relief.

In any normal society there are layers of support structures which must prevent the tragedies of the Phumla Lolwanas. I am sure that, as we speak at this very moment in this House, there must be thousands of destitute families who do not know where they will find their next meal. Although I agree with the Minister of Finance that we should show our children that we have the power to enjoy the sweet fruit of liberty, grass-roots communities are not yet tasting this sweet fruit.

The Phumlas of our nation, however, do not understand anything about microeconomic policies, the need for structural adjustment programmes and fiscal discipline. Their needs are much more immediate. It is about a job, a hot meal every day, a roof over their heads, access to good health care and a quality education for their children. May God help us. May we have the commitment that, when we talk about this Budget and when we commit this Budget, we will not be found wanting to reach the Phumla Lolwanas who still have hope. [Applause.]

Mr L ZITA: Madam Speaker, if one listens to the hon Heine it would seem as though the manifesto of the DP, really, ought to be: As the DP we hate the poor, we are neoliberals, we are for freedom, without responsibility, we stand for the strong against the weak. That would seem to be the manifesto of the DP. [Interjections.] Furthermore, if one listens to them, it would seem that workers are the problem in this economy.

It is important for them to look at the history of the development of other countries. East Asia developed because everyone in their society had a stake in the economy. It did not develop at the expense of working people. All democratic developments must involve everyone.

The hon Green should note that we are, indeed, touched by the sentiments he raised. However, as the ANC, it is exactly our Reconstruction and Development Programme that can ensure that the poverty that he is talking about is eradicated forever. I therefore invite him to join us, as the ANC, in resolving these problems.

Developing countries share the legacy of the unfulfilled promise of modernity. From Cape Town to New Delhi, across the Third World, we were drawn into the maelstrom of the modern world. Because this lifestyle was imposed on us, it did not have integrating forces that it had in the developed world. We had the worst of all possible wealths. We have the most pronounced concentrations of wealth, for those who are lucky enough to be drawn positively into the system. For the rest of us our experience of capitalism is violence.

So the challenge for the developing world and what has been upheld by many a liberation movement is, firstly, national liberation and democracy and, secondly, development. In 1994 a fundamental basis for irreversible democracy was laid. The challenge now is development. Development should be understood in two way: We have to develop economic capacity, in order to bring about a better quality of life for the majority. It is primarily a challenge of economic accumulation, of wealth and is the only basis for a better quality of life for all.

As the ANC we believe that even if the Budget does not resolve this at once, it lays the foundation for its ultimate resolution. This is done through the fiscal allocations, but more importantly through the orientation of this Budget. As the ANC we said, at the National General Council:

Although microeconomic stability remains a necessary condition for growth, it is not a sufficient condition for growth, development and job creation.

So if microeconomic stability is necessary but not sufficient for growth, what are these more targeted strategies that we see as necessary? The Department of Trade and Industry’s budget, as allocated by the overall Budget, seeks to address the real economy. The department’s budget can thus be described as a constant budget with minor fluctuations. A total of 46% goes to industry development, 34% goes to enterprise development, the remainder goes to the promotion of trade and investment in the country and global negotiations and administration.

This means that 95% of the department’s budget is directly involved in the process of wealth creation. This reinforces the process of accumulation at the level of enterprises and scans global markets for South African products which seek to draw foreign investments to the country.

The enterprise and industry development programme promotes the competitiveness of the manufacturing industries through research, training and other technological and innovation support programmes. It addresses enterprise development with the focus on black economic empowerment, and seeks to increase the rate of sustainable small, medium and micro enterprises.

Overall the programme includes the following key subprogrammes: There is the competitive strategy which provides support to companies and industries in environmental, management and equalisation of standards. Environmental dimensions and standards are critical competitive factors in the global economy.

The other programme includes the funding of Khula Enterprise Finance, Ntsika Enterprise Promotion Agency, and the manufacturing advance centres, as well as the South African Women’s Empowerment Fund. There is also the contribution to the National Empowerment Fund. Rigid economic development and the integration mechanisms of particular regional production systems, especially economic zones, as well as partial economic initiatives, are put in place to promote equitable geographic development.

The other key programme is enterprise organisations, and this involves financial support to industries. It reduces the costs of entrepreneurs through incentives and grants. There is also the infrastructural investment, human capacity development and support for manufacturing. These measures are biased and targeted.

Members will recall that when opening Parliament, Comrade Thabo Mbeki identified agriculture, tourism, agroprocessing, automobiles and components, mining technology, minerals beneficiation, clothing and textiles, as well as the information and communication technologies as our targeted industries. These have a high job creation potential.

Companies that choose to follow the lead of the state and participate in these sectors will benefit from specific tax exemptions and training. In tourism, for example, there is a learnership programme as part of the creation of 3 000 black-owned companies. It is evident that this is a developmental state that is able to target, intervene and lead. It does not allow supply and demand to be the sole determinant of prices, as the DA would have us believe. It raised the level of prices to the strategic challenges that face our country.

This Budget addresses the overall concerns of our constituencies. The tax proposals contain a number of progressive measures. There is a commitment to a capital gains tax. This has remained from last year. This is an important egalitarian measure to ensure that propertied classes do not have unbridled power and resources. For our working class constituencies, R600 million has been set aside in the form of a wage subsidy to encourage job creation and training. This will reduce the cost of hiring new workers.

By increasing the skills levy from 0,5% to 1% of payroll, additional money has been set aside to continue the task of providing skills to the working class. Furthermore, there are a number of measures designed to protect the poor sections of our society. Those workers who earn R23 000 a year, will no longer pay income tax, and those who earn R70 000 a year will pay 12% less tax. The VAT zero rating on paraffin has the same effect.

Budget 2001 continues to consolidate the fact that South Africa is one of the highest social investors in comparative terms with regard to both the developed and the developing world. There are a number of challenges. We must continue to support the small and medium enterprise sectors. Access to finance remains a challenge. Many entrepreneurs complain about the poor accessibility of Khula. Is the present form of Khula the best appropriate mechanism to address access to finance by SMMes? There are also problems in the financial sector. To what extent do we have to ask: Is the fact of its dominance by white people and its present priorities undermining our attempts to develop the economy? There is also a trend by companies to reduce or terminate their spending on research and development. This is certainly a problem.

In conclusion, we are witnessing the maturing of a developmental state. Slowly we are beginning to discern ourselves, albeit faintly, in the mirror of the economy. A people’s economy is being brought in. Budget 2001 lays a solid foundation in this regard. [Applause.]

Mme P K MOTHOAGAE: Mme Sebui, ke kopa boitshwarelo ka dilonyana tse di diragetseng mo nakong e e sa tswang go feta. Ke ne ke setse ke dumedisitse maloko a a tlotlegang. Ke rata go gatelela gape gore re le ANC, re ema Molaotlhomo ono nokeng.

Tona Manuel maloba fa a ne a eme Kokoano Boset[s]haba ka lefoko, o re bontshitse gore ikonomi ya rona e a tlhatlhoga, e a gola, le fa gangwe le gape re utlwa mo makwalodikgannyeng gore boleng jwa ranta bo a wa. Dilo tse di ntseng jaana ga re ise re di utlwe mo pusong ya tlhaolele mo malobeng.

Batho ba bangwe mo Ntlong e ba a itebala. Motlotlegi Heine o lebetse gore maragaraga a re rakanang le ona gona jaanong ke a bona. O gakaletse gore Molao wa Badiri o mametlelelwe. Mme tota ga a a gakalela sepe fa e se fela gore a tle a nne kgatlhanong le ona. Le Moruti Green yo o ntseng a mo setse morago yoo, ke a makala gore a bo a emetse metswedi ya dikgang gore e tle go mmontsha mme yo o sotlegileng. Se se bontsha gore le kwa phuthegong ya gagwe ke bahumi. O ne a simolola go bona motho yo o sotlegang ka letsatsi leo.

Lenaane Tlhabololo le Kagoseša kgotsa RDP re itse botlhe gore re tswa kae le yona. Re na le Freedom Charter, e e re tsaletseng RDP. E teng, ke fela gore o ithibile matlho le ditsebe. Baporofeti ba ba senang ponelopele ba ba tshwanang le DP le New NP ba tlaa go bolelela gore ga ba bone sepe. Sa bona ke go ngongorega. Sefela sa Luthere sa re:

Lesa go ngongorega o dire.

Moono wa rona o moša wa kabo ya matlole o bontsha maemo a a edileng a ikonomi le bokgoni ba go fokotsa disuga tsa Puso. Se se re tlela maungo a kgololosego, jaaka Tona a setse a re bontshitse.

Thekiso ya dithoto ke sengwe sa tse e leng gore re na le bothata ka tsona. Bangwe ba rona ga re tlhaloganye e bile ga re batle go bona, le fa re bontshiwa gore go na le boleng mo go rekiseng dingwe tsa dithoto. Ka ntlha ya fa re le mo temokerasing, ga re makale fa o ganetsa, gonne ga re re o dumele sengwe le sengwe se tota o sa dumalaneng le sona.

Ditshwaelo tse di ntseng di dirwa ke DP le New NP di bontsha fela kutlobotlhoko e e leng gore ba re tlhodia fela. Ba tlhola ba re bolelela ka bagodi ba rona le ditirelo tse di sa tsamaeng sentle. Sa bona fela ke go ya kwa bathong ba rona ka nako ya ditlhopho.

Ke rata go raya Rre Eglin ke re ga go na tlhaloganyo gore a tlale ka bese ya manobonobo a bo o tsamaya a ya kwa mekhukhung, a ya go batla ditlhopho tsa batho mme morago ga moo a ba lebale, mme a boele mo Ntlong eno. Fa re tla ka molao o o fetolang matshelo a batho, o a o ganetsa. Se ga se bontshe tlhaloganyo.

Ke ne ke sa ntse ke bontsha gore komiti ya matlotlo e ne e biditse ditheetso go ya ka molao o, go tla go netefatsa gore re mo tseleng. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut e bontshitse gore mo dingwageng di le 10 tse di fetileng go nnile le tswelopele e e bonalang.

Ke swabile thata fa ke lemoga mo bekeng e e fetileng gore Mme Taljaard - yo ga jaana a seyong fano mme fela bakaulengwe ba gagwe ba tla mmolelela - o sokame. Kgang ya gagwe ya gore a lebelele fela Lefapha la Dikgwebo tsa Setšhaba ga se moono o re ka tsamayang ka ona, gonne re lebeletse gore mafapha a dirisane. Letsogo la molema le itse se se dirwang ke le le jang. O re tletse ka moono wa kwa Amerika, a re bontsha gore thuto e tshwanetse go fetolwa jang. Fela re na le melao e re e fetisitseng re le Ntlo, e ba neng ba e ganetsa, e re lebeletseng gore dithuto tsa dipalo, botegeniki le boitseanape e nne karolo ya lenaneothuto kwa dikolong tsa rona.

Lefapha la Merero ya Selegae la ga Rre Buthelezi le bone madi a mantsi a a tlaa thusang gore melao ya rona ya tsenelelo e dire gore batho ba ba nang le bokgoni ba tle mono gae go tla go re thusa go tlhatlhelela.

Mo go tlholeng ditiro, Mokgatlho wa Kgwebo ya Bantsho o bontshitse gore dikgwebopotlana di na le seabe se segolo mo go tlholeng ditiro, fela Puso ga e na lenaneo le le akaretsang seno. Seo ga se nnete, gonne re na le mananeo a e leng gore fa a ne a dira ka mokgwa o re o batlang, re ka bo re setse re bona dilo tse dintsi. Re lebeletse gore matlole a a jaaka Umsobomvu a thuse bašwa ba rona le go ba tsweletsa pele go dira ditiro tse di ba agang, jaaka baeteledipele ba isago.

Ke rata go tsaya tšhono eno jaaka ba ba neng ba tlatsa Mogenerala Viljoen. Le nna ka re, tsamaya sentle, o ye kwa penšeneng. Fela, puo e ke sa dumalaneng le yona ke ya gore morago ga 1996, ANC ga e ya dira ditsholofetso tsa gagwe. O tla gopola gore re ne re kwala Molaotheo, o o neng wa dira gore Moaforika Borwa mongwe le mongwe a nne le tšhono le ditshwanelo. Re ne re fedisa bo-Bophuthatswana, bo-Kwazulu le bo-Transkei. Re ne re sa re re tlaa tsenya bo-Orania e e batlang morafe o le mongwe fela. Ga ke dumele gore Molaotheo wa rona o ntse jalo. Fa e le gore o ne a tletse go bone Orania fela, ga ke bone fa a bone seo a neng a se tletse kwano, mme tshwaelo ya gagwe re a lebogela.

Re tsene mo go 1994, re fa re bua ka dikabo tsa madi tse di lebeletseng go fetola matshelo a batho ba rona kwa magaeng le kwa dipolaseng, jaaka re itse gore Aforika Borwa bogolo jwa yona ke dipolase le metseselegae. Dikabo tse re buang ka tsona mo letsatsing le ke tsa gore re fitlhelele diphitlhelelo tseo.

Ga ke bone moeteledipele wa New NP fano, fela ba lekoko la gagwe ba tlaa mmolelela gore a tseye kgakololo ya ga Rre Peter Mokaba e e reng, a tswe mo go Rre Tony Leon ka gore o rwele Rre Leon ka magetla. Ke gopola gore o itse naane ya kamele, tente, le monna. Go ise go e kae, o tlaabo a mo ntsheditse kwa ntle ga tente go tsene ena. Tse ga di kitla di mo tswela mosola. Ke ne ke re kwa go ene, aga Aforika Borwa yo mošwa go tswa go yo o mo tlhakatlhakantseng.

Tautona o re gakolotse mo puong ya gagwe ya maloba gore, re le makoko a Kokoano Bosetšhaba, re leke go bontsa balatedi ba rona kwa morago ka go aga setšhaba se seswa. Ke rata go tsaya puo ya gagwe mme ke e lebise kwa keteledipeleng ya UCDP, e ke sa e boneng fano. Fa re le mo Kokoanong Bosetšhaba re disisana le bona, fela fa re tsena kwa gae, ba a fetoga e nna batho basele. Ba dirisa dirala disele kwa dintshong, kwa manyalong le ditirong tse e seng tsa Puso go ikgobokanyetsa balatedi. Ke rata go ba raya ke re, a ba rute batho ba bona gore re Maaforika Borwa rotlhe, re golotse UCDP go tswa kwa Bophuthatswana, go tla mo Aforika Borwa o moswa. Le rona re tlaa rotloetsa batho ba rona gore ba age Aforika Borwa o moša, mme ba tlogele go ngapana.

A moruti a itse gore le rona re buisa Beibele. Ga ke itse gore a Moruti Meshoe o teng mo Ntlong eno. Ke utlwile Moruti Meshoe a gateletse ntlha ya Aids, ke sa tlhaloganye gore, fa e le gore tota ke moruti, ke goreng a sa batle go letla batho ba kereke ya gagwe go dirisa mesomelwana mo dinakong tse tsa Aids e e feditseng batho, mme a ba bolelela go tswa mo thobalanong ka ba tshaba mesomelwana. Bašwa ba rona ba santse ba na le maatla, ba a taboga, ba a itsokotsa, ga gona ka moo re ka ba rayang ra re ba tlogele thobalano. Mo dikganetsanong tsa rona ka ga HIV/Aids, re na le lenaneo la dingwaga di le tlhano. Re lebeletse gore re tsamaye re le fotola fa go tlhokega.

Go na le kgetsi e e tlhatlhetsweng kwa kgotlatshekelo ke ditlhopa tsa thekiso ya melemo. Ga di batle re tsenya tirisong Molaotlhomo o o letlang gore batho ba bone melemo. Re solofetse gore ka thuso ya dinaga tsa kwa ntle le botlhe ba ba supileng fa ba sena kgetsi, ba tlaa fetola maikutlo a bona, mme re kopanele go aga Aforika Borwa o moša. [Legofi.] (Translation of Setswana speech follows.)

[Ms P K MOTHOAGAE: Madam Speaker, I apologise for what has just happened. I had already greeted hon members. I still want to stress the fact that as the ANC, we fully support this Bill.

The hon Minister Manuel made it quite clear when he addressed the National Assembly that our economy is growing, even though we read in the newspapers that the value of the rand is fluctuating. We never heard of such things during the time of the previous apartheid governments.

Some people in this House seem to forget who they are. The hon Heine forgets that the mess that we are now faced with, is the result of what they did. He is eager to have the Bill amended so that he can criticise it. It surprised me to see Pastor Green, who literally waited for the news media to come and show him a poor woman, supporting Mr Heine. This shows that all members of his Church are rich. That was the first time he saw a poor person. As we all know, the Freedom Charter gave birth to the Reconstruction and Development Programme. It does exist, the problem is that the hon member turns a blind eye and a deaf ear to it. Prophets of doom such as the DP and the New NP will tell you that they do not see anything. All they do is complain. A Lutheran hymn says:

Stop complaining and do something.

Our new budgetary theme has helped us have a satisfactory economic state and the ability to reduce Government debt. It brings us the fruit of liberty, just as the hon Minister has already said.

One of our problematic areas is the selling of property. Some of us do not understand and are not even willing to listen when we are enlightened about the value of selling some of our property. But because of our democracy, we cannot force anyone to do things that they do not want to do.

The comments made by the DP and the New NP are nothing else but a substantial amount of noise. They always tell us about our elderly and the services which are not being rendered properly. They only go to our people during election time.

It does not make sense for Mr Eglin to go to a squatter camp in a luxury bus to campaign for votes and then forget about those people and return to this House. When we come up with a Bill that seeks to change people’s lives, he criticises it. It really does not make sense.

I was still referring to the fact that the Finance committee called a hearing on this Bill to ensure that we are on the right track. The Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut proved that the previous 10 years marked a drastic success.

I was very disappointed last week when I learned that Mrs Taljaard, who is not here now but I believe that her friends will tell her, is crooked. She only concentrates on the Department of Public Enterprises, which is contrary to the way we do things, and we want all departments to work together. The left hand should know what the right hand is doing. She suggested an American way of changing our education system. But we passed laws in this House, and they criticised them. With these laws we suggested that subjects such as mathematics, technology and science should be part of our school curriculum.

The Department of Home Affairs led by the hon Mr Buthelezi was given a lot of money to assist with the immigration laws which will help us to invite people to come into our country to equip us.

The Black Business Council has shown that small businesses have a role to play in job creation, but the Government does not have a programme that accommodates this. However, this is not true because we do have programmes which, if they had been activated in the way we expected, would have led to lots of changes. We expect schemes such as the Umsobomvu Fund to help our youth to do things that will equip them as future leaders.

I would like to take this opportunity and like others who spoke before me, support General Viljoen. I am also saying he should go and enjoy his pension. However, I do not agree with the view that the ANC failed to deliver on its promises after 1996. The House will remember that we were writing a Constitution that enabled each and every South African to have rights and privileges. We got rid of the former Bophuthatswana, KwaZulu and Transkei. Our intention was not to be Orania, but to be a nonracial society. I do not believe that our Constitution allows for that. If his intention in coming here was to see an Orania attitude, I do not believe that this has been realised. We, however, thank him for his comments.

We came into power in 1994, and we are now talking about grants that will change the lives of our people in rural areas and farms, as we know that South Africa is a predominantly rural country. The grants that we are talking about will help us realise our objectives.

I do not see the leader of New NP in the House, but his followers will tell him to take Mr Peter Mokaba’s advice that he should leave Mr Tony Leon, as Mr Leon is outweighing him. I believe that he knows the folk-tale of the Camel, the Tent and the Man. Soon Mr Leon will throw him out of the tent, while he will remain inside, and this will not do him any good. I want to tell him to build a new South Africa out of the confusion that he caused.

The President reminded us earlier in the National Assembly to set an example to our followers and rebuild our nation. I want to take his words and direct them to the leadership of the UCDP, which is not in the House. In the National Assembly, we work co-operatively with them, but at home the opposite is true. They use certain events, such as funerals, weddings and other nongovernmental social gatherings, as their platform to campaign for political support. I urge them to teach their followers that we are all South Africans. We liberated the UCDP from the former Bophuthatswana and brought it to the new South Africa. We also urge our people to build a new South Africa and stop all the fighting.

The pastor should know that we are also able to read the Bible. I do not know whether Pastor Meshoe is in this House. I heard him stressing the Aids issue and I did not understand him. If he is truly a pastor, why does he not allow members of his Church to use condoms to fight Aids, instead of telling them to abstain from sex because they cannot use condoms? Our young people are still very active. There is no way that we can tell them to abstain from sex. In our debates concerning HIV/Aids we have a five-year plan in which we anticipate the necessary changes.

The pharmaceutical groups have a case against us in the High Court because they do not want us to pass a Bill that will enable people to buy cheaper drugs. We hope that with the help of other countries and those people who do not have a case against us, they will eventually change their minds, and we will work together to build a new South Africa. [Applause.]]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, may I take this opportunity to congratulate our Minister on introducing such a good Budget. [Interjections.]

The power of transformation and the challenge to build the South African economy expresses its success in the Appropriation Bill. The Bill provides a physical framework that indicates strategic changes in the fiscal policy and expenditure distribution which attempt to reduce poverty and increase equitable public service delivery.

The budgeting process is not bureaucratic in decision-making. Instead, it represents the Government’s plan to prioritise resources at national, provincial and local government level. The consequences of implementing the macroeconomic policy depend on the gross domestic product, private consumption, foreign and domestic investment, current trends in employment and gross domestic inflation.

The MF believes that in order to increase productivity, competitiveness and growth in the economy, specific productive measures must be consistently exercised, such as introducing new technologies and expanding on South Africa’s information technology infrastructure, by providing opportunities to develop these required skills through youth programmes, education and training internships. The Skills Development Act provides an institution and incentives for all role-players and stakeholders to develop and retain skills through commercial and societal activities.

South Africa needs skilled people in science, technology, management and manufacturing, which are the key elements to improve and sustain economic growth. Therefore the national skills development strategy is tasked with the challenge of producing a more effective performance of our economy in order to participate in market opportunities.

The MF is of the view that South Africa cannot afford to import qualified personnel. It is our duty to produce our own skilled employees, because training workers today is an investment in the present and future development of the economy. Promoting foreign and domestic investment stimulates the job creation capacity which South Africa desperately needs to sustain macroeconomic stability.

Foreign direct investment rose from R1,5 billion in 1999 to R4,2 billion for the first half of the year 2000. This is not adequate and is not the ultimate target. Therefore significant action must be taken to attract investors, for example intensive efforts by role-players to combat crime, improving service delivery at police stations, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system, and promoting a culture of reporting crime and encouraging the public to internalise anticrime values through education.

We certainly cannot allow crime to frighten potential investors away. The MF welcomes the R4 billion allocated to the criminal justice sector to assist in the fight against crime. However, the expected recruitment of 1 000 police personnel is insufficient to combat, control and reduce criminal activities. To beat the crime rate, we need more police officers to patrol the streets and neighbourhoods. Crime is committed either for need or greed. The need for survival is the dominant reason for the escalation of property crime. Therefore job creation and skills development are the definite solutions in reducing property crime.

In the early 1990s the South African political transformation put privatisation on hold. The restructuring process of state assets resulted in many job losses. However, in recent years, through state-owned enterprises, millions have benefit at the social level. This is indicated in the increase in grants and the accessibility of housing, better education, water and electricity to millions of people.

South Africa must build a supportive environment for privatisation to revolve around the state sector. International experience has proved that this strategy will create more competition in the market and attract foreign capital, which this country greatly needs. Furthermore, privatisation can assist in reducing the large gap in service cost we are burdened with.

HIV/Aids is destroying economically viable people. Therefore the MF advocates that the pilot programme of administering nevirapine and milk powder to HIV-positive pregnant women must become compulsory. Critical efforts must be made to ensure that operational requirements do not stifle the compulsory administration of nevirapine. After all, without a sufficiently economically active population the economy will collapse. Let us not forget that we have emerged from an apartheid economy which largely benefited nonblack minorities. Seven years of democracy cannot compete with three centuries of oppression. Hypocrites who are disloyal to democracy and truth do not belong in South Africa.

At this stage, may I say that the pain of apartheid has left a lamp burning that will burn for ever and ever. May I at this stage quote what was said in the convention at Khayelitsha by Mrs Kumar, president of the women’s group in India, on Women’s Day. She said: ``How can you separate a dancer from a dance - Because we all are the dancers.’’ The meaning is: How can the DP and the New NP separate themselves from this Appropriation Bill? For they and all of us belong to South Africa and the upliftment of South Africa. Liberating South Africa was neither a perfect process nor an overnight miracle. Freedom was achieved with immense human sacrifice. This country has made tremendous economic, social and political progress. Viva South Africa, viva!

HON MEMBERS: Viva!

Miss S RAJBALLY: The MF supports the Appropriation Bill. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mnr C AUCAMP: Mevrou die Speaker, mnr die President, soos verskeie sprekers voor my in hierdie debat, wat eintlik verlede Donderdag en Vrydag gepraat het, rig ek ook eers ‘n woord van my kant en van die AEB se kant aan genl Constand Viljoen by sy uittrede uit die politiek. Generaal, u het die saak van u en my mense altyd met eer en waardigheid gedra en u het ‘n beeld van die Afrikaner geprojekteer waarmee ek my altyd met vrymoedigheid kon vereenselwig.

Ek het ook waardering vir die band van vriendskap wat daar tussen ons twee gesinne ontstaan het. Ek en Ina sal dit verseker mis. Dit is tóg jammer dat hierdie vriendskap nie neerslag kon vind in die noodsaaklike bymekaarbring van wie uit innerlike oortuiging bymekaar hoort nie. U het met u uittrede gewag gemaak van die futiliteit van u beste pogings om in hierdie Huis te beding vir wat vir ons mense belangrik is en dat die ANC deur blote meerderheidsdominansie die pad finaal vir u toegemaak het. Ek hoop die agb lede van die regerende party het daarvan kennis geneem. Dit help nie om mooi kranse op iemand se graf te plaas as jy jou vir sewe jaar lank nie regtig aan hom gesteur het nie.

Aan die ander kant moet ons onthou ‘n volk se toekoms word nie deur ander geskryf nie, maar deur homself. Skep u eie toekoms! Daartoe wil die AEB sy beskeie deel bydra en steeds ons saak hiér stel, van die hoogste podium in die land, en instrumenteel probeer wees tot die saamsnoer van hulle wat hul politiek ook wil beywer vir wat vir ons kosbaar is. Seën en sterkte vir u en tannie Ristie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, Mr President, like various speakers before me in this debate, who actually spoke last Thursday and Friday, for my part and on behalf of the AEB I will also firstly say a few words to Gen Constand Viljoen on his retirement from politics. General, you always presented the cause of your and my people with honour and dignity and you projected an image of the Afrikaner with which I could always identify freely.

I also appreciate the bond of friendship which developed between our two families. Ina and I will certainly miss that. It is indeed a pity that this friendship could not result in the necessary bringing together of those who belong together through inner conviction. On your retirement you mentioned the futility of your best attempts to negotiate for what is important to our people in this House, and that the ANC finally closed the road for you through mere majority dominance. I hope the hon members of the governing party have noted this. It does not help to lay beautiful wreaths on someone’s grave when you have not really paid attention to him for seven years.

On the other hand, we must remember that a people’s future is not written by others, but by itself. Create your own future! The AEB wants to make its modest contribution to that end and still state our case here, from the highest podium in the country, and try to be instrumental in bringing together those who politically also want to work for what is precious to us. Blessings and everything of the best to you and Aunt Ristie.] With regard to the Budget, in the first place, I want to congratulate the Minister on his ability to turn a serious, dry and wearying business such as the Budget Speech into a real happening. A little pill and an apple on the desk, and a little bit of humour, that really is the spoonful of sugar that makes the medicine go down.

Aan die positiewe kant moet die verhoging van die intreevlak van belastingpligtigheid tot R23 000 verwelkom word. Ook die aanwending van R19 miljard se inkomste uit privatisering bring die begrotingstekort af tot ongeveer R7 miljard en moet eweneens verwelkom word. In dié verband wil ek ‘n ernstige versoek tot die Minister rig dat die R3 miljard wat addisioneel tot die begroting uit die Sasria-fonds te wagte is uitsluitlik aangewend moet word om misdaad in Suid-Afrika te oorwin. Fondse in die Sasria-fonds is deur die publiek bygedra om hulle te dek teen verliese verwant aan die onsekere veiligheidsituasie gedurende die vorige bewind. Nou is dit ``money from home’’. Hierdie fondse moet op verwante wyse aangewend word om veiligheid en sekuriteit in Suid-Afrika te verseker. Sasria is veiligheidsgeld, en ons moet dit so hou.

Die begroting ken R17 miljard toe aan die SAPD. ‘n Addisionele R3 miljard kan die wêreldse verskil maak en daartoe meehelp dat daar eens en vir altyd ‘n uitklophou geslaan word in die geveg teen misdaad in Suid-Afrika. Dit sal geweldig bydra tot beleggersvertroue en ekonomiese groei sodat so ‘n eenmalige inspuiting oor en oor die moeite werd sal wees.

Laat my toe om nog ‘n paar positiewe punte te noem. Die aansporings vir kleinsakeondernemings word verwelkom. Groter duidelikheid oor verligting deur middel van wysigings aan die arbeidswetgewing sou hierdie aansporing in waarde verhoog het. Die verslag oor die afgelope jaar toon ook goeie fiskale dissipline deur die Minister en die makrosyfers lyk positief, soos byvoorbeeld die intoombring van die begrotingstekort en die relatief goeie verhouding tussen die tekort en die BBP.

Aan die negatiewe kant is die dieselrabat vir landbou te min te laat. Hoekom is die rabat die helfte minder as dié wat visserye verlede jaar reeds ontvang het? Verder is die verhogings in kinder- en bejaardesorgtoelaes ontoereikend. Ouderdomspensioen het oor die afgelope ses jaar ver minder as inflasie gestyg en moes beter aangepas word. Die ekstra belasting op brandstof moes vermy gewees het in die lig van die abnormale stygings wat hierdie sektor die afgelope tyd weens eksterne faktore moes konfronteer. Die aansporingsmiddele aan vervaardigingsbedrywe moet uitgebrei word na die landbousektor wat in wese ‘n vervaardigingsbedryf is wat spesialiseer in die vervaardiging van voedsel. Ons wil ook voorstel dat ‘n belastingaftrekking vir sekuriteitsuitgawes ingestel moet word, aangesien belastingsbetalers aansienlike koste aangaan, terwyl sekuriteit in wese die plig van die staat is.

Die top marginale koers vir individue moet van die huidige 42% afgebring word na hoogstens 40%. Dit sal positief inwerk op besparing, die grootste bydrae tot ekonomiese groei. Dit is ook teleurstellend dat die sekondêre belasting op maatskappye van 12% nie afgebring is na 10% nie, want dit sou ook groei gestimuleer het. Verder is daar ook nie ‘n verhoging ingestel op die maksimum perk aftrekbaar vir pensioen en annuïteitsbydraes nie.

Ten slotte, ‘n besigheid kan die beste begroting op aarde opstel, dit is egter nog net die papierwerk. Om die mooi planne in werking te stel vereis kundigheid, effektiewe bestuur en die beste personeel vir elke taak. Dit is waar lewering in Suid-Afrika tekort skiet. Bring meriete en ondervinding terug in alle sfere van die landsbestel en die soete vrugte waarvan die Minister in sy rede gepraat het, kan dalk gouer werklikheid word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[On the positive side, the increase in the entry level for tax liability to R23 000 must be welcomed. The utilisation of revenue amounting to R19 billion from privatisation brings the budget deficit down to approximately R7 billion and must also be welcomed. In this regard I want to address a serious request to the Minister that the R3 billion which is expected in addition to the budget from the Sasria fund be utilised exclusively to combat crime in South Africa. Money in the Sasria fund was contributed by the public as coverage against losses associated with the uncertain security situation during the previous dispensation. Now it is ``money from home’’. These funds must be utilised in a similar way to ensure safety and security in South Africa. Sasria is money for security, and we should keep it that way.

The budget allocates R17 billion to the SAPS. An additional R3 billion could make the world of difference and contribute to winning the fight against crime in South Africa once and for all. This would contribute enormously to investor confidence and economic growth so that such a once- off injection would prove its worth time and again.

Allow me to mention a few more positive points. The incentives for small business enterprises are welcome. Greater clarity on relief by means of amendments to the labour legislation would have increased the value of these incentives. The report on the past year indicates good fiscal discipline by the Minister and the macro figures look positive, for example the reining in of the budget deficit and the relatively good relationship between the deficit and the GDP.

On the negative side, the diesel rebate for agriculture is too little too late. Why is the rebate half of that which fisheries already received last year? Furthermore, the increases in grants for child care and the aged are insufficient. The old age pension has increased by far less than inflation over the past six years and should have been adjusted more efficiently. The extra taxation on fuel should have been avoided in the light of the abnormal increases which this sector has had to confront recently due to external factors. The incentive measures to manufacturing industries must be extended to the agricultural sector, which is in essence a manufacturing industry which specialises in manufacturing food. We also want to propose that a tax deduction for security expenses should be introduced, as taxpayers incur significant costs, while security is in fact the duty of the state.

The top marginal rate for individuals must be reduced from the current 42% to a maximum of 40%. This will have a positive effect on saving, the largest contributor to economic growth. It is also disappointing that the secondary taxation on companies of 12% was not reduced to 10%, because this would also have stimulated growth. Furthermore, an increase was also not introduced on the maximum limit deductible for pension and annuity contributions.

In conclusion, a company can draw up the best budget on earth, but that is still just the paperwork. To implement the good plans requires expertise, effective management and the best staff for every task. This is where delivery in South Africa falls short. Bring merit and experience back in all spheres of national administration and the sweet fruits of which the Minister spoke in his speech could possibly become a reality sooner.]

Mrs B N SONO: Madam Speaker, hon President, hon Ministers and hon members, much is known about the propensity of small business to create jobs and wealth in the modern world. Throughout the world and in South Africa, big business has tended to shed jobs. This means that the private sector employs proportionally half as many people as it did.

All additional economically active people during the last few years have been accommodated in the small business or self-employment sector. This makes this sector the only feasible route for widespread economic employment and emancipation of potential entrepreneurs in the lower socioeconomic groups.

Though the development process cannot be planned, the conditions can. Entrepreneurs can cope with their insecurity and the uncertainty of the marketplace. Government should concentrate its effort on providing a sound and accessible legal framework, a conducive business environment, and the opening up of markets. Since 1995 the Government’s initial small business strategy has concentrated on creating a number of institutions to promote small business.

Financial packages, for instance the new Cape Equity Fund, could never begin to alleviate the problem around SMME funding. Venture capital investment is a game pursued by individuals. It requires knowledge of the entrepreneur’s stake, faith that one will succeed and a nose for opportunities in the fast-changing conditions of the marketplace.

About half the adult population of South Africa is not skilled in financial matters. This is a reality we have to live with. Literacy is a requisite for modern borrowing but not for entrepreneurship. A total amount of R90 million has been budgeted to fund programmes which have a direct impact on the expansion of the small business sector.

There has been a market drop in the appropriation for 2001. Perhaps the Minister could shed some light as to why the allocation of funds to Ntsika has been reduced from R50 million to R35 million in this budget. Similarly, as regards Khula, the Department of Trade and Industry’s Vote is not specific on an allocation for Khula. It only indicates a commitment to recapitalise Khula to retain its present client base and a paltry transfer of R20 million is made. The SMME sector needs development by stealth and money too.

In contrast,the empowerment fund will receive R100 million from the Department of Trade and Industry. Much as the DP is not opposed to black empowerment, the empowerment deals have been about measures and acquisitions, not many jobs are created from these deals. Black empowerment has been synonymous with empowering friends and relatives of the ANC hierarchy.

In the era of the 21st century and a rapidly changing world order, the Government needs to switch priorities and act on the realisation that to attract investments and catapult the small, medium and micro enterprises sector into the world economic arena, only well-thought-out and focused strategies will drive this country forward. We recommend that the Government’s institutional framework for the support of small, medium and micro enterprises, be streamlined.

Government should develop mechanism that will ensure frequent consultation with stakeholders and rapidly decentralise SMME support. If we are serious about addressing the problems of poverty, crime and skills development in our country the SMME are the only way to go and need a lot of funding, not what we are seeing now in the Appropriation Bill.[Applause.]

Dr G G WOODS: Madam Speaker, rather than do the analytical economist thing and venture across the Budget’s macroeconomic interfaces, today I will do the management accounting thing and venture across the Budget’s primary fiscal components - these, of course, being the areas of revenue and expenditure.

As things are, there is little of concern on the revenue side, with improved and improving collections, improved efficiencies in the system and a broadening tax base, all leading to significant overruns in recent years. Overruns, I might add, without which many of the stabilisation and equity achievements would not have been possible. Of ongoing interest is the much-changed tax system which has evolved over the past six years. Here we would urge the Minister, once the capital gains tax and the new tax incentive regime have been bedded down, to remind the Katz commission of their long-outstanding and overdue obligation, of a full appraisal of the reformed tax system.

I will now comment on key features of the expenditure side of the Budget, where the overall spending pattern and its allocative propositions must, through thoughtful adjustments in recent years, have reached a near optimal arrangement of priorities and other necessary considerations. Here I include the distribution across the big social spending areas, the improved current capital spending mix and the many smaller diversions of money to a variety of public entities, funds, schemes and other initiatives which are meant to address the important demands of our society.

But, as it is often argued, aiming in the right direction is not enough when it comes to the use of public funds, neither is just to hit the target; it is the specific targets that must be hit if we are to achieve high value-for-money outcomes for the country’s people. Here we have only taken the earliest steps. There are appropriate systems and practices which have now been designed and approved, in the form of Public Service Regulations’ strategic planning requirements and the Public Finance Management Act’s financial management requirements. In theory these together provide all Government agencies with the tools to dramatically improve their value-for-money performance through improving economies, efficiencies and greater effectiveness. But will we get there? I think there are three situations which could prevent us getting there.

The first would be if there is poor or only partial implementation of the new systems I referred to. While a solid start has been made towards implementation of both the new strategic planning and the financial management approaches, we would agree that there is a long way to go still

• perhaps another three or four years.

Too many, maybe the majority, of new systems are never fully or properly introduced or utilised. The international public sector experience is, indeed, true to South Africa, especially regarding computer systems. If we look back at the last two attempts to bring in new financial management systems, most of them never got beyond the 60% to 70% market introduction, thus losing a lot of potential that they otherwise promised.

The second area of danger I wish to highlight is that of inadequate human capacity, and I have heard a number of speakers during the course of this debate referring to the same problem. Every day I think we see good ideas and good intentions coming from Government fail because of this inadequate level of human capacity. The new systems I have referred to, will demand a much higher level of appropriate expertise if, indeed, they are to meet the objectives that we set for them. It is true to say that at this point we are not doing nearly enough to address this crisis.

The third area I would like to highlight is what we can call poor attitudes. Critical to higher performance generally and specifically to higher value-for-money performance, and therefore to the full use of the systems and practices, is the necessity for a particular mindset. It is a mindset that one sees in the more successful and competitive businesses. It is a mindset which demonstrates a sustained drive to want to improve performance every year and to build on the previous year’s successes in a way that becomes self-reinforcing and self-perpetuating. An attitude which is part of a new corporate culture in Government would cause all state employees to creatively pursue more delivery from each rand. We should be more active in finding ways to imbue the necessary attitudes in and across all those who work in our public sector.

In summary, it is only through the full use of the systems that have been provided by officials that are appropriately enabled and sufficiently willing, that we will achieve the value-for-money performance that the country is in urgent need of.

Mr S L DITHEBE: Madam Speaker, hon President, hon Deputy President, hon Ministers and hon members, this year’s Budget tells a tale of very bold and realistic efforts by the people’s democratic Government to reverse the plight of poverty and restore the dignity of those who have been at the receiving end of the apartheid regime’s mismanagement of the economy.

It is also a tale of the people’s revolutionary movement that had to choose between fleeing and fighting. It chose to fight on for a better life. Faced with increasing international isolation and utter mismanagement, the unflinching and resilient struggles of our people, especially the youth, those who presided over this economy - and some of them are sitting on that side of the house - were prepared to destroy and obliterate the livelihood of those whom they have appointed themselves as crusaders of change for the fight against poverty today.

These are the same souls for whom the call for a better life by our people was tantamount to treason. Today, we are free in the land of our birth and we can stand here and proclaim to our country, to Africa and the world that ours is a Government that is sensitive to constructive criticism levelled in the spirit of transforming society from one that has two nations, where the one nation is black and poor, and the other white and wealthy, to one that is egalitarian in nature, truly nonracial, nonsexist and democratic.

This is the mission that the 2001-02 Budget seeks to accomplish. In doing so, we must ask ourselves two crucial questions: To the extent that there is a reduction of 40 cents per litre of illuminating paraffin, which is the source of fuel for the poorest of the poor, and to the extent that all people who earn up to R23 000 per annum do not pay tax at all, and those who earn up to R80 000 per annum save about R140 per month in tax, what is to be done to ensure that these truly are concessions that benefit the poor and those sections that I have referred to? We can choose to quote these figures at every press conference and from every public platform, or we can ensure that we mobilise the widest cross-section of our population to become conscious of these gains and benefit from them.

Flowing from this, we wish to call on all our youth to mobilise on a wide scale to ensure that the retailer at the street corner or spaza shop in an informal settlement does not overcharge those who are supposed to reap the benefits of a 40 cents drop in the price of illuminating paraffin. We say this conscious, of course, of the fact that there is no administrative infrastructure in place, on the part of Government, to monitor these concessions to the destitute and vulnerable. We count on the discipline and commitment of the ANC Youth League and its allied formations and all our youth in South Africa to ensure that this becomes a true victory for our people.

We also call for a crusade of savings on the part of those who have received concessions in terms of this Budget, and I campaign for sound tax morality on the part of corporate South Africa and individual taxpayers. The SA Revenue Service must succeed. This way the tax burden on all of us will lessen.

The youth, in any society, is impatient and anxious for change. We know that. They understand why the Government, five years ago, decided to introduce macroeconomic reforms to reduce the budget deficit. If it did not, we would continue to talk of the apartheid debt for the next five decades with no end in sight. Such a debt burden would be passed on to future generations, resulting in more suffering.

Flowing from this, we must ask: Is there enough reason to frown or celebrate? I want to argue that while it is important to avoid a rosy and glamorous picture of the quality of life of our people today, especially the youth and women, we have every reason to celebrate.

A reduction in the budget deficit will ensure that there is no heavy tax burden on the working population, and that the possibility of a single digit inflation rate exists. The effect of this is greater spending and saving capacity on the part of all economically active persons. Some would have us believe, though, that Government is not prioritising economic growth and job creation. They question the speed with which we are restructuring state assets, and yet a closer look at the predictions of doom from the DA reminds us that they oppose not so much the pace of restructuring, but the fact that the net result of this will be black economic empowerment.

We commend the Government’s approach to initial public offerings as an attempt to cut the budget deficit to advance black economic empowerment, thereby increasing the tax base. I want to say, in addition to that, that the Department of Trade and Industry runs a programme where every at least 500 calls are received. This programme is the business referral and information network to support the small, medium and micro enterprises in our country. The provincial and local government departments’ local economic development fund, at any given time, can award about R1,5 million to a municipality to assist small, medium and micro enterprises.

However, we understand the intricate connection between the economy and a dedicated human resources development strategy. This Budget introduces drastic expenditure dedicated to education, skills development, learnerships and job creation.

Mabapi le melato ya baithuti diyunivesithing, eo e leng hore hangata ba e etsa lebaka la tshenyo ya thepa, re batla hore boitshwaro boo re a bo nena, re bo tshwela ka mathe. Re batla hore batjha ba rona ba fadimehe, ba qobe diketso tsa bokebekwa le boitshwaro boo e leng hore bo bontsha lenyatso naheng ya habo bona.

Re batla le ho thoholetsa mopresidente wa mehleng, comrade Madiba, ka letsholo la hae la hore borakgwebo ba kenye letsoho kahong ya dikolo, ditliliniki le tse ding tse bohlokwa jwalo. (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)

[In relation to students’ outstanding fees at universities, which they usually use as a reason for destroying equipment, we want to say that we abhor such behaviour, we spit on it. We want our youth to come to their senses and avoid criminal activities and the kind of behaviour that shows disrespect for their country.

We also want to applaud our previous president, Comrade Madiba, for setting out to get business people to lend a hand in building schools, clinics and other important structures.]

To enhance the spirit of youth patriotism, we call for the funding of the National Youth Service Programme to allow young people to improve their skills, gain practical work experience and be able to serve their communities and gain life experience.

We salute the Ministry of Defence for contributing to this challenge by announcing that it is ready to take in thousands of youth in order for them to carve their career paths in our navy, air force and army. Our vigilance would mean that not only should we applaud the billions of rands allocated to infrastructure development and poverty alleviation, but ensure that we intensify our struggle to protect our infrastructure.

We intensify our struggle against Aids by abstaining, being faithful and using condoms in order to push back the frontiers of its destruction. Cognisant of this, we understand the preciousness of life and that our revolution can only be sustained if its future, our youth, take advantage of Government’s efforts to provide health for all, and this Budget seeks to achieve that - to care for those infected and affected by Aids. This is our call to the youth.

Some will write this Budget off as a nonevent or even trivialise it. But those of us who know the material conditions of poverty and neglect greet it as a significant milestone in our lives. Forward, young lions! Let us give the adversaries of change no quarter; let us defend our democratic gains; let us defend this Budget and the momentum it has unleashed; let us heed our President’s call for unity in action with the single-mindedness of a freedom fighter, and let us take the advice of our President when he says:

… those who complete the marathon course will do so only because they do not, as fatigue sets in, convince themselves that the road ahead is still too long, the incline too steep, the loneliness impossible to bear, and the prize itself of doubtful value.

We, too, as the people of South Africa and Africa, must together run our comrades marathon. As comrades who are ready to take to the road together, refusing to be discouraged by the recognition that the road ahead is very long, the incline very steep and that, at times, what we see as the end is but a mirage, when the race is run, all humanity and ourselves will acknowledge the fact that we only succeeded because we believed in our own dreams.

Every year the rains will fall to bless our efforts. That, too, is our dream. Because it is our dream, we are able to demand of our ancestors, pula, nala [rain, prosperity]! [Applause]

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, hon President, hon Deputy President, hon members, when presenting our Budget to this House on 21 February, I noted that:

This Budget tells the story of the choices and decisions we have made and which have advanced the transformation of our country and its economy to the point where we can now begin to enjoy the fruit. It tells the story of a young and proud democracy hard at work to improve the lives of all its people. The National Assembly debate on the 2001 Appropriation Bill last week and today continued the message of our story. We have listened and engaged in open debate in our efforts to contribute towards improving the lives of our people. I wish to express my very sincere appreciation to all the members of this House, but especially to the 57 members who participated in this debate.

The quality of most contributions was exceptional. We must therefore commend participants for their efforts to prepare their inputs. Too often in the past, members have shied away from debates on economic issues, and this debate is evidence that the tide is turning. A special word of appreciation must go to the hon M J Mahlangu, who, as Chair of Committees, has put in an extraordinary effort to extend training opportunities to members. [Applause.]

Turning to the contributions, the committee report that was tabled by the hon Barbara Hogan is ample evidence of her capable stewardship in leading the hearings, clearly a very complex set of issues. I thank her for that. [Applause.]

The portfolio committee highlighted the need for a continuing linkage between growth and poverty reduction. As we move forward, Government and business are challenged to lead decisively, working together to build a stronger link between economic growth and poverty reduction. This is not an easy task. We face an undeniably difficult and demanding path. But, as the speaker before me said, we are not strangers to this path. We shall walk it courageously and with vigour, as we know that the fruits of success and a better life for all our people lie alongside this road.

The new challenge we are facing is an amplification of the shift to a series of microeconomic issues. Whereas the decisions in macroeconomic management are largely in the domain of Government, microeconomic or second- stage change, is far more inclusive. It has different loci of decision- making, and therefore more attendant risks. We must remain alive to the enormity of this undertaking, and we will continue to engage with the many ideas on the quality of life issues - including those in land reform and water provision, especially in Water Week at the moment - housing, infrastructure, savings, local government transformation, business development and skills development, all of which were so richly contributed to in the course of the debate since Thursday.

The discussions in the debate also afforded us an opportunity to reflect on the fact that there is much evidence of very substantial changes which are taking place. There is no place for the kind of pessimism articulated from the opposition benches. We must, though, strengthen our resolve to focus on the quality of services rendered. The instances of poor services delivered are more often a consequence of the failure by public servants to internalise the principles of Batho Pele than the adequacy of financial resources.

The form and content of the 2001 national Budget strengthens the focus on service delivery. The Estimates of National Expenditure outlines policy developments, legislation and other factors affecting expenditure alongside spending plans. Details of departmental outputs and service delivery indicators take another step forward towards setting measurable objectives in line with the Public Finance Management Act.

Better information on service delivery will show how public money is being spent. This is good practice in terms of transparency and accountability. It informs departmental managers, policy and decision-makers and the public about what progress departments are making towards their objectives; it helps departments plan, budget and manage programmes better; it improves accountability and control; and it assists Government policy and decision- makers direct funds where they are needed most and where they will best meet Government’s aims.

I will now turn to some of the matters which, from the contributions to the debate, suggest that not all members understand them adequately. Firstly, who drafts the Budget? The Budget is a strong statement of the collective responsibility of Government. Elections are fought on the basis of a commitment to implement a policy platform. For this reason, the party in power is responsible for the drafting of the Budget, as the spending plans must stand to realise the implementation of the political platform. This is the case in governments across the world, without exception.

Here in South Africa, we invite participation through the publication of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement for consideration by Parliament. I am glad that the Budget Reform Task Team, which is led by the hon Mahlangu, will also assist in bringing Parliament and its committees into this process.

Having heard the views of compatriots through the agency of Parliament, Government draws up the Budget. The crafting of section 77(2) of the Constitution was never intended to deny Government this fundamental responsibility, nor was it in the minds of the drafters that the budget law should be subject to filibustering, gridlock or plain paralysis in the course of the parliamentary process.

We must comply with the Constitution, and I hope that we will pass the legislation this year, but at the same time we must understand that it is not possible to redraft Government’s spending plans afresh through a series of portfolio committee hearings. That is not the purpose of our deliberations. But the MTEF does afford this House an opportunity to reflect on future spending plans. It is perhaps timely that we ask portfolio committees to give due attention to the two outer years of the MTEF. The purpose of publishing these is to have Parliament advise us on our priorities timeously.

Secondly, with regard to the issue of intergovernmental fiscal relations, we have a complex relationship between the three spheres of government. The provinces are dependent on national Government for the transfer of more than 96% of their revenues. The Division of Revenue Bill before Parliament sets out intricate arrangements for intergovernmental fiscal relations and resource sharing.

Whilst we will pass legislation on provincial taxing powers during this year, the resulting impact on resources available to provinces is likely to be limited. Provincial borrowing does not add resources for available expenditure. It allows us, rather, to share available funds between the spheres of government in a more appropriate way.

What is more important is that we give effect to co-operative governance by the style of executive decisions. All the MECs of Finance will attest to the fact that we are striving for compromise and certainty. The details published in the Budget Review, and the fact that the decisions are taken on the division of revenue by Cabinet, with all nine the premiers in attendance, is testimony to this fact. Any notion such as that articulated last week by Premier Morkel suggesting that the Western Cape Province is being punished for its relative success, is devoid of truth, and indeed, contrary to the precepts of the Constitution, and entirely against the grain of our practice in Government.

We also want to suggest - the hon Cupido is not in the House, but she needs to hear this - that one area where the complexity of fiscal transfers arises, is in respect of welfare payments. Provinces provide for welfare services and for the payment of grants from their equitable share. When increases are considered, such as is the case with pensions and child support grants, we stand advised by the provinces. The fact is that some provinces are better able to afford higher increases.

The norm is that the increases are negotiated at a bilateral between the Minmecs of Finance and Welfare, and we can only accept an increase that all provinces can afford. In this arrangement, if we seek to increase the grants to levels higher than the provinces can afford, we will have to make up the difference in affected provinces, thereby distorting the allocation formula. This is an important point that we should understand, and I think that, as Government, we are not entirely satisfied with the R30 increase in social pensions or the R10 on the child support grant. But in complex intergovernmental fiscal relations, it is important that all members understand this.

Permit me to digress on the subject of pensions. We would be wise to take counsel from the experiences of both Europe and Latin America. It would be far better to implement a system where all working people provide for their own retirement, leaving the state in a stronger position to care for the vulnerable. The alternative would be to construct a system that may later prove to be unaffordable. Rather than go this route, the challenge before us is to build a bridge between social grants we provide for in the Budget and those arrangements for retirement that attract contributions from employers and employees.

The issue of tax cuts arose in the debate as well. This year we are again able to put back money in the pockets of individuals. Taxpayers, mainly workers earning below R80 000 a year, will benefit from R8,3 billion in personal income tax relief, sharing the fruits of fiscal discipline that we have achieved. Tax relief is an important catalyst for future economic growth and development. It allows people to spend more, to invest more, to create more jobs and to realise a better life for all people in the future.

Members of the opposition, and the hon Dr Rabie in particular, have complained that the intended tax relief does not significantly lower the burden of the upper middle income earners, that is, those who earn above R100 000 a year. I would like to remind the hon members that this group of middle income earners benefited significantly from the R9,9 billion in income tax relief in last year’s Budget.

This year, we unashamedly target further tax relief to the working poor and to those whose incomes are more modest and whose livelihoods are vulnerable. In doing so we share the fruits with lower-income earners, keeping to our pledge to taxpayers that everyone may pay less tax in future. Yet, we need to bear in mind that the nature of the tax curve, as defined by both brackets and rates, does spread the benefits across the board so that the most cursory of glances at the tax tables, for instance Table C2 of the Budgetary Review, would reflect that an individual earning R100 000 would now pay R3 080 less tax a year.

Die agbare dominee het ook gevra dat ons bietjie aansporingsmaatreëls vir die landbou daarstel. Ek wil saam met hom gaan soek na daardie enkele boer wat nog belasting betaal. Ek wil hom vang en hom miskien in die museum sit. Ek wil daardie boer sien. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[The hon reverend also asked us to introduce a few incentive measures for agriculture. I want to go and search with him for a single farmer who is still paying taxes. I want to catch that farmer and possibly put him in a museum. I want to see that farmer. [Applause.]]

Regarding the proceeds of privatisation, Government’s careful construction and implementation of its privatisation strategy is set to deliver proceeds of about R18 billion this year. These receipts will flow from the Telkom initial public offer as well as the restructuring of Sasria and Transnet’s interest in M-Cell.

I just want to point out that this money is fundable. It will not be set aside. It is part of the big changes. By paying less in debt service costs, we have more money available to do other things. That is the point we raised in the Budget, namely that we will spend R10 billion less on debt service costs and education this year, and that was understood, somewhat, by the hon Dr Pheko.

During the debate, the backbenchers asked what we expect to receive for M- Cell shares and whether the expected proceeds would change in value if M- Cell were coupled with a second fixed line licensee. Questions concerning the expected proceeds from the ongoing SAA and Denel restructuring were also raised.

While we will listen, of course, to alternative views and options, hon members are aware that such pointed questioning is unlikely to add value to the debate or the amount that we will receive from the sale of any part of the entity. We know that the strength of such deals is dependent on the careful construction and presentation to the market.

We would certainly contribute to our own failing, should we reveal all now in the interests of greater transparency, or race to the market merely for the sake of expediency. In saying that we are late for a date, are members suggesting that we are able to control the vagaries of the market itself? No, we must proceed along the course that has been planned, taking into account market circumstances as we proceed.

The issue of education was raised and we agree with the opposition that the investment in training, skills and knowledge is the key to our future. Education, training and skills development remain the cornerstone of our political platform and our long-term growth strategy. We recognise the need to build and improve the skills and capabilities of our people in order to secure our future.

Building our skills base is a formidable challenge, given the legacy of the past. The 2001 Budget takes the lead, directing over R58 billion to education. This includes R2,8 billion collected from the Skills Development Levy. Eighty percent of the receipts accrue to 27 sectoral education and training authorities that have been set up to improve skills in industries across the economy. The remaining 20% will go to the National Skills Fund to support special training needs and opportunities for the unemployed, enabling people to contribute to the productive economy. Approximately R47 billion will be spent on primary and secondary schooling at provincial level, and R7,5 billion is directed towards higher education, building the knowledge and information-based skills required by the new economy.

Retaining the skills of our people and importing scarce skills and labour are equally important. Government is in the process of finalising legislation and interventions that will streamline and improve migration services to ensure that we are able to attract and recruit the foreign skills that we need into our economy. We are also aware that increased access to the global market has opened up opportunities for skilled South Africans abroad. Greater mobility across international borders and activities of transnational companies are today’s reality and are likely to continue into the future. While we cannot but ride the wave, we have to strive together to ensure that skilled people are valued and have a future in building our economy, our country and our people.

On the subject of the labour market, the hon Heine may be interested to know that in comparative terms, South Africa’s regulations are few. In general, for the hon Le Roux’s information, one can look at the economy in the United States and find that there are 62 different regulators in the financial sector. One should go to Germany and see their amount of regulation.

This idea that we have an economy that is overregulated is fundamentally wrong. It is without any evidence, in fact. That is what we need to understand and come to terms with. [Applause.] There is no completely unregulated economy. The most unregulated labour market in the world was found in Indonesia and that labour market virtually no longer exists.

Turning to the issues of growth and foreign direct investment, the Budget debates have rightly contained wide-ranging discussions of the growth performance of the economy and the need to stimulate accelerated investment in productive capacity. These are pressing concerns. The Budget contains several measures directed at increased growth. These include incentives for industrial investment, additional allocations for maintenance and construction of public infrastructure, substantial personal income tax relief and an accelerated depreciation regime for small business.

Growth and foreign investment will also be promoted by state asset restructuring initiatives, our support for tourism development, enhancement of skills development, broadening of export opportunities and Government’s low borrowing requirements. Alongside these substantive and dynamic trends, yes, confidence, sentiment and investor attitude play a role, but we should not allow negativity to interfere with our commitment to succeed, generally. History throws up countless cases of countries and companies that have done well, despite the most pessimistic popular perceptions.

Yesterday, I was privileged to join a group of colleagues from Zimbabwe, Minister Makoni, the Minister of Finance and Economic Development, in particular, in a series of discussions on the economic challenges faced by our northern neighbour. Here is a context in which a spiral of negativity, reinforced by discontent, has driven a difficult and vulnerable situation into a serious financial and economic downturn. We will naturally offer what support we can for the normalisation of commerce and trade in Zimbabwe and for the implementation of sound development policies. However, Zimbabwe’s difficulties have been brought on by quite different circumstances and policies from our own. We should not allow these circumstances to be insinuated into the challenge we all share and reinforce in confidence in our own policies and prospects.

Turning to the issue of people who opt out of Government services, it was suggested that Government needs to display greater sensitivity to the needs of people who now provide for their own health care, children’s education, security services and the like. Surely the challenge of our democracy is that we are duty bound to provide a better life for all South Africans. Gone for ever are the days when policing meant an oversupply of resources to white residential areas and none for the townships, when the provision of education meant an unsustainable gap between the quality of facilities at white and black schools, or when highly sophisticated health care was provided at low cost by the state for some, whilst the majority languished in squalor and in ill health.

Our responsibility now demands that we place our limited resources at the disposal of all. If individuals choose to opt out of the services that this country can provide for all, because they can afford better for themselves, that is their right. However, the idea that they are, somehow, unfairly treated, is plainly wrong.

Private medical scheme membership continues to be favourably treated for tax purposes. Excellent schools, colleges and universities are funded by the state and enrol children of the rich and the poor alike. Everyone benefits from our roads, courts of law and trade promotion and we all share in the broad social benefits of steady progress in reducing poverty and extending human development to all.

In conclusion, I would like to express my appreciation for Gen Viljoen’s positive comments, and I would like to join those who wish him well as he steps out of the political arena.

Mag dit beter gaan in die boerdery, Generaal. [Applous.] [May your farm go from strength to strength, General. [Applause.]]

I must confess that hearing many of the comments from the opposition benches left me with mixed emotions: amusement at the flimsy premise of the opposition to the Budget; disappointment at the ease with which they seek to talk the economy down; fascination at the contradictions between what they see as necessary improvement and their acute lack of ideas; shocked by the extent to which they remain victims of their own past - hon Andrew’s missing ingredient can be reduced to a hackneyed set of white fears; and amazement at how uninformed their comments are, ignoring the extent of social dialogue taking place in South Africa through the Presidential Working Groups, Presidential Advisory Groups, Nedlac, the Millennium Labour Council and a series of similar fora.

I would like to invite the hon Andrew and, perhaps, a number of other members of the DP, in particular, even if it is for a day, to consider becoming African. [Applause.] They must share with us in the joy, the love, the vision, the caring and all that makes us so special as Africans. They must forget about their European past, come with us, build Africa with us, consider this their home if they are big enough and old enough to do so. [Applause.]

Perhaps, more appropriately, we should use this Budget as an opportunity to prove to our people that we can and will use our resources to build a better life for all. The invocation by the hon Feinstein, to patriotic activism should become our loadstar with this Budget. I have pleasure in commending this Budget to the House. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Bill be read a first time.

Division demanded.

The House divided:

AYES - 217: Abrahams, T; Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Baloyi, S F; Belot, S T; Benjamin, J; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, G B; Bhengu, N R; Bloem, D V; Bogopane, H I; Botha, N G W; Carrim, Y I; Cassim, M F; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chikane, M M; Chohan- Kota, F I; Cindi, N V; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; De Lange, J H; Didiza, A T; Dithebe, S L; Dlamini, B O; Doidge, G Q M; Duma, N M; Dyani, M M Z; Ebrahim, E I; Fankomo, F C; Fazzie, M H; Feinstein, A J; Ferreira, E T; Fihla, N B; Fraser-Moleketi, G J; Frolick, C T; Gandhi, E; Gcina, C I; Gerber, P A; Gininda, M S; Gomomo, P J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Green, L M; Gumede, D M; Gxowa, N B; Hajaig, F; Hanekom, D A; Hangana, N E; Hendrickse, P A C; Hlangwana, N L; Hlengwa, M W; Hogan, B A; Holomisa, S P; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Koornhof, G W; Kotwal, Z; Landers, L T; Lekgoro, M K; Lekgoro, M M S; Lishivha, T E; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Lucas, E J; Lyle, A G; Madasa, Z L; Magashule, E S; Magubane, N E; Magwanishe, G; Mahlangu, G L; Mahlangu, M J; Mahlawe, N; Mahomed, F; Maimane, D S; Makasi, X C; Makwetla, S P; Malebana, H F; Maloney, L; Maluleke-Hlaneki, C J M; Malumise, M M; Manie, M S; Manuel, T A; Maphalala, M A; Maphoto, L I; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Marshoff, F B; Masala, M M; Maseka, J T; Mashimbye, J N; Masithela, N H; Mathebe, P M; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Maziya, A M; Mbete, B; Mdladlana, M M S; Meshoe, K R J; Mfundisi, I S; Mgidi, J S; Mlangeni, A; Mnandi, P N; Mngomezulu, G P; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mogale, E P; Mohai, S J; Mohamed, I J; Mohlala, R J B; Mokaba, P R; Mokoena, D A; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B G; Moloto, K A; Momberg, J H; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Moosa, M V; Morobi, D M; Moropa, R M; Moss, M I; Mothoagae, P K; Mpahlwa, M; Mpontshane, A M; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mtsweni, N S; Mufamadi, F S; Mutsila, I; Mzimela, S E; Mzondeki, M J G; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncube, B; Ndou, R S; Ndzanga, R A; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngculu, L V J; Ngubane, H; Ngubeni, J M; Nhleko, N P; Njobe, M A A; Nkomo, A S; Nonkonyana, M; Nqakula, C; Nqodi, S B; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, S B; Oliphant, G G; Pahad, A G H; Phala, M J; Pheko, S E M; Pieterse, R D; Radebe, B A; Rajbally, S; Ramakaba-Lesiea, M M; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Rasmeni, S M; Ripinga, S S; Schneeman, G D; Scott, M I; Seaton, S A; Sekgobela, P S; September, C C; September, R K; Serote, M W; Shabangu, S; Shilubana, T P; Shope, N R; Sigwela, E M; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, D J; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Solomon, G; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Swart, S N; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, S V; Turok, B; Twala, N M; Vadi, I; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, S C; Van Wyk, A (Annelizé); Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Vos, S C; Woods, G G; Xingwana, L M T; Yengeni, T S; Zita, L; Zondi, K M; Zondo, R P.

NOES - 50: Andrew, K M; Aucamp, C; Bakker, D M; Bell, B G; Beukman, F; Blaas, A; Borman, G M; Botha, A J; Bruce, N S; Camerer, S M; Clelland, N J; Da Camara, M L; Dowry, J J; Durand, J; Eglin, C W; Ellis, M J; Farrow, S B; Geldenhuys, B L; Gibson, D H M; Gore, V C; Greyling, C H F; Grobler, G A J; Heine, R J; Jankielsohn, R; Kalyan, S V; Le Roux, J W; Lee, T D; Maluleke, D K; McIntosh, G B D; Moorcroft, E K; Morkel, C M; Mulder, P W A; Ntuli, R S; Odendaal, W A; Opperman, S E; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Rhoda, R T; Schalkwyk, P J; Schippers, J; Schmidt, H C; Schoeman, R S; Selfe, J; Semple, J A; Simmons, S; Smuts, M; Sono, B N; Van Wyk, A (Anna); Viljoen, C L; Waters, M.

Question agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a first time.

                  STANDING OVER OF ORDER OF THE DAY

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, as agreed among the Whips, I move:

That Order No 2, namely Consideration of Report of Ad hoc Committee on Filling of Vacancies on Commission for Gender Equality, stands over.

Agreed to.

       TOLERANCE AND DIVERSITY: A VISION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

                             (Statement)

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, before we proceed, I would like to draw your attention to today’s ATC’s, and I apologise for the incorrect date. But we have reproduced in it a vision for the 21st century, which has been endorsed by many world leaders at the request of the United Nations’ Human Rights Commission. In recognition of the historic role that the National Assembly has been playing since the end of apartheid, I have been requested, as Speaker, to add my signature to those of President Mbeki and former President Mandela on behalf of South Africa, and I have done so. [Applause.]

This is a recognition of and tribute to the work of members of the first democratic Parliament elected in 1994, and also to the contribution of all those who have been members of this second Parliament. As we are aware, much remains to be done and the challenge is set out in the vision that is before us in the ATC. On the eve of Human Rights Day, I would just wish to draw your attention to two of its paragraphs.

We all constitute one human family. This truth has now become self-evident because of the first map of the human genome, an extraordinary achievement which not only reaffirms our common humanity, but promises transformations in scientific thought and practice as well as in the visions which our species can entertain for itself. It encourages us to move towards the full exercise of our human spirit, the reawakening of all its inventive, creative and moral capacities, enhanced by the equal participations of men and women.

It could make the 21st century an era of genuine fulfilment of MPs. We must strive to remind ourselves of this great possibility. Instead of allowing diversity of race and culture to become a limiting factor in human exchange and development, we must refocus our understanding, discern in such diversity the potential for mutual enrichment and realise that it is the interchange between great traditions of human spirituality that offers the best prospect for the persistence of the human spirit itself. For too long, such diversity has been treated as a threat rather than a gift, and too often that threat has been expressed in racial contempt and conflict, and in exclusion, discrimination and intolerance.

Over the coming year, we pledge ourselves to seek that conversion of mind and heart. What we envisage for every man, woman and child is a life where the exercise of individual gifts and personal rights is affirmed by the dynamic solidarity of our membership of one human family. I place that before hon members on the eve of Human Rights Day.

           DECADE FOR NATIONAL MOBILISATION AGAINST RACISM

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  apartheid was declared a crime against humanity;
   (b)  despite the fact that South Africa now has a nonsexist,
       nonracial, democratic Constitution, there are disturbing signs
       that racism still persists in our society;


   (c)  these incidents of racism are symptoms of the persisting and
       deep-seated legacy of structured racial oppression in our
       society and indicate that race remains the principal determining
       factor of poverty, life expectancy, vulnerability to disease and
       general social marginalisation; and


   (d)  the National Conference on Racism adopted the South African
       Millennium Statement on Racism and Programme of Action; and

(2) therefore resolves to declare the period 2001 to 2010 as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, hon members, as South Africans, we have had different experiences of racism. I am certain that our debate today and many others will be informed by these experiences.

From its formation in 1912, the ANC has fought for an inclusive society wherein all its people, regardless of national group or colour, should be part of every process in our country, including political decision-making. In fact, the objective of the unity of all our people and the principle of nonracial and democratic society was the foundation upon which the ANC was formed. To date there has been no other political organisation in this country that has fought, sacrificed and defended these principles except the ANC. [Applause.]

In pursuance of these noble goals and objectives, the ANC and its allies organised, in 1955, the historic congress of the people whose main objective was to crystallise these ideals. Thousands of South Africans made a declaration at Kliptown that was to be the guiding principle of the ANC and the democratic movement as a whole. They said in unequivocal terms:

We the people of South Africa declare for all our country and the world to know that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no government can just reclaim authority unless it was based on the will of the people.

These words, among others, form the principle that has guided the ANC in leading the people of South Africa in their struggle for liberation and a better life for all. This historic declaration, coming as it did at the height of repression and erosion of the dignity of black people under the NP’s racist rule, was brave and groundbreaking. The impact of apartheid, oppression and subjugation was described by our first Noble Peace Prize winner and the then ANC President, Chief Albert Luthuli, in 1960, as follows:

Nonwhites under the minority rule of whites only have for decades suffered and continue to suffer a repression that not only impoverishes them, but is a most humiliating affront to their person and dignity.

The adoption of the Freedom Charter and the ideas it espoused was in line with the general thinking within the ANC. In a speech read on his behalf in Ladysmith on 31 October 1953, Chief Luthuli stressed that the weapon of meeting the challenge of white domination was to create a strong front of all freedom-loving people in our country, and said:

The ANC is pledged to this policy. We have pledged to work and co-operate with those who respect us as a people, share our democratic aspirations and relentlessly oppose domination.

I am quoting this to remind this House of our history and the leading role played by our liberation movement in uniting all South Africans in fighting the demon of racialism. Throughout its history, the ANC’s presidents have articulated these ideals. In 1986, President Oliver Tambo, receiving the third World Prize Award on behalf of Nelson and Winnie Mandela in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, recommitted the ANC to continuing the onslaught against apartheid and racism in our country. He said:

… no amount of political manoeuvering or killing of our people will blunt or stop the offensive of our masses, under the leadership of the ANC, to destroy racism in our country … It is a victory that we will use to build a truly democratic South Africa, one in which we shall abolish racism once and for all, and end the unjust and unequal relations of domination and exploitation that exist between black and white in our country today and which are expressed in the concept and the practice of apartheid.

Former President Mandela made a similar statement in his defence statement in the Old Synagogue Court in 1962, when he said:

The ANC further believes that all people, irrespective of the national groups to which they may belong, and irrespective of the colour of their skins, all people whose home is South Africa and who believe in the principles of democracy and of equality of men, should be treated as Africans …

This was the same concept as the one enunciated in the epoch-making speech of President Mbeki, delivered in this very House, on 8 May 1996, when he declared: ``I am an African.’’

In this address, he, too, expresses the feelings, emotions and ideas expressed by all his predecessors, as follows (Hansard 1996, col 425):

The Constitution, whose adoption we celebrate, constitutes an unequivocal statement that we refuse to accept that our Africanness shall be defined by our race, our colour, our gender or our historical origins. It is a firm assertion made by us that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white. It gives concrete expression to the sentiment we share as Africans and will defend to death, that the people shall govern.

Today, as we sit in this House, we speak guided by the wisdom of men and women who taught us that racism is an evil monster that we should fight at all costs, together as South Africans.

South Africa made a grand entrance into the international arena and was received warmly by the world of nations. We began the task of rebuilding this wonderful land, to make it one in which all inhabitants would be happy and proud. However, in doing so, we still have to grapple with the reality of the legacy of our past. Back in 1964, former President Nelson Mandela said:

The lack of human dignity experienced by Africans is the direct result of the policy of white supremacy. White supremacy implies black inferiority. Legislation designed to preserve white supremacy entrenches this notion. Menial tasks in South Africa are invariably performed by Africans. When anything has to be carried or cleaned the white man will look around for an African to do it for him, whether the African is employed by him or not. Because of this sort of attitude, whites tend to regard Africans as a separate breed. They do not look upon them as people with families of their own; they do not realise that they have emotions - that they fall in love like white people do, that they want to be with their wives and children like white people want to be with theirs; that they want to earn enough money to support their families properly, to feed and clothe them and send them to school. And what house-boy' or garden-boy’ or labourer can ever hope to do this?

That was former President Mandela speaking.

I believe that some of these manifestations of racism he spoke about exist today, as they did in 1964 and in 1994. We must not underestimate the deep psychological damage that this ideology caused. The incidents of racism reported in our media are not isolated occurrences. They are part of a deeper mind-set.

The racism experience persists today when black work seekers are rudely told to ask Mandela to give them jobs. [Interjections.] It persists when the private sector is perceived to be a white domain, and black presence is tolerated as tokenism of impotent appointments that mock affirmative action policies. It is fuelled when it is said that black management in the Public Service equals inefficiency, corruption and a lowering of standards.

It is entrenched when some political leaders visibly follow these old racial patterns in speech, style and practice. This is hardly consistent with our antiracist, antisexist and antidiscriminatory Constitution. It is at odds with the postapartheid resolve for reconciliation and nation- building.

The problem we face in this country was aptly articulated by President Mbeki on 29 May 1998, when he noted that South Africa was a country of two nations. He characterised these nations as follows (Hansard 1998, col 3378):

One of these nations is white, relatively prosperous, regardless of gender or geographic dispersal. It has ready access to a developed economic, physical, educational, communication and other infrastructure. This enables it to argue that, except for the persistence of gender discrimination against women, all members of this nation have the possibility of exercising their right to equal opportunity, and the development opportunities to which the Constitution of 1993 committed our country.

The second and larger nation of South Africa is black and poor, with the worst-affected being women in the rural areas, the black rural population in general and the disabled. This nation lives under conditions of a grossly underdeveloped economic, physical, educational, communication and other infrastructure. It has virtually no possibility of exercising what in reality amounts to a theoretical right to equal opportunity, that right being equal within this black nation only to the extent that it is equally incapable of realisation.

I quote this particular statement because some people, mainly from the political sectors, seem to have misunderstood the statement made by the President, and some deliberately misunderstood it. As I said, it is an expression of those who have experienced the other side of racism who are, therefore, saying we need to eradicate racism in our country, and it is certainly in pursuance of our policy, as the ANC.

We need to accept that taking steps to redress the injustices of the past and transforming our society is necessary for the consolidation of our democracy. We need to ensure that in our homes, schools and neighbourhoods we inculcate a new value system that respects people for who they are, and not the race group we want to assign them to.

An open and honest debate on the problem of racism would enable a new consciousness to emerge and would create an environment where we would intensify antiracism awareness in our schools, churches and especially in our media, which plays a critical role in shaping our view of our world. As we were united in 1955 when we drew up the Freedom Charter, we need, indeed, to unite in action for change now.

The future still looks as bright as it did to Chief Albert Luthuli when he wrote in 1960, and I quote:

Personally, whatever the difficulties, I see hope only in an undivided democratic South Africa. Difficulties are not inseparable if all concerned would approach them with a spirit of goodwill and realism, and an unqualified respect for truth.

We shall intensify our campaign against racism by declaring this decade a decade of mobilisation of the nation against racism, as the conference that was held on racism asked us to do.

In conclusion, allow me once more to use the words of Chief Luthuli, and I quote:

There in the embryo was a portrayal of my new South Africa, a company of men and women of goodwill, yearning to begin work on the building of a structure, both permanent and real. Indeed they have already begun this work.

Let us make Chief Luthuli’s dreams a reality. [Applause.]

Ms M SMUTS: Madam Speaker, I wish to move an amendment to the draft resolution as presented by the hon the Chief Whip.

I move that the draft resolution, moved by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, be amended by the substitution of paragraph (2) thereof, by the following paragraphs:

(2) further notes that -

   (a)  the gap between rich and poor in South Africa is becoming wider;


   (b)  millions of South Africans live in poverty with all the social
       ills which poverty brings; and


   (c)  stunted physical and intellectual development of many of our
       children is a result of poverty;

(3) finally notes that HIV/Aids poses a threat of enormous consequences, with the pandemic certain to cause the deaths of millions of our people within the next decade; and

(4) therefore resolves to declare the period 2001 to 2010 as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism, Poverty and Aids.

If we are going to indulge in the declaration of decades of mobilisation, let us deal with South Africa’s true problems. Aids in South Africa has been appropriately described as a genocide in circumstances where the state stands by and allows South Africans to suffer and die in their millions - 10 million by 2015 in one estimate. One of my colleagues will address this question during the debate.

Poverty is the banner under which our hon President and the Minister of Foreign Affairs write when they speak against the world financial institutions trumpeting a new world order. Yet their Government fails to implement its own programmes at home, as the Human Rights Commission has just reported in its second socioeconomic report covering 1998 and 1999. The Human Rights Commission reported that data on indicators such as mortality rates and the number of children benefiting from child support grants was simply not available from Government departments, and that includes both national and provincial departments. Information, it says, on vulnerable groups, especially rural people and the poor, was not provided. The departments stated that the required disaggregated statistics could not be provided, because they rely on other institutions such as Statistics South Africa.

However, the HRC reports:

It seems inconceivable that the departments can plan and implement policies without such data. For example, the national Department of Health could not provide the number of people who live further than five kilometres from a health care facility …

That is the department’s own standard -

… yet it has a clinic-building programme aimed at improving access to health services. How the Department of Health assesses which communities are allocated new clinics without this information is difficult to comprehend.

Yet here we are again talking about racism, which in the definition of the ANC and the HRC means white racism.

The hon the Deputy President has just displayed here the same time warp that the ANC used at the race conference in Sandton last year as a justification for talking about racism as white racism. I remember that the hon Pallo Jordan on the occasion of that conference - just as the hon Deputy President, who used 40-year-old quotes today - fiercely attacked Prime Ministers who were in office a good 20, 30 and 40 years before. This appears to be used as a justification for making racism synonymous with white racism. It is a strange time warp.

Why are we talking about racism again? Because, in our view, the consolidation of black voters against the legacy of apartheid - this is directed at the hon Johnny de Lange - is the ANC’s way of deflecting attention from its failure to deliver to the poor, while, in the words of Saki Macozoma this Sunday, the black elite is taking the lion’s share of the changes in terms of redistribution of wealth. Members will know that Unisa’s Bureau of Market Research has just shown that 23% of South Africans who are earning over R300 000 are now black. A milestone. A real milestone, as Saki says. But also a wake-up call to the hon the Minister, to all of us, because, hon Deputy President, we are a country of three classes. The top one is black and white, and rich; the middle one is black and white, and static; and the lower class is predominantly black. It is poor and is getting poorer.

Let us stop playing games around the concept of the two nations. The hon members are members of the black elite, the race conference was attended by the black elite. We are a nation of three classes. We need a decade of growth. [Interjections.]

Mr M T GONIWE: Madam Speaker, I would like to know if the hon member would please take a short question?

Ms M SMUTS: At the end of this speech, with pleasure.

We need a decade of growth, not a decade of racism. I think that is self- evident. Racism is one of our problems. It always is, and it always will be, as it is everywhere. As I have said before, I am getting bored with my own voice on this subject. A Constitution cannot eradicate … [Interjections.] Why does the hon member keep bringing up this same old debate? A Constitution cannot eradicate racism any more than a decade could. A Constitution sets the principles for policy and law, precisely because discrimination and racism are features of human behaviour. We can make it better or we can make it worse.

Now the ANC has made it worse in the year 2000, so much worse that its alienating effects are undermining the sentiments of confidence in South Africa and impeding growth, as the hon Ken Andrew said here; so much worse that the entire ``gesindheid’’ [attitude] that brought South Africa through the transition has changed, as the hon Constand Viljoen said here last year.

The December election results showed that ANC voters were not taken in by this blaming game anymore. Every time we debate this issue, the ANC gets more and more muted - and we will note with interest today whether they are muted or not. Today we had the very great pleasure of the peaceful presence of our hon Deputy President. But I understand that in the other House, where the resolution was also debated, peace was not the order of the day.

The hon the President has made it quite clear that the race discourse will continue and that Government will implement the Sandton Race Conference decisions, of which this declaration of a decade is point number one. I remind hon members that the conference was, of course, dominated by the ANC, which had no fewer than 134 public representatives in attendance.

The parameters of the decade are a dead giveaway - we are not merely locking into the UN Decade Against Racism, 1993 to 2003. We are not locking into that, despite the fact that we have, in fact, conclusively moved against racism precisely since 1993, one could argue, when we passed the nonracial interim Constitution. No, no, we must have a decade nicely covering the next two general elections. [Interjections.] Why? Because the ANC’s Mafikeng conference game plan has not changed.

The hon the Deputy President quoted at length and he reminded us - he almost made me nostalgic - of the old ANC. But what we are looking at here is the new ANC, and the new ANC plays the politics of the black bull. [Interjections.] The new ANC plays the politics of the black bull. Hon members who were here in the previous Parliament may remember the former President’s story of the black bull. It was a story from his wild and younger days. The former President, Mr Mandela, had been asked by some colleagues and comrades to go and break up a meeting held by J B Marks. Amid ovations, J B Marks delivered what former President Mandela called a perfect speech outlining strategies to mobilise our people to overthrow white supremacy.''I had no answer,’’ said former President Mandela, ``because Marks was logical, clear and convincing.’’ He went on to say:

I then addressed the crowd. I said there are two bulls in this kraal. There is a black bull and a white bull. J B Marks says that the white bull must rule in this kraal, and I say that a black bull must rule. What do you say? The same people who had been screaming for J B Marks a moment earlier, now turned around and said: ``The black bull’’. I had actually said nothing.

[Interjections.] The appeal to race, which overrides all reason, is calculated to keep all three classes of black voters in line behind the ANC, together with a fourth one, a new underclass. Former President Mandela told his story to warn that if we do not create an atmosphere where all good men and women can contribute to nation-building, then extremists who have no depth of thinking nor vision can destroy what others have spent years building.

Hon members must please remember Mandela’s atmosphere, Ken Andrew’s sentiments, and Constand Viljoen’s ``gesindheid’’ [attitude]. Do not destroy what we have built up together. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Madam Speaker, I rise to voice the support of the IFP for the draft resolution before the House. I do, however, pray for the following minor amendment: That in paragraph (1)(b) the words and sexism'' be inserted after the wordracism’’, and that, of course, the word persists'' be changed topersist’’ in compliance with the rules of grammar. We do that because we realise and recognise that not only racism is a demonic problem in this country, but that sexism also continues to be a pervading evil.

Having said that, in a debate of this nature, one cannot help making some factual statements which may render some people uncomfortable. There is an alarming and disturbing amount of dishonesty whenever the issue of racism is discussed. Some people would like us to believe that there are no racists around anymore, in spite of the fact that we, as a country, emerged out of the horrors of the scourge of apartheid barely six years ago. Apartheid was institutionalised racism pursued by a certain section of the South African population against another, which was at the receiving end. I call this dishonesty because we cannot pretend that simply because apartheid has been removed from the Statue Book, racism has, likewise, died a natural death. It continues to live in the hearts of some committed racists.

An HON MEMBER: Especially the ANC!

The DEPUTY MINISTER: Madam Speaker, whenever we discuss this issue of racism, we do so not because we want to tar every white person with one brush. We do recognise that there were white people who fought racism throughout their lives, sided with those of us who struggled under the yoke of racism and apartheid and sought to rid this country of the demon of racism. Whenever we discuss this issue, we really want to rid our society of the scourge, so that we can progress as a nation and join other nations of the world which have made headway in fighting the demon of racism.

The roots of intolerance run very deep, both in human nature and organised society. Intolerance is a monster which manifests itself in ever-changing forms and shapes. The evolution of mankind’s spirit requires that we remain constantly committed to eradicating intolerance, both in its roots and in its manifestations. Racism, xenophobia, paternalism, sexism and any other form of entrenched condescending attitudes against any segments of our population are expressions of such intolerance. The battle against intolerance cannot be won by focusing only on some of its manifestations, but must be conducted across the board. It must be a generalised social attitude.

Unesco has tried to define racism in its 1978 Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice. And yet, even the comprehensive language of this international instrument does not fully capture what remains an elusive evil. Article 2 reads, and I quote: Racism includes racial ideologies, prejudiced attitudes, discriminatory behaviour, structural arrangements and institutionalised practices resulting in racial inequality, as well as the fallacious notion that discriminatory relations between groups are morally and scientifically justifiable …

This declaration had to be followed up with other international instruments which broadened the definition of racism to include xenophobia.

Later this year South Africa will have both the privilege and the responsibility of hosting a high-level UN conference in Durban which will seal a new instrument on the basis of which the battle against intolerance will be broadened to include - we hope - xenophobia. In fact, in a rapidly globalising society, increasingly characterised by the massive movement of people into different contexts and countries, xenophobia becomes increasingly more relevant and pernicious. Yet it is easy to predict that xenophobia will not be the last manifestation of the evil of intolerance, and that new forms will continue to emerge. Who knows, perhaps in the next few years those who do not access cyberspace will become the object of discrimination. Intolerance dwells in the hearts and minds of people. We need to create a social climate which educates people to be tolerant. We need to create an open society in which people accept that other people may be different in their religion, race or sexual orientation, but not necessarily inferior for that reason. I am reminded of the statement of Thomas Jefferson engraved in large letters all around his spectacular memorial in the heart of the US nation’s capital which proclaims, and I quote:

I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

To me this succinct and unwavering commitment captures what is otherwise contained in the hundreds of pages international documents dedicated to the eradication of intolerance have adopted since the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

The fight against intolerance is not a task that can be accomplished within a matter of a few years, or one for which any set deadline can be given. However, it is important that we commit ourselves to a 10-year timeframe, during which we could particularly focus on this problem with a view to seeking to do everything in our power to help eradicate it. But we must be aware that in our context it will take much longer to achieve tangible results.

We must also be aware that the scope and the targets of our struggle against intolerance and racism will need to be changed and adjusted as we progress. In order to do so, we must walk the tightrope between being sensitive and open-minded! We need to be sensitive to those who suffer and hurt because of the intolerant attitudes of others, and we need to be open- minded to recognise that intolerance is not eradicated with other intolerance, even when one becomes intolerant of intolerance itself.

The debate on racism must not become in itself a new source of intolerance, nor should discussions about race, cultural diversity and the specific characteristics of various ethnicities of which South Africa comprises ever become taboo topics. We must also cast the fight against intolerance in the language and the methodology of commitment, not in the undertones of guilt and recrimination. The past cannot be forgotten, and it is a matter of personal choice whether it should be forgiven.

We cannot forget the past as it sets the agenda of our commitments to the future. However, we should not use the past to force commitments which should be embraced by all those concerned because of their self-evident value and compelling necessity for the prosperity and stability of our country. We must eradicate intolerance because it is the right thing to do for all of us, not only because we intend to right past wrongs.

Our children are growing up differently from the way we did and many of us are experiencing cultural diversity even within the same family. Foreigners in South Africa speak different languages, and act and think differently. Each of our communities lives by different customs and traditions and often follows a different body of unwritten laws to regulate their affairs and sanction their private transactions. Our country has not yet given full recognition to the existing plurality of legal systems which, as a matter of fact, are in force and effect at community level. We have a long way to go before we fully accept how diverse we really are and develop the tools to cope with the requirements of a truly open society.

This will be a long-term process which involves all of us, from our families to the way we conceive and implement the role of the state in respect of the lives of communities. The fight to eradicate intolerance must include schools, private associations, NGOs, churches and communities. However, it is important that its agenda and modalities are not predetermined officially.

I have placed greater emphasis on the need to eradicate intolerance rather than simply to deal with racism, because the fight against racism may carry the inherent danger of becoming cast into rigid parameters which, once again, may divide right and wrong in a rigid fashion, throwing into a new prison of intolerance those who, because of personal choices, happen to be on the wrong side of the new crusade.

The history of humankind is consistent in teaching the lesson that the most noble causes became discredited once they sought to oppress, discriminate against and trample on those who do not agree with them. The battle against intolerance will triumph and succeed because, for the first time in human history, a crusade has been commenced with which has the potential to be all-inclusive and to free everyone. It cannot be against somebody, but for everyone. It is only by realising that, to a greater or lesser extent, we are all victims of one form of intolerance or another, that we will all accept to walk on the path to freedom and recognise that in it there are tangible gains for each of us, our families and our communities.

I do not believe that the realms of law, politics and spirituality can be artificially divided, because they are nothing but different facets of the same human experience. I believe that the spiritual imperative of loving one’s neighbour as one loves oneself may eradicate the roots of intolerance and racism. We often do not speak of this magical and uniquely human phenomenon which is our capacity for loving. Racism, xenophobia, paternalism and any other form of intolerance, would disappear if people interacted with one another with a genuine sense of love.

I find it peculiar that discussions about loving one another remain confined to the intimacy of our families or churches and are not part and parcel of what we as a society should teach and learn. It seems that love is not a sufficiently dignified matter to be discussed in public affairs debates or in Parliament. I say so because a society can suffer from many injuries, some of which are more readily recognisable than others. We can easily recognise widespread physical injuries caused by adverse environmental conditions in certain societies. By the same token, we should accept that certain societies may suffer widespread psychological injuries because of the psychological environment.

We must consider the possibility that, because of our background, we have, indeed, been injured in our spirit, and that our greatest injury is our reduced capacity of loving and accepting one another. We are not going to cure this injury through any legislative action, neither can racism be legislated out of existence, nor can love be legislated into practice. [Applause.]

Mr J DURAND: Madam Speaker, Deputy President, hon members, few people would believe, prior to 1990, that South Africa would become a rainbow nation with a nonracial future. No one would believe that whites in large numbers would vote ``yes’’ on a referendum that would lead to negotiations; that F W De Klerk would, from a position of relative power, unban the ANC and other liberation movements; that Africans, coloureds and Indians would, after years of colonialism and apartheid, not kill off whites in a process of ethnic cleansing, as in some east European country, but that we would reach out to each other and create this rainbow nation.

Who would believe that blacks with every reason to be bitter, such as former President Nelson Mandela, would abandon race-based politics and act in such a way that elderly white icons of apartheid such as Betsie Verwoerd would embrace his vision, and that all South Africans would want to align and enrol in his vision of one South African nation?

Why then must racism be elevated to a national debate? [Interjections.] Now that there is a black elite that makes up 23% of the richest South Africans and has doubled its income in the last five years, why must President Mbeki constantly speak of two nations - one rich and white, the other poor and black? Everyone must agree that we are still a far cry from where we want to be as a nation, as far as economic equity is concerned. We cannot rest while more than 50% of rural African women between 18 and 25 years of age are poor and unemployed.

The SA Human Rights Commission, an ANC organisation, reported recently that after six years of ANC rule, 2,3 million learners attended schools that do not have water within walking distance. [Interjections.] There are 6,6 million learners attending schools without toilets. Fourteen million South Africans are vulnerable to food insecurity and about 2,5 million South Africans are malnourished. Food insecurity and malnutrition are the highest in rural areas amongst the African population. This Government needs to address the problems of stunting and wasting in children under five.

There can be little doubt that the ANC finds race useful as an excuse for its failures. Recent surveys have shown that only 5% of South Africans cite racism as their main concern. Education, safety and job creation rank as much higher concerns with South Africans. Why, then, if we need skills and expertise to build the economy and create jobs, does our Minister of Education want universities to kick out white African academics to employ black Africans from foreign countries? That is racism.

The Employment Equity Act of 1998, which has precedence over all labour laws, is still in the process of being adhered to. Yet the market, and not the state, has succeeded in raising the income level of blacks.

Today, the ANC or President Mbeki must rediscover the vision of the men and women who adopted the Freedom Charter in 1955, and laid the foundation of a nonracial, democratic South Africa that belongs to all who live in it. [Interjections.] The PAC’s definition of African was a racist and exclusive one. Many coloured and Indian leaders, prominent in the Black Consciousness Movement, came to feel rejected as insufficiently black and felt pressured to replace their cultural heritage with artificially adopted African symbols. They gave their children African names to feel part of the movement. The PAC has since evolved its definition of African to include everyone who swears loyalty to Africa. Let us put racism behind us.

Psychological and political liberation has been achieved. We are one nation. Let us build on what we have while we work together towards complete economic liberation. By African standards, we are not poor. We are in a middle-income country. By international standards, we are rich in minerals and other natural resources. Our people are the future. Whites are not the enemy. They are a natural resource that could help to unleash the rich potential of South Africa and the subcontinent. [Interjections.]

Let us prove the doomsday prophets wrong. Let us say to those who predicted catastrophe that we created a miracle in 1994. The miracle people will deal with Aids, unemployment, poverty and crime. Let us manage the economy responsibly, provide growth and create jobs, keep the expertise at home and right the wrongs of the past. Let us learn lessons from Africa, and not make the same mistakes. Our people demand this.

Africans, especially Africans of the diaspora, look towards us with hope. We cannot afford to disappoint them. [Applause.]

Ms N G W BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, hon members and Deputy President, the hon Dene Smuts of the DP said that discrimination and racism are part of human behaviour. It is disgusting to hear this in this day and age.

What is the basis for justification? Where is Ms Smuts, anyway? The DP constantly goes into this denial syndrome that racism and racial discrimination still exist and are, in fact, the direct causes of poverty and economic deprivation. [Interjections.] This is so. She also said that she was nostalgic for the old ANC. Is she also nostalgic for the old South Africa? [Interjections.]

Yes, I have. As the Deputy President said, the Freedom Charter was very important and became the beacon that lit the way forward. It was necessary as the understanding developed that racism and racial discrimination in South Africa were being used to maintain a vicious, colonial domination over and the exploitation of indigenous people.

The ANC described this as colonialism of a special kind. It was a repression that was directed against the black people of South Africa. The ANC is nonracial in character. It has always been steadfast in its commitment to the ideals and goals set out in the Freedom Charter. It has always welcomed into its fold, as a national liberation movement, all classes and strata of the oppressed people, as well as democratically- minded whites.

The Reconstruction and Development Programme developed the spirit of the Freedom Charter in a practical form. It is the tool given to the people of South Africa, hammered out by the ANC on the anvil of experience, by which the people of South Africa can create a better life for all. This future can only be built if we bring an end to poverty and discrimination, which we have inherited from those who brutalised and exploited South Africa through apartheid and colonialism. One could hear them opposing every step forward, clinging to the past. [Interjections.]

Yes, oh yes! As President Thabo Mbeki, in his state of the nation address said: ``It is a past of a racially divided country of masters and servants, of racially inspired conflict and mistrust’’.

I want to say to Madame Smuts that we salute those who organised and participated in the first National Conference on Racism, 2000, which had as its theme ``Combating Racism: A Nation in Dialogue’’. Amongst other matters that that conference agreed on is that the practice of racism is inhuman and constitutes a gross violation of human rights. It made a commitment to support all efforts to eliminate racism and gender-related discrimination in our society, and recognised the link between racism and poverty.

Only when we have eliminated racism completely can we put an end to poverty. [Interjections.] What is it that all South Africans must do to achieve this? If we recognise the reality articulated by this conference, then, as President Mbeki said, surely one of the things we must do is that we as a people should deliberately and directly engage the challenge of racism and racial discrimination, and not pretend that these do not exist. [Interjections.]

Before I dwell on what the ANC-led Government has achieved and what we, the people of South Africa, could do to confront this problem, it might be interesting for the younger generation in the public gallery to know what kind of monster we now have to try and dismantle. [Interjections.] Remember that when the NP came into power in 1948 it enacted a series of wicked laws which were intended to entrench racism and racial discrimination. [Interjections.]

The people of South Africa will recall the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949, which prohibited marriages between Europeans and so-called non- Europeans and the Population Registration Act of 1950, which was designed to classify … [Interjections.] The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, I will not tolerate the heckling that is going on. It is disrupting the debate that is before this House. Please let us be orderly and allow the debate to continue. Continue, hon member.

Ms N G W BOTHA: The Population Registration Act was designed to classify people according to race and to make provision for the compilation of a register of the population of the Union and the issuing of identity documents. In section 5(1) of that Act it is stated that every person whose name is included in the register shall be classified by the director as a white person, a coloured or a native, as the case may be, and every coloured person and every native whose name is so included shall be classified by the director according to the ethnic or other group to which he belongs.

Then there was the Group Areas Act, if hon members remember, the Immorality Act of 1927, the Bantu Authorities Act of 1951 and the Bantu Education Act of 1953, which ensured that all bantus'' were deprived of decent education and, in the words of Dr Verwoerd, remained merehewers of wood and drawers of water’’. Also, in 1953, if hon members remember, they passed the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, which enforced segregation in parks, on buses and in hospitals. Remember those signs that said: ``Net vir blankes’’ [Whites only]. [Interjections.]

All these laws were passed within five years of NP rule, the hon Sheila Camerer’s party, although she is not here. The damage it did will not take five years to undo. [Interjections]. On the contrary, the ANC, in its first five years of rule, has ratified the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Last year we passed the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, which gives effect to section 9 of our Constitution, so as to prevent and prohibit unfair discrimination and harassment, promote equality and eliminate discrimination and prevent hate speech. This Act is the cornerstone of our democracy and sections 7 and 8 of this Act deal specifically with the prohibition of unfair discrimination.

This Act is far-reaching in its application, and binds both the state and all private parties. It has the potential to be a powerful tool to protect disadvantaged groups from unfair discrimination and enable them to access and enjoy socioeconomic rights. It also includes positive measures to promote equality in all spheres. It is clear that the Act is committed to a vision of equality that seeks to redress systemic socioeconomic inequalities.

There are a number of other racist laws that were repealed by our new democratic government. However, we still need to audit all those which still remain and remove them from our Statute Book.

We commend those South Africans who have taken the initiative to correct this injustice by breaking down the race barriers and those who have committed themselves to building unity among all South Africans. We particularly commend Carl Niehaus and Antjie Krog and their colleagues for their initiative to assist in the effort to rebuild the moral fibre of our society. [Interjections.]

This is a challenge to the DP, the New NP, the FF, the FA and the AEB to break the shackles of racist thinking and beliefs, and concretely show their support for nonracialism by supporting this draft resolution. As Dr Russell Ally of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said, and I quote:

The law cannot change the hearts and minds of people, but it can act as a deterrent to the heartless and the mindless.

We must bury the scourge of racism, and we must win this war. We fully support the declaration of 2000 to 2010 as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr S E MZIMELA: Chairperson, the topic before us brings into sharp focus the fundamental question of what this Parliament is all about or why we, the representatives of the South African people, are here. In short, do we really care about our responsibilities?

Certainly, racism has been part of human nature since time began and will still be there when time ends. Let us be clear about one thing: There is no human race, nation, ethnic group, tribe or clan that is without its fair share of racists. Racism is a complex, multifaceted human phenomenon which defies simplistic solutions. It resides in the hitherto unreachable dark crevices of the human psyche. It is evidence of a defective character, the causes of which elude scientific analysis.

In our country, because of our past, racism is an emotionally charged issue. In addition, it has become highly politicised and therefore makes rational discourse virtually impossible. The general view is that whites are by definition racists, and therefore must forever remain contrite and penitent. Blacks, on the other hand - so the apostles of this school of thought claim - can never be racists.

Such a view, however, is not only self-righteous, but preposterous and dangerous. In essence, it means that for as long as there are blacks and whites in this country, there will never be honest dialogue about racism, nor consensus on how to fight the scourge. Consequently, for the next ten years we will be exchanging accusations and hurling insults at one another. At the end of the decade, we will be worse off than we are today.

The Human Rights Commission has asked this Parliament to declare 2000 to 2010 the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism. The request is rather strange, if not loaded with sinister intent. The commission is an independent body that was created by this very Parliament and vested with full powers to be the guardian of human rights in this country. Therefore it is within the competence of the commission to make the sort of declarations it is now asking Parliament to make. Why? Parliament’s permission or endorsement is unnecessary.

Parliament must, of course, be concerned about racism. But that concern must be part of the total concern for human rights. This does not mean that we do not recognise that a particular human right may require specific attention at a particular time, under particular circumstances.

The UDM subscribes to the view that the right to proper nourishment and the right to good health are fundamental human rights. We note with increasing distress the unnecessarily rapid rise in the levels of poverty in a country that is not poor. How do we intelligently and convincingly explain the fact that millions of South Africans live in conditions of degradation, destitution and despair? Does this reality not prod Parliament to mobilise all South Africans against poverty?

In the next 10 years, millions of our citizens, especially the young, will die of Aids. Does common sense not dictate that we mobilise all South Africans for an all-out war against the contracting and the spread of Aids? It is the view of the UDM that if this Parliament is serious about mobilising the South African public, then the agenda for such mobilisation must of necessity include poverty and Aids. The UDM accordingly calls on this Parliament to declare 2000 to 2010 as a decade to mobilise against Aids, poverty and racism. [Applause.]

Adv Z L MADASA: Mr Chairperson, hon members, the ACDP would like to move an amendment to the motion, substituting paragraph (2) with the following paragraph:

(2) is of the view that all South Africans should be mobilised against racism and for the promotion of reconciliation, not only in this decade, but for as long as racism persists.

Father Yves Confar, a Catholic, wrote: What is racism? It is the dividing and grading of human beings into groups, and then effecting of discrimination against some of them, on the grounds that their human qualities or characteristics are genetically determined. Racism refuses to see man outside a system of classification based on genetic factors, real or supposed. In its view, it is these factors that radically and decisively qualify, unite or separate them.

As Father Confar points out, racism and its ideology is incompatible with the tenets of the Christian faith as regards, firstly, the unity and, secondly, the dignity of human nature, and also with regard to Christian spirituality. Racism is a pseudoreligion. It has disastrous results which attack Christianity at its roots. The Bible says: `` Be transformed by the renewing of your mind.’’ It is in the mind that the battle lies. We need a combination of spiritual and physical instruments to ensure that transformation takes place.

The attitudes of Christians to racism are far from uniform. Yet, the attitude of their leader, Jesus Christ, to racism is consistently the same

• that of condemnation. If one wants to assess the attitudes of Christians on racism, one can do so on two levels: On the one hand, the level of statements and actions, and, on the other hand, the level of day-to-day attitudes and the reactions of ordinary Christians.

Racial discrimination and racial exploitation are totally at variance with true Christianity. Yet some who claim to be Christians have, however, been persistent and ruthless offenders in recent centuries. The main reason for this chilling anomaly is that since the commencement of European colonial expansion to the Americas and to Africa, the countries of Christian Europe have been faced with massive opportunities for the exploitation of people less powerful and technically less advanced than themselves, and they grasped their opportunities. The same trend is evident today, albeit perpetuated in more subtle forms. For example, there is the unequal treatment of the developing world by the developed world in multilateral trade relations.

Looking back over centuries, there is ample evidence of often vigorous protests and criticism of racism by Christian leaders abroad and here at home. Abroad, leaders such as Dominican Bartholomew De Las Casas and others such as the William Wilberforce worked very hard to abolish slavery. They were hardly effective, but they may have reduced the participation of Catholics in the trade. The Church did not interfere with slavery as a customary institution. Here at home, on the contrary, some sections of the Church used the Scriptures to enforce racism and apartheid. It was as a result of the opposition of the outspoken Dominican that I mentioned that colonial regimes in Spain and Portugal officially rejected the notion of essential racial inferiority and declared that the conquered people of the new world, however strange their culture and notwithstanding their non- Christian condition, were fully entitled to all fundamental human rights.

Slavery is not identical to racism. Some people who have been guilty of slavery were not necessarily also guilty of racism, as the above would appear to indicate. However, a racist attitude is the readiest salve for the conscience of the exploiter. If a group is believed to be by their very nature ineradicably inferior and incapable of advancement, it is easier to justify the disparity between their poverty and degradation, and the wealth and splendour of those who exploit them.

Another possible answer to the dilemma of the abuse of the Bible for selfish gain is that the Church, while dedicated to serving God, is comprised of men and women who are not themselves perfect. The point is that the actions of men and women acting in an evil way do not reflect the Gospel accounts of Christ and His message for all people. The truth is that some Christians choose to disobey what the Bible teaches them. A public apology by those Christians who committed atrocities is required. They must apologise, not once or twice, but at every conceivable opportunity until racism is eradicated.

The Church has a big role to play in the eradication of racism, not only in society but also within the Church community. Let us avoid racial prejudice and exaggerated nationalism, fostering instead a universal love for people. Transformation by the renewal of the mind is the antidote to eradicating racism. [Applause.]

Dr P W A MULDER: Mr Chairperson, a few months ago a white male dragged a black man behind his vehicle for several kilometres. This was shocking, and can never be tolerated in any society.

A few weeks ago, on a farm near Potchefstroom, a black man, Mr Jeremia Molapesi, aged 43, attacked Mr Koen Botha with a panga. In the struggle, Mr Botha’s daughter, Lelane Botha, aged 17, was killed. This was shocking and the ending of a young girl’s life was totally unnecessary.

A year ago a black burglar broke into a home in the rich part of Kroonstad and started removing valuables. The owner, who was sleeping, was woken and surprised the burglar. How did the burglar react? He asked the owner for forgiveness, and gave his valuables back. He told the black owner of the house that he thought the house was owned by a white man, and that he would not steal from a black brother. Is this crime or pure racism? Statistics would show it as normal crime.

In debating this issue we must draw a careful distinction between normal crime, whether it is black-on-white crime or white-on-black crime. All white-on-black crimes cannot be racist while all black-on-white crimes are normal actions.

When I watch the SABC-TV news, the impression I get is that every incident of black-on-white crime, whether it is a house burglary or a farm attack, is not racism, while the other way round it is always racism. We are getting nowhere with this approach and we are polarising our society more and more. Of course there is white racism in South Africa, but of course there is black racism as well. South Africa and its people are longing for racial harmony and peace.

Suid-Afrika en sy mense smag na rasseharmonie en vrede. Mense is bereid om groot opofferings te maak ten einde dit te bereik. Witmense besef die noodsaaklikheid om hulle energie in belang van almal in die land aan te wend. Aan die anderkant vra hulle ruimte om in Suid-Afrika hulself te mag wees. Swartmense vra erkenning van hulle menswaardigheid en veg tans teen historiese minderwaardighede.

As Suid-Afrikaners teen hierdie agtergrond in die openbaar oor rassisme uitgevra word, is hulle tans polities korrek en word die front voorgehou dat dit steeds beter met rasseverhoudinge in Suid-Afrika gaan. Dit is ongelukkig nie waar nie. Nasiebou is nie om net van een sportgebeurtenis na die ander te strompel en te hoop daar is weer ‘n Callie en Monique nie.

Die gees van goedgesindheid en samewerking wat ‘n mens in 1994 by baie mense opgemerk het, is volgens my waarneming die afgelope tyd besig om te verander. Daar is verskillende redes daarvoor. Ek kan ‘n lang lys maak hoekom ek so dink, maar ek is bekommerd dat daar duidelik ‘n verharding plaasvind, pleks van die teenoorgestelde.

Luister maar na die radio-inbelprogramme of na wat gepraat word as wit of swart groepe alleen is daar by die braaivleisvuur. Swartmense glo dat as hulle Setswana praat, ons nie kan hoor wat gesê word nie, en witmense dink dat as hulle om die braaivleisvuur staan, hulle ook kan praat waaroor hulle wil. Daar hoor ‘n mens wat verandering is en hoe dinge in die land verander.

Die uitgangspunt van die ANC in hierdie mosie is dat as ons rassisme uitroei, sal nasiebou suksesvol wees en sal alle ander probleme soos armoede en werkloosheid opgelos word. Ongelukkig is dit nie so eenvoudig nie en help dit nie net om op die een aspek te konsentreer nie. Gaan kyk maar na Amerika en Rwanda en die probleme wat daarmee saamgaan.

Gee die Afrikaner ruimte om homself te wees - of dit nou deur Afrikaanse skole en universiteite is, of deur sy reg op selfbeskikking te erken - en kyk hoeveel energie en goedgesindheid daar by hulle loskom om aan die probleme van Suid-frika te werk. Plaas hulle onder druk, en kyk hoe daardie selfde energie negatief aangewend word om weerstand te bied en die druk op hulle te weerstaan.

Ek kry die indruk dat swart leiers met die mond Suid-frika se verskeidenheid en die sogenaamde reënboog erken, maar aan die einde van die dag stem hulle eintlik daarmee saam dat ons in een nuwe snaakse Engelse nasie ingeboelie word. Gaan kyk na die harmonie in lande waar minderheidsgroepe voel hulle regte word beskerm en waardeer teenoor die konflik in lande waar sulke groepe onderdruk en ontmagtig voel. Rassisme is ‘n kopding wat nie uit mense uitgedreig kan word nie. Kom ons verander die nasiebouresep en kyk wat gebeur vorentoe in terme daarvan. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[South Africa and its people are longing for racial harmony and peace. People are prepared to make great sacrifices in order to achieve this. Whites recognise the necessity of applying their energy in the interests of all in the country. On the other hand they are asking for room in South Africa to be themselves. Blacks are asking for recognition of their human dignity and are currently fighting against historical inferiorities.

When South Africans, against this background, are publicly questioned about racism, they are currently politically correct and put up a front to the effect that race relations in South Africa are continually improving. This is unfortunately not true. Nation-building is not simply about stumbling from one sporting event to another and hoping that there will be another Callie and Monique.

The spirit of goodwill and co-operation that one noticed among many people in 1994 has, according to my perception, been changing lately. There are various reasons for this. I could enumerate a long list of reasons as to why this is so, but I am concerned that a hardening is clearly taking place, instead of the opposite.

Listen to the radio phone-in programmes or to what is said when white or black groups are alone around the barbecue fire. Blacks believe that if they speak Setswana, we cannot hear what is said, and whites think that when they stand around the barbecue fire, they can also say what they wish. There one can hear what change is and how things are changing in the country.

The point of departure of the ANC in this motion is that if we eradicate racism, nation-building will be successful and all other problems such as poverty and unemployment will be solved. Unfortunately it is not as simple as that and it does not help only to concentrate on the one aspect. Look at America and Rwanda and the problems which are associated with this.

Give the Afrikaners room to be themselves - whether it be through Afrikaans schools and universities or through recognition of their right to self- determination - and see how much energy and goodwill they will have to work on the problems of South Africa. Place them under pressure, and see how that very same energy is applied negatively to offer resistance and to resist the pressure on them.

I get the impression that black leaders pay lip service to diversity in South Africa and the so-called rainbow nation, but at the end of the day, they actually agree to our being bullied into a single new, strange English nation.

Look at the harmony in countries where minority groups feel that their rights are protected and appreciated, as opposed to the conflict in countries where such groups feel oppressed and disempowered. Racism is a state of mind which cannot be threatened out of people. Let us change the nation-building recipe and see what happens in this regard in the future. [Time expired.]]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Mr Chairperson, hon members, there is a catalogue of issues that are cause for concern to South Africans. Among them are racism, poverty, disease, especially HIV/Aids, illiteracy and joblessness. All these have to be stamped out if we hope to lead a wholesome life. In stamping them out, we shall be on the way to levelling the playing field and thus enabling all to know that they are equal and therefore one should not be perceived as better than the other.

It is much easier perhaps to stamp out racism. With the necessary willpower among the people, it can be done away with almost overnight. If we can accept that all people are human, have dignity and need to be treated alike, we can go a long way towards eradicating racism. If white South Africans can have goodwill and desist from painting people, even young girls, white, avoid dragging people behind their bakkies, stop poisoning black people with weed control tablets, and even accept that dogs should bark without their owners being shot at, this country will be a happy place to live in.

On the other hand black South Africans should not view themselves as entitled to all they behold. They should conduct in-depth introspection and refrain from pointing fingers. Similarly, they should also accept that there is a place for all under the sun. They should not murder people at will on the farms, nor should they feel they have the right to hate when they do not want to be hated. The principle should simply be, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Despite the equality legislation passed by this honourable House, the rigid application of credit requirements by banks and businesses continues to target blacks. This should not be allowed to continue because such practices serve to drive a wedge between the two groups - the blacks and the whites. It serves as fertile ground for the perpetuation of white affluence and black poverty, resulting in the polarisation of relations. In the spirit of national dialogue to combat racism, Government has to go out of its way and address the question of racism, people have to be reassured that they matter, the nation has to hear Government tell them that we are all South African and should wake up to the call. Government can help the course of ending racism if they can imbue the nation with the notion that diversity of race and culture should not become limiting factors in human exchange and development. We should, like St Paul in his letters to the Phillipians, forget those things of the past, which are behind and reach forth to those things which are before us. In order to avoid racism we, as a nation, should love and accept, respect, serve, consult with and be tolerant of one another.

Finally, let us look forward to the forthcoming UN Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance and participate meaningfully in it with the hope of putting paid to this scourge of racism. [Time expired.]

Mr P R MOKABA: Mr Chairperson, hon members, I think that this particular topic is quite important for South Africa as a whole. I have been listening to speakers before me, and I think that the one thing it is going to do is to help the ANC educate members on the left about what needs to be done in the country so that we can all develop.

For instance, the hon Mr Mulder said that racism was a state of mind. Now, in order to deal with racism as a state of mind, hon Mulder would say: ``Crush the heads.’’ [Applause.] The hon Mr Mzimela said that it is unfortunate that blacks are not thought to be racist also. [Interjections.]

Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairperson, is the hon member prepared to take a question? [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Are you prepared to take a question, hon member?

Mr P R MOKABA: No, no, Mr Chairperson. I am still teaching him. He should ask a question when he is educated. [Interjections.] Let him sit down. [Applause.]

What is racism? We are saying racism is neither the fact that one is black nor the fact that one is white. That is not racism. Racism is a system, first and foremost, that allocates or denies people public goods and services in such a way that such allocation or denial coincides with the fact of race, sex or anything.

It is that system that we want to smash; it is that system that is capable of being destroyed. The hon member Mrs Camerer knows that, in the past, her party did not just pass laws, they forcibly removed people to go and live elsewhere. [Interjections.] [Applause.] She knows that they were doing that, because their own racist practitioners told her that there was no way in which they could mix black and white blood.

Here they passed all of that legislation, all of those laws that we are battling with today. Where is Durand? She needs to teach him that those statistics that he was quoting are correct. Those are the things that we have inherited from the party that he belongs to today. [Interjections.] And that is what her party did. [Interjections.] Those are correct. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

One finds all of those millions of people being deprived, one finds all of them affected by crime, one finds all of them living in those kinds of conditions in Guguletu, Khayelitsha, and so on. They will never be free. They will never enjoy freedom until the DA in this province is defeated and destroyed completely. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

What is our problem today in society? Politically, the problem in South Africa today is the continued existence of the DA - the New NP and the DP. That is the political problem of today. [Interjections.] Economically, the problem is the continued existence of poverty that affects, for the most part, blacks, black Africans, blacks who are female, and those blacks who live in rural areas. That is South Africa’s problem in economic and social terms.

What, then, do we need to do? We are not just debating this question, we are debating it in order to find solutions, solutions that will make South Africa a nonracial and nonsexist democracy, a prosperous South Africa. [Interjections.] That is the goal that only the ANC believes in, together with our partners in the IFP. [Interjections.]

Those members do not believe in nonracialism, they do not believe in nonsexism, they do not believe in prosperity. They believe in deprivation. And that is why I am saying that their party needs to be destroyed. I am not saying those members must be destroyed. [Interjections.]

The hon members Mrs Camerer, Mr Gibson and Marthinus van Schalkwyk and the others are important. They are indeed important. They have to exist because I need to teach my children who they should not become. [Interjections.] I need to teach my children. [Interjections.] [Applause.] I need to show them to my children. I also need them to continue to survive because they are an important dinosaur in our society, a tourist attraction here. [Interjections.] [Applause.] Tourists who come here to see where we come from, need to come and see them. [Interjections.] [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order! [Interjections.] Order, hon members! That is enough! Order!

Dr S E M PHEKO: Mr Chairperson, racism became a major problem in the world with the rise of the slave trade in 1400 and colonialism in the nineteenth century. These inhuman systems were propelled by what was called the European Renaissance. My time is limited and I will therefore not elaborate. I want to remind the House that in 1960, the founding president of the PAC, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, addressed a court of law in this country on behalf of PAC leaders and members with whom he was charged for leading the Sharpeville uprising against racist laws. He said:

Your Worship, it will be remembered that when this case began we refused to plead because we felt no moral obligation whatsoever to obey laws which are made exclusively by a white minority. We believe in one race only, the human race to which we belong. The history of that race is a long struggle against all restrictions, physical, mental and spiritual. We would have betrayed the human race if we did not do our share. We are glad we have made our contribution.

We stand for equal rights for all individuals. Once a truly nonracial democracy exists in this country, all individuals, whatever their colour or race, will be accepted as Africans. We are not afraid of the consequences of our action, to go to prison. It is not our intention to plead for mercy. Thank you, your worship. In its basic documents in 1959, the PAC declared the establishment of a nonracial society as one of its aims. At that time, the PAC was fiercely opposed by political groupings in this country, calling themselves multiracialists. Their supporters, who claim to be experts in the English language, said there was no such word as ``nonracial’’ in English. The PAC, in turn, argued that there was enough racialism in South Africa. It did not need to be multiplied.

Today, the Constitution of this country talks of nonracialism. This terminology originates from the PAC, and the English experts seem to have changed their minds and have now accepted nonracialism in their language. I must add that as a result of the Sharpeville uprising, which was led by the PAC on 21 March 1960, the United Nations declared 21 March the international day for the elimination of racial discrimination.

The PAC is proud that its sacrifices for nonracialism have been recognised by the United Nations and contributed this important convention to the international community, to international law and, of course, to this country. [Time expired.] Mrs S V KALYAN: Mr Chairperson and hon members, having been a victim of apartheid myself, I can allege that it was, indeed, a crime against humanity.

I recognise racism’s subtle presence in some everyday situations, but allowing it to determine decade-long agendas and emphasise the divisiveness of race will surely be a limiting factor in our human development and growth to become the desired one nation. Many of the members responded to the clowning around by the hon Mokaba and he said he did not want his child to be like Douglas Gibson. I hope he also gives his child the advice not to become a farmer, because that child’s life would be in danger. [Laughter.]

The DP fully understands the importance of the debate on racism in this country. However, racism is not this country’s biggest problem right now. HIV/Aids is. South Africa is mired in a health crisis as the rate of infection reaches 22% of adults. The recent survey of the Institute of Race Relations predicts that 10,5 million adults will be infected by 2015 and that by 2005, 1 million children will be orphaned, yet the Government stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the impact on humanity that this pandemic is posing.

When President Mbeki was asked by the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Leon, to consider proclaiming HIV/Aids a national emergency to allow South Africa to act in terms of section 31 to gain access to generic drugs, the hon the President stated that this had never happened anywhere in the world and he would not do so. Well, I beg to differ with the hon the President.

On 5 November 1998, California’s Alameda county declared a public health emergency over Aids rates. It was the first local government in the US to declare an original disaster because of HIV. By declaring a state of emergency, usually reserved for major disasters or civic unrest in Alameda county, a 61% decline in the number of Aids cases over the past five years was noted.

Yet another glaring example of the ostrich approach that the Government has towards the HIV/Aids pandemic is its refusal to accept the offer of 1 million free HIV test kits, worth R50 million. [Interjections.] Talk about burying one’s head in the sand. The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! On what point are you rising, hon member?

Mr M T GONIWE: Comrade Chairperson, I would like to beg you to rule that this member is out of order. We are discussing racism, not Aids. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order! Hon member, I think every member has a right to say what they want to say to support the speech. [Applause.] Continue, hon member.

Mrs S V KALYAN: The hon member should listen. He will get the point just now. [Interjections.] Instead, the Department of Health will pay for about 200 000 kits. The DA has been accused of supporting the pharmaceutical industry. It looks like the shoe is on the other foot now - I direct this to Minister Tshabalala-Msimang.

A feeble excuse was offered for the refusal, namely that the free kits need refrigeration, while the bought ones may be kept at room temperature. If that is true, then I have a suggestion for the health department. They should use the free kits in the cities and hospitals and the bought kits in the rural areas. The very important thing is that the free test kits can diagnose HIV infections within five minutes from a single drop of blood. The impact on curbing the spread of infection could be phenomenal. The mystery of the Government’s silence around HIV/Aids confounds many. Is there a logical explanation? Has anyone in Government heard the theme of the Aids 2000 Conference, which is: ``Break the Silence’’?

The World Conference on Racism seeks to ensure full recognition of the dignity, equality and respect of human rights. Sadly, in South Africa we are failing those infected and affected by HIV/Aids. I appeal to all in this House to support the amendment by my colleague Dene Smuts to declare the period 2000 to 2010 as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism, Poverty and Aids. By placing HIV/Aids on the agenda we can help many people stay negative and give positive people hope and dignity. [Applause.]

Ms P GOVENDER: Chairperson and colleagues, I start my speech today with the words of Thenjiwe Mtintso at the opening of the special women’s hearings of the TRC, and I quote: As women speak, they speak for us who are too owned by pain to speak. Because always, always in anger and frustration, men use women’s bodies as a terrain of struggle, as a battleground.

Behind every woman’s encounter with the Special Branch and the police lurked the possibility of sexual abuse and rape. Your sexuality was used to strip away your dignity, to undermine your sense of self. You had to strip naked in front of a whole range of policemen, making remarks about your body. Women had to do star jumps, naked, breasts flying. Fallopian tubes were flooded with water until they burst. Rats were pushed into vaginas. Women have been made to stand the whole day with blood flowing down and drying on their legs. They gained strength from asking you to drink your own blood.

In testimony to the TRC in Medunsa one of the women said: ``She was wearing pink cloth. They disembowelled her. She was eight months pregnant.’’

This is the heart of darkness, vented by apartheid on African, Indian, coloured and white comrades, united in a nonracial struggle against a patriarchal capitalist and racist regime. This regime tried to silence and keep invisible its horrific effects on over half of our population. This was intended so that we could not hear our own voices.

Even those who had known mama Albertina Sisulu, like the juror of the World Court of Women against War for Peace, Zanele Mbeki, commented that she had heard and seen a new side that had never been publicly spoken of. As we look at the causes of racism in searching for ways to end racism, we cannot allow ourselves to see and hear only half of the story. As Thenjiwe Mtintso said and I quote:

You can escape racism by going home and shutting the door. You cannot escape from gender discrimination in the same way because it is about power relations that actually start in the home.

In Why History Matters Gerda Lerner says and I quote:

The term ``race’’ first appeared in the 16th century and only in the 19th century did it become biologised. The so-called races of mankind were classified hierarchically with whites at the top. It is no accident that these ideological constructions coincide with the development of nationalism and colonialism.

Jakes Gerwel at the conference last year spoke of, and I quote:

Colonialism was one outflow of the European Renaissance. In an ironic way, a key expression of the European Renaissance was finally ended with the demise of formal racial rule in South Africa.

Not long before Thabo Mbeki noted, and I quote:

… the most merciless genocide our native land has ever seen of the Khoi and San.

Add to this the deaths of thousands, if not millions, of our people through the military wars of colonialism and conquest and economic wars of poverty. These were underpinned by religious war for our souls to believe the lie that dictates the image of God as white and male. Such a God punishes him by blackening his children and all their children ever after. Genocide, slavery, colonialism, indentured labour, the values of greed, hate and fear are invoked.

Adam Hochschild, in his book King Leopolds’s Ghost says, and I quote:

The rubber boom, cause of the worst bloodletting in the Congo of genocidal proportions running into millions of lives, began under the Belgian king’s rule.

The list of specific massacres are detailed, but include as an example, and I quote:

In 1889 a state officer bragged about the killing squads under his command. Each time the corporal goes out to get rubber, cartridges are given to him and for every one used he must bring back a right hand.

In six months they used 6 000 cartridges, which meant 6 000 adults were killed, excluding the children who were killed by the butt of their guns! There are harsher details about the murder of an African leader of integrity, Patrice Lumumba, by the intelligence units of the Americans, the British and Pretoria, and his replacement by men of greed who had learned their masters’ lesson of brutality. The images of these men of greed, the lap dogs of colonialism, have reverberated throughout Africa since. So a consciousness which remembers only one genocide, forgets the murders of the Lumumbas of our continent.

The biblical injunction: ``Curse beckon, slave shall he be to his brothers’’ condemns to perpetual hewers of wood and drawers of water the rural African women of Verwoerd’s dreams. The story of Adam and Eve is invoked as divine warning against women seeking knowledge. Today researchers using modern technology trace human linkages to a common female ancestry, an original Eve who lived approximately 200 000 years ago. The implication is that all humanity originated in Africa and that the essential natural human race is one human race!

In South Africa a woman’s place was determined in law by, for example, the Natal Code of Law of 1891, which declared an African female a perpetual minor. In section 29 of the Urban Areas Act the definition of an idle Bantu'' includes any African woman between 15 and 60 who is unemployed. An idle Bantu’’ was ordered to be removed from the urban area by the hierarchy of race and sex, which ensured that black women were concentrated in domestic service at the lowest paying industries. The Star’s response to the famous antipass campaign of the fifties and the arrest of 2000 women was: ``No nannies today.’’

This is an attitude which stereotypes and denies black women their worth and their dignity. In the eighties, a white manager of one of the largest clothing companies in Durban said in response to a question challenging him on the practice of strip-searching, that ``it was done decently’’. He was outraged at the thought - at the suggestion that was made - of what he would have done had it been his wife, his daughter, his sister or his mother who was similarly strip-searched. The practice is equivalent to an internal examination by a doctor.

During slavery the slave was regarded as the property of the slave owner and had no rights to her own body. In 180 years of slavery it is no surprise then that not one man was convicted of raping a female slave, yet stories such as that of the young girl slave, Steyntje van de Kaap, who was flogged by her master until she agreed to have sex with him, are documented. The end of slavery saw cases such as Anna Simpson, who laid a charge of rape against Damon Booisen, who was sentenced to death by Judge Menzies until he discovered a few weeks later that Anna was ``a bastard coloured’’.

The Women and Children’s Protection Bill of 1899, which raised the age of consent, was agreed to by the all-white, male legislature on behalf of white women, but was contested for African and Indian girls, because, as the Deputy Speaker at the time was quoted as saying:

You place the life and liberty of every white man in this country at the mercy of every coolie girl.

Fatima Meer’s Portrait of Indian South Africans makes notes of indentured labourers coming to South Africa. On board there is evidence of sexual assault not only by fellow emigrants, but also the crew. The majority of those who have been and still are being raped in South Africa are black women, yet in interracial rape, Dugard in 1991 finds that black men found guilty of raping white women were hanged, whereas white men accused of raping black women were seldom, if ever, found guilty. [Interjections.]

Those on that side of the House who represent the owners of wealth have a responsibility to their children; the generosity of spirit that says: I am formed of the migrants who left Europe to find a new home in our native land! Whatever their own actions, they remain still part of me. Being part of all these people and in the knowledge that none dare contest that assertion, I shall claim: I am an African.

They should not betray the generosity of those whom they have tortured and killed. Nor should they betray the landless their wealth, by voting against poverty, by voting against the land Bill, the labour law Bills, and the Bills to improve access to affordable medicine. They should not ignore the statistics of the Western Cape that show not a single African man or woman and 2,1% coloured women in management positions. [Time expired.][Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, Deputy President, despite our ultimate efforts to define racism, the subject still remains a complex concept which has caused atrocious harm to humanity.

The MF acknowledges that the fallacies and fictions attached to the meaning of race have created profound misery in South Africa, which is extremely difficult to eradicate. Race is a problematic concept and attempts to evaluate the concept make no sense, spiritually and morally. Perhaps the only petty purpose race may serve is to rank human beings in political, social and economic categories. Extensive experience throughout the world indicates that probably the truth is that race is not used to determine who is black, Indian, Asian or coloured, but instead, who is not white.

Although the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other relevant legislation promulgate a nonracist and nonsexist society, we must accept that the law has limited influence on attitudes and the human mind. South Africa currently needs a strategic framework to combat racism. Therefore the MF accepts the wonderful challenge in declaring 2000 to 2010 as the Decade of National Mobilisation against Racism.

The MF understands the nature of and extent to which racism has shaped our divided society. Therefore, the people of South Africa must also understand that the MF exercised political wisdom when it saw the necessary responsibility to save the nation from racism by aligning itself with the majority party. However, certain so-called democratic champions frightened our voters into passive black fear by claiming that the MF sold the votes to the majority party. These undignified tactics will not deter the MF from reconciling the minorities with the majority, especially those insecure minorities who lack the correct understanding of the error and legacy of racists.

Unfortunately, racism is still rooted in production and reproduction of thoughts and ideology. The MF fully supports the proposed national action plan and strategy to combat racism. After all, it has aligned itself with the majority party because changing racist practice takes practice. May I conclude by quoting from the same great lady, Mrs Kumal:

Listen to many voices speaking and many unspoken, and stop this racist practice.

[Applause.]

Mr C AUCAMP: Mr Chairperson, hon Dene Smuts contrasted the white and the black bull. Let me make it clear today: I support the Blue Bulls. [Laughter.]

‘n Dekade is ‘n baie lang tyd in ‘n land se geskiedenis. Is dit verantwoordelik om ‘n hele dekade aan een enkele kwessie te wei?

Die wysiging van die DA voeg ander belangrike sake by, soos armoede en vigs. Dit bewys reeds dat daar ander vraagstukke kan wees en in tien jaar se tyd kan daar nog ander bykom.

Dit is onverantwoordelik om ‘n mens ‘n dekade lank te bind aan een, of drie, onderwerpe. Die MRK is ‘n artikel 181-instelling. Wat maak ons as ander artikel 181-instellings op dieselfde voorrang aanspraak maak?

Is dit nie ironies nie, ‘n hele dekade moet gewei word aan die agenda van een van die artikel 181-instellings, terwyl ‘n ander een, die artikel 185- kommissie, nog nie eens in die lewe geroep is nie?

Die konferensie oor rassisme het ‘n totaal eensydige swart-wit-aanslag gekry. Wil ons dit vir nog 10 jaar voortsit? Spaar my dit. Hierdie debat is ‘n voorbeeld daarvan dat hierdie soort pratery mense net verder uitmekaar dryf - voel agb lede nader aan mekaar as voor dié debat begin het? My mense voel rassisme word gebruik om die struggle lewendig te hou. Die seepkistoespraak van die agb Mugabe, ek bedoel Mokaba, is ‘n uitstekende voorbeeld hiervan.

Sowel die mosie van die ANC as dié van die DA is negatief. Albei is ``against’’. Dit is tyd dat ons positief raak. ‘n Dekade van mobilisasie van harmonie, vrede, versoening en selfseggenskap vir alle gemeenskappe in ons land, sal ons laat vorentoe beweeg. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[A decade is a very long time in the history of a country. Is it responsible to devote an entire decade to a single issue?

The amendment of the DA adds other important matters, such as poverty and Aids. This already proves that there could be other issues and ten years from now more issues may have been added to this.

It is irresponsible to commit oneself to one, or three, subjects for an entire decade. The Human Rights Commission is a section 181 institution. What do we do if other section 181 institutions demand the same preferential treatment?

Is it not ironic that an entire decade should be devoted to the agenda of one of the section 181 institutions, while another institution, the section 185 commission, has not even been established yet?

The conference on racism got a totally one-sided black-white perspective. Do we want to continue with this for another ten years? Spare me that! This debate serves as an example of the fact that this kind of talk only drives people further apart. Do hon members feel closer to one another than they did before the debate began? My people feel that racism is being used to keep the struggle alive. The soap-box speech of the hon Mugabe, I mean Mokaba, is an excellent example of this.

Both the motion of the ANC and that of the DA are negative. Both are ``against’’. The time has come for us to become positive. A decade of mobilising harmony, peace, reconciliation and self-determination for all communities in our country, will allow us to move forward.]

Mr D K MALULEKE: Chairperson, hon Deputy President and hon members, parts of KwaZulu-Natal may look like the Scotland and parts of the Western Cape may look like California, but this is Africa and most South Africans are poor. In 1996, 57% of South Africans were living in poverty and no up-to- date figures exist. That, however, may have represented progress.

Black household income has risen by 9%, in real terms, over the previous five years. We must congratulate the Government for its efforts since 1994. Some 9 million more people now have access to clean water and about 1,5 more households have access to electricity. Moreover, the Government has built nearly 1 million houses for people who had no formal shelter before. It has provided every child at primary school with a free peanut butter sandwich per day, thus ensuring minimum nutrition. It has introduced basic pension for the poor elderly. It can take pride in these figures even if they do not tell the whole story.

For a start, much remains to be done. More than 3 million households out of 10,7 million still have no electricity. Eight million out of 43 million people still have no access to clean water. Moreover, too much water that is piped leaks away before it reaches the taps. Too much water arrives contaminated. Too much water is used wastefully because it is cheap for the rich and expensive for the poor.

Ronnie Kasrils has estimated that 21 million South Africans have no sanitation. One difficulty is that South Africa is, at least nominally, a federal state with nine provincial governments and seven out of the nine are run by the ANC, which also dominates the National Assembly. For instance, the Eastern Cape and Mpumalanga, which are both ANC-run, spent hardly any of their capital budgets for housing in the first six months of the past fiscal year.

A similar incapacity afflicted even parts of the national Government, notably the Department of Health, which failed to spend 28% of its budget for hospital rehabilitation in the past year. With its provincial counterparts, it allowed 12% of its allocation for the country’s nutrition programme to go unspent. In other words, many thousands of children are not getting their daily peanut butter sandwiches.

Lots of pensioners, too, do not receive their pensions either, because of incompetence or theft by local officials. In such circumstances many South Africans will have to fend for themselves, perhaps by doing what our forebears have done for generations, that is farming. Some 46% of the population live in rural areas. Fifty-four per cent of the rural population has strong ties with a village or country community.

Who will mend Africa? That it is in trouble is hardly in doubt. Seven or eight of its countries are convulsed by insurgencies. Half a dozen more are involved in the war in Congo. Several others suffer recurrent ethnic clashes and two others, Ethiopia and Eritrea, are licking their wounds after the old-fashioned and very bloody border war.

Just as worrying is that many of the countries that have escaped such fighting are floundering economically. Half of sub-Saharan Africa’s 600 million people live on just 65 cents a day. Recently, they have been getting poorer. Thus, it is important for us to declare war against poverty. Poverty is just as bad as racism. It is capable of rendering any country ungovernable. Because a hungry stomach knows no law, poverty is a recipe for civil war. It is for this reason that our revolution should be directed towards eradicating poverty for all mankind.

The rich countries have already abandoned some of their bad habits. They no longer prop up villains. They have untied most of their aid and are increasingly fussy about how all of it is spent. They have recently offered debt relief to 22 of the world’s poorest countries. Most of those are African countries.

Much more can be done, however, in terms of not just reducing trade protection, but also promoting the development and provision of drugs. Rich countries might, for instance, promise to pay the costs of vaccinating Africans against malaria. In order to encourage the pharmaceutical companies to develop a vaccine the rich should certainly be more generous with aid that is well spent, as some of it is. Indeed, all evidence suggests that aid can significantly improve the Africans’ lives if they are lucky enough to live in countries with good leadership, sound economic policies and respect for the rule of law. [Interjections.]

The last South African survey of the SA Institute for Race Relations estimates that South Africa’s unemployment rate stands at 23%. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order!

Mr D K MALULEKE: I am not afraid of racism. I have been affected by racism as well. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Mrs S M CAMERER: Mr Chairperson, it would really help to ask you to request the red bulls in the kraal to behave properly!

By debating the motion on the Order Paper, as amended by the DA, we become part of the national dialogue to combat racism advocated by the millennium statement adopted by the Human Rights Commission conference on racism last year, which I had the honour to attend. There is certainly a lot to discuss.

In our view, Parliament is a much more appropriate forum to discuss these vital and weighty matters than highly politicised media events like the HRC’s conference, and with some notable exceptions, serious debate is indeed taking place here. Only last week we debated the issue under the heading proposed by the deputy leader of the DA, namely, Steps to Improve Relations between Communities and Complete the Task of Reconciliation and Nation-building. Positive suggestions came from this House in the course of that debate.

In my speech I would like to briefly refer to our constitutional and legal framework for the suppression of racism which, as President Mbeki pointed out when he opened the HRC conference last year, is necessary to end this violation of Human Rights although, as he said, possibly on its own insufficient as we also need a change of heart.

I think we can say that South Africa’s framework is outstanding. But putting it into practice and implementation is where we fall down. The framework starts with South Africa’s Constitution, which provides in its equality clause that neither the state nor any person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on the grounds of race, or on the grounds of race together with any other ground such as colour, social origin, culture, gender, language, birth and so on, to list some other grounds which are often closely associated with discrimination based on race.

This is also emphasised in the millennium statement, where the issues of reparation for the victims are identified by the TRC. Land and tenure reform, and access to capital and skills, as well as training, are specifically identified as issues associated with racism. Also the length between race and patriarchy is identified defined as the twin evils.

The Constitution also provides that national legislation must be created by a certain date - which was eventually meant to prohibit this unfair discrimination - in the form of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act which, in addition, widens the definition of racial discrimination and creates processes and institutions to safeguard equality and prevent discrimination based on race and related grounds … [Interjections.] The red bulls are misbehaving again, Chairperson.

The Constitution also provides for certain so-called independent institutions supporting democracy in Chapter 9 to bolster these provisions, particularly the Human Rights Commission and the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities. Some of these institutions have performed actively and with mixed success in the field of preventing discrimination based on race. Others have not performed at all, because they do not exist yet.

The Human Rights Commission allowed the conference on racism last year to become highly politicised by the ANC Government. Unfortunately, it was held on the eve of the local government elections, and the race card was played with a vengeance by politicians at the conference. Prominent political opponents of the ANC were not even allowed to be platform speakers. It was not as solution-oriented and forward-looking as one would have hoped, although the programme of action does recover some ground. The question remains as to whether its proposals will ever be properly implemented.

Judging by her comments in this week’s newspapers, the United Nations’ Human Rights Commissioner, Mary Robinson, is seeking to prevent the same mistakes being made at the forthcoming international conference. She is quoted as saying that the focus would be on putting in place remedies for the future, and that there should be acknowledgement of the hurts of the past, but in a forward-looking way. Bravo, Mrs Robinson!

I would like to draw attention today to the areas of nondelivery by Government in the national effort to improve race relations and combat racism. We are all aware that the honeymoon period for the rainbow nation is over, and that racial intolerance constantly lurks in our everyday human relations, and every now and then breaks out with destructive force and tragic consequences.

After listening to the hon Mokaba’s cheap cracks, it is clear we do require mechanisms … [Interjections.]

Ms N G W BOTHA: Chairperson, I would like to ask the hon Sheila Camerer if she is prepared to take a question. [Interjections.]

Ms S M CAMERER: Chairperson, I do not have much time. When I have finished my speech I will take a question. [Interjections.]

After listening to the hon Mokaba’s cheap cracks, it is certainly clear that we do need mechanisms to facilitate better race relations between our various communities. What would be helpful is speedier implementation of the items that are referred to in the programme of action, and other measures that it fails to mention. For instance, while portions of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act came into operation last September, the establishment of the equality courts - which are the main mechanism for enforcement - seems a long way off, as Government has not allocated the resources to do this. So, we have again the familiar picture of laws on paper not being realised.

But even more crass is the example of the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, ie the cultural commission. This should surely be an important weapon in the Government’s armoury to undermine racism, and promote racial harmony and reconciliation. However, this commission has lain fallow for the five years since the final Constitution was passed, without any evidence of Government’s move to bring it to fruition.

All other Chapter 9 institutions are up and running, but there is still no move to establish the culture commission, except a bit of lip service. General Viljoen, in this House last week, expressed his disillusionment with the Government’s failure to act. Interestingly, the programme of action last September specifically asks for the establishment of the culture commission to be speeded up. Six months down the line there is still no sign of life, and the DA calls for immediate steps to get this commission off the ground.

Other items referred to in the plan of action do not fare much better. Land reform, also cited in the programme of action, is soundly founded in our law and in terms of the institutions of our country, but it is also bogged down in inefficiency and controversy. On the one hand, only 10% of over 60 000 land claims have been finally resolved after all these years. On the other hand, through clumsy handling, a fairly standard land expropriation matter is making world headlines as an example of farmers being driven off their land in this country for the sake of land redistribution. It is inexplicable that, without any negotiation, the Department of Land Affairs should have slapped an expropriation order on a farmer, Willem Pretorius, at a price he rejects as unreasonably low, while at the same time professing to be prepared to negotiate further on the price. [Interjections.]

Then there is the issue of TRC reparations. [Interjections.] With due respect to the hon Govender, there has been more foot dragging, although, according to the Minister of Finance, Trevor Manuel, R300 million had been set aside in the Budget to pay for reparations, rather than the R3 billion actually needed. [Interjections.] Nothing much has happened, nothing has been paid. [Interjections.] This is what he said last year, and this is what he said the year before. [Interjections.] Very little is happening, and the discontent of the TRC victims festers on. [Interjections.] [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr Z P JORDAN: Chairperson, a week or so ago Prof Wilmot James, addressing an audience here in Cape Town, quoted the former President, Comrade Nelson Mandela, writing in 1978 on the issue of Afrikaans. In what he said, former President Mandela appealed to people to think with their minds and not with their blood when addressing the issue of Afrikaans. I hope that in this debate on this motion today we are, in fact, thinking with our minds and not with our blood. That the issue is emotive, is unavoidable and true, and that the issue strikes a raw nerve amongst many South Africans is equally true. But that, I would think, is precisely the reason we should think with our minds and not with our blood.

South Africa has been chosen as the site for the UN Conference on Racism this year. The conference will take place in Durban in September. This country was chosen as the site because this is the country that has a very special place in world affairs, and racism specifically has a very special place in the history of this country.

Delegates, coming from every part of the world, will be coming to South Africa in the hope of witnessing here, a nation - the people of South Africa - wrestling with the legacy of racism. And I think it will redound to our eternal shame if they discover that in our country there is not a shared national commitment to root out racism.

When the session began today, the Speaker referred to a document prepared by Mrs Mary Robinson, the Human Rights Commissioner of the United Nations, from which I wish to quote. It says:

Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all kinds of related intolerance have not gone away. We recognise that they persist in the new century and that their persistence is rooted in fear, fear of what is different, fear of the other, fear of the loss of personal security. While we recognise that human fear in itself is ineradicable, we maintain that its consequences are not ineradicable - in other words, that racism is eradicable.

What that quotation tells us is that racism is, very regrettably, an international phenomenon. It is not a vice that is specific to any one region, continent, racial group or religious community. Indeed, it would be absurd to suggest that it is only white people who are racists. In that respect I agree with the hon Dr Mzimela. And he should know, because at our hearing, when he was a member of the Cabinet in the Government of National Unity, he said to a colleague of Indian origin: ``You will know us the day we give you a one-way ticket to Bombay.’’ That is Dr Mzimela. He knows. He should know that it is not specific only to white people. [Interjections.]

Dr S E MZIMELA: What had he said?

Dr Z P JORDAN: It does not matter what he said. What matters is what that hon member said. [Interjections.] Regrettably, it is a vice which one will find in Brazil, where one will find a person who callously destroys the jungle, the rainforest and natural resources on which the indigenous population depends. It is the same vice that inspired European settlers in Virginia to trade smallpox-infested blankets with native American tribes, and it is the same vice that inspired much of the misery which was visited upon this country until quite recently.

It would really be nice if, just by folding our arms and looking on and being complacent, racism would go away. But I want to say to the hon Dene Smuts that, unfortunately, it will not go away. It requires a struggle, and a struggle against it to make it go away. [Interjections.] It is not going to go away by burying our heads in the sand, by pretending that it does not exist, by describing it as something that has been with humanity since the beginning of time. It has not been with humanity since the beginning of time.

An HON MEMBER: Was the hon member there? [Interjections.]

Dr Z P JORDAN: Yes, one cannot legislate love, but let us remember that racism also did not fall from the heavens. It was legislated quite systematically. The hon Botha told us what happened after 1948. One can go back to 1910. One can see that it was legislated then, too. Yes, racism did not fall from the sky. It does not come from within people. It is made by human beings and governments. So we have to act against it, and that is what the Government is trying to do.

When we talk about poverty and Aids, let us try to remember that the poverty that afflicts the black majority in this country also is not something that descended from heaven. It is a direct consequence of policy. Yes, I agree with Ms Dene Smuts that there are rich blacks, and that there is a black elite. I have always been a member of that elite. I am not ashamed of it. [Interjections.] But, for goodness sake, she told us that there are rich blacks now. Is it not about time there were some rich blacks? [Interjections.] Why does she seem to resent it so much? [Interjections.] Is she driven by anger? Of course it is time there were some rich blacks!

Now, let us examine this issue seriously. Is it not something to be commented upon that in a country in which 85% of the population is black, it is considered remarkable that there is a Cyril Ramaphosa, Dikgang Moseneke and Nthato Motlana. There are three, four or about 20 black families who are rich. That is made into such a big megillah. I mean that is really absurd. That is an index, in fact, of precisely the problem - that she should be remarking on the fact that there are rich blacks in a country in which they are in the majority. [Applause.]

We have heard reference also to white bulls, black bulls and even the Blue Bulls. [Laughter.] I support the Stormers, so I am not involved. But, let us ask ourselves: Who is it who uses race demagogically? I have here a piece from New Statesman, a British newspaper written by one Bryan Rostron and he says, explaining the DA’s election strategy in the Western Cape, for example, that a senior party manager, that is a DA manager, said, and I quote:

We focused on the white areas and, off-the-record, made sure that we scared the living daylights out of them.

Who is playing white bull and black bull here? He goes on to say:

A flier from the DA stuck through my letter box screamed: ``ANC victory means higher rates, more crime, crumbling services.’’ More prominent, however, there was a bright red box with a skull and crossbones and in large writing `danger’.

This would instantly be recognisable, Mr Rostron says, to any South African as a ``swart gevaar’’ [black danger] warning. Who is playing black bull and white bull? They should tell us that.

At the end of the day we want to see the eradication of racism, and I beg the House’s indulgence to move an amendment to the Chief Whip’s motion to this effect. I move that the following paragraph be added after paragraph (2):

(3) instructs the Programme Committee of the National Assembly to schedule a debate on poverty and HIV/Aids before 6 April 2001.

[Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Mr Chairperson, colleagues and comrades, the fact that all South Africans can celebrate Human Rights Day tomorrow is a triumph of justice over iniquity. It is also appropriate to have this debate on racism as we embrace the 2001 to 2010 Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism. It is our constitutional duty to recognise the injustices of the past, to develop mechanisms for their redress and to plot a course that would take the people of this country forward to healing and reconciliation.

This debate grants us the opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to restoring dignity to those South Africans who suffered humiliation, discrimination and provocation as wave after wave of racist domination was unleashed on them by European colonisers and their white supremacist descendants. Moreover, it allows us, once again, to pay special tribute to the cadres who led the resistance movement against this unforgivable crime against humanity.

Our debate here today is another milestone in our preparation for the international UN Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance that South Africa will host in Durban later this year. How appropriate that the United Nations decided that South Africa should be the venue for this important conference! This honour that has been bestowed upon us is an acknowledgement of a tragic past, built on racial discrimination and division, and a celebration of a future free from racial intolerance and a country united in all its diversity.

As we honour the events at Sharpeville in 1960, one of the fundamental turning points in the protracted and courageous history of the freedom struggle, we need to acknowledge those children, women and men whose unequivocal commitments to human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms made this bold vision of a democratic and just South Africa possible. The mere fact that Parliament is dedicating itself and the people of South Africa to a decade of activism and advocacy against racism, is in itself an acknowledgement of the enormity of the task that lies before us.

Today, we will commit to fighting this scourge of racism in a manner that changes the way South Africans think, behave and act out their lives individually and collectively. If we do not act now, our precious Constitution will remain a theoretical framework for all our aspirations of a just and nonracial constitutional democracy.

In the coming decade we must, once and for all, excise the spectre of our racist heritage and liberate all South Africans so that we can fully achieve our individual and collective potential as envisaged in our Constitution. I am proud and deeply grateful that I am able to honour the women and men who so fiercely carried the torch for equality, dignity and freedom. These ideals have become the pillars of our Constitution and the inspiration for our Bill of Rights.

I salute the fallen heroes of the struggle against racist oppression who died before they could experience our hard-won freedom and the beginnings of a nonracial society. I salute the thousands of prisoners and detainees who suffered extreme physical and emotional pain in their pursuit of a South Africa in which all of us could live in dignity, regardless of race. I salute those South Africans who, in their campaign for freedom from racial oppression, were rendered stateless in exile and isolated from their families and loved ones.

I salute the women who kept our hearts and minds intact when their personal safety, and the security of their homes and families were under siege. Most of all, I salute the children and youth of this country who really turned the tide by sacrificing what should have been carefree and cherished childhoods. As we revisit our liberation history, the sacrifices made by children, teenagers and young adults will always remain a beacon of inspiration to those dedicated to fighting oppression.

As an African first and foremost, and as a privileged white South African, I am profoundly indebted to the men and women who braved the wrath of their oppressors during centuries of colonialism and decades of destructive and vindictive National Party rule. I am filled with deep gratitude that, as a white citizen, my equality, dignity, freedom and intrinsic human rights are guaranteed and protected in our Bill of Rights, our secular Holy Grail, that documents our covenant to make peace, justice and prosperity flourish for the benefit of all.

However, we are only seven years down the line, and it would be foolish to suggest, as others have indicated, that justice has been done. As the other speakers pointed out, the lingering effects of slavery, colonialism, patriarchy and apartheid have left deep scars that still prevent the majority of South Africans from experiencing the just and equitable life we are all guaranteed in our human rights covenant.

The reasons why the international commmunity declared apartheid a crime against humanity are not only seared on our memories, they continue to form an all too tragic part of the daily experiences of many South Africans to this day. In the northeastern Free State, where I have my constituency office, many whites still strenuously resist integration in what they consider to be their own schools.

In Harrismith the Human Rights Commission was called in to investigate a primary school where the school governing body decided to create an all- Afrikaans preschool class. This rather unsubtle attempt to preclude African children from entering schools, their schools, so-called, can be documented along with incidents of hostile racism where landowners cut off water supplies to farm schools, vulnerable little institutions that are already teetering on the brink of extinction.

In the same constituency, white farmers are still evicting labour tenants from their farms in droves. Agriculture, which was the single biggest employer of people in the region, has dropped to fifth or sixth on the list. People are hounded off their ancestral land with no more than the clothes on their backs and the parting shot from the landowners to ``go and get your house from your President’’.

Yet now that these families are eligible to claim their most basic human rights, the fight has become even dirtier. The old and the infirm are dumped in the townships because they are ``no longer productive’’ or they present a so-called security risk to the landlord and his family. A brief scrutiny of the daily newspapers provides evidence of a litany of human rights abuses, especially in our rural areas. These acts bear testimony to the barbarism of racism and the power of domination, and they have enormous implications for us as South Africans in terms of our right to dignity.

I would like to use this podium to make a personal appeal to Mr Willem Pretorius of the Transvaal Agricultural Union not to stand in the way of land reform. Their show of belligerent protest against the restoration of land, usurped from its rightful owners, is short-sighted, ill-advised and deeply hurtful to the indigenous communities … [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order, hon member. Order, hon Minister.

Mrs S M CAMERER: Mr Chairperson, on a point of order: Is the hon Deputy Minister aware that this Expropriation order has been withdrawn? [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! That is not a point of order. Continue, hon Minister.

The DEPUTY MINISTER: The fact that it occurred, in the first place, is a tragedy - members should just wait till they hear the rest of this.

Their show of belligerent protest against the restoration of land, usurged from its rightful owners, is short-sighted, ill-advised and deeply hurtful to the indigenous communities of this country, who lost their land to successive white regimes without any compensation, their land invariably being wrenched from them by force. We will never be able to truly celebrate Human Rights Day if the restoration of land and land rights are not realised for the majority of the people in this country. We cannot hope to achieve true reconciliation until we have embraced and fulfilled the demands for redress, fairness and justice. None of us can say we did not know, especially those who so glaringly benefited from the unjust system.

The land grab by supporters of the previous regime was a careless display of ruthless oppression and racial domination. A recent editorial in the Business Day said white farmers have a special history to live down. The labour regime on farms has been repressive and patriarchal. Because they own so much of South Africa, farmers are seen as the prime expropriators of indigenous land. They were one of the main client bases of the NP during apartheid, and in a country ruled by a black majority they need to go out of their way to be sensitive to those who share the land with them. The violation of political, civil, socioeconomic and cultural rights was and remains the mainstay of forces of oppression in this country. The farm labour system is a case in point.

I would like to borrow from the wisdom of the former ANC leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Dr Albert Luthuli, who ardently wished for a white voluntary change of heart. I would like to conclude with his statement, contained in his autobiography Let my people go. He said:

What we have aimed to do in South Africa, is to bring the white man to his senses, not to slaughter him. Our desire has been that he should co- operate with us and we with him.

I would like to commend Parliament for declaring the coming decade as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism. I am certain that this example will inspire many South Africans to become advocates of change in their search for unity, tolerance and human dignity. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Amendment moved by Ms M Smuts negatived (Democratic Party, New National Party, United Democratic Movement and Freedom Front dissenting).

Amendment moved by the Deputy Minister of Public Works agreed to (Afrikaner Eenheidsbeweging dissenting).

Amendment moved by Adv Z L Madasa negatived.

Amendment moved by Dr Z P Jordan agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to (Democratic Party, New National Party, United Democratic Movement and Afrikaner Eenheidsbeweging dissenting), viz:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  apartheid was declared a crime against humanity;


   (b)  despite the fact that South Africa now has a nonsexist,
       nonracial, democratic Constitution, there are disturbing signs
       that racism and sexism still persist in our society;


   (c)  these incidents of racism are symptoms of the persisting and
       deep-seated legacy of structured racial oppression in our
       society and indicate that race remains the principal determining
       factor of poverty, life expectancy, vulnerability to disease and
       general social marginalisation; and


   (d)  the National Conference on Racism adopted the South African
       Millennium Statement on Racism and Programme of Action;

(2) therefore resolves to declare the period 2001 to 2010 as the Decade for National Mobilisation against Racism; and

(3) instructs the Programme Committee of the National Assembly to schedule a debate on poverty and HIV/Aids before 6 April 2001.

The House adjourned at 18:55. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

MONDAY, 19 MARCH 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

Mr N B Fihla has been appointed as chairperson of the Portfolio
 Committee on Correctional Services with effect from 14 March 2001.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces: Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote No 24
 - Public Enterprises for 1999-2000 [RP 133-2000].

1. The Minister of Education:

 (1)    Government Notice No 1195 published in Government Gazette No
     21783 dated 22 November 2000, Education Laws Amendment Act, 2000
     (Act No 53 of 2000).


 (2)    Government Notice No 1196 published in Government Gazette No
     21784 dated 22 November 2000, Higher Education Amendment Act, 2000
     (Act No 54 of 2000).


 (3)    Government Notice No 1355 published in Government Gazette No
     21783 dated 13 December 2000, Adult Basic Education and Training
     Act, 2000 (Act No 52 of 2000).
 (4)    Government Notice No 73 published in Government Gazette No 22002
     dated 22 January 2001,   Amendment of Statute of the University of
     Venda, made in terms of section 32 of the Higher Education Act,
     1997 (Act No 101 of 1997).


 (5)    Government Notice No 74 published in Government Gazette No 22003
     dated 22 January 2001,   Amendment of Statute of the Technikon
     Free State, made in terms of section 32 of the Higher Education
     Act, 1997 (Act No 101 of 1997).


 (6)    Government Notice No 75 published in Government Gazette No 22004
     dated 22 January 2001,   Amendment of Statute of the Technikon
     Natal, made in terms of section 32 of the Higher Education Act,
     1997 (Act No 101 of 1997).


 (7)    Government Notice No 121 published in Government Gazette No
     22031 dated 9 February 2001, Item for inclusion as an addendum to
     the National Policy on the Conduct of Senior Certificate
     Examination: Supplementary Examination, made in terms of section
     3(4)(l) of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of
     1996).


 (8)    Government Notice No 122 published in Government Gazette No
     22031 dated 9 February 2001, Item for inclusion as an addendum to
     the National Policy on the Conduct of Senior Certificate
     Examination: Memorandum, made in terms of section 3(4)(l) of the
     National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


 (9)    Government Notice No 123 published in Government Gazette No
     22031 dated 9 February 2001, Item for inclusion as an addendum to
     the National Policy on the Conduct of Senior Certificate
     Examination: Meetings of Examiners and Moderators, made in terms
     of section 3(4)(l) of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act
     No 27 of 1996).

1. The Minister of Finance:

 Report and Financial Statements of the South African Revenue Service
 for 1999-2000, including Reports of the Auditor-General on the
 Financial Statements of the South African Revenue Service: Administered
 Revenue and Financial Statements of the South African Revenue Service:
 Own Accounts for 1999-2000. 4.    The Minister for Provincial and Local Government:


 (1)    Report and Financial Statement of the Board for Municipal
     Accountants for 1998-99.


 (2)    Report and Financial Statement of the Board for Municipal
     Accountants for 1999-2000.

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 (1)    Framework Agreement for the creation of a Free Trade Area
     between Mercosul and the Republic of South Africa, tabled in terms
     of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


 (2)    Explanatory Memorandum to the Framework Agreement.

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

 (1)    Declaration of the United Nations World Conference against
     Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,
     as follows:


    Tolerance and Diversity:


    A Vision for the 21st Century


     As a new century begins, we believe each society needs to ask
     itself certain questions. Is it sufficiently inclusive? Is it non-
     discriminatory? Are its norms of behaviour based on the principles
     enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?


     Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all kinds of related
     intolerance have not gone away. We recognise that they persist in
     the new century and that their persistence is rooted in fear: fear
     of what is different, fear of the other, fear of the loss of
     personal security. And while we recognise that human fear is in
     itself ineradicable, we maintain that its consequences are not
     ineradicable.
     We all constitute one human family. This truth has now become self-
     evident because of the first mapping of the human genome, an
     extraordinary achievement which not only reaffirms our common
     humanity but promises transformations in scientific thought and
     practice, as well as in the visions which our species can
     entertain for itself. It encourages us toward the full exercise of
     our human spirit, the reawakening of all its inventive, creative
     and moral capacities, enhanced by the equal participation of men
     and women. And it could make the twenty-first century an era of
     genuine fulfilment and peace.


     We must strive to remind ourselves of this great possibility.
     Instead of allowing diversity of race and culture to become a
     limiting factor in human exchange and development, we must refocus
     our understanding, discern in such diversity the potential for
     mutual enrichment, and realise that it is the interchange between
     great traditions of human spirituality that offers the best
     prospect for the persistence of the human spirit itself. For too
     long such diversity has been treated as threat rather than gift.
     And too often that threat has been expressed in racial contempt
     and conflict, in exclusion, discrimination and intolerance.


     Preparations for the United Nations World Conference against
     Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,
     to be held in South Africa in September 2001, offer an opportunity
     to consider how far the aspirations of the three UN Decades
     Against Racism have been realised. The horrors of racism - from
     slavery to holocaust to apartheid to ethnic cleansing - have
     deeply wounded the victim and debased the perpetrator. These
     horrors are still with us in various forms. It is now time to
     confront them and to take comprehensive measures against them.


     The World Conference should adopt a declaration and plan of action
     which would provide the standards, the structures, the remedies -
     in essence, the culture - to ensure full recognition of the
     dignity and equality of all, and full respect for their human
     rights.


     Over the coming year we pledge ourselves to seek that conversion
     of mind and heart. What we envisage for every man, woman and child
     is a life where the exercise of individual gifts and personal
     rights is affirmed by the dynamic solidarity of our membership of
     the one human family.




 (2)    Following a request from the Executive Co-ordinator for the
     World Conference against Racism (WCAR), Mr Jyoti S Singh, for the
     Speaker to sign the World Conference against Racism (WCAR)
     Declaration "in recognition of the historic role that the South
     African National Assembly has been playing since the end of
     Apartheid", the Speaker has signed the Declaration.


 (3)    The President of the Republic submitted the following letter,
     dated 14 March 2001, to the Speaker informing Parliament of the
     employment of the South African National Defence Force:


     EMPLOYMENT OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL DEFENCE FORCE IN
     COMPLIANCE WITH THE INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REPUBLIC OF
     MOZAMBIQUE FOR HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE DURING WIDESPREAD FLOODING.


     This serves to inform the National Assembly that I authorised the
     employment of South African National Defence Force (SANDF)
     personnel to fulfill the international obligations of the Republic
     of South Africa towards the Government of the Republic of
     Mozambique in providing humanitarian assistance during widespread
     flooding in the Zambezia and Sofala Provinces.


     This employment was authorised in accordance with the provisions
     of Section 82(4)(b)(ii) read with Section 227(1)(d) of the
     Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1993 (Act No 200 of
     1993), [which Sections continue to be in force in terms of Item
     24(1) of Schedule 6 to the Constitution of the Republic of South
     Africa, 1996 (Act No 108 of 1996)], read further with Section
     3(2)(a)(iv) of the Defence Act, 1957 (Act No 44 of 1957).


     (a)     Personnel
     A total of 83 personnel have been deployed to Mozambique: 1X
     Mission Commander; 5X Mobile Air Operation Team (MAOT) Personnel;
     3X Command Post Personnel; 4X Translators; 8X Protection
     Personnel; 16X Air Crew; 16X Ground Crew; 5X Telecommunication
     Personnel; 1X Logistical Officer; 1X Media Liaison Officer; 1X
     Doctor; 6X Medical Personnel; 1X Petroleum Oil and Lubricant
     Officer; 1X CJ Ops Liaison Officer and 6X Divers.


     (b)     Aircraft


     4X Oryx Helicopters; 2X BK117 Helicopters; 2X C130 Transport
     aircraft; 1X C212 Light Transport Aircraft.


     The SANDF members were initially deployed for a total of fourteen
     days over the period 24 February 2001 to 09 March 2001. Due to the
     fact that the actual deployment was only rendered on the 01 March
     2001, the of period employment was extended until the 15 March
     2001.


     FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
     The estimated financial implications are as follows:


     (a)     Direct Cost required for the periodR 2 632 659,46
          (i) Personnel Cost (allowances, accommodation,   etc)R 1 266
                 194,10
          (ii)     Medical CostR11 732,95
          (iii)    Diesel, petrol and fuel filtersR32 076,72
          (iv)     MapsR3 500,00
          (v)      Aircraft fuelR1 319 155,69


     (b)     Flying hour cost (excluding fuel)R11 392 599,00


     (c)     Total Marginal CostR14 025 258,46


     The cost indicated above does not include landing, parking,
     navigational, ground support equipment and lighting surcharge
     fees.


     The National Treasury is responsible for the costs of this
     Deployment.


     I will also communicate this report to the Members of the National
     Council of Provinces, and wish to request that you bring the
     contents of this report to the notice of the National Assembly.


     Regards


     T M MBEKI

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly:

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development on the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Amendment Bill [B 9 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 14 March 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered the subject of the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Amendment Bill [B 9 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 9A - 2001].

                    TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 2001
   

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

Report and Financial Statements of Investment South Africa for 1999-
2000.

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly:

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism on the South African Weather Service Bill [B 54 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 13 March 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism, having considered the subject of the South African Weather Service Bill [B 54 - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 54A - 2000].

2. Report of the Ad hoc Committee on Filling of Vacancies on Commission for Gender Equality, dated 20 March 2001:

   The Ad hoc Committee on Filling of Vacancies on Commission for Gender Equality, having considered and examined nominations for the filling of vacancies on the Commission for Gender Equality, nominates, in terms of section 193(5) of the Constitution, the following persons for appointment to the Commission:

       As full-time commissioners, to commence serving immediately
       for a term of five years:
       1.  Beatrice Ngcobo.
       2.  Manana Tlake.
       3.  Gertrude Fester.
   
   
       As full-time commissioners, to commence serving on 1 May 2001
       for a term of five years:
   
   
       4.  Nombulelo Siqwana-Ndulo.
       5.  Sheila Meintjies.
       6.  Bafana Khumalo.
   
   
       As part-time commissioners, to commence serving on 1 May 2001,
       or as soon as possible thereafter, for a term of five years:
   
   
       7.  Rashida Manjoo.
       8.  Sophia de Bruyn.
       9.  Themba Kgase.
       10. Nobantu Mayekiso.
       11. Nozipho Bhengu.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, dated 28 February 2001:

 The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having held public
 hearings on Job Creation Estimates arising from Industrial
 Participation Programmes linked to Strategic Defence Arms Procurement
 Programme, reports as follows:


 A.     Introduction


     In its Fourteenth Report, dated 30 October 2000, the Standing
     Committee on Public Accounts expressed "concern at the possibly
     optimistic estimations of jobs to be created" by the Industrial
     Participation Programmes linked to the Strategic Defence Arms
     Procurement Programme, and "advise[d] of its intention to request
     the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry to express its
     opinion on this" (ATCs, 2 November 2000, p 1057). In order to
     assist the Committee in responding to this request, the Ministry
     of Trade and Industry and various research institutes specialising
     in these matters were invited to make submissions at a public
     hearing held on 6 February 2001. Other interested parties also
     requested an opportunity to make written or oral inputs. The
     public hearings were held jointly with the NCOP Select Committee
     on Economic Affairs.


     1. Executive summary of oral presentations


          As several of the presentations raised matters that went
          beyond the specific matter referred to the Committee, copies
          of all written material received were forwarded to the
          Standing Committee on Public Accounts, for its consideration.
          The following executive summary is of the main points made by
          those who made oral submissions:


          (1) Mr Alec Erwin, Minister of Trade and Industry


              The Minister indicated that his Department's involvement
              arose from its responsibility for the National Industrial
              Participation Programme (NIPP), which was approved by the
              government some years ago. The NIPP applies to all
              procurements by government structures where the imported
              component exceeds US $10 million. The Strategic Defence
              Arms Procurement Programme is subject to this broader
              policy. The decision to procure weapons stands on its own
              merits and follows Parliament's approval of the Defence
              Review in April 1998. The NIPP is not a simple "offset"
              programme. It is based on a more complex model that seeks
              to use major procurements by all government structures to
              leverage in investment. The model was developed after
              extensive study of international experience, and the
              government was well aware of the risks and dangers of
              "offsets". The Non-Defence Industrial Participation
              projects (NIPs) that were negotiated in relation to the
              weapons procurement programme were not selected on the
              basis of the value of the offers alone, but rather were
              ranked in terms of their potential contribution to
              broader industrial policy objectives. The projects
              selected and negotiated with suppliers were intended to
              create specific capacities in our industrial economy and
              focused, in particular, on specialist steel product
              production, auto components and other strategic sectors.
              Negotiators were specifically not mandated to seek
              performance bonds with a value greater than 10% of the
              purchase because there would then be a risk that the cost
              of the IP projects would inflate the purchase price.


              The Minister said that estimates of investment and job
              creation were undertaken as part of the risk and economic
              impact assessment. The business plans of the various
              projects indicated that 6 264 direct jobs would be
              created during the first 10 years, and a further 6 200
              over the following five years. The risk and economic
              impact assessment had been based on a more conservative
              estimate that 9 400 direct jobs would be created in the
              various projects by 2008, plus 4 000 direct temporary
              jobs in construction and a further 1 500 permanent jobs
              in steel mills. This gives a total of 14 900 direct jobs.
              This total was then multiplied by four to give an
              estimate of "indirect job" creation. The Minister said he
              was confident that these projections were attainable, and
              indicated that 15% of the projects measured by value had
              already begun to be implemented. The NIP projects were
              expected to yield an estimated R100 billion in knock-on
              benefits (export revenue plus investment). Non-defence
              industrial investment would total R24 billion.


          (2) Mr Guy Lamb, Prof Paul Dunne and Prof Richard Haines,
              Project on "Industrial Participation and Industrial
              Development" co-ordinated by Centre for Conflict
              Resolution


              The presentation was based on an ongoing research project
              on the implications of NIP projects for industrial
              development in the Eastern Cape and the Nelson Mandela
              metropole. The presentation began with a review of
              international experience with "defence offsets". From
              this the presenters concluded that while offsets can
              attract and focus investments, they also have the
              potential to distort and undermine an integrated
              industrial strategy. The presenters expressed the view
              that it was generally better to seek a price reduction
              through "off the shelf" purchases than to pursue
              "offsets". With reference to the Eastern Cape and the
              Nelson Mandela metropole, they suggested that there was
              tension between the NIP projects identified to be located
              in the Coega Industrial Development Zone and the
              trajectory of economic development identified for the
              area by the Eastern Cape provincial government and the
              municipality of the Nelson Mandela metropole. While
              acknowledging that their research was still in an early
              stage, the presenters suggested that "offsets" and
              defence-related industrial participation tended to focus
              on the periphery of the country's industrial strategy,
              and would tend to reinforce the reproduction of the
              "mineral and energy complex" rather than promote a more
              robust industrial development. The presenters argued that
              the projects appeared to have been selected through a
              "top down" process with little sign of an attempt to
              synergise with local economic development initiatives.
              They also questioned the validity of the procurement
              package in relation to the security needs of the country.


          (3) Mr Terry Crawford-Browne, Economists Allied for Arms
              Reduction (ECAAR)


              Mr Crawford-Browne argued that international experience
              showed that "promises of job creation related to arms
              acquisition are grossly exaggerated", and suggested that
              South Africa would be no exception. He alleged that many
              of the details of IP projects were hidden behind a veil
              of "commercial confidentiality" and called for greater
              transparency in this regard. He said that "offsets" had
              been prohibited in trade agreements between the European
              Union and the North American Free Trade Area because they
              were difficult to oversee and tended to distort economic
              activity. He warned that several of the projects would be
              likely to rely on imported skills rather than local human
              resource development, and said that research had shown
              that the corvette acquisition programme that was being
              negotiated by the previous government, would have
              resulted in a net loss rather than gain of jobs.


          (4) Mr Jeff Ashmead, Mr Ken Warren, Mr Gerald Wolman and Ms
              Peggy Drotskie, Sacob


              The presentation focused on identifying potential
              problems with counter-trade deals and certain principles
              to guide such transactions. The presenters expressed the
              view that counter-trade was not an ideal vehicle for
              industrial policy or investment promotion. Counter-trade
              tended to conceal prices and distort markets. Further
              drawbacks to such deals included the following:


              (a)  Inefficiency: International experience showed that
                   such deals often involve the payment of large
                   commissions to brokers, which amount to a "hidden
                   cost", making counter-trade an expensive and often
                   unprofitable way to trade.


              (b)  Complicated: A web of international transactions
                   often mean that the only beneficiaries from
                   transactions are intermediaries.


              (c)  Risky: The transactions involve commodities that are
                   price-volatile, and this is compounded by exchange
                   rate uncertainty.


              The reduction in world military expenditure, following
              the end of the cold war, suggested to Sacob that the
              international arms trade might be a buyer's market. This
              may present opportunities for South Africa to negotiate
              benefits from the international industry. While Sacob was
              wary of counter-trade deals, they did not suggest that
              the present deal be undone, but rather called for an
              accountable process, coupled with sufficient checks and
              balances and public transparency. They also called for an
              equitable spread of opportunities from offset
              arrangements.


          (5) Ms Tanya van Mierless and Mr Neil Coleman, Cosatu


              The presentation focused on the broader issue of the
              opportunity cost of the arms deal in comparison with the
              potential impact on the economy and job creation of
              alternative developmental projects. Cosatu argued that
              government spending has the potential to increase
              employment and enhance skills development. However, arms
              acquisition and the industrial participation projects
              linked to that programme would "aggravate the dichotomies
              in the economy and not narrow them". This was because the
              armaments industry was skill- and capital-intensive,
              dominated by white males, located in metropolitan areas
              and characterised by concentrated ownership. The defence
              industry also did not have a strategy to link itself to
              the civilian economy.


              Cosatu also argued that the arms procurement programme
              would redirect government spending away from social
              services to defence. This in turn would constrain
              employment growth and the social wage. The presenters
              believed that social service spending would decline in
              real per capita terms over the next three years, with
              broader implications for labour. The presenters said the
              industrial participation programmes did not include a
              sufficient training or employment equity component to
              counter such trends, and efforts to evaluate their impact
              in this regard were frustrated by commercial secrecy
              clauses. Cosatu called for more information to be
              released on the nature of investments in IP projects and
              on the new jobs to be created. In concluding, they
              recommended a parliamentary inquiry "if the channelling
              of resources is found to be problematic and the
              opportunity costs are found to be high".


          (6) Response by Minister Erwin


              The Minister said the point of departure of many of the
              submissions was opposition to the arms procurement
              programme and to the use of "offsets". The government had
              decided to make this procurement and would not seek to
              reverse the contracts it had entered into. It was also
              government policy to have an Industrial Participation
              Programme. The government was not blind to the problems
              encountered in "offset" programmes elsewhere, but many of
              the examples cited were not applicable to South Africa.
              The present deal was not being undertaken by an economy
              in dire straits desperate to find some mechanism to
              promote foreign investment. IP was an instrument, but not
              the sole instrument, of industrial policy.


              The Minister welcomed proposed research projects to check
              on the unfolding of the programme: To check whether a
              country with some industrial and negotiating capacity can
              succeed. The IP linked to the arms procurement was being
              used to enhance manufacturing and beneficiation of
              primary products by developing strategic capacity. A
              conscious decision had been taken not to try and sustain
              a massive defence industry producing a wide range of
              weapons systems. Current policy is aimed at retaining
              only certain areas of strength that could feed into the
              development of a modern industrial economy. Commission
              has not been paid to intermediaries, as the government
              chose to negotiate directly with the prime contractors.
              Every effort had been taken to liaise with provincial and
              local authorities over the design of projects.


 B.     Conclusions and recommendations


     As indicated above, the specific issue the Committee was requested
     to "express [its] opinion on" was the estimations of the jobs to
     be created as a result of the Industrial Participation Programmes
     (both DIPs and NIPs) negotiated as part of the Strategic Defence
     Armaments Procurement package. In its report, the Standing
     Committee on Public Accounts expressed "concern at the possibly
     optimistic estimations" in this regard. We will confine our own
     remarks to the specific matter referred to us, and not offer any
     comment on the broader issues raised in many of the submissions
     made to us, which clearly fall outside our own terms of reference.


     Whether or not these estimates are "optimistic" would, in our
     view, appear to depend on the accuracy of the basis on which they
     are calculated and the degree to which the IP projects will, in
     fact, be implemented.


     The estimate of approximately 65 000 jobs, in fact, embraces jobs
     in various categories. Firstly, there are the jobs expected to be
     created in the specific IP projects agreed, or under negotiation,
     with the contractors - both DIPs and NIPs. These include both jobs
     in the factories or plants expected to be created by the various
     projects and also jobs expected to be created in the construction
     of those factories or plants. Both of these are called "direct
     jobs" - jobs that will be directly created by the projects. Not
     all of these will, however, be "permanent". The construction jobs,
     in particular, will last only as long as it takes to construct the
     factory or plant, thus they will be "temporary". Many of these
     could, in fact, be expected to have disappeared before many of the
     project jobs kick in. The estimates of "direct jobs", in other
     words, measure all the jobs that will be created over the period
     until 2008, and not the number of jobs that will exist at any one
     time. The maximum number of "direct jobs" existing at any one time
     will thus be less than the estimates of the total number that will
     be created over the entire period.


     In addition to "direct jobs", the estimates also include a number
     of "indirect jobs" that will be generated by the programme. These,
     we understand, relate to downstream and upstream activity that
     will be generated by the IP programmes. For example, if a steel
     mill is built it will require cement and will thus create demand
     for cement and cement industry workers. The number of "indirect
     jobs" is estimated on the basis of a multiple of the number of
     "direct jobs". Again the total refers to all the "indirect jobs"
     that will be created along the entire contract period, and does
     not necessarily mean that all these jobs will exist throughout the
     entire period. For example, the "indirect jobs" in the cement
     industry would be generated during the construction period. Once
     again, therefore, the maximum number of "indirect jobs" that will
     exist at any one time will be less than will be created over the
     entire contract period.


     According to the information provided by the Ministry of Trade and
     Industry, calculations based on the business plans of the NIP
     projects estimate direct job creation over the first 10-year
     period at an average of 6 264 jobs, or just over one tenth of 1%
     of non-agricultural employment of 5,95 million in 1998. Over the
     next five years, a further 6 200 new manufacturing jobs are
     expected, according to the business plans, to be created by these
     projects.
     The final affordability study was based on more conservative
     estimates. These were as follows:


     Total number of direct jobs created
     in various projects to 2008            9 400


     Total number of direct jobs
     in construction                         4 000


     Total number of permanent jobs in mills 1 500


     Grand total of direct job              14 900


     In calculating the number of indirect jobs, a multiplier of four
     indirect jobs to each direct job was selected. This was based on
     ratios used in various econometric modelling exercises applicable
     to the economy as a whole, and compares to a ratio of 10 indirect
     jobs to one direct job, which the Ministry says was achieved in
     some other non-Defence-related National Industrial Participation
     Programme projects. Applying the multiplier of four to the figure
     of 9 400, 11 900 or 14 900 gives a range of indirect jobs from
     37 600 to 59 600.
     The figure of approximately 65 000 (actually 64 165) direct and
     indirect jobs was based on a different method of working back from
     projected investments, export orders and domestic turnover. This
     yielded a result in the same range as the calculations conducted
     for the affordability study.


     The Ministry also told us that several of the projects (13 out of
     a total of 70 projects) had already started. The number of direct
     jobs created or retained in these projects to date was as follows:


     BAA/SAAB (six projects)             358
     Agusta (two projects)               177
     Thyssen (one project)                70
     Thomson (three projects)            378
     Ferrostaal (one project)             60


     Total (13 projects) 2 043


     Taking into account the record of actual direct job creation to
     date, the estimates of expected direct job creation arrived at by
     three different methods of calculation do not seem to us to be
     overly optimistic, provided of course that the contractual
     obligations of suppliers are complied with. We have not
     interpreted our mandate as requiring of us to pronounce on whether
     or not we think the NIP contractual obligations will actually be
     fulfilled. We concur with Public Accounts that ".the economic
     benefit of these NIPS [is] a significant part of the bigger "value-
     for-money" composition of the arms deals, and as such sees a
     strong responsibility on the part of the government to enforce
     them" (ATCs, p 1057). Minister Erwin indicated to us that the
     government was committed to achieving this and, as indicated
     above, some 15% of the total projects measured by value have
     already begun to be implemented.


     As far as the indirect jobs are concerned, the estimates rest on
     econometric assumptions that the Committee does not feel qualified
     to comment on. We cannot, in other words, offer any useful comment
     on the assumption that four "indirect" jobs will be created for
     each "direct" job; it may be higher or lower. This depends on
     opinions about econometric models that are used by the government
     for other purposes. It also depends on one's views on a matter
     raised explicitly in the Cosatu submission and implicitly in some
     of the others as to whether or not there is an "opportunity cost"
     in terms of job creation from the decision to procure weapons, as
     against using the resources for other purposes.
     Some of the confusion and misunderstanding about the job estimates
     appears to us to arise from not fully understanding the way in
     which the figures were arrived at, and perhaps from "optimistic"
     presentations or expectations in some quarters that misinterpreted
     or misunderstood the total to be created along the contract period
     as the number of jobs that would exist at any one time. Some
     confusion or misunderstanding of the 65 000 total as the direct
     jobs that would arise from the projects also seems to have been
     evident in some quarters.


     It would seem to us that, from the point of view of Parliamentary
     oversight, whether by Public Accounts or other committees,
     including this one, what is needed is a relatively rigorous and
     clearly measurable set of indicators against which actual
     performance can be assessed. The estimate of direct jobs used for
     purposes of risk and economic impact assessment seems to us to
     offer a relatively clear, coherent and realistic set of
     estimates/targets. We would, therefore, recommend that assessments
     of outcomes of both DIPS and NIPS as far as job creation is
     concerned, should be based on estimates of "direct" jobs.


     The Committee would like to thank all those who made submissions.