National Assembly - 02 November 2001
FRIDAY, 2 NOVEMBER 2001 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 09:01.
The Deputy Chairperson of Committees took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Miss M N BUTHELEZI: Chairperson, 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 the Durban Metro Council has set aside R200 million to build proper and adequate houses for 11 000 families in Durban;
(2) believes that this demonstrates the commitment of the ANC-led Durban Metro Council to provide houses, security and comfort for all our people, thereby improving the quality of life for all, especially the poor; and
(3) welcomes the bold move by the Durban Metro Council to provide houses for the people.
Mr T D LEE: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) takes note of the strong-arm tactics of the New NP leader in demanding oaths of loyalty from New NP Western Cape Ministers who will otherwise lose their jobs; (2) recognises that a leader whose people will not follow him out of conviction is not a leader but little more than a dictator; and
(3) therefore calls on the New NP leader to listen to the voice of the people and to let public representatives choose their course freely and according to their own conscience.
[Interjections.] [Applause.]
Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I will move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) notes that nine men who allegedly posed as policemen and soldiers at phony roadblocks on the KwaZulu-Natal south coast have been arrested and have appeared in court on charges of armed robbery;
(2) congratulates the SA Police Service for apprehending the alleged robbers;
(3) questions why the alleged robbers were not also charged with falsely representing police officers in terms of section 66 of the SA Police Service Act or soldiers in terms of section 115 of the Defence Act;
(4) acknowledges that the offence of falsely representing peace officers is of a serious nature and should be rooted out at all levels; and
(5) calls on the Minister of Safety and Security to take immediate action to stop this phenomenon.
Mr J H NASH: Chairperson, 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 six Cuban mathematics and science teachers who will train in public schools next year will arrive next month …
Oh, it is 60 Cubans! I am sorry.
(2) further notes that the intention of this training is to improve pupils’ performance in science and mathematics;
(3) believes that this programme reflects the ties of solidarity between the people of Cuba and South Africa; and
(4) commends the Cuban internationalists who will be coming to our country to widen our skills base to meet the challenges of transformation.
Please note that it is not six: it is 60! [Laughter.] [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! It was not a debate. It was only a notice of motion. [Laughter.]
Dr P J RABIE: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) almost 7 million people in South Africa face the predicament of
being unemployed;
(b) we dare not play petty politics and blindly criticise from the
sideline while unemployment seriously affects the lives of so
many South Africans; and
(c) it is the responsibility of every member of this House to
enthusiastically and passionately help solve this burning issue,
by getting involved in constructive co-operation, despite
political differences; and
(2) recognises the importance of working together to solve unemployment, in order to realise our dream of a successful and prosperous South Africa.
[Applause.]
Mr C T FROLICK: Chairperson, 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) welcomes the announcement by the United Cricket Board that the financial, psychological and sociological proceeds of the 2003 Cricket World Cup would be used to create opportunities for the children of South Africa;
(2) recognises the significance of the choice of Soweto to launch an event that would be televised to an estimated 1 billion people in 60 countries;
(3) further notes that Soweto is the place where, in 1976, the youth of South Africa took it upon themselves to indicate their displeasure with the circumstances under which they were growing up; and
(4) calls on all South Africans to support the key objectives of the organising committee in order to leave a legacy of a volunteer culture in the country.
[Applause.]
Mr J T LOUW: Chairperson, 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 Comrade Nelson Mandela and senior members of the provincial government of the Northern Cape unveiled plans for a new community service and skills development centre;
(2) believes that the building of this new community service and skills development centre will contribute significantly to improving the lives of the people of Colesberg and will bring the Government closer to the people;
(3) welcomes these plans; and
(4) commends Madiba, the private sector and the provincial government for developing these plans.
[Applause.]
Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UCDP: That the House -
(1) notes with compassion that -
(a) the Government's child social security programmes reach only a
small portion of poor children, as according to a recent study
by Idasa up to 30% of children are desperately poor and go to
bed hungry; and
(b) the two programmes through which delivery is concentrated,
namely the child support grant and the care-dependency programme
cater for only 12% of the estimated number of poor children; and
(2) calls on the Government to live up to the levels of the signed international treaties which give children the right to social services, basic health and nutrition, basic housing and shelter and basic education by ensuring that it maintains a high priority value for child social security benefits. Mr J P I BLANCHÉ: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) believes that for democracy to prosper, a healthy balance between majority and opposition parties is necessary;
(2) recognises that opposition to the Government cannot be effective from within the governing party;
(3) recommits itself to government that is principled, efficient, accountable and transparent;
(4) agrees that elected public representatives must serve the interests of their voters and not the interests of their pockets; and
(5) calls on all public representatives to rededicate themselves to the delivery of services and hope to the homeless, the unemployed, those living with HIV/Aids, the elderly and victims of crime.
[Applause.]
Prof B TUROK: Chairperson, on a point of order: Is it in order for one member to give another one an ANC membership form?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, I will leave you, after Parliament has risen this afternoon, to proceed with the business of trying to attract each other. [Interjections.] [Laughter.]
Mrs R R JOEMAT: Chairperson, 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 -
(a) reports that a domestic worker is taking her employer to the
labour court for unfair dismissal; and
(b) that her employer attempted to force her to take an HIV test if
she wanted to retain her job;
(2) believes that this action by this employer is an attack on her human rights and dignity;
(3) reiterates its position that the decision to go for an HIV test must be made by an individual out of his or her free will and that he or she has a right to confidentiality;
(4) condemns this insensitive action by this employer; and
(5) urges all employers to respect the rights of their employees and to uphold the right to privacy.
[Applause.]
Mr M J ELLIS: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) recognises that political parties arrange overdraft facilities for elections;
(2) notes that the DP’s 1999 election debt has been repaid in full …
[Interjections.] Yes, repaid in full.
(3) notes that the DA overdraft for the 2000 elections was mainly spent in the Western Cape to get a majority of former New NP people elected;
(4) notes that, unlike the New NP, the DA undertakes to repay every cent of this debt; and (5) suggests that the tripartite alliance should beware of inheriting the 1999 New NP debt of R6,2 million at federal level and the R800 000 it owes in KwaZulu-Natal.
[Interjections.] [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, please proceed.
Mr H J BEKKER: Chairperson, 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 with shock the tragic accident in which Mr Antoneij Rupert was killed;
(2) further notes that Mr Antoneij Rupert played a significant role in establishing South Africa as a significant wine producing and exporting country and that his skills and contribution will be sorely missed; and (3) expresses its deepest sympathy with the immediate family of Mr Antoneij Rupert.
Mr N B FIHLA: Chairperson, 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 great alarm the recent report on prison warders selling prison keys to prisoners at Bloemfontein’s Grootvlei B Prison;
(2) believes that these immoral and criminal deeds committed by trusted members of our society cannot go unpunished;
(3) commends the prisoners who highlighted this form of corruption in the prison; and
(4) acknowledges that the prisoners’ commendable conduct bears testimony to the Department of Correctional Services’ rehabilitation programmes and positive management.
Mr J SCHIPPERS: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) Gerald Morkel has become another political corpse in Tony Leon's
``Fight Blacks campaign'';
(b) the death list reads as follows:
William Mnisi - DP deputy leader;
Solly Verveen – DP-leader, Gauteng North;
Omie Singh – DP member of Parliament, KZN; Richard Pillay – DP
member of Parliament, Gauteng; Peter Marais – DA mayor, Cape
Town Unicity; Gerald Morkel - New NP Premier, Western Cape;
Cedric McNeel – DP deputy leader, Western Cape; and
(2) urges all DA councillors to remain calm until the anti-defection clause is suspended and to follow Marthinus van Schalkwyk into the new South Africa.
[Applause.]
Mr T ABRAHAMS: Chairperson, 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 that the Auditor-General released a report yesterday on the financial state of the Road Accident Fund;
(2) expresses its dismay that the fund has actually succeeded once again in slipping further into debt, and is now technically insolvent; (3) notes with concern that the accumulated shortfall of the fund as at April 2000 was an astonishing R10,5 billion;
(4) condemns the fact that South Africans have to pay high fuel prices, in order for the Government to throw R2 billion a year into this bottomless pit; and
(5) calls on the Government to urgently restructure the fuel price and to change the basis of operation of the fund in order to eliminate exploitation of the fund and the victims.
Mr R P ZONDO: Chairperson, 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 serious misgiving the continuous distortion of facts and propagation of half-truths by the ACDP through notices of motion; (2) believes that -
(a) motions are a vehicle for Members of Parliament and parties to
pronounce on matters of national and international importance;
and;
(b) the ACDP has frequently misused the notices of motion to spread
its misleading and untrue messages;
(3) appeals to the ACDP to show respect for the truth; and
(4) requests members to respect the intellect of South Africans to distinguish fiction from fact, truths from half-truths.
INSTALLATION OF TRANSITIONAL GOVERNMENT IN BURUNDI
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move without notice: That the House -
(1) notes the installation yesterday of the transitional government of Burundi, led by Pierre Buyoya and Domitien Ndaaiizeye, who will exchange the presidency and deputy presidency after 18 months;
(2) believing that this is a critical step in securing peace in the Great Lakes region;
(3) congratulates all those who brokered the Arusha agreement on the reaching of this important milestone;
(4) wishes the new government every success in the securing of peace and democracy in this war-ravaged country; and
(5) assures the people of the Great Lakes region of the support of this House in the pursuit of peace, freedom and prosperity.
Agreed to. NATIONAL CHILDREN’S DAY
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that tomorrow, 3 November, is National Children’s Day;
(2) further notes that our country is a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child;
(3) believes that our children are our greatest national treasure, the hope and promise of the future;
(4) reasserts its commitment to ensuring that the rights of the child are protected; and
(5) pledges to work for the elimination of child exploitation and abuse. Agreed to.
COMPLETION OF TASK OF AD HOC COMMITTEE ON POWERS AND PRIVILEGES OF
PARLIAMENT
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That with reference to the resolution adopted by the House on 11 September 2001, the Ad Hoc Committee on Powers and Privileges of Parliament is to complete its task by no later than 31 March 2002.
Agreed to.
DESIGNATION OF DR Z P JORDAN TO REPLACE MR T S YENGENI IN SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY PARLIAMENT
(Draft Resolution) The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That the House, with the concurrence of the National Council of Provinces, designates Dr Z P Jordan to replace Mr T S Yengeni as the representative of Parliament in the Southern African Development Community Parliamentary Forum in terms of article 6(3) of the constitution of the said Forum with immediate effect.
Agreed to.
APPOINTMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE TO NOMINATE PERSONS TO FILL VACANCIES ON SA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That the House, in accordance with section 193(5) of the Constitution, appoints an ad hoc committee to nominate persons to fill the pending vacancies on the South African Human Rights Commission, the committee to -
(a) consist of 27 members in the following propoportions: African National Congress 14, Democratic Party 2, all other parties 1;
(b) exercise those powers in Rule 138 that may assist it in carrying out its task; and
(c) complete its task by 1 March 2002.
Agreed to.
QUESTIONS: PRECEDENCE
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows: That, notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 29(8), Questions shall not have precedence on Wednesday, 7 November 2001.
Agreed to.
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Chairperson and hon members, today I present to this House the new Unemployment Insurance Bill - and there is no trouble because it is not about the death alliance. The finalisation of the process of introducing this Bill to the National Assembly marks a new chapter in the history of the Unemployment Insurance Fund, as it attempts to address systemic inefficiencies of the past.
Prior to 1979, the state contributed up to 50% of the fund’s annual collections. There are ample records to prove that, during this time, the fund always had sufficient financial reserves to cover its funding needs. After 1979, the then government decided to legalise black trade unions. This policy also coincided with the amendment of the Unemployment Insurance Act, which reduced the contribution of the state from 50% to a maximum of R7 million per annum.
The paradox of this decision was that funding was reduced, but the obligations of the fund increased to provide coverage to vulnerable workers. This placed the fund firmly on the road to bankruptcy. A brief historical review of the fund shows that within five years of this decision, the fund started to experience financial difficulties. The state responded to calls for assistance during 1984, 1989 and 1994.
The Bill before the House goes to the heart of the current problems facing the fund. It is aimed at ensuring that we achieve a lasting resolution to the financial woes that have, for a long time, plagued the fund. During the period of attempting to resolve the funding crisis, the fund has continued tirelessly to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable workers in our country. Through various administrative interventions the fund has never had occasion to turn away any legitimate claimant. Today, I also presents the fulfilment of the commitments I made in June 1999, when I unveiled the 15-point programme of action to restructure the fund.
Unemployment insurance is an important policy area as it contributes towards the improvement of the social safety net to mitigate the economic hardships for the unemployed. The Bill pays particular attention to extending unemployment insurance coverage beyond current levels. This is aimed at enhancing the sustainability and cost-effectiveness of the fund and creating an environment conducive to improved compliance.
This is to ensure that the fund’s income is increased whilst low-income earners are compensated at income levels that are acceptable and able to deal with the issue of poverty relief. It is estimated that these measures will bring in an additional income of over R250 million a year, together with the benefits of better and easy management of wage audits and earnings declarations.
The restructuring of the Unemployment Insurance Fund seeks to address the following shortcomings within the current legislation: The limited and nonviable nature of coverage, weak enforcement and compliance measures, the lack of financial sustainability and the depletion of the fund’s financial reserve, the rigid benefit structure, discrimination against certain categories of employees, and a lack of a comprehensive data base of contributors.
In 1996, a three-person task team comprising experts from labour, business and academia was appointed. This task team was to perform a situational analysis of the administration of unemployment insurance, conduct a comparative analysis based on international norms and make recommendations regarding the findings and the financing thereof.
The task team recommended that coverage be extended to all workers with minimum exclusions, gender discrimination be removed by separating maternity and unemployment benefits, a progressive benefit schedule be implemented, the existing types of benefits be retained, stricter enforcement and compliance measures be introduced, a computerised data base be introduced, all stakeholders be included in the processes and structures of the UIF, and limited executive powers be given to the UIF board.
In November 1998, after several reports were tabled on the financial status of the fund, Cabinet approved the release of the task team’s report for public comment. In December 1998, I released the report on the restructuring of the fund. The document was published in the Gazette, and I invited the public to make relevant submissions to the Unemployment Insurance Board.
On 2 February 2000, Cabinet approved two new Bills, the Unemployment Insurance Bill and the Unemployed Insurance Contributions Bill. The latter Bill deals with the collection of the unemployment insurance contributions from employers and is intended to consolidate collections under a single administration. Sars will be given full responsibility for collection. The Unemployment Insurance Bill will be administered solely by the Department of Labour and the Unemployment Insurance Fund will have the single responsibility for administration and adjudication of claims.
With regard to problems in respect of this fund, this law will attempt to address a number of difficulties currently being experienced, that is, litigation procedures currently impose meagre fines on employers who fail to make their unemployment insurance contributions. It is giving us the power to act against those employers who do not comply with the fund. The current system of contribution collection and payroll declarations by employers is inadequate and requires a complete overhaul. The use of contributors’ record cards as the only means of determining benefits payable to contributors’ has exposed the fund to potential abuse by both employers and employees. There are key changes that are being made. Within the framework of the new legislation, coverage of workers within the labour market will be extended. For the first time in the history of unemployment protection in this country, we will include domestic workers, seasonal workers, and employees earning above the current UIF annual income threshold of R97 188.
Kuyaqala ukuba samkele oomama abasebenza emakhayeni, ukuze nabo bakhuseleke phantsi kwalo mthetho. [Kwaqhwatywa.] Nabasebenzi bethutyana, phaya ezifama, kuyaqala ukuba nabo bakhuseleke. (Translation of Xhosa paragraph follows.)
[It is the first time that we welcome mothers who work as domestic workers, so that they can also be brought under the protection of this legislation. [Applause.] It is also the first time that legal protection is being extended to casual workers on the farms.]
The inclusion of higher income groups as UIF contributors will be determined by a maximum income threshold to be determined from time to time by the law.
There has been much debate about the inclusion of public servants. I accept the report that has been made by the Portfolio Committee on Labour in this regard. I hope that we will be able to do this investigation with the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, and submit it to Parliament in due course.
We also introduced a graduated benefits schedule dealing with maternity and unemployment benefits because maternity benefits were first introduced by the UIF in 1954. A female contributor must be paid benefits for maternity leave, whether or not she is capable of and available for work. The UIF provides 45% of the last wage for a maximum period of six months.
However, drawing maternity benefits means that women workers therefore use up their unemployment benefits. Given that it is obviously only women who apply for maternity benefits - I have seen no man applying for maternity benefits - this provision therefore discriminates against women. [Applause.] The new legislation, therefore, proposes to eliminate this discrimination by separating maternity benefits and unemployment benefits.
Also, regarding strengthening the compliance and enforcement measures, we are looking at the creation of a contributors data base, dispute resolution measures, financial management and actuarial assessment of the fund and entitlement benefits.
I want to conclude by saying that, as members will have realised from the aforementioned, my department and I are very serious about addressing problems facing the unemployed by providing some form of safety net. The Bill before the House is the culmination of the joint efforts of the staff of my department, the National Treasury, the Portfolio Committee on Labour, and social partners. I wish to extend to them my gratitude on the dawn of the new Unemployment Insurance Fund.
Indeed, the Portfolio Committee on Labour has worked very tirelessly, even late at night, to make sure that we are where we are today. I want to thank, in particular, the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Labour. Even though he is not here today - I believe he is in Saudi Arabia - I wish him well. [Applause.]
Mr S A MSHUDULU: Chairperson, hon members, distinguished guests and the nation at large, the ANC as an agent for change supports this Bill.
It is with pride that I stand here to represent the ANC in this debate on the Unemployment Insurance Bill, which is aimed at establishing an unemployment insurance fund to which employers and employees contribute, and from which employees who become unemployed are entitled to draw benefits. And, we are doing so to alleviate the harmful economic and social effects of unemployment.
Having heard what our Minister has said, I wish to avoid repeating his words but I would like to highlight specific areas in the Bill. We, as the ANC, note that the Unemployment Insurance Act, No 30 of 1966, has been amended 20 times, between 1 May 1967 and 1 June 1988, without addressing the social needs of vulnerable workers who are mainly women, the disabled, domestic workers and seasonal workers.
Under the old regime, the fund was nonviable because of its scope of coverage, how it was structured and because it had an inappropriate administrative system based on apartheid policies. Because of this inefficient administrative system that is also outdated, the fund’s data could not assist in its sustenance as information was, sometimes, unreliable. Its structures were not representative of all stakeholders as represented today in Nedlac for them to be run democratically.
With poor data, it was impractical to manage, monitor and enforce compliance of those employers who cheated on the fund. What was worrying was that there was no certainty as regards entitlement to benefits. And, it was inaccessible because of a lot of bureaucracy. With all these unending problems, it was necessary that the Government of the people begin to fulfil its mandate towards bettering the lives of people, and that is no other than the ANC-led Government.
Regarding the content of the Bill, to be more specific, Chapter 1 is amended to include all employees who work for more than 24 hours a month with a particular employer. It also includes domestic and seasonal workers who work an aggregate period of at least three months over a 12 month [eropd with the same employer and whose work is interrupted by reason of a seasonal variation in the availability of work. To this end, this Act will apply to them and their employers 12 months after this Act takes effect. The Minister must, as soon as possible, after this Act takes effect, designate or appoint a body which must seek to investigate and make recommendations regarding the administration of this Act to domestic workers as well as seasonal workers.
In terms of clause 14 in Chapter 3, contributors who receive disability grants can still benefit from the fund. Clause 18 has a provision that allows the applicants to determine where they would like to be paid as opposed to the practice where the claims officer was the one to decide. Clause 35 also provides for mechanisms for benefits paid in error to be recovered or recouped within 90 days after a written claim has been forwarded to the ineligible person. Clause 37 provides that, should there be a dispute, it should be referred to the CCMA for arbitration after an appeal has failed through the board.
Chapter 4 provides for enforcement mechanisms as a measure to minimise problems whereby some employers evade paying for their employees.
Chapter 6 provides for the establishment of an unemployment insurance board where all Nedlac stakeholders shall nominate three members each to represent them on the board, for example, organised labour, organised business, the state and the community. Their duties shall be as provided for in this Bill, which shall include advising the Minister as well as making recommendations to him on matters that affect the fund.
Before I conclude in isiXhosa, allow me to reflect on the exclusion of Public Service employees of provincial and national governments, which the Minister has already mentioned. There was a report which was submitted on 30 October to this House. It reflects that during the public hearings, concerns were raised about the exclusion of public servants as set out in clause 3(1)(c) of the Bill. After consultation with the Government on this matter, the majority of committee members agreed that, given the urgency of finalising this draft legislation, the provisions in the Bill should remain.
The Commission on Gender Equality raised the concerns about the nature of maternity coverage as set out in the Bill. The CGE believes that this may constitute unfair discrimination. It was recommended that, because of the concerns raised during the public hearings, the committee should request the Minister of Labour, in consultation with the Ministers of Finance and of the Public Service and Administration, to investigate the possibility of including public servants as well as the financial implications thereof under the Unemployment Insurance Fund. This investigation should be completed within nine months and a report on the outcome of the said investigation should be presented to the committee.
It was also recommended that the Minister of Labour should, in consultation with the Presidency and the CGE, investigate the current formulation of maternity rights, as stated in clause 24, in order to ensure full coverage for the most vulnerable workers as well as the financial implications thereof under the Unemployment Insurance Fund. This investigation should be completed within nine months and a report should be presented to the committee on the outcome of the said investigations. It must further be noted that the ANC Government has saved the fund from financial crisis.
Makhe, kancinci nje, ndilungiselele abantwana bomthonyama, ndithi gqaba, gqaba, phaya naphaya. Nanjengokuba egqibile ukutsho uMhlalingaphambili, ngo- 1996 iqela leengcungela, elibandakanya abasuka kwezabasebenzi, oosomashishini nezifundiswa, lachongwa ukuze lihlalutye ulawulo lwe- Unemployment Insurance Fund, lenze uhlalutyo oluthelekiseka nomgangangatho wamazwe ngamazwe, ze benze izindululo ngokubhekisele ekunikezelweni kwezimali kubaninizo.
Ezinye zezindululo zabo zezi: kufuneka lubekhona ukhuseleko kubo bonke abasebenzi kufuneka kususwe ucalu-calulo ngokobuni; ze kwahlulwe izibonelelo zabakhulelweyo kwezo zokungabikho phantsi kwengqesho, izibonelelo ezikhoyo ezisisicwangciso ngokuphathelele kumgangatho mazisetyenziswe; ezo zikhoyo izibonelelelo kufuneka zigcinwe; iindlela eziqatha zokuqinisekisa ukuthotyelwa kufuneka zaziswe eluntwini; abantu mabaxhotyiswe ngolwazi lokugcina iinkcukacha ngeekhompuyutha, kufuneka bonke abadlala indima ephambili babandakanywe kumanqwanqwa e-UIF, kananjalo, amagunya, angemakhulu, okuthabatha izigqibo anikezelwe kwi- Unemployment Insurance Fund.
Ingamampunge, futhi, asiyiyo inyaniso into yokuba i-ANC ayizange ibakhathelele abasebenzi. Ngako oko, ndiyabulela kumzukulwana kaMdladlana. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[I shall now switch over to my mother tongue, for the sake of its speakers. As the chairperson has already mentioned, in 1996 a group of experts was set up to evaluate the administration of the Unemployment Insurance Fund and this group consisted of labour representatives, business people and academics. Its brief was to do an evaluation that would include looking at comparative situations in other countries and then come up with recommendations with regard to the payment of beneficiaries.
Among the recommendations made were the following: the interests of all workers should be protected; all forms of discrimination on the basis of gender should be eliminated; provision for pregnancy should be separate from provision for unemployment; procedures aimed at maintaining standards should be used; the present procedures should be retained; people should be made aware of the strict measures aimed at ensuring adherence to procedures; people should be trained in storing data on computers; all stakeholders should be involved at all levels of the UIF; and furthermore, some decision-making powers, which are not considerable, should be given to the Unemployment Insurance Fund.
To suggest that the ANC never cared about the interests of the workers is not only irresponsible but also untrue. Therefore, I am grateful to hon Minister Mdladlana. [Applause.]]
Mrs B N SONO: Chairperson, the Kliptown manifesto says, and I quote:
The Government will look after the most vulnerable section of the population, even members of the civil service will have a right to state help. This Bill is a piece of legislation that violates even the basic tenet of the Constitution, which is the Bill of Rights.
The DP believes that an efficient and effective unemployment insurance fund is beneficial in a developing economy like ours. The concept of a fund where contributors are entitled to bridging finances to ease the financial burden between jobs makes economic sense. The provision of maternity benefits for a fixed period associated with childbirth is not only just and fair, but it goes a long way towards recognising the importance of women’s role in society - something desperately lacking, not only in South Africa, but in many parts of the world today.
Unfortunately, the existing Unemployment Insurance Fund has been plagued by abuse and has, consequently, been hit by bankruptcy, all of which stems from impracticable systems born of unfeasible legislation. The commissioner even attested to this at a committee meeting on the status of women.
Whilst this Bill has many strong points which deal with many of the shortcomings of the existing UIF, it still falls short of providing a new streamlined, financially viable and efficient UIF. In its current form, it also faces at least two potential constitutional challenges. This is notably regarding the exclusion of civil servants and the potential infringement of their rights under section 27(1)(c) of the Constitution, which the labour portfolio committee has effectively chosen to ignore in the legislation before us today.
However, the advantages of this Bill are important and worthy of sincere praise. The delinking of maternity rights from unemployment insurance is a step in the right direction. But when we asked the commissioner how they were going to go about implementing this, no plans were in place. The payment of maternity benefits marks a significant milestone in the recognition of the role of women in society. The debates surrounding the inclusion of domestic and seasonal workers have attracted great media interest recently. The DP is conscious of the important role that both domestic and seasonal workers play in our society and economic wellbeing as a country. [Interjections.]
The coverage commences directly after a 12-month investigation by the department into the logistical problems caused by their inclusion. The commissioner again attested that he was assigned to do the costing. We have a problem. Automatically there is going to be a hassle factor before it gets attested to. The DP hopes that the department will be open and amenable to new and creative ideas stemming from the investigation. While the inclusion of both domestic and seasonal workers is important, it is also important not to add to the so-called hassle factor of the economy.
If it becomes practically and bureaucratically difficult to administer the inclusion of domestic and seasonal workers, particularly for the employer, many will either simply ignore these provisions or, worse still, think twice about hiring again. We again made the commissioner aware of this and he could not come up with a solution. He even admitted that there are no women on that very commission. So at the end of the day, we should, as women sitting here, put our money where our mouth is. [Interjections.]
With regard to financial controls, the state will recover any deficits in the fund and all expenditure will obviously have to be within the permissible framework of the Public Finance Management Act. The Bill provides for adequate financial controls in most areas. Application procedures have been streamlined and made more user friendly. The serious potential problems with this legislation are within the application of the new Act and unfortunately, in the opinion of the DP, render this Bill impossible to support. [Interjections.]
The decision to exclude public servants from the fund must surely be one of the most significant problems with this piece of legislation. At Nedlac, their inclusion was agreed to by both business and labour. Their final exclusion is entirely due to the intervention of Government and the department. The department was unable to produce a reasonable argument to sustain their point of view and traded entirely on the presumption that the Public Service is a stable means of employment. The nation can be assured that the DP will always be there to execute its duty to the point. [Interjections.]
At no stage was the committee presented with reasoning as to why public servants would not need the sort of coverage envisaged in the UIF Bill. The DP supports the notion of an effective and efficient UIF. While this legislation has made great strides in that direction, the fatal flaws I have outlined today unfortunately make it impossible for us to support this Bill. The inclusion of all … [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Prince N E ZULU: Chairperson, Ministers and hon members, South Africa is entering into a glowing new era in so far as this Bill is concerned. This Bill comes at a period engulfed by very harsh economic realities. The majority of people are unemployed and more are losing their jobs. Such a predicament has severe consequences for the state, as evidenced by crime and other violent acts, especially on pensioners harassed by their children and grandchildren.
The IFP welcomes the fact that in conjunction with the receipt of unemployment benefits, applicants or workers will also be afforded a chance to undergo training and vocational counselling for employment. Skills are a very important resource when looking for employment. Employers need people with skills and they do not consider the fact that we come from a very repressive era where it was not even possible to acquire those skills.
As regards the application to receive benefits, we wish to put on record that some applicants fail to receive their benefits when their employer, who, in many cases, goes underground or even abroad, is liquidated. Such employees are not issued with their blue cards. When they go to the labour offices, they are required to produce these blue cards and have no recourse to justice in the circumstances as they are not properly guided as to what they should do. Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Some people get yellow cards!
Prince N E ZULU: Yebo. [Yes.] One should really believe that the proper course to follow would be to look for the liquidator or master responsible for such liquidation. Another alternative would be to go the SA Revenue Service’ offices if that applicant was a registered taxpayer, so that they can give an indication as to what has happened to the employer. But this process can be very tiring and expensive for an unemployed person. Some, if not most of them, will not even know of this route.
The IFP also welcomes the entrenched right to illness benefits when an ill person is not at work. In the course of this illness, she or he - I better say ``he or she’’ - may not receive any benefit from his or her job beyond the 14-day period.
The IFP welcomes the inclusion of domestic and seasonal workers in the Unemployment Insurance Fund. These are the employees who are very vulnerable to unemployment, as they cannot be easily absorbed by the labour market. Providing something to fall back on in times of distress, will surely be a very noble effort.
However, we are concerned that public servants are not yet included in this Bill, whereas they are also employees. We would like to see them included in the provisions as employees. The fact that they have other benefits does not tally with the argument that they should not be included in this Bill. At this point, members could point a finger at me and see me as a typical and living victim of the absence of such a clause in the previous and current dispensation. Therefore, this situation cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely.
What is wrong with the enhancement of their benefits if we are determined to deal with the brain drain from the Public Service? The private sector siphons numerous skills from the Public Service because, in comparison, it pays better. The extension of these benefits can summarily and ultimately serve to deter this exodus. The IFP supports this Bill. [Applause.]
Ms H F MALEBANA: Chairperson, the advent of democracy brought about hope for a better life to the previously disadvantaged and marginalised. The Bill is about the acceleration of service delivery to the sick, the unemployed, the poor and the hungry. It is about ensuring that the social security net covers the majority of the people.
Considerable strides have been taken with this Bill. As far as domestic and seasonal workers are concerned, it is the first time in the history of our country that they are commended as workers. Their contribution to the economy is being acknowledged. This is a major victory for the ANC-led Government and the workers as a whole. The hon the Minister of Labour must provide regulations, within a period of 12 months from the commencement of this Act, on mechanisms regarding the administration of this Bill to domestic and seasonal workers.
The calculation date for the unemployment benefit application will be the date from which the contributor is unemployed. To qualify, the contributor must register as a workseeker at a labour centre and be available for justifiable work. The contributor will not receive benefits if she or he does not report at the stipulated dates and times or if she or he refuses to undergo training without just reason. But if the contributor becomes ill while collecting unemployment benefits, she or he will remain entitled to continue receiving the benefit.
Regarding illness, the illness period is determined from the date the employee is unable to perform duty owing to illness or is receiving 50% of the normal salary owing to illness. If the contributor fails to perform or fulfil any prescribed requirements, then she or he cannot apply for the benefit. If the contributor has exhausted all illness benefits or refuses to undergo medical treatment without just reason, she or he is not entitled to receive the benefit.
Concerning the adoption benefits, the application is submitted by one contributor of the adopting parents or partners. The child must be under two years of age. The adoption will be granted by an order of court as per the requirement of the Child Care Act of 1983. The contributor must spend the period not working but caring for the child.
In the case of dependant’s benefits, the deceased contributor’s spouse or partner is entitled to the benefits if the application is submitted within six months and is in accordance with the requirements of the Act. The deceased contributor’s child can also apply for the benefit after six months, if there is no application submitted by the spouse or life partner of the deceased contributor.
As far as public servants are concerned we as the ANC, have proved that we love them as well as all the other workers of this country. As the ANC-led Government, what we are saying is that we need to have the public servants also included in this Bill, but we could not do so, owing to technical complications. The hon the Minister of Labour must investigate their inclusion and the financial implications thereof, nine months after the promulgation of the Act, which, of course, is a reasonable time frame.
I now come to maternity benefits. Previously most women were punished or penalised for being mothers. They were either dismissed or did not get their salaries when going on maternity leave. Women workers waged a battle to ensure that maternity benefits are recognised as rights and also that maternity benefits are delinked from unemployment benefits. That guarantees that as contributors women’s unemployment benefits are not affected when they go on maternity leave.
It must be borne in mind that during maternity leave life becomes difficult and complicated for the family. It is the responsibility of all of us as South Africans, as a country that encourages mothers to breastfeed, to ensure that the new addition to the family becomes a bundle of joy and happiness. Failure to do so always leads to women abandoning their newborn babies to rush back to work so that they can start earning their full salaries. Ke nako ya gore re thome hlokomela batswetši ba rena. Ba nyaka tšhelete ya go ba apeša le go hlokomela gore masea a bona a hwetša kalafo ka nako ya maswanedi. [It is high time that we cared for our nursing mothers who need some money to purchase appropriate clothing and a healthy diet for their newborn babies.]
Sixty per cent of the normal salary for four months is a step in the right direction. We are saying that 100% will ensure that our nursing mothers do not run back to work immediately after childbirth, but that they and their families enjoy the arrival of the new addition.
Bjale ka naga yeo e ratago go bona re eba le masea ao a thabilego, ao a phedilego gabotse, re swanetše go fihlela le go phethagatša takatso ya bomma bao ba amušago masea ka go ba fa megolo ya bona ka moka ge ba eya setswetši. Ka Sepedi re re: Lesea ka gae ke makhura. A re le amogeleng ka diatla tše pedi. Ke a leboga. (Translation of Sepedi paragraph follows.)
[As a country that is totally committed to promoting health care, we need to accommodate the needs of those women who choose to breast feed their babies by paying them full monthly salaries as well as benefits when they go on maternity leave. My Sepedi culture recognises newborn babies as symbols of joy and happiness. So, we need to embrace those gifts in that spirit.]
Mr A BLAAS: Chairperson, the Bill we are dealing with today is of a technical nature and addresses weaknesses in the current legislation that provides the safety net for those who have become unemployed. The fact that we are dealing with a Bill like this, in addition to the current financial state of the Unemployment Insurance Fund, is a clear indication of the seriousness of the unemployment problem in South Africa. It is my sincere hope that in future we will be able to see contributions to the fund increase, while payment to those who become unemployed falls, as we succeed in addressing the problem of unemployment in South Africa.
Unemployment is a national crisis. We dare not play petty politics with this issue. The issue of unemployment can only be solved if we lift it out of the political arena and find ways of working together, despite whatever our political differences might be. This is also one of the key reasons the NNP believes that a return to a more inclusive model will be in the interests of everybody. We have a responsibility towards the youth of South Africa to see to it that the building blocks of a prosperous and growing economy are in place.
Die Nuwe NP ondersteun die wenslikheid van die wet sonder enige voorbehoude. Die meeste van die hervormingsmaatreëls in die wysigingswetsontwerp is verbeterings op die ou wet en kan, indien die administrasie doeltreffend en nougeset gedoen word, baie van die bestaande probleme ondervang.
Kommer bestaan egter steeds oor die finansiële lewensvatbaarheid en outonomie van die fonds. Die uitsluiting van ‘n groot en belangrike sektor van die deelnemers uit die fonds en die gebrek aan aktuariële berekeninge laat vrae ontstaan of die bogenoemde maatreëls wel die fonds in staat gaan stel om sy verpligtinge na te kom.
Die grondliggende beginsel waarop die fonds as versekering vir werkloosheid gebou is, berus op ‘n beginsel van groepsdeelname. Klousule 3(1)(c) sluit egter die werknemers en werkgewers in die nasionale en provinsiale sfeer van regering uit. Die uitsluiting is teenstrydig met alle getuienis wat deur die portefeuljekomitee aangehoor is.
Dit is ‘n beduidende groot uitsluiting en dus teenstrydig met die beginsel van minimumuitsluiting. Dit ontneem werknemers in die sektor ook van die voordele van die fonds. Die komitee beveel gevolglik aan dat die insluiting van dié sektor weer oorweeg moet word.
Indien die regering egter erns hiermee gehad het, kon hy in die wetsontwerp dieselfde voorsiening vir dié sektor gemaak het as vir die huis- en seisoenwerkers. Hierdie optrede is inkonsekwent en diskriminerend. Om dié rede kan die Nuwe NP nie die wetsontwerp steun nie.
Die wetsontwerp is ‘n verbetering op die bestaande wet. Die uitsluiting van die openbare sektor ontneem egter die fonds van ‘n beduidende inkomste. Dit ontneem ook ‘n beduidende groep werknemers van die voordele van die fonds. Die wetsontwerp as sodanig gaan egter nie die probleme oplos nie. Die bestaande skuld moet goedgemaak word. Dit is verblydend om te sien dat die aanvullende begroting hiervoor voorsiening maak.
‘n Vasberade wil om die fonds suksesvol te administreer en te bestuur, is noodsaaklik. Geleenthede moet deur konstruktiewe samewerking en oplossings geskep word wat veral werkloosheid onder die jeug aanpak. Dit sal die las op die maatskaplike veiligheidsnetwerke, soos die Werkloosheidsversekeringsfonds, aansienlik verlig.
Die Nuwe NP kan ongelukkig, om die redes soos genoem, nie die wetsontwerp steun nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The New NP supports the desirability of the Act without any reservations. Most of the reform measures in the amending Bill are improvements on the old Act and can, if the administration is carried out efficiently and meticulously, obviate many of the existing problems.
However, concern still exist regarding the financial viability and autonomy of the fund. The exclusion of a large and important sector of participants from the fund and the lack of actuarial calculations give rise to questions as to whether the aforementioned measures will indeed enable the fund to meet its obligations.
The fundamental principle on which the fund is built as insurance for unemployment, rests on the principle of group participation. Clause 3(1)(c), however, excludes the employers and employees in the national and provincial spheres of government. The exclusion is in contradiction with all evidence heard by the portfolio committee.
This is a significantly large exclusion and therefore contrary to the principle of minimum exclusion. It also deprives employees in the sector of the benefits of the fund. The committee therefore recommends that the inclusion of this sector be reconsidered.
However, if the Government had been serious about this matter it could have made the same provision in the Bill for this sector as for the domestic and seasonal workers. This action is inconsistent and discriminatory. For this reason the New NP cannot support the Bill.
The Bill is an improvement on the existing Act. However, the exclusion of the public sector deprives the fund of significant revenue. It also deprives a significant group of employees of the benefits of the fund. However, the Bill as such is not going to solve the problems. The existing debt must be paid back. It is heartening to see that the supplementary estimate makes provision for this.
Determination to administer and manage the fund successfully is essential. Opportunities must be created by way of constructive co-operation and solutions which tackle unemployment among the youth in particular. This will significantly lighten the burden on the social security networks, such as the Unemployment Insurance Fund.
For the reasons mentioned above, the New NP can unfortunately not support the Bill.]
Mr M N RAMODIKE: Mr Chairperson, the UDM will support this Bill. As we know, great minds debate or discuss issues, average minds debate or discuss events, and small minds debate or discuss people. We are not going to discuss people in this Bill. We are going to discuss the merits and demerits of the Bill.
I want to associate myself with the report of our Portfolio Committee on Labour on the Unemployment Insurance Bill, which has already been presented to this National Assembly for consideration. Our committee heard and considered evidence and submissions made by various stakeholders during the public hearings. To name but a few, there was Business South Africa, the Centre for International and Comparative Labour and Social Security Law, the Commission for Gender Equality, Disabled People of SA, Cosatu and several others. This is an issue. We are not talking about people here.
The commitment of the portfolio committee and the department to continue working and co-operating with the stakeholders in dealing with labour matters need, therefore, not be reiterated or emphasised. The commitment of the committee to ensure that this Parliament remains accessible, transparent and accountable cannot be questioned, in particular, in as far as this Bill is concerned.
The UDM was, however, concerned about the exclusion of public servants, as set out in section 3(1)(c) of the Bill, and about a percentage of maternity benefits which, according to the Commission for Gender Equality, may constitute unfair discrimination. We are grateful that, this morning, the hon Minister came up and responded positively to these concerns.
Our committee agreed that because of these concerns, which we also raised during the public hearings, the Ministers of Labour and of Finance and the Minister for the Public Service and Administration should investigate, expeditiously, the inclusion of public servants, taking into account the financial implications thereof, under the Unemployment Insurance Fund. The committee also agreed that the Department of Labour should further investigate the concerns about the maternity benefits and report back on the matter in the near future. The Minister has, again, responded positively to this concern.
All the political parties represented on the committee agreed unanimously that the legislation should be passed by Parliament, and the UDM supports the Bill. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Mr Chairperson, we can make as much noise as we want to on unemployment. We can debate as many Bills as we want to on unemployment in this House, but the fact of the matter is that as long as the Government of the day does not create jobs in South Africa, the financial burden of unemployment will cost South Africa dearly.
Dit is die waarheid, Meneer die Voorsitter. Die agb Minister van Arbeid sal met sy kollega moet praat en sal moet verseker dat die omstandighede in Suid-Afrika gunstig raak vir beleggings om sodoende werk te skep. As daar werk is, dan is die werkloosheidsprobleem ‘n baie kleiner een. Die agb Minister van Arbeid en sy kollegas sal moet sorg dat die veiligheidsituasie in Suid-Afrika verbeter. Die agb Minister van Arbeid moet verseker dat die arbeidswette in Suid-Afrika van so ‘n aard is, dat dit gunstig is vir oorsese beleggers en vir besigheidsmense om behoorlik besigheid in Suid- Afrika te kan kom doen. Die sukses van hierdie wetsontwerp gaan afhang van die effektiewe administrasie.
Dit is algemeen bekend dat daar baie probleme is as dit kom by die werkloosheidsversekeringsfonds. Daar is mense wat by twee of drie verskillende plekke werkloosheidsversekering gaan eis en in die tou gaan staan. Dit bring ‘n verdere finansiële las op die belastingbetalers van Suid-Afrika. Daarom sê die VF: Voordat die behoorlike administrasie om 100% te kan verseker dat daar nie korrupsie kan plaasvind nie, kan ons nie hierdie wetsontwerp ondersteun nie. Die VF kan net die wetsontwerp ondersteun indien die regering van die dag sorg vir gunstiger omstandighede om werksgeleenthede te kan skep. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[This is the truth, Mr Chairperson. The hon the Minister of Labour will have to talk to his colleague and will have to ensure that the conditions in South Africa become favourable for investments in order to create work. If there was work then the unemployment problem would be a much smaller one. The hon the Minister of Labour and his colleagues will have to ensure that the security situation in South Africa improves. The hon the Minister of Labour has to ensure that the labour laws in South Africa are of such a nature that they are favourable for foreign investors and for business people to be able to do business properly in South Africa. The success of this Bill will depend on its effective administration.
It is common knowledge that there are many problems when it comes to the unemployment insurance fund. There are people who queue at two or three different places to claim unemployment insurance. This places a further financial burden on the taxpayers of South Africa. For this reason the FF says: Until there is proper administration to make 100% sure that no corruption takes place we cannot support this Bill. The FF can only support this Bill if the government of the day ensures that there are more favourable conditions to create job opportunities.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Mr Chairperson, the hon member must be deaf.
It is noted that the contributions to the formulation of this Bill began as early as 1996. The findings of the task team appear to put in place provisions to institute an efficient Unemployment Insurance Bill.
Having viewed the provisions, everything appears adequate. However, in view of the graduated benefit schedule, it is felt, although this has been agreed to, a higher contribution should be considered. The provision the Bill makes to delink maternity and unemployment benefits is supported, and it is felt that without this differentiation, it would certainly infringe upon the rights of and discriminate against women.
The strengthening of compliance and enforcement measures serves to seriously address the issues of noncompliance of employers. The fines and penalties should certainly serve the purpose. The creation of a contributions data base certainly appears to be an administrative asset. However, a backup system and safety precautions, as to the privacy of this documentation, are important and security to ensure this must be stressed.
Furthermore, the dispute resolution measures, financial management and actuarial assessment serve their purpose well. The department is to be applauded. It is certain that the Bill sets out a good framework for the Unemployment Insurance Fund and if instituted adequately, it will certainly attain its envisaged objectives.
The MF supports the Unemployment Insurance Bill. [Applause.]
Mr G G OLIPHANT: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister, comrades and colleagues, what pains me today is that we have members of the opposition parties, particularly the DP and the FF, coming to misrepresent the facts about the Bill here today.
It is clear that members do not attend portfolio committees, and when they come here, they just talk about what they think. Actually, when the hon member from the DP started to quote from the Kliptown manifesto, I thought that at least she had read the Freedom Charter, but when she went on, it was clear that she was just quoting something else. The issues that she raised were issues that we have debated in the committee and, clearly, she has misrepresented the facts. The DP is doing a disservice to its members. They must, please, ensure that they give them the facts before they deploy them to this platform. [Interjections.]
The Unemployment Insurance Bill before Parliament today reconfirms the continued commitment of the ANC to service delivery, and the protection of the poor and the vulnerable. The Bill represents the final leg of our labour law reform process, which started in 1994.
The ANC Government has done exceptionally well, in the past seven years, to transform the labour market from what it was under the old apartheid rule to the new dispensation. The restructuring, today, of the UIF forms an important part of the five-year programme of action which was launched by the Department of Labour in 1995 to pursue the goals of the RDP. The RDP calls for new measures to extend human rights, strengthen democracy and promote economic growth. The evidence of our legislative record is next to none in the developing countries and still compares favourably with developed economies. For the record, since 1994 we have enacted the integration of labour laws, disestablished the then Department of Manpower - commonly known as ``Mannekrag’’ - and formed the Department of Labour. We have also until now passed the Nedlac Act, Labour Relations Act, Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Employment Equity Act, Skills Development Act and the Skills Development Levies Act. This is an impressive record, which has contributed meaningfully to shaping our economy today.
This Bill enables workers who become unemployed or their dependants to claim benefits from the fund, including maternity, illness and adoption benefits. It also represents yet another milestone in the implementation of our constitutional mandate to provide for appropriate social protection of those in need.
The Bill gives renewed hope to domestic and seasonal workers who will also be entitled to claim benefits from the fund after certain transitional investigations have been concluded. This provision also applies to public servants in the provincial and national spheres of Government who were historically not covered by the Unemployment Insurance Fund.
With regard to domestic workers, the investigation for their inclusion has gone on for almost 10 years since the Limbrick Commission which, amongst others, investigated workable methods of collecting their contributions. Whilst we accept that this is a complex and difficult matter and that it will not be easy for lawmakers to resolve, we also accept that it is even worse for domestic workers who become expectant and unemployed, with no social security benefits, to mitigate their economic hardship. The portfolio committee undertakes to to give the Minister and the Department of Labour all the support they would need to resolve this matter.
We also take this opportunity to welcome the adjustments estimate of R605 million for social insurance as announced by the Minister of Finance on Tuesday. This will bring the necessary relief to the Unemployment Insurance Fund and put it in a better position to meet its obligations. Through this law, we also seek to strengthen the administrative capacity of the fund in order to deal with problems of noncompliance by employers, nonpayment and the sometimes deliberate misrepresentation of employee earnings. The new system will enable claimants to be prequalified for benefits even before reporting to the Unemployment Insurance Fund offices, which further enhances the capacity of the fund to deal with employer-employee fraud.
The ANC is quite satisfied with this legislation and urges Parliament to support it. Indeed, this is a product of extensive stakeholder participation at Nedlac, which was further assisted by the involvement of the ILO department of social security. The portfolio committee also conducted public hearings on this Bill during March 2001 as part of our commitment to accountability, transparency and accessibility to Parliament. All 15 organisations that participated contributed a great deal towards improving this law and we appreciate their effort.
In conclusion, I wish to report that the portfolio committee has also finalised its work of dealing with amendments to the Labour Relations Act and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act. We are ready to debate this piece of legislation in Parliament before we go on recess or, if needs be, to come back even more ready next year to conclude this matter. The ANC supports the Unemployment Insurance Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Mr Chairperson, I want to thank the acting chairperson of the portfolio committee. Someone was calling him a small elephant. I suppose there are two elephants in Parliament: there is the big one and a small one.
I want to thank hon members for supporting our department because any labour legislation that we introduce is not an easy process. Members will remember that I made this announcement in the year 2000, but it went on up to 2001. The debates were very vibrant and, of course, had tensions - I remember domestics even chaining themselves to the gates of Parliament. That shows members how dynamic and vibrant our labour market is.
It is, of course, very easy for other members to come and lament at this podium because of not understanding the dynamics within the labour market. If one is not careful, if one does not create this balance, one can easily cause havoc, anarchy and chaos in this country. The ANC is not an anarchic organisation. We do not want chaos in this country. We do not want a situation in this country where there is no President in the country and key positions do not have people manning them, like in the Western Cape.
Unfortunately, I do not think that the hon member Ms B N Sono understands the difficulties in relation, for instance, to public servants. It is not a simple matter. Because one will effectively be deducting 1% from the salaries of public servants, one needs to consult extensively before doing that. Having been a teacher for many years, one cannot just take 1% of my salary without a challenge from me. So we have to be sure of what we are doing, because there is no union leader who has guaranteed me that there will be no reaction. We have seen reactions before, and I do not want those reactions to happen now.
Therefore, I agree with the decision of the portfolio committee on this matter. I think it is a very responsible decision that the portfolio committee has taken. I, therefore, commend them and thank them very much for taking such a decision in this regard, and for not following the DP line. That is why that party is joining the ``Death Alliances’’ all the time. [Interjections.]
Mr D H M GIBSON: Death Alliance?
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Yes, Death Alliances like yours.
I also want to say that one of the reasons we wanted to include the public servants was precisely because we, firstly, wanted the fund to be viable. However, at the time of the negotiations at Nedlac we were still rambling with our own Treasury committee in relation to the guaranteeing and underwriting of the fund. We have now resolved those problems. The state guarantees the fund.
Secondly, there is now an agreement that will deal with the current problems of the fund, hence the R605 million which was announced by the Minister of Finance in this regard. The fund is, for the first time, having serious financial difficulties because past governments had been giving us R7 million per year. We now have R605 million to assist the fund and we should be saying hallelujah.
The issue of domestics is also not a very simple matter - the hon members have domestic workers. Some members here were even opposed to what we are currently proposing in relation to the determination to their wages. I do not want to mention those who were opposed to that. Members must remember that the domestics are earning meagre wages as well and, for the UIF, we will have to deduct 1% from the R100 that they are earning per month. So there are many other issues that I need to resolve. One of them is the support of this House on the minimum wage that we are proposing, so we should stop dancing and dilly-dallying on these matters.
I really want to thank hon members.
Re a leboga, Ntate Ramodike. [Thank you, hon member Ramodike.]
I was not sure about where the New NP stands because there were some contradictions in what Mr Blaas was saying. But I do not want to blast Mr Blaas because I want him to be a member of the ANC pretty soon! [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Question put.
Division demanded.
The House divided. AYES-165: Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Baloyi, M R; Bekker, H J; Benjamin, J; Bhengu, F; Bloem, D V; Buthelezi, M N; Cachalia, I M; Carrim, Y I; Chauke, H P; Chikane, M M; Chohan-Kota, F I; Cindi, N V; Coetzee-Kasper, M P; Cwele, S C; De Lange, J H; Diale, L N; Ditshetelo, P H K; Dlali, D; Doidge, G Q M; Dudley, C; Duma, N M; Erwin, A; Fankomo, F C; Fihla, N B; Frolick, C T; Gcina, C I; George, M E; Gomomo, P J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Govender, P; Gumede, D M; Gxowa, N B; Hajaig, F; Hangana, N E; Hendrickse, P A C; Hlaneki, C J M; Hogan, B A; Holomisa, S P; Jassat, E E; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kati, J Z; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Komphela, B M; Koornhof, G W; Kota, Z A; Kotwal, Z; Landers, L T; Lishivha, T E; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Lyle, A G; Mabe, L; Mabena, D C; Mabeta, M E; Maduna, P M; Magazi, M N; Magubane, N E; Mahlangu, M J; Mahomed, F; Maimane, D S; Maine, M S; Makasi, X C; Malebana, H F; Maloney, L; Maphalala, M A; Maphoto, L I; Martins, B A D; Masala, M M; Maseka, J T; Maserumule, F T; Masutha, M T; Maunye, M M; Maziya, A M; Mbadi, L M; Mdladlana, M M S; Mfundisi, I S; Mguni, B A; Mnandi, P N; Modise, T R; Moeketse, K M; Mogoba, M S; Mohamed, I J; Mohlala, R J B; Mokoena, D A; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B G; Moloto, K A; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Morwamoche, K W; Moss, M I; Motubatse, S D; Mshudulu, S A; Mtsweni, N S; Mutsila, I; Mzizi, M A; Nair, B; Nash, J H; Ncube, B; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, N E; Ngcengwane, N D; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njobe, M A A; Nkomo, A S; Nqodi, S B; Ntshulana-Bhengu, N R; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, M B; Nzimande, L P M; Olifant, D A A; Oliphant, G G; Oosthuizen, G C; Phala, M J; Radebe, B A; Rajbally, S; Ramodike, M N; Rasmeni, S M; Ripinga, S S; Roopnarain, U; Schneeman, G D; Seaton, S A; September, C C; September, R K; Shilubana, T P; Sibiya, M S M; Sigcawu, A N; Sigwela, E M; Sikakane, M R; Sithole, D J; Skhosana, W M; Skosana, M B; Solo, B M; Solomon, G; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Turok, B; Twala, N M; Vadi, I; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, J H; Van der Merwe, S C; Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Xingwana, L M T; Zita, L; Zulu, N E.
NOES-31: Andrew, K M; Bell, B G; Blaas, A; Blanché, J P I; Borman, G M; Botha, A J; Cupido, P W; Da Camara, M L; Davidson, I O; Delport, J T; Durand, J; Eglin, C W; Gibson, D H M; Gore, V C; Kalyan, S V; Lee, T D; Lowe, C M; Maluleke, D K; Olckers, M E; Pretorius, I J; Rabie, P J; Rhoda, R T; Schalkwyk, P J; Schippers, J; Semple, J A; Seremane, W J; Sono, B N; Taljaard, R; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Wyk, A (Anna); Waters, M.
As the result of the division showed that there were fewer than one half of all the members of the House present as required for a vote to be taken on a Bill, decision of question postponed in terms of section 53(1) of the Constitution.
WELCOMING OF MILLENNIUM SENIOR CITIZENS CLUB
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Before we proceed to the next Order of the day, I would like to recognise in the gallery the members of the Millennium Senior Citizens Club of Durban, who are visiting Cape Town and our Parliament. [Applause.]
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND
CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON JUDICIAL MATTERS AMENDMENT BILL
Order disposed without debate.
Report adopted.
JUDICIAL MATTERS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Could I please solicit the support of the Whips. Hon members of the New NP, could we please have some decorum in the House?
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, it is a well known practice to encompass in a single Bill, in this case the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill, a variety of amendments which do not require individual amendments. This is the case with the Bill before this House this morning. The amendments contained in the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill to a large extent correct deficiencies in certain provisions and repeal certain redundant provisions.
I do not intend to explain these technical amendments to the House today. However, it often happens that proposed amendments of a more comprehensive and substantial nature are included in an amending Bill of this nature …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, it is not permissible to be conducting business in the aisles, as some hon members are doing. I am sorry to interrupt the debate. Hon Prof Mohamed and all hon members who are in the aisles should either take their seats or leave the Chamber quietly so that the business of the House can proceed. Hon Minister, you may continue. We will give you injury time.
The MINISTER: Chairperson, thanks for that kindness.
I want particularly to refer to clauses 6 and 7 of the Bill. However, allow me to provide the House with some background information before I turn to the content of the relevant clauses.
Section 81 of the Correctional Services Act of 1998 deals with special measures for the reduction of the prison population. Statistical data provided by the Department of Correctional Services indicates that an unacceptably high percentage of the total prison population on a monthly basis consists of unsentenced prisoners.
Since the ambit of section 81 of the Correctional Services Act of 1998 is limited to sentenced prisoners, and in an attempt to address the overcrowding in our prisons, a provision was included in the Correctional Services Amendment Bill by way of an amendment which aimed to establish a mechanism for the release of unsentenced prisoners. The Correctional Services Amendment Bill was passed by this House on 11 May this year and referred to the National Council of Provinces for concurrence. Certain objections were raised in respect of the relevant proposed provision while the Bill was being considered by the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Development. The chairperson of the committee decided to invite comments on the Bill. After considering the comments received, a further amendment was effected to the proposed provision of the Bill and the Bill was referred back to the National Assembly.
However, a decision was taken to reject the relevant clause in favour of a more comprehensive amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977. This decision was based on the fact that a mechanism of this nature should form part of the bail provisions contained in Chapter 9 of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977, and that provision ought to be made for the head of prison to apply to the magistrate’s court in question to reconsider bail conditions in individual cases.
It was also felt that applications of this nature should be restricted to persons who remain in custody in respect of certain less serious offences. Any magistrate of the magistrate’s court in question may consider such an application.
This brings me to clauses 6 and 7 of the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill before the House, which were formulated after a process of consultation with the Department of Correctional Services and the Office of the inspecting judge for prisons, who were in favour of and supported the proposed provisions.
Clause 6 of the Bill, therefore, aims to amend Chapter 9 of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977 by inserting a new section 63A into that Act. Provision is made for the release of accused persons or the amendment of the bail conditions of accused persons who are charged with certain less serious offences; who have been granted bail by any lower court in respect of the relevant offences but are unable to pay the amount of bail concerned, and who are in detention only in respect of the less serious offences concerned. Clause 6 further provides that an application of this nature may be brought by a head of prison on account of prison conditions which constitute a material and imminent threat to the human dignity, physical health or safety of the accused person in question. An application of this nature will also only be successful if the Director of Public Prosecutions concerned, or a prosecutor authorised thereto by him or her in writing, has indicated that the prosecuting authority does not oppose the application. Clause 7, in short, aims to amend section 64 of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977 so as to ensure that the proceedings contemplated in clause 6 are recorded in full.
I conclude by saying that the proper application of a mechanism of this nature will, to a large extent, contribute to a position where an acceptable norm for the prison may be maintained with relative ease. I want to thank the portfolio committee, particularly Adv Johnnie de Lange, for their co-operation and for the manner in which they dealt with this Bill. [Applause.]
Mr M T MASUTHA: Chairperson, hon members and the House, when this country adopted its Constitution in 1996, it made certain promises to its people, which it now has the duty to fulfil. One of these promises is contained in section 1(a) under the Founding Provisions of the Constitution, which states, and I quote: The Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state founded on the following values:
Human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.
The notion of equality is further elaborated upon under section 9(2) of the Constitution, which states and I quote:
Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms.
The Bill before us today, the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill, 2001, is a small, yet significant contribution towards the fulfilment of this promise. I am in particular referring to clause 6 of the Bill, which introduces a new section into the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977, namely section 63(A). This new section empowers a head of a prison to apply to the court which has granted bail to an accused who is unable to pay the amount of the bail for the release of the accused in lieu of bail, or to amend the bail conditions imposed on the accused by that court. This could include the reduction of the amount of bail granted to the accused by that court.
The proposal to include such a major amendment under the Correctional Services Amendment Bill, 2001, was, correctly so, deemed by this House to be inappropriate when it rejected that Bill earlier this year. As the detained persons concerned in this regard are not convicted persons, but awaiting-trial accused persons whose cases are still pending finalisation by a court, by way of a criminal trial. Moreover, it would have been inappropriate, as was proposed in that Bill, not to refer the review of bail granted to the detained accused person back to the court which granted such bail. Further, the Bill is intended to ensure that this measure is applied, particularly, in the specific situation in which the prison population of a particular prison is reaching such proportions that it constitutes a material and imminent threat to the human dignity, physical health or safety of an accused.
The Bill before us is intended to ensure that poor people who have committed minor crimes are not left to languish in jail, pending finalisation of their trials, purely because they cannot afford to pay bail. This will ensure that all people are equal before the law and have the right to equal protection and benefit of the law as our Constitution dictates under section 12. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members might have noticed that the hon Mr Masutha is very proficient at braille. [Applause.]
Dr J T DELPORT: Mr Chairperson, allow me, at the outset, to tender the apologies of Mrs Camerer, my colleague from the New NP who cannot be here today. I have no mandate to speak on her behalf, but I am quite sure that she will embrace everything that I say. [Interjections.]
Een van die aangrypendste oomblikke wat ek die afgelope twee tot drie jaar in hierdie Parlement beleef het, was toe die President van die Konstitusionele Hof, sy edele regter Chaskalson, voor die portefeuljekomitee kom getuig het. Hy was emosioneel ontroer toe hy sy persoonlike ervaring en waarneming aan ons voorgelê het van hoe dit in ons tronke lyk waar verhoorafwagtende mense, en baie van hulle op kleiner oortredings, aangehou word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[One of the most moving moments I experienced during the past two or three years in this Parliament was when the President of the Constitutional Court, His Excellency Mr Justice Chaskalson, gave evidence before the portfolio committee. He was emotionally moved when he related his personal experience and observation to us about conditions in our prisons where people awaiting trial, and many of them for minor transgressions, are being detained.]
He was adamant that, from the point of view of the human dignity of our people, regarding their physical health and safety, we simply cannot allow this situation to continue. We fully support this legislation that will at least take out of prison those people who have committed what we normally call petty offences, and who cannot pay the R20, R50 or R100 bail to take them out of those circumstances.
However, that does not solve the big problem because we are dealing with an aspect. We are making a contribution. In fact, what we are doing by accepting this Bill today is to admit that we have circumstances contrary to human dignity, physical health and safety. We need more and better facilities. We cannot wish away crime. We cannot let all accused go free on bail. Certainly not, because that, once again, would be contrary to the interests of the community. But we must, some way or another, ensure that more and better facilities are provided so that those who are being kept as awaiting trial persons are not exposed to inhumane circumstances.
Ons kan nie toelaat dat nog meer mense, en veral jongmense, se lewens geknak word in tronke nie. Te veel jongmense kom erger uit ‘n tronk as wat hulle daar ingegaan het. Te veel jongmense doen morele en/of fisieke skade op van ‘n omvang waarvan hulle nooit weer kan herstel nie.
Ons moet aandring, as Parlement, dat almal betrokke, veral die Departement Korrektiewe Dienste en die Tesourie, aan hierdie baie belangrike saak aandag gee. Ons doel met ‘n vonnis is mos nie net om die man te straf nie. Ons doel is in die eerste plek hervorming. Dit is my pleidooi, dit is my party se pleidooi, en ek glo dit is die breë gemeenskap se pleidooi. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[We cannot allow the lives of more people, and especially young people, to be shattered in prisons. Too many young people leave prison in a worse state than they were in when they entered it. Too many young people are damaged morally and/or physically, to such an extent that they can never recover again.
We, as Parliament, should insist that all those involved, especially the Department of Correctional Services and the Treasury, address this very important issue. Surely what we intend to do by way of a sentence is not only to punish the person. Our intent is primarily that of reform. That is my plea, that is the plea of my party, and I believe it is the plea of the broader community.]
Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill is a Bill that seeks to address the problems faced by the Department of Correctional Services and other justice authorities regarding overcrowding in correctional facilities.
We know that unemployment is an enemy to our country. It is often found that the accused persons or awaiting-trial prisoners are given small amounts of bail, and yet they cannot pay. That adds to the problem of overcrowding.
The Bill will assist the head of a prison, as provided for in the Correctional Service Act 111 of 1998, to deal with the overcrowding. If the head of a prison is satisfied that the population of that prison is reaching such an alarming proportion that it constitutes a material and imminent threat to the human dignity, physical health or safety of the accused who is charged with an offence that is not serious, or an offence that a police officer could have granted bail for, in terms of section 59, or when bail is granted by a lower court and there are no further charges, then the head of that prison may apply to the applicable court for a release of an accused on a warning, in the place of bail.
However, the application must be lodged in writing with the clerk of the court. The application must be supported by an affidavit from the head of a prison and a written certificate from the Director of Public Prosecutions, or an authorised person, that the prosecuting authority does not oppose the application. If the accused has an attorney, the attorney must be notified of the transaction. The clerk of the court must place the relevant application before the magistrate for consideration without delay.
The good thing about this is that the magistrate may even cause the accused to be present if he or she deems it necessary. The outcome of this amendment is that the magistrate may release the accused on a warning to appear before a specified court on a specified date or reduce the bail amount.
The IFP believes that if this procedure is followed to the letter, it will go a long way in addressing the problems facing the Department of Correctional Services, ie the overcrowding and its associated financial burdens. The IFP supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Mr J T MASEKA: Chairperson, this Bill amends various existing Acts within the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development that can be amended without having to enact a separate amendment for each Act. These amendments include repealing certain redundant provisions and filling gaps which have arisen in practice.
Clauses 6 and 7 of this Bill are very important, because they fill gaps that have arisen in practice. It is also very important to advise, perhaps, the Correctional Services officials that these clauses should not be misused because some people might be taken to court for bail reduction unnecessarily, even more so in the case of people who pretend to have committed lesser offences, but they are instead the most dangerous criminals.
The UDM supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, the ACDP, in fact, alerted the chairman of the justice committee regarding problems with the envisaged amendment to the Correctional Services Act. It was significant that this issue was raised by the hon Steve Swart after an address to the committee by the Constitutional Court President, judge Chaskalson, as the learned judge had referred to the appalling conditions which existed at the Diepkloof Prison.
The inspecting judge, Judge Fagan, has also drawn attention to the inhumane conditions in certain of our prisons, and the urgent need to curtail the spread of disease, particularly HIV/Aids while this is still manageable. Of the total prison population of 168 497, there are 50 902 prisoners awaiting trial, many of whom may well be acquitted. Many thousands of these awaiting- trial prisoners are exposed to appalling conditions and run the risk of becoming infected with HIV, thus resulting in an indirect death sentence.
Whilst acknowledging the role of prisons in protecting society from dangerous criminals, prisons are an expensive way of reinforcing criminal behaviour. This is particularly true in South African prisons. And, it is for this reason that members of civil society need to lobby Government officials and parliamentarians for the implementation of restorative justice practices.
The ACDP will support this Bill. [Applause.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill appears to centralise amendments made to a series of Bills, which certainly serve to save on paperwork and a series of individual sittings which would have been required to cover these within the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.
Having to rectify deficiencies, supplementing and filling gaps and repealing certain redundant provisions are to be addressed through combining a series of Bills within the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill. The question should be asked, noting the allocation of time, whether it is possible to debate all these amendments within the allocated time to enable us to determine the validity of individual amendments. As in this case, amendments are made to 12 existing Bills via 38 clauses.
However, having viewed these clauses, it is noted that the amendments were made wisely and strategically. The MF places its confidence in the department’s efforts to correct and improve these Bills. The MF supports the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, I am essentially rising to thank hon members for this very good and short discussion.
I have no doubt that Madam Sheila Camerer would have agreed with Dr Delport if she was here, because the sentiments that he expressed in his short speech are shared by all of us. Indeed, we all owe it to ourselves to do something about the conditions in our correctional service facilities. The hon member should appreciate the efforts that are being made. New prisons are being built. We are even co-operating with the private sector in terms of what we call Apops in order to address these problems.
We agree with the hon Dudley that we also need to research the whole concept of restorative justice. As a department, we are beginning to do precisely that.
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
Order disposed of without debate.
Report adopted.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, the Bill before the House is intended to give effect to the Law Commission’s recommendations. It has only two main objectives, namely, to give statutory recognition to the practice of plea bargaining, which already takes place in our courts; and to introduce the new practice of sentence bargaining into our criminal law.
Because the provisions of the Bill are self-explanatory, I do not intend discussing them in any detail whatsoever. I commend the Bill to this House. [Applause.]
Ms F I CHOHAN-KOTA: Chairperson and hon members who are left, I have been given 12 minutes to deal with this Bill. I promise that I will only take part of that time.
This Bill has been introduced now as part of the plan to simplify and streamline the criminal justice system. Plea discussions and plea bargaining have happened in our courts on an informal basis and what this law is doing now is to regulate an informal practice in a manner that takes care to ensure that no injustices occur.
However, there are a few things to note with regard to this Bill. Firstly, it does not apply to the unrepresented accused. We feel that, generally, we should discourage the practice of the accused standing before courts without legal representation as our Constitution provides for legal representation.
Secondly, we feel that if the unrepresented accused were covered, there would be an imbalance in the negotiating process in that this would pit the prosecutor, who is obviously well versed in the law and tenets of this Act, against the accused, who, being at an obvious disadvantage, will be vulnerable.
The last reason for this exclusion is to protect the integrity of the plea agreement itself. Theoretically, nothing would prevent an unrepresented accused from challenging the agreement once it has been concluded. This would, again theoretically, result in litigation upon litigation which would simply defeat the point of plea bargaining. The second issue of note in this Bill is that there is a role created for victims of crime. In terms of the Act, the prosecutor, prior to finalising a formal agreement with the accused, has to consult with the investigating officer and the victim in the matter concerned. The victim in this regard is able to do two things. Firstly, they are able to make representations as to the proposed charge and sentence. Secondly, the victim can insist on the inclusion in the agreement of the compensation provision relating to any damages suffered.
Some of us in the committee have been in favour, for a long time, of the more frequent use of the existing mechanisms in the Criminal Procedure Act to offer compensation to victims of crime. These provision have, for one reason or another, fallen into disuse in our courts. It is, therefore, particularly pleasing that compensation is specifically mentioned in this legislation and hopefully will assist in establishing a culture of restorative justice in our courts.
The final issue that requires some note is that of minimum sentences. The House, not so long ago, amended this very Act in another piece of legislation that we have coined the ``Minimum Sentences Legislation’’. This Act provided for minimum sentences for very serious national priority crimes. It is vital that the measures in this Bill do not undermine the expression of the will of this Parliament in that other amendment to this particular Act.
To ensure this, we do provide some measures in the Bill. But, the main task will be that of the National Director of Public Prosecutions who will have to compile directives and other matters in this regard. We keenly await these directives in the next few months.
It is important to note and we must stress that plea bargaining for the sake of obviating difficult and complex trials pertaining to serious crimes is not what this is about. However, plea bargaining reduces the time required to be spent on straightforward, open and shut cases so that prosecutors are able to invest more time and effort in serious and complex crimes.
Before even embarking on plea bargaining negotiations, the prosecutor must take the interests of the community into consideration. This is provided for in this legislation. It is for this reason that the task of plea bargaining will be handled by senior prosecutors in our courts. We have provided that the directives of the National Director of Public Prosecutions must be submitted before they become effective, so that we in this House could have the opportunity to make an input. We also look forward to receiving these directives within the next few months.
Finally, let me say that, as a committee, we are under no illusions that this is a perfect Bill. There are too many potential contingencies that will arise in practice and many unknowns. It is therefore safe to predict that from time to time we are going to come back, revisit, amend, twig and improve what we have in front of us. In anticipation of this, we have provided in the Bill itself that, once every year, records and statistics relating to the implementation and application of this Bill in practice, must be submitted to Parliament. This is like an in-built oversight and monitoring mechanism.
However, having said this, I would be remiss if I did not emphasise that this Bill marks a bold step towards the delivery of a quick, efficient and more just justice regime in our courts. The department, the Law Commission and this House itself should all justly and justifiably be proud of this step. I have no hesitation in saying that the ANC completely and wholeheartedly supports this legislation. [Applause.]
Dr J T DELPORT: Chairperson and hon Minister, the DP supports this Bill. In fact, the hon the Minister will recall that this was one of the aspects that was mentioned by the DP during the budget debate as something that requires priority attention.
I am not going to repeat what my hon colleague has said in her exposition of the Bill. What we were very concerned with right from the outset was the dangers inherent in a system of plea bargaining and sentencing. What one does not want is a perception by the public that some things are agreed upon in the backrooms, which they have no access to. That is one point. We have remedied that. It takes place in an open court and the magistrate must put the agreement, questions and satisfy himself that both the plea and the sentence are just and appropriate.
Another point which has an inherent danger is the problem of an inexperienced prosecutor who comes up against a very intimidating personality in the form of an old and experienced attorney or even a senior advocate. This is also being remedied and we want to refer to the valuable advice of Dr D’Oliviera. Only prosecutors authorised by the National Prosecuting Authority will be able to make such agreements. I can imagine that in the place where I am from, Port Elizabeth, there may be three to five prosecutors who are the designated authorised people who can enter into agreements of this nature.
Another important aspect, and my colleague has referred to it, is the step taken to promote restorative justice. It would seem that the idea of compensation in the Act is not being used to its full extent and we are bringing this to the attention of the victims, and the surviving spouses must also be given an opportunity to make inputs. In many instances, such as in motor car collisions, the criminal case and damages could be settled once and for all. This is especially so in cases where poor people cannot afford long court cases. This is a very important innovation in our law.
We have known in the past that, to a certain extent, plea bargaining could be accepted by prosecutors on a charge of murder, culpable homicide or assault. This Bill, however, takes it to the full extent. It is something which we were cautious about in the committee. We have set certain fixed parameters, which is a good measure. Let this develop within those parameters until the whole culture of plea bargaining and sentence bargaining has become more part of our law. It should also become part of the curriculum at universities, where future legal practitioners could be equipped.
Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, the Criminal Procedure Second Amendment Bill seeks to address the need to reduce the burden on court cases. We support the Bill. We do so because of all the compelling reasons cited in the committee meetings. We also do so on account of what the preceding speakers had to say from the podium today. This is indeed another small, but important step being taken to improve the efficiency of the justice system and remove bottlenecks which lead to long delays. It is common cause with us that justice delayed is justice denied.
Out of all the agreements we have had, one more thing that needs to be agreed upon is the completion of the consensus. This entails educating the South African public. Laws can be outstanding, just, clear, concise, well written, modern and in keeping with the best, but what good are they if they are not understood by everyone. We should make them our own.
Crime in our country has many causes, and estrangement from the law is probably one of the most important. In the case of a plea bargain, one has access to many American films in which this occurs. Government should encourage scriptwriters to include new advances in justice as soon as the President’s ink has dried on this Act of Parliament. Film and video are effective means of translating what is so clear to the Johnny de Langes or the Penuell Madunas of this world.
Film and video allow the ordinary citizen to understand in a real life situation, how the law works and what implications it has. Plea bargaining will soon be a way of life in our courts. Can we replace LA Law with ``SA Law’’ on our TV screens? I also wish to make a plea for plea bargaining to be scripted into dramas for the small and big screens.
Mr J T MASEKA: Chairperson and hon members, this amending Bill facilitates plea bargaining between the prosecutor and an accused person or his legal representative, which is entered into before an accused person pleads to the charge against him or her. This agreement is in respect of a plea of guilty by the accused to an offence of which he or she may be convicted.
Furthermore, this Bill relates to the appropriate negotiated sentence to be imposed in the event of the accused being found guilty. This plea bargaining helps to shorten the trial and will also help to reduce the backlog of cases in courts.
It is also important that accused persons who are not represented in court should have fair trials. Prosecutors who are to conduct this plea bargaining process should also take the interest of an accused person into consideration. The UDM supports the Bill.
Ms C DUDLEY: Chairperson, the ACDP has been promoting the concept of restorative justice for some time now. The appeal of the restorative justice model, particularly when considered against the backlog, is the acceptance of blame by the offender and the recognition of the need to make restitution to the victim. Unfortunately, this has not been the traditional approach where the offender has, in fact, sought to evade accountability and the legal process has degenerated into a contest between the state and the defence lawyers to establish guilt or obtain an acquittal.
This amending Bill applies restorative justice premised upon the accused accepting blame by pleading guilty. The plea bargaining takes place subject to existing legislation regarding minimum sentences.
The ACDP particularly welcomes the fact that victims of crime must, where it is reasonably possible to do so, be afforded the opportunity to make representations regarding the contents of the agreement and the inclusion of a condition relating to the compensation of the rendering to the complainant of some specific benefit or service.
The prosecutor must also consult regarding the interests of the community. Thus not only are victims’ rights included, but community interests are also considered. The ACDP welcomes this Bill.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, though considered legal, the current situation of prosecutors and accused persons entering into informal plea discussions and plea negotiations, does need to regulate sentence bargaining, for which the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977 failed to provide.
In 1992 a survey of 72 of the world’s most populous countries found that guilty pleas accounted for 92% of all convictions in state courts. It is now 2001 and as to whether those statistics have escalated or depreciated, plea bargaining plays its role here.
Noting the complexities that accompany criminal procedures, the investigation to simplify this process, especially in the light of plea bargaining, has been adequately addressed. The Bill aims to allow the prosecutor and the accused person to negotiate and enter into agreement concerning a sentence if the accused is found guilty. The question arising from this is whether this will not cause tension between the presiding officers and the prosecutors as a result of the powers which the Bill gives to the prosecutors?
The MF supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Mr C AUCAMP: Chairperson, my apologies for missing out on the previous debate. I was, for a few moments, out of the House. The proceedings went so fast that when I came back the debate was concluded. So I wanted to support that Bill.
The overcrowded courtrooms form the background to this Bill, which support it. I think that this Bill will relieve this situation considerably.
Die AEB pleit reeds geruime tyd vir iets soos die Hof vir Klein Eise wat siviele sake behartig, wat kriminele sake met eenvoudiger prosedure kan bespoedig. Dié wetsontwerp kan iets daarvan beantwoord.
Die vraag kan gevra word of die regsbeginsel van ordelike regsproses nie in gedrang kom nie. Ons het reeds pleitonderhandelinge met betrekking tot die uitspraak, skuldig of nie, en dit word nou na die vonnis uitgebrei. Ons voorsien geen probleem daarmee nie.
Met verkeersoortredings het ons reeds jare lank pleitonderhandelinge met betrekking tot die vonnis. Daar word vooraf oor boetes onderhandel, sonder ‘n hofsaak. Daarom glo ons dat dit in beginsel reg is. Net een vraag aan die Minister. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The AEB has been pleading for a considerable time for something similar to the Small Claims Court which deals with civil cases, to expedite criminal cases by means of a simpler procedure. This Bill can contribute to our achieving this goal.
The question may be asked whether the legal principle of orderly process of law is not being jeopardised. We already have plea bargaining with regard to the verdict, guilty or not, and this is now being extended to the sentence. We foresee no problems in this regard.
In respect of traffic offences we have had plea bargaining with regard to sentences for many years. Fines are negotiated in advance, without a court case. We therefore believe it to be right in principle. I would just like to ask the Minister one question.]
I always thought that there would be a limit - a ceiling - that one cannot have murder and serious cases on this procedure. But I can see that there is no such thing in the Bill. Can the hon the Minister put us at ease as to why the process will not be endangered by the difficult and serious cases? I thought that the process would only apply in less serious cases. We support the Bill. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, I am rising to thank hon members for such a good and yet very short debate on this Bill. We deliberately sped through the first debate because we did not deem it wise to listen to the hon member Aucamp. We knew his views. [Interjections.]
Mr C AUCAMP: I know the hon Minister’s views too.
The MINISTER: But, of course, we missed him. There are no limits, deliberately because we want to leave these matters in the hands of the prosecutors and the courts.
It has been said by other speakers that, indeed, the courts would have the final say because they would have to accept the plea or sentencing agreement. If the court does not accept it, for whatever reasons, it does not matter whether one is talking about possession of a few grams of cocaine or dagga, or about murder, then there is no agreement. The case proceeds as though there has never been an agreement at all. Madam Chohan-Kota said that we should hasten the provision of the guidelines. I will definitely make sure that that does happen, because the system cannot work without proper guidelines in place.
The hon member Mzizi said that we should replace LA Law'' with SA
Law’’. I will ask the hon member himself to convey this sentiment to my
colleague Dr Ben Ngubane. But I must say that in some instances it is
already happening. One will see attempts on SABC 1 and 2 to present
something about the criminal justice system on television. But I am sure
that we can do a bit more than that. With those few words, I would like to
express my gratitude to the Chairperson and hon members. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
LOTTERIES AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate) The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, those who were clapping and hoping that I might have the numbers for the next draw, I must disappoint them. [Laughter.] [Interjections.] I would like to begin by first thanking the committee and the House for agreeing to fast-track the progress of the Bill through.
This relates to one issue only in the amendment, and that is promotional competitions. Those hon members who were involved from the beginning will recall that there was much discussion on this matter. Promotional competitions really have two dimensions to them, which we are dealing with in this piece of legislation. One is the potential for these competitions to proliferate and possibly compete with the National Lottery. Secondly, there are certain aspects of these competitions which consumers need to be protected against.
In the original Act as it was passed, we put a quite severe limit on the promotional competitions. Subsequently, as was agreed, we have done considerable research on this matter and I think that our view is quite clear that the restriction to R1 million was not workable and we have tightened up slightly on the consumer protection aspects.
I am pleased that the amendment has gone through and it will clarify the position and probably allow for a number of promotional competitions in the Christmas period, during which hon members stand a chance of doing something useful and interesting. I hope hon members will support the amendment. [Applause.]
Mrs B N SONO: Mr Chairperson and hon members, section 54 of the Lotteries Act of 1997 makes provision for the regulation of promotional competitions. It also places an obligation on the Minister who administers the Act, the Minister of Trade and Industry, to make regulations in respect of promotional competitions prescribing matters not provided for in that section.
It is an improvement on what it was initially. It makes it easier for other competitions to exist within the country. The DP supports any measure that curtail the Minister’s ability to impose a monopoly.
Again, in view of the fact that the National Lottery Fund has been slow in allocating funds to charities, this amending Bill makes it easier for some charities to run their own competitions and, thereby, be more efficient.
The DP supports the Bill.
Mr D LOCKEY: Mr Chairperson, I have been under pressure not to use the allotted 12 minutes. This Bill amends the Lotteries Act of 1997 relating to matters connected with promotional competitions.
Section 54 of the principal Act regulates such promotional competitions. It empowers the Minister of Trade and Industry to make regulations which govern the scope of operation of such competitions.
The main purpose of section 54 is to protect the national lottery and other lotteries from the potentially adverse effects of promotional competitions. One has to stretch the imagination to comprehend why this protection was deemed necessary, particularly given the runaway success of the national lottery in South Africa.
Even our beer consumption has declined significantly since the introduction of the national lottery. It appears, therefore, that there is no need for such overzealous protection. An extensive survey of the marketing industry in South Africa has found that section 54 was too restrictive and, secondly, that some of these provisions were impractical and not conducive to bona fide marketing practice. The objective of this Bill, therefore, is to repeal unnecessarily restrictive provisions.
The Bill still contains adequate protection for the consumer against any negative influence that might arise through the conduct of a promotional competition. The Minister still has the power to regulate the accounting procedures and the process of identifying the winner of such a competition. Promotional competitions may also not add to the regular price of the product being promoted, but a promotional campaign can be run with a significant discount to the product being promoted.
The Bill received widespread support from the marketing industry, and the ANC supports the amending Bill. [Applause.]
Mr H J BEKKER: Mr Chairman, the Lotto is the first national lottery that has ever been introduced in South Africa. Logically, with uncertainty in mind, legislation prohibiting any other form of lottery had to be very stringent at that time. At that time, also, the original goal determined by the portfolio committee with regard to section 54 was to protect the national lottery against competition.
Public response against the draft regulations in terms of section 54 was overwhelmingly negative, and it was argued that they were not practical and hostile to accepted marketing practice and restrictive on business operations. Responses were also critical of the fact that the maximum value of the prizes was limited to R1 million annually.
The National Lotteries Board has now concluded that promotional competitions had not negatively affected the national lottery and that the very restrictive conditions of section 54 could be amended to retain just those aspects that provided the public with protection. The effect of this legislation is that promotional competition is no longer unlawful if the purchase of goods or the use of the service promoted by that promotional competition falls into line with these particular aspects.
The Bill, therefore, amends section 54 of the Lotteries Act of 1997 by repealing unnecessary limits and protective measures. The reality of the situation is that promotional competitions which were conducted continually, even after they were outlawed in terms of the original Gambling Act, are of vital importance and serve as a marketing tool for any business that operates in the public domain by selling goods and services. They form an integral part of advertising and promotion campaigns, create jobs, stimulate economic activity and enhance consumer participation and spending in the goods and services field. Furthermore, since the national lottery has, as such, been a huge success and promotional competitions seem not to have harmed it in any way, this Bill is fully in order. The IFP will, therefore, support this Bill. [Applause.]
Dr R T RHODA: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members, the Lotteries Amendment Bill is very straightforward and very clear and, at the outset, I will say that the New NP supports the Bill.
Because promotional competitions are an important part of the marketing mix and a legitimate business tool today, and because the original draft of section 54 of the Lotteries Act of 1997 would have had the effect of making many promotional competitions unlawful, and I believe this was not the intention of the legislation, the National Lotteries Board requested the Bureau of Market Research of the University of South Africa to conduct research into promotional competitions and to report on the possible effect of the draft regulations on promotional competitions.
After consideration of the report, the National Lotteries Board recommended that section 54 be amended quite extensively. Persons most affected, namely the members of the Marketing Association of South Africa and the Direct Marketing Association of South Africa, now state that they are highly pleased and note that the amendment recognises the legitimacy of promotional competitions, and that section 54, as stated in the objects of the amending Bill, retains provisions to protect the general public at large.
We support the Bill.
Mr C T FROLICK: Mr Chairperson and hon members, the aim of the Lotteries Amendment Bill is to amend section 54 of the original Act.
Extensive public comments were received by the National Lotteries Board on the regulations drafted and published in terms of section 54 of the Act. The submissions received were mostly negative and claimed that that section was impractical, unimplementable, hostile to and not cognisant of accepted marketing practice and realities, and unduly restrictive on bona fide business operations.
Indeed, promotional competitions are an important part of marketing and the original draft would have made such competitions unlawful. The Bureau of Market Research at Unisa was started by the National Lotteries Board to conduct research regarding these competitions. The Board based its recommendations to the Minister on this research.
The UDM concurs that amendments to section 54 of the Act retains the provisions necessary to achieve the intended objectives of the section, namely the protection of the general public. Simultaneously, unnecessary limits and protective measures are repealed.
The UDM supports the Lotteries Amendment Bill, as amended.
Mrs C DUDLEY: Mr Chairman, March 2000 saw the coming into being of the national lottery. The first lottery game, the Lotto, has an average jackpot win of several million rands per week, and people have spent more than R3,4 billion on the lottery since it began.
The lotteries are accessible to communities previously inaccessible to legalised forms of gambling and are available from more than 7000 outlets, countrywide. The lottery is a no-risk monopoly which purports to exist primarily to support good causes. In fact, it is a risk-free licence for Government to print money, and this Bill affords even more protection for this monopoly.
So far its performance has been appalling and the consequences being that charities have in fact suffered and not benefited, receiving less later or nothing at all. In addition, questionable new causes have been supported, such as established rugby teams like the Blue Bulls.
Only in so far as this Bill restricts gambling would we agree with it. Anne Crotty had already summed it up in Business Report last year, saying that, indeed, looking back over the past years, one would be forgiven for thinking that there was a concerted attempt by business and the Government to shrink the economy.
Within six weeks of the launch of the lottery, consumer-related companies were warning of its effects on their sales and bottom line. Now, every week corporate results reveal the strain of the huge shift that is occurring in consumer demands. It is not just the food and clothing groups that are suffering. It is also the furniture retailers. The lottery has absolutely no positive economic impact, and its effect is 99,9% negative.
George Bernard Shaw said the lottery is a tax on people who do not understand maths. However, more distressing than this is that this predominantly attacks the poor. Rich people buy lottery tickets for distraction. Poor people buy them out of desperation. Even the Minister of Social Development has acknowledged that his budget is funding the gambling industry in South Africa.
The ACDP believes that the lottery should be terminated or, at the very least, become a section 21 company where all profits are distributed to charities and not to shareholders sitting overseas, profiting out of the hardships of South Africans. The ACDP and the AEB, who allowed me their time, will not be supporting this Bill. [Applause.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Mr Chairperson, since the introduction of the lottery to South Africa, people have flocked to purchase tickets for the chance to win the millions put up for grabs.
It is noted that the earlier Bill allocated provisions that were not in order and the amendments made in this Bill serve to correct that. It is nice to note that the close working relationship between Government and research institute as well as the para-research conducted by the Bureau of Market Research of the University of South Africa has adequately supplied research that assisted with the formation of the amendment made.
The now-amended Bill appears to be in order and has no real effect on the running of the lottery. Although it contradicts many religious beliefs, the lottery has instilled hope in many South Africans who wish for a better life than one of poverty.
The MF supports this Bill. Tata Ma Chance, Tata Ma Millions. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Mr Chairperson, I thank those parties that supported the Bill. I must say it was somewhat of a pleasure to have a relatively sensible input coming from my left for a change.
I fully respect the rights of the religious-based parties to be opposed to the lottery and it is good to see causes supported with such passion. However, I do think that we should keep a sense of perspective on the facts. There is no argument that, I think, can be sustained that the performance of the lottery has been appalling.
Regarding the purported shifts in expenditure from the furniture industry and all others, this is really not something that a coherent case can be made of. Shifts in expenditure are occurring all the time. The furniture industry is one of the best performing industries in the economy, and one of the fastest growing sectors in the economy. So, all these tales that we heard about shifts towards cellphones, etc, are just the ordinary workings of any economy.
It seems to me that it would be a far better situation that, if people are going to gamble, and I am afraid people gamble worldwide, it should be done in a manner that is regulated and, through the lottery we can have an important impact on ordinary people. To say that the charities will suffer is just not correct. The system of distribution that we have put in place far exceeds, in terms of credential requirement, transparency and efficiency, anything that has been put in place in South Africa before.
We have completed the first phase of distributions, and members in the House will recall what that was about. That was for urgent cases particularly related to children and poverty. We are now going through a much wider process of putting things out for distribution. Four hundred million rands is available for distribution this year. The impact that we can have on charities and good causes, with this, is outstanding.
I think it is not correct or useful to attack the allocations made to sporting bodies. This is a very important part of our society. The activities for which these funds were given to these sporting associations were to build facilities and programmes for the youth. That is an outstanding cause, and we will continue to provide funds for outstanding causes. We will begin moving into the arts and culture domain, so that the gambling that the people do, the causes that we will eventually use these funds for, are very useful. I make these points because I think it is important that we have a sense of pride in and ownership of the good causes that we have. We, as Government have moved prudentially. I will not make any apologies for that. We have put in place a distribution mechanism that identifies each and every recipient and, where it is possible, to track, at any time, what is happening to those funds.
If we are going to distribute money as Government, we must do it in the best possible way. We have done that. I do not apologise for that. I thank the House for its support. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Mrs C DUDLEY: I would like the objection of the ACDP recorded.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Your objection will be recorded.
Mrs C DUDLEY: I would like the objection of the AEB noted … [Interjections.]
Mr C AUCAMP: Chairperson, I would like the objection of the AEB recorded.
I also have a point of order I want to raise. In her speech on my behalf, the hon Dudley referred to the Blue Bulls as an ``established’’ rugby team. I think that is an overstatement. [Laughter.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Mrs Dudley, you do not move an objection on behalf of another party. You only do it behalf of your own party. [Interjections.]
Bill read a second time (African Christian Democratic Party and Afrikaner Eenheidsbeweging dissenting).
COMPANIES AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Order disposed of without debate.
Report adopted and Bill agreed to.
CULTURAL LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Order disposed of without debate.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House in terms of Rule 272(4)(c) pass the original Bill as approved by the House on 24 May 2001 without incorporating the proposed amendment from the National Council of Provinces.
Agreed to.
Bill [B 45B-2000] accordingly passed again without further amendment.
The House adjourned at 11:38. _____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The Minister of Communications submitted the
Wysigingswetsontwerp op Telekommunikasie [W 65 - 2001] (Nasionale
Vergadering - art 75) to the Speaker and the Chairperson on 2
November 2001. This is the official translation of the
Telecommunications Amendment Bill [B 65 - 2001] (National Assembly
- sec 75), which was introduced in the National Assembly by the
Minister on 6 September 2001.
National Assembly:
- The Speaker:
Bills passed by National Assembly on 2 November 2001: To be submitted
to President of the Republic for assent:
(i) Companies Amendment Bill [B 35B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec
75).
(ii) Cultural Laws Amendment Bill [B 45B - 2000] (National Assembly -
sec 75).
- The Speaker:
Message from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly:
Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 2 November 2001 and
transmitted for concurrence:
(i) Animal Health Bill [B 64B - 2001] (National Council of Provinces
- sec 76).
The Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Agriculture and Land Affairs of the National Assembly.