THURSDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2001 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:35.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

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

That the House -

(1) notes the DP’s walkout during the briefing session by the agencies investigating the arms deal; (2) believes that -

   (a)  the walkout by the DP constitutes a deliberate affront to the
       integrity of the investigation and the credibility of the
       investigating agencies; and


   (b)  this ill-considered act displays the resolve of the DP to stop
       at nothing in its misguided agenda of working tirelessly and
       ruthlessly to discredit the government, the breakdown of the
       rule of law and portraying South Africa in a bad light both here
       at home and abroad; and

(3) calls on all South Africans to see the DP for what it is - a negative, confused minority sect of yesterday men and women with nothing to offer the people of this country.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the N1 highway between Johannesburg and Cape Town was closed
       yesterday for almost four hours because of smoke from tyres that
       were burnt next to the road;


   (b)  this illegal act by the community of Edenburg was in protest
       over the lack of delivery by the ANC-led municipality of
       Kopanong in the Free State; and


   (c)  the ANC Government is failing in its Batho Pele campaign in
       rural communities and these communities are now reverting to
       civil disobedience in order to attract attention to their
       plight;

(2) calls on the ANC Government to heed their calls for better delivery; and

(3) requests the leadership of the ANC to get actively involved in attending to the needs of rural communities.

Mr V B NDLOVU: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) notes with deep sympathy the death of Mr Josiah Nkosi, the managing director of Makhosi Construction, who is yet another victim of car hijacking on his doorstep;

(2) further notes that …

[Interjections.] Will you keep quiet, please?

   further notes that this civil engineer, builder and mathematician
   who was the first such black graduate of the University of the
   Witwatersrand back in 1972, will be sorely missed in the profession;

(3) realises that this incident took place in full sight of the victim’s daughter who went out after hearing an altercation and whose arrival prevented the car from being stolen;

(4) truly prays that the victim’s family and next of kin will heal with time after this sudden loss; and

(5) requests the members of the SAPS to apprehend the criminals and more so to ensure the safety of the child who witnessed this sinister act.

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that the President of the Republic of South Africa, hon Thabo Mbeki, has urged elected representatives to listen to what the people have to say because they are an important partner in accelerating delivery;

(2) believes that the statement made by the President is in line with the ANC-led Government’s approach of involving people in the process of change;

(3) welcomes the statement made by the President, hon Thabo Mbeki; and

(4) urges all members of Parliament to implement this clarion call during their constituency work.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes the replacement of certain members of the SAA board;

(2) hopes that this move will also be the dawn of an era of a more transparent policy on remuneration packages at SAA and a commitment to corporate governance; and (3) calls on the Minister to disclose immediately the remuneration packages of newly appointed members of the SAA board, thereby regaining the credibility of and trust in the SAA.

Mr W G MAKANDA: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) welcomes the formal agreement by the members of the World Trade Organisation to launch a new round of multilateral trade talks;

(2) is specifically encouraged by the door being opened for developing countries to have access to medicines;

(3) further welcomes the acceptance by the European Union of a text calling for the phasing out of export subsidies;

(4) calls for the encouragement of environmental development in the context of economic empowerment and job creation; and

(5) hopes that this new round of negotiations will pave the way for a more equal and just international trade system, that does not relegate the developing countries to perpetual poverty.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that Deputy President Jacob Zuma called on the people of South Africa to go back to the philosophy of ``any child is my child’’ in order to curb child abuse and child rape;

(2) believes that this philosophy is in line with the spirit of ubuntu which encourages values of care, sacrifice and solidarity;

(3) reiterates the Deputy President’s call for the people of South Africa to embrace the philosophy of ``every child is my child’’; and

(4) works towards a secure and caring environment which upholds the rights of children and especially the girl child.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the University of Transkei is reported to have managed to drag
       itself back from the brink of closure;
   (b)  the interim administrator, a Prof Nicky Morgan, attributed
       Unitra's success to meticulous planning, student debt recovery
       and belt-tightening in every aspect of its operations;


   (c)  this university is located in one of the poorest areas in the
       country but managed to collect R19 million in fees this year;
       and


   (d)  the Eastern Cape has contributed enormously to the country's
       economic growth and good governance through education;


 (2)    congratulates the university on its speedy financial recovery
     and Prof Morgan on his sterling work; and


 (3)    calls upon the Minister of Education to ensure that Prof
     Morgan's successor is someone with suitable qualifications, who
     will be able to carry on with the good work already achieved.

[Applause.]

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Mev die Speaker, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek tydens die volgende sitting sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis kennis neem dat -

(1) die teruggryp na die uitgediende begrippe van verlig'' en verkramp’’ deur die leier van die Nuwe NP, om sy huidige optrede en toenadering tot die ANC te regverdig, verdag en jammer is;

(2) die opsie van mnr Van Schalkwyk om hom en die Nuwe NP by die ANC te voeg, met verlig en verkramp absoluut niks te make het nie;

(3) die VF meen dat persoonlikheidsbotsings en onderliggende verskille tussen die Nuwe NP en die DP binne die DA, kiesers by ‘n doodloopstraat gebring het;

(4) die partye kiesers voor ‘n hopelose keuse tussen die Nuwe NP se oneervolle abdikasie of die DA se sinlose konfrontasie plaas; en

 5) die VF glo egter daar is 'n alternatief en uitkoms hieruit en dat
    die oplossing tydens die VF se nasionale kongres op 16 en 17
    November op die tafel geplaas word. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting I shall move:

That the House notes that -

(1) the leader of the New NP’s reversion to the obsolete concepts of verlig'' andverkramp’’ in order to justify his current actions and approach towards the ANC is suspect and unfortunate;

(2) Mr Van Schalkwyk’s option to range himself and the New NP on the side of the ANC has absolutely nothing to do with verlig'' and verkramp’’;

(3) the FF believes that personality clashes and underlying differences within the DA between the New NP and the DP have brought voters to a cul-de-sac;

(4) the parties have placed voters before a hopeless choice between the New NP’s dishonourable abdication and the DP’s senseless confrontation; and

(5) the FF, however, believes that there is an alternative and a way out of this and that the solution will be tabled at the FF’s national congress on 16 and 17 November.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  a sangoma and her two accomplices have been sentenced to life
       imprisonment for killing her own four-year-old daughter in
       Thohoyandou in 1999;


   (b)  the sangoma used the child's body parts to ``please her
       ancestral spirits'' on the instructions of her handler; and


   (c)  sentencing of the accused comes in the wake of heinous crimes
       against women and girl children;

(2) commends the police service on their sterling work; and

(3) welcomes the sentence imposed on the accused as fitting the crime and calls on the courts to be firm when dealing with perpetrators of violence against children.

Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes -

   (a)  the unprocedural and unprecedented briefing by the Joint
       Investigating Team to Parliament that could create the
       impression that the JIT has formally accounted to Parliament;


   (b)  the confirmation by the Office of the Auditor-General that the
       executive has had a copy of the report and therefore had the
       scope under section 4(6) to add or subtract from the report; and


   (c)  the DA's principled decision not to participate in the
       orchestrated press conference of the ruling party in this
       Chamber; and

(2) expresses its desire -

   (a)  to debate this matter of public importance as a matter of
       urgency in this House in a formal plenary; and


   (b)  to ensure a thorough and critical engagement with this report
       takes place in Parliament's Standing Committee on Public
       Accounts.

[Applause.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the UN-led coalition of member states in the battle to contain
       terrorism is as important now as ever and that bioterrorism and
       nuclear terrorism require constant vigilance;


   (b)  South Africa as a member country has pledged its support for
       this coalition;


   (c)  in the list of 12 counterterrorism conventions five treaties
       have not been signed by South Africa; and


   (d)  seven treaties require ratification by South Africa, including
       the 1999 International Convention for the Suppression of
       Financing of Terrorism; and   (2) therefore calls on the Minister of Foreign Affairs and any other
   individuals responsible for realising these commitments to do so as
   soon as possible, so that the position of South Africa is unambiguous
   and so that our internal strategies are implemented with clarity and
   commitment.

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

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the Coega development project is on track, and this initiative
       is going to have a profound impact on the economy of the country
       as a whole, and on the Eastern Cape in particular;


   (b)  it will be a great initiative in job creation leading to the
       expansion of businesses in the provinces; and


   (c)  it will increase our country's export rate; and

(2) calls on -

   (a)  businesses and environmentalists to refrain from all negative
       attitudes; and


   (b)  all members in this House and the population at large to support
       the development of Coega, as it will be beneficial to us all.

[Applause.]

Mnr J J NIEMANN: Mev die Speaker, hiermee gee ek kennis dat ek tydens die volgende sitting sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis -

(1) kennis neem daarvan dat al 81 rekenaars uit die kantore van die Padongelukkefonds verdwyn het net voor die ondersoek van die SAPD na sistematiese korrupsie deur personeellede van die fonds;

(2) verder kennis neem daarvan dat die Minister van Vervoer by herhaling deur die lede van die portefeuljekomitee versoek is om as ‘n tussentydse maatreël streng stappe te doen om diefstal van dié fonds se geld stop te sit;

(3) sy kommer uitspreek oor die Minister se volgehoue onwilligheid om daadwerklik op te tree; en

(4) aanbeveel dat die administrasie van die fonds onmiddellik geprivatiseer word deur die inkoop van ‘n erkende ouditeursfirma se bestuursvaardigheid. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Mr J J NIEMANN: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting I shall move:

That the House -

(1) notes that just before the SAPS’ investigation into systematic corruption by staff members of the Road Accident Fund all 81 of its computers disappeared from the fund’s offices;

(2) further notes that the Minister of Transport has been requested repeatedly by members of the portfolio committee, as an interim measure, to put an end to theft of the fund’s money;

(3) expresses its concern at the Minister’s continued unwillingness to take decisive action; and

(4) recommends that the administration of the fund be privatised forthwith by buying into a recognised audit firm’s management capabilities.]

Mr D G MKONO: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) notes the sacking of Transnet chairperson Louise Tager by the Minister for Public Enterprises;

(2) further notes that despite vehement denials, it appears that Tager’s sacking serves the purpose of exonerating senior officials for their role in the Andrews saga;

(3) expresses its concern at the questioning of the Transnet board’s lack of action in dealing with the Andrews saga, as it amounts to the pot calling the kettle black; and

(4) calls on the Government to take full responsibility for the Coleman Andrews saga.

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

That the House -

(1) notes that the European Union has pledged R6,5 million to Algeria for flood victims;

(2) believes that this amount is significant in rebuilding infrastructure destroyed by these floods and assisting the Algerian people in rebuilding their lives; and (3) welcomes the pledge made by the European Union.

[Applause.]

PLEDGE BY USA AND RUSSIA TO REDUCE NUCLEAR ARSENAL AND LIMIT SPREAD OF BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS

                         (Draft Resolution)

The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) notes the pledge by President George Bush of the United States to reduce his country’s nuclear arsenal by two thirds over the next 10 years and the commitment of Russian President Vladimir Putin to try to respond in kind;

(2) further notes the agreement between the US and Russia to cooperate to limit the spread of biological, nuclear and chemical weapons; and

(3) welcomes these positive developments in the promotion of world peace.

Agreed to.

                        MOTION OF CONDOLENCE

              (The late Manelisi Honana Fezile Dibongo)

Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House notes that-

(1) the PAC announces the death of one of its Apla veterans, Comrade Manelisi Honana Fezile Dibongo, whose guerilla name was Ngamashema;

(2) Dibongo was gunned down by unknown assailants at Langa township in Cape Town on Friday 9 November as he was alighting from his car and died on the spot;

(3) his rich contribution to the struggle, however, will remain in the annals of the history of this country eternally; (4) Comrade Ngamashema took part in the PAC positive action campaign against the apartheid laws which led to the massacre on 21 March;

(5) Dibongo received his military training in Egypt and Yugoslavia; and

(6) he will be buried at his home village at Mqanduli in the Eastern Cape on 17 November.

The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: I am not sure whether that was a notice of motion or not, because motions without notice are cleared with other parties’ Chief Whips before being moved in the House.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I do wish that parties among themselves, and Whips of parties in particular, would clear these matters beforehand, because these are not issues around which there should be controversy, especially given the kind of content of that motion without notice. [Interjections.] So, we will treat it as a notice of motion, as opposed to a motion without notice. RELEASE OF FOREIGN AID WORKERS CHARGED WITH SPREADING CHRISTIANITY

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) expresses its thanks that eight foreign aid workers - four Germans, two Americans and two Australians - who were arrested in Afghanistan in August on a charge of spreading Christianity, were freed early today, South African time, and that they are safe and in good physical condition;

(2) congratulates President Bush on achieving this, it being one of the four demands he stated in his ultimatum to the Taliban; and

(3) taking into account that these aid workers stood trial on a charge for which they could receive the death penalty, rejects persecution on the grounds of faith wherever it still occurs throughout the world and re-affirms the principle of religious freedom entrenched in the Constitution.

Agreed to.

           STANDING OVER OF MOTION NO 1 ON THE ORDER PAPER

                         (Draft Resolution)

The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That Motion No 1 as printed in my name on the Order Paper stand over until before the Fourth Order of the Day.

Agreed to.

                    EDUCATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Speaker, this piece of legislation is an amending Bill which proposes changes to three existing education laws, that is, the Employment of Educators Act, the Further Education and Training Act, and the South African Schools Act.

I apologise, at the end of this very exciting session and a day before we go off to our different parts of South Africa, that these laws are not very exciting or particularly controversial. I would have liked to have spoken about the future of higher education instead, but we had to get these Bills through.

The Bill proposes minor textual changes to the Employment of Educators Act, and the Further Education and Training Act which, I trust, will be supported by the House. The Employment of Educators Act contains provisions for dealing with misconduct and disciplinary actions against teachers, all aimed at speeding up the processes involved. Given the incidents of misconduct and unprofessional behaviour which we have been hearing about recently and which have been uncovered in the media, the need for streamlined disciplinary processes must be accepted. Now, we can say that with the amendments that we passed last year and this one, which we hope we will pass, we have very speedy, effective, just disciplinary action that can be taken against those who break the most important oath of all, the oath to look after our young people.

Since amending the Bill in 2000, and implementing these procedures during the past year, a number of shortcomings have been identified which have worked against our wish to deal with such matters speedily and fairly. We are therefore requesting the approval of the House to refine certain aspects of these procedures, and to remove some of the ambiguities, including amendments to the forms used to convey a written or final warning to a teacher. By the way, our systems of labour relations are extremely complex and difficult when it comes to disciplinary action. Regrettably, they are too difficult and we are told that, at least in the area of teaching, we must simplify them.

The amendment to the Further Education and Training Act deals with the provision of loans and overdrafts to further education and training institutions. We have experienced some problems regarding debts which are incurred by these institutions, for which the state may be considered responsible. However, in terms of the new Bill, only the MEC for education in the province will be empowered to approve a loan or overdraft to an institution, and without such approval neither the state nor the institution will be liable for that debt.

This will send a nice cautionary message to lending institutions. The colleges, in future, will be obliged to work within their budgets, except for major or unanticipated expenses where the MEC might have reasons to approve a loan or overdraft. This will ensure that the fiduciary relationships of the responsibilities of Government are secured and that no unwarranted expenditure occurs.

The most substantive change introduced in the Bill is to the South African Schools Act, where the implementation of the Act has shown some unfortunate gaps. Perhaps the most dramatic and public evidence of these has been the case of the former principal of Ermelo Hoërskool, who is alleged to have diverted significant amounts from the school’s fund into his own pockets, only a few weeks ago. Regrettably, we now know that he was not alone in that and we have had to address this serious problem, among others.

The amendments deal with four areas: firstly, the function of a school governing body; secondly, the status of the representative council of learners, as against other student bodies; thirdly, the functioning of the school governing body; and finally, the management of funds of the school.

There are legal certainties that are provided in respect of the functions of the school governing body to ensure that there is a clear separation of functions between the governing body and the Department of Education. I would like to remind members who were not members of this House in 1996 that we possibly have the most advanced legislation concerning the participation of parents in the governing of schools.

I have always been astonished that this House not only passed this legislation, but that the trade unions agreed to it in 1996. It gives parents an authority and role, but I am not aware of any other country that gives them that. But, occasionally, there are, in fact, errors and mistakes that take place. To deal with this, then, what we say is that the principle of a partnership between the governing body and the province, because they are partners, must not be compromised. In any partnership it is necessary to know and understand the different responsibilities of each partner.

In respect of learner bodies, the proposed legislation makes it very clear, as far as students are concerned, that what was always intended in the South African Schools Act was that the representative council of learners should be and I quote ``the only recognised and legitimate learner body at the school’’. Of course, we said that the governing body should be democratically elected. This is a principle of democracy working at the lowest and most important level. We must also ask for this form of representation in society, and schools are not exempt from this principled representation.

However, in too many instances, another body, most often a prefect body, which is not democratically elected, is put forward as a group representing learners. And, everywhere where there has been trouble, particularly where schools are now more representative in their composition, this has been because there has not been a truly representative body of learners. So, the amendment does not outlaw prefects. It merely seeks to ensure that they are understood in their rightful place, usually as an arm of the management of the school, which is what the prefects are. Prefects are appointed by the school and serve a totally different function from the representative council of learners.

Similarly, other bodies, including national student bodies like Cosas and Azasco, may be encouraged at schools but should not be confused as legitimate representatives of learners. I will make it very clear, however unpopular it may be, that the political organisations, whatever their strength, are not representatives of learners. It is elected representatives who represent learners. So, the others are voluntary associations whose mandates and accountabilities lie elsewhere.

Secondly, it should be quite clear that the representative body of learners, where it is strong and representative, helps in the running of the school. But, there is no place at all in our history or law where we say that they have co-determination with the principal. We want to assert in this House that this is a consultative body and principals are obliged to consult. But, in the end, principals are paid to run the schools. This fundamental aspect is very important, as such, as we are beginning to get our school system to work. As regards the functioning of the governing bodies, it has become apparent that many governing bodies are not fulfilling their functions in terms of the law. In some cases this is due to a lack of capacity. We are working hard to build this capacity in a number of programmes. I hope that, within the regulation, members of Parliament will play their part in assisting governing bodies. What I said last year was that we should keep silly party politics out of schools. That does not mean that public representatives should not, under the new regulations, be involved in assisting in the development of these governing bodies.

Regrettably, others have demonstrated a wilful neglect of their duties, either with the aim of frustrating the professional management of the school or the department, or to substitute themselves as the governors of the schools. We cannot tolerate this, given the enormous powers which these school governing bodies have been allocated.

We have, therefore, made provision that where a governing body ceases to perform all or some of its functions, the head of department of the province will be empowered to intervene either by the appointment of a person to fulfil those neglected functions or to insist on the election of a new governing body. At the same time, we have committed ourselves to building capacity where there is a need for this and a willingness by governing bodies to meet their responsibilities. I trust that this approach will also be strongly supported.

We have also proposed an amendment which prevents governing bodies from entering into any loan or overdraft arrangements without the permission of the member of the executive council responsible for education. The expectation is that the MEC will ensure that any loan which is approved is educationally grounded, and not to be used for some trivial matter or for something that cannot be regarded as a serious priority.

The final aspect that we deal with and also one that has elicited the most comments and debates in committees is the utilisation of school funds. We have discovered that many schools, especially those which are able to collect substantial fees from the parents, charge high fees. Let me say quite clearly that, whatever our social backgrounds, the fee structure in South African public schools has to be investigated. Frankly, the fee structure is too high. We do not want to have anecdotal stories of why it is too high or what it is used for. But I cannot, in fact, as the Minister of Education, countenance a fee structure where, in a public school, students are asked to pay between R8 000 and R12 000 a year. This is something that we have to look at very carefully. I will come back to the House with a resolution as to what to do about this.

What is more important here is that in some of the schools the trustees have been hiding money in trusts established by the schools. This is completely untenable. To set up a trust and put the public moneys or school fees into a trust removes accountability from the parents to a select group of trustees who may, at any stage, without the consent of the school, amend the purposes of the trust and use it for their own enrichment.

Some schools have done so under the mistaken belief that to contribute to a trust brings about certain tax advantages. Well, I am happy to say, and hon members may not know this, that my colleague, the Minister of Finance, has decided that any financial contribution to a school, public or private, is exempt from tax. Hon members should applaud this big development that the Minister of Finance has introduced. There is, therefore, no need for such trusts.

I have, therefore, proposed in the Bill that money from the school fund of a public school may not be paid into a trust or be used to establish a trust, and I call for hon members’ support for this. School fees are public moneys and must remain on the public domain, under the scrutiny of the school governing body - and nobody can argue against that - which is also required to submit its budget and financial reports to the department. Money which has already been paid into a trust fund will have to be repaid to the school except where there has been a proper utilisation in the interest of the school.

I might add that this provision does not stop a private association of parents or other interested parties from establishing a trust where the beneficiary is a school. This is outside the domain of our legislation or what we call public money which is what the school fees are. And this would be a private arrangement between the trustees and the school. Most important of all, as I said, such money would not be public money.

These amendments are all intended to bring about greater clarity and do not introduce any departures from our policy or from the original purpose of the Act. I trust that hon members will appreciate the need for constant improvements to the legislation based on our experience of implementing it. All the provinces have agreed to this legislation.

We must get rid of one myth: This is a move from a state-controlled system, which is highly hierarchical, to one in which significant governance responsibilities are placed in the hands of the communities. The principle of moving power to the communities is a good one and we will not deviate from that. In doing so, we have to ensure that, sometimes, unscrupulous and reactionary persons who would seek to abuse these rights are not allowed to do so.

I would like to say a word which is not in this script about the tolerance of this House in respect of the matric examinations. May I compliment this House for not politicising some of the problems that have risen in relation to the matric examinations. With 550 000 candidates, thousands of newspaper articles, examiners and teachers involved, what we have been able to do is, in fact, to ensure that the examinations are held in due integrity and probity.

After all, they are benchmarked against the Scottish Examination Board, which is a very important element. The most important thing is that we have to stand over because of the credibility of the examination process. I am pleased to say that the latest investigation shows that not a single examination paper has ever been found outside legitimate venues. That is an important thing. But, as members know, there have been leaks and we have dealt with this by taking very strong action.

Of course, the biggest action that we must take, and I am asking for the assistance of the public and the police, is to expose the godfathers who initiate these processes and it is the poor students who are on the receiving end of this. I want to thank members very much for their support, and we hope that we can show a similar kind of public consciousness because there are certain things whose integrity is so important that we will make it part of the normal arguments in politics. [Applause.]

Mr R S NTULI: Madam Speaker, hon Minister and colleagues, I want to reciprocate the compliments of the Minister regarding the nonpoliticisation of the Matric results. We deliberately took this stand because we know that the issue of examinations is of national concern. We also did this with due respect to the learners and parents, having been educators ourselves.

Having said that, I turn my attention to the matter at hand. The DP welcomes this opportunity to state its position on the Education Laws Amendment Bill. The Bill aims to amend the South African Schools Act, the Further Education and Training Act and the Employment of Educators Act, as has been indicated. These pieces of legislation had shortcomings and the amendments seek to plug these loopholes.

Section 11 of the South African Schools Act provides for a representative council of learners to be established at every school that enrols learners in the 8th grade and beyond. Clause 1 of this Bill provides for this council to be the only one, and here I am implying the council that still has to be established. The prefect system, while it may continue, will not be able to do so as we know it. In a sense, it is history. We do not lament its demise because we also put priority on representivity.

Clause 2 of the Bill amends section 15 of the South African Schools Act to provide the legal framework within which public schools can function. In terms of the Bill public schools can only operate within the provisions of the South African Schools Act. Clause 3 substitutes section 20 of the South African Schools Act, which deals with the functions of the governing body.

While the Employment of Educators Act of 1998 and the Labour Relations Act of 1995 made recommendations to the head of department on the appointment of educators, the school governing bodies previously used the Employment of Educators Act of 1994 and, obviously, there were loopholes in this as well. Section 36 of the principal Act is amended to prohibit school governing bodies from applying for overdrafts and raising money through loans without obtaining the prior approval of the MEC.

Section 37(3) of the principal Act states that a public school must or may open a banking account. The amendment of clause 7 prohibits governing bodies from paying money from the school fund into a trust or establishing a trust. In terms of the new legislation, money used to establish, or paid into, a trust fund prior to the year 2002 must be paid back into the school fund.

That trust funds may lead to abuse is a valid concern. However, the vast majority of our schools are not corrupt. We should also note that the increasing involvement of parents has been enormously beneficial to the public school system. The benefits have certainly outweighed the disadvantages. Besides, we have all the laws we currently need to stamp out corruption where it possibly exists.

To obviate abuse of trust funds where it possibly exists, a preferred route would be for the provincial heads of departments to monitor and oversee the management and administration of such trusts. At any rate, the matter could be taken up by the Auditor-General’s office, who could be required to undertake an audit of the records and financial statements of a trust administered by a public school that is suspected of being involved in corruption or mismanagement.

The DP understands what malpractices these amendments seek to prevent, and we support this in principle. But we do not believe that the measures to deal with the few who are corrupt should be applied to the honest majority. In a way, this could shackle their creativity in raising funds and investing those funds in the interest of education. Such a denial would put especially the former model C schools in an invidious position as they receive less state funding in terms of the norms and standards for funding of public schools.

The limitation of the powers of school governing bodies has been ameliorated to a certain extent by the Bill, making provision for the MEC to grant schools permission to enter into loans and overdrafts or to open another account where appropriate. For this provision to have any practical value, the MECs have to be efficient and prompt in responding to such requests and to avoid serious inconvenience to the schools involved.

The retrospective nature of the clause in the Bill relating to trust funds is a cause for concern. The reason is that many schools have operated trust funds for decades, perfectly legally and without any corruption or mismanagement. In terms of this Bill, which will become law soon and before the start of the year 2002 at any rate, many routine procedures of financial administration which are currently legal will become illegal. We therefore suggest that there should be a sufficient phasing-in period of six months for schools to adjust to the system.

Another recurring area of concern, as evidenced by this Bill, is that national Government continues with its tendency to centralise control and remove the discretion of MECs to establish what is best for provincial and local circumstances. Gradually, but steadily, the MECs for education are losing their jurisdiction over education, especially regarding school governance. There are sufficient laws and regulations available to stop malpractices. We do not need another law that will reduce the capacity of schools to assist the state to raise money needed to fund quality education in all schools.

Finally, we need to emphasise that the DP opposes the increasing tendency to centralise power by the national department. This leaves us with no option but to oppose the Bill. We want to stress that we are not opposed to the content of the Bill. What we are actually concerned about is the constant centralisation of power to the national Ministry.

Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, may I express my thanks to the Whips of other parties for allowing me to speak now. I have to catch a plane at 16:05.

‘n Mens gebruik nie ‘n 16 pd-hamer om ‘n muggie dood te slaan nie. ‘n Mens jaag ook nie al die kinders uit die klas as een of twee ‘n bietjie uit hulle kassie spring nie, en dit is presies wat hierdie wysigingswetsontwerp wil doen. Enkele bestuursliggame het dalk die gesonde finansiële instrument van trusts misbruik, nou word almal die gebruik daarvan verbied.

Die departement het geskrik vir die moontlikheid dat hulle dalk sal moet opdok as bestuursliggame lenings aangaan wat hulle nie kan diens nie, nou moet álle bestuursliggame soos minderjariges of ongerehabiliteerde insolvente die toestemming van die departement kry as hulle selfs net ‘n huurkoopkontrak vir ‘n kopieermasjien wil aangaan. Sommige bestuursliggame het nie die riglyne gevolg wat die departement gestel het vir die formaat van hulle begroting nie, nou word almal verplig om dit presies op ‘n voorgeskrewe wyse te doen, ongeag verskillende omstandighede.

Talle sinvolle, positiewe en probleemoplossende voorleggings en voorstelle is gedoen wat inderdaad aan die doelstellings van hierdie wetsontwerp sou beantwoord, sonder om die effektiewe bestuur van bestuursliggame aan bande te lê. Die finale wetsontwerp wat vandag aan hierdie Huis vir goedkeuring voorgelê word, bevat egter nie een enkele wysiging wat voorgestel is nie. Opposisiepartye kan maar voorstelle maak, burgerlike instellings kan voorleggings maak, maar dit help niks. Big Brother het gepraat.

Optrede soos hierdie maak positiewe en konstruktiewe opposisie moeilik en plaas ‘n vraagteken agter die opregtheid van die ANC se openheid tot ``co- operative governance’’. Hierdie saak gaan oor meer as net enkele administratiewe wysigings. Dit gaan oor die volgehoue proses om bestuursliggame as instellings van die burgerlike samelewing aan bande te lê en aan die staatsinstellings onderworpe te maak. Bestuursliggame het inderdaad vandag ‘n groot verantwoordelikheid, moet ‘n besigheid van groot omvang effektief bestuur en die toenemende inperking van hulle bevoegdhede gaan egter uiteindelik negatief inwerk op hulle bestuursvermoë. Geïsoleerde wanpraktyke moes aangespreek word, want met hierdie wetsontwerp word die kind met die badwater uitgegooi. Die AEB kan nie hierdie wetsontwerp ondersteun nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[One does not use a 16 lb hammer to kill a gnat. One also does not chase all the children out of a class if one or two get a bit out of hand, and that is precisely what this amending Bill wants to do. One or two governing bodies may have abused the sound financial instrument of trusts, and now everyone is being forbidden to use them.

The department panicked at the possibility that they may possibly have to pay if governing bodies take out loans they cannot service, now all governing bodies have to get the permission of the department even if they want to enter into a hire-purchase contract for a photocopy machine, like minors and unrehabilitated insolvents. Some governing bodies did not follow the guidelines set by the department for the format of their budget, now they are all being obliged to do it precisely in a prescribed manner, irrespective of differing circumstances. Numerous meaningful, positive and problem-solving submissions and proposals were made which would indeed meet the objectives of this Bill, without hampering the effective management of governing bodies. However, the final Bill submitted to this House today for adoption does not contain a single amendment that was proposed. Opposition parties are welcome to make submissions, civil institutions can make submissions, but nothing helps. Big Brother has spoken.

Actions like these make positive and constructive opposition difficult and place a question mark over the sincerity of the ANC’s openness to co- operative governance. This matter is about more than a few administrative amendments. It is about the sustained process of keeping governing bodies as institutions of civil society in check and making them subject to Government institutions. Today governing bodies indeed have a big responsibility, must manage a large business effectively and the increasing restriction of their powers is eventually going to have a negative effect on their management ability. Isolated cases of malpractice should have been addressed, because with this Bill the baby is being thrown out with the bath water. The AEB cannot support this Bill.] Prof S M MAYATULA: Madam Speaker, I deliberately allowed the hon Aucamp to speak first so that I would be able to respond.

Unfortunately, he was not able to attend the meetings of the portfolio committee where we first fine-tuned the Bill. We went through all the representations and tried to clarify where we stood with regard to the main issues. He did not have any formal proposal as far as the amendment that we are proposing is concerned.

Hon members, this Bill is an important amending Bill. I would like to start by trying to indicate what these amendments are intended to achieve. They are intended to provide for the representative council of learners to be the only recognised body at a school. This recognition relates to the administration of the school and does not preclude the establishment of other learner bodies such as Cosas and others. It is intended to make further provision regarding the failure of a governing body to perform its function so that the department can intervene and put corrective measures in place. It is intended that schools should only raise loans with the approval of the MEC to prohibit public schools from paying school funds into a trust fund.

The committee successfully addressed and clarified all the concerns which were raised during the public hearings. I would like to confine myself to clauses 5 and 6 which deal with loans and trusts. Firstly, I would like to clarify what this Bill is not intended to do. It is not intended to stifle fundraising by public schools. It is not intended to prevent public schools from taking out loans provided a written approval is obtained from the MEC, not the Minister, hon Ntuli. It is not intended to prohibit public schools from investing surplus funds in other accounts provided the approval of the MEC is obtained. It is not intended to prohibit the establishment of trusts provided school funds are not used. If all these activities are not prohibited, why the fuss about the approval of the MEC?

The hon Ntuli says the Bill seeks to centralise power in the national Minister. [Interjections.]

Mr T D LEE: He is normally right. He is always right. [Interjections.]

Prof S M MAYATULA: The truth of the matter is: Let us remember that while the independent schools are independent legal entities and the buck stops with them, the public schools remain public schools and the Government becomes responsible when the chips are down. Without this piece of legislation if anything were to go wrong as far as those loans are concerned, whether we like it or not, those people would go to the legal entity, in this case, the Government.

I would like to address myself to the issue of trusts. A perception is created here that by saying school funds should not be put in a trust fund we are preventing the private sector from assisting schools, because the only channel through which they can assist schools and get a benefit is through trusts. That is totally incorrect. Most of us, even in this Chamber, send our children to the former model C schools. Most of us are involved in school fundraising projects for our schools. Most of us are involved in campaigns encouraging the private sector to contribute financially to the promotion of education and health projects for the betterment of our people’s lives. Can we at the same time, in the form of this Bill, try to stifle that? We want the private sector to assist us. But the question they ask, is: ``If we come in, as a party from the private sector, what is in it for us? Shall we get our tax benefits?’’ The answer is a big yes. As the Minister has just said, and I also want to remind this House, on 23 February 2000 our Minister of Finance made a proposal in this House which was accepted. He proposed that a provision be made for a new definition of public benefit organisations which would qualify for tax exemptions. He went further and said that the tax deductability of donations should be extended to preprimary schools, primary schools, children’s homes, organisations caring for the aged and those that focus on HIV/Aids care. The Income Tax Amendment Act of 2000 confirmed this position. What this means, is that sponsors do not have to channel their funds through school trusts in order to get tax benefits.

It is important to note that section 16 of the South African Schools Act already creates the perception that the governing body of a public school must act in a position of trust. The schools are already trusts and can get benefits from whatever angle. The Bill does not amend this. All it does is to confirm and strengthen these benefits. Section 37(2) of the South African Schools Act provides that all money received by a public school, including school fees and voluntary contributions, must be paid into a school fund. This Bill is directed to that money which we referred to as a school fund. That money belongs to the school, not the national Minister and not the MEC. It is only the school governing body and the parents who should have a say over the use of that money.

Should part of that money be put in a trust, the trustees call the tune because they sit on a board and decide how that money should be used, and the parents are not part of that. If contributions made directly into the school fund attract the same benefit as when money is put in a trust, what could be the reason for putting the school funds in a trust? Not only does money donated directly to a school fund bring about the same tax benefit, this also brings about transparency which is what our democracy is all about.

Transparency can only bring about good financial management so that we do not have many Ermelos. Everybody knows how much each school has, and what it is that it is going to do with that amount. Hon members should remember that even schools are put into quantums for the sake of funding. We need to know how much each school has so that we know how much to give from the Government’s perspective. Let us encourage and assist the school governing bodies to govern and control their funds without any interference from trustees. Let there be no room to have some school funds stashed away in a trust out of reach of the parents and the department.

Let me end with examples of private sector projects where a company donates funds directly to the schools and, in the process, helps them to help themselves. This is something that is happening even as I speak. I am referring here to the Decillion Foundation which has sponsored the building of two community schools, and is in the process of building a third school.

In the first project, on 12 October 2001 the Decillion Foundation handed over a project of about R135 000 to Daluxolo Primary School in Idutwya in the Eastern Cape. The community of Daluxolo opened their own banking account and, through their own initiative, using the money that they received from the Decillion Foundation, were able to build three classrooms. They were able to buy furniture for their school, fence it, buy a water tank, and build toilets. This sponsor is going to get benefits. On 2 November 2001 the same company, Decillion Foundation, donated R120 000 to Namadzavho School at Elim, in Louis Trichardt, in the Northern Province, with the intention of doing the same thing.

Does this Bill mean that parents cannot form a trust if they want to? Let me answer that. This does not preclude individual parents from sitting down and deciding that they want to form a trust. As long as that money goes straight from their pockets to the trust, because nobody can control that, and they can now decide with which project they are going to assist. But, once the money is part of a school fund, it should be governed and handled by the school governing body, and not by anybody else.

If we all have this understanding, I think there will be no perception that this Bill is going to stifle fundraising, because all of us, individually and collectively, are out there doing that and we want our communities and the private sector to come to the party and assist us as we build our schools. [Applause.]

Mr B M DOUGLAS: Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the empty seats today have something to do with the forthcoming defection clause, whether it is a happy payday thing or an attitude towards the Bill on Education that we are debating here today.

Maybe I should start off by commending the hon the Minister on his skilful use of the Hegelian dialectic in the construction of this speech. It is of some renaissance type, I have been noticing for the time that I have been here.

One cannot help but notice that from the formerly oppressed section of the House, when the Minister and the chairperson of the committee spoke, we could hear some hosannas from the formerly oppressed and also some nostalgic banalities against transformation by others. Therefore, I am compelled to say that some misunderstanding and invective are deliberately orchestrated, like Malcolm X said, ``to serve as a peg for those nervous Nellies and Uncle Toms to hang their perplexing and disturbing anxieties on’’.

The Bill before us today helps to ban these misrepresentations - as the say in Latin, ``Pro Salute Animalium’’. [Interjections.] I was teaching long before the member knew about education. It bans those servile, dysfunctional, dislocated, disconnected, and dissenting people who are serving their masters’ interests forever and ever, amen. [Interjections.]

Mr T D LEE: You sound disturbed. [Laughter.]

Mr B M DOUGLAS: Madam Speaker, the Republic of South Africa is undergoing a revolutionary change in its educational landscape. This Education Laws Amendment Bill amends the South African Schools Act and amends the pre-1994 language usage which was not gender-sensitive and user-friendly and had lots of other shortcomings. Allow me to quote Dr Martin Luther King Jr, for those who read about him. He said, and I quote:

The acceptable year of the Lord is now …

Not that I look like a preacher or something. I believe that this is the acceptable year to offer options to poor children who are stuck in a system that is not preparing them to compete in today’s global society. This is the acceptable year of the Lord to bring to the brokenhearted parents who see their children move through the school system by social promotion and come out the other end of the system as nothing but dysfunctional illiterates. Yes, this is indeed the acceptable year of the Lord to challenge the last vestiges of the apartheid education system.

The recognition of the democratically elected representative council of learners does not mean the banning of prefects or Cosas or Azasco, or the Sacos of this world, but it liberates many learners from imposed ideological and other forms of bondage, and replaces it with democratic and accountable structures that transform and build learners, and their leadership, confidence, and future in society, not taking children out of the classrooms on excursions and orgies on the streets of Johannesburg, as has happened in the past, thus transforming the children to become scoundrels, scallywags, skollies and so forth.

Yes, we have advanced this legislation in respect of school governing bodies, but, notwithstanding the critical role and responsibility, it lends justification for intervention by heads of departments. But, they need capacitation, because of all these anomalies that exist between those with affluent backgrounds and those with less. I think that we need to talk about positive discrimination in poor areas, and even rural areas in this regard. In these areas where the school governing bodies underperform or exceed their mandates, or are manipulated and dictated to by headmasters, if that is the case, we will get more Ermelo’s and more allegations of Koos Krugers, and so forth.

This brings the IFP to support clause 6 of the Bill that limits schools to having single banking accounts and not to channel school funds into trust accounts and so forth. Yes, indeed, money is the root of all evil and if we think of the Koos Kruger saga, these allegations against Koos Kruger, I mean the people allege that this man paid for his booze and servants, he even went to epicurean centres and had a good time with school funds. Somebody alleged in the NCOP that he even denied a black student a bursary from the funds that he acquired.

It does lend credence to the concern by the MEC for Education in the Eastern Cape, Mr Sizane, when he elucidated on the conquering Roman emperors who sought to change the workings of the Greek empire and institutions but left the Greek teachers in the empire’s schools. What we need here is whistle blowers, toll free numbers and incentives to close the net. We need to take off our silk gloves, and to show them our nails.

The IFP believes that the Education Laws Amendment Bill will assist in normalising public schools and further education in our country, and we therefore support the Bill. [Applause.]

Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Madam Speaker, if the previous speaker was a teacher, I can understand why there is a lack of quality education in the classroom. [Laughter.] The hon the Minister should be congratulated on his criticism of Big Brother. It is high time that somebody in the executive spoke out against the trash that masquerades as reality TV, thank you.

But unfortunately the hon the Minister himself wants to play the role of Big Brother, by wanting to control education from the cradle to the grave. The Education Laws Amendment Bill is a case in point. While most countries are currently allowing space for a market approach to education, our Government is tightening control on every facet of education. Mr Seepe of Vista University is right when he says in The Star that the problem with our education system is that its control is too centralised.

Clauses 5 and 6, dealing with loans and trust funds, will have the effect of severely curtailing the ability of governing bodies to discharge their responsibilities in terms of section 21 of the Schools Act, of maintaining and improving school property. Yes, schools should of course not be allowed to incur financial debt in an uncontrolled manner. But loans remain an essential vehicle for the purchase of assets which cannot be funded from school fees in any one year. Making it as difficult as possible to obtain a loan, as clause 5 does, serves no purpose.

The argument that if a public school cannot comply with its obligations the state will be liable to compensate claims against the public school is debatable. There is very strong legal opinion that section 61 of the Schools Act does not relate to contractual claims at all. Clause 6 forbids a school governing body from establishing a trust fund from school funds or paying school fees into a trust.

Let me say this at the outset: the New NP condemns any abuse of trust funds. Compulsory school fees should not be diverted to a trust fund in order to get a bigger subsidy from the state. Trust funds should be used for no other purpose than for educational purposes, to benefit all the learners of a specific school. Any illegal or irresponsible actions on the part of governing bodies relating to trust funds should be rooted out completely. However, as has been said here before, one should not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Many schools have operated trust funds for decades, perfectly legally and without corruption, as a vehicle to supplement the resources supplied by the state, and such trusts should not be terminated.

There is a misconception. In most instances - I will go so far as to say in 90% of instances - the trustees are either parents or members of the governing body. In my view retrospective illegality, as contained in clause 6, is bad law-making, unpractical and perhaps even unconstitutional, and should be deleted completely. All that is going to happen in practice is that trusts currently controlled by school governing bodies will be re- established outside the control of the school, and this is exactly what the Minister does not want to happen.

Net ‘n laaste opmerking oor die verteenwoordigende rade van leerders, wat nou die enigste erkende liggame van skole word. Daar bestaan ‘n wanopvatting dat alle prefekstelsels ondemokraties is. Dit is nie heeltemal waar nie, maar die rede hoekom hulle nie 100% demokraties is nie, is omdat hulle ‘n belangrike rol vervul in die handhawing van dissipline in skole. ‘n Gewone oop demokratiese sisteem sal beteken die gewildste leerlinge word prefekte, en dit is nie altyd bevorderlik vir dissipline nie. Die Minister het egter tereg opgemerk die prefekstelsel sal weer na vore kom as ‘n subkomitee van die verteenwoordigende raad van leerders. Die Nuwe NP steun nie die wetgewing nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[One last comment about the representative councils of learners, which are now becoming the only recognised bodies of schools. There is a misconception that all prefect systems are undemocratic. This is not entirely true, but the reason they are not 100% democratic is because they play a very important role in the maintenance of discipline at schools. A open democratic system will mean that the most popular pupils become prefects and this is not always beneficial to discipline. However, the Minister rightly noted that the prefect system will once again come to the fore as a sub-committee of the representative council of learners. The New NP does not support this legislation.]

The Minister said all the provinces supported the legislation or the Bill. To the best of my knowledge the MEC for Education in the Western Cape does not support the Bill. [Applause.]

Prof L M MBADI: Madam Speaker, Minister of Education and colleagues, the UDM supports the Education Laws Amendment Bill. The Bill seeks to amend, amongst other things, the South African Schools Act of 1996, so as to provide for the representative council of learners to be the only recognised learner body at a school and to make further provisions regarding the failure of a governing body to perform its functions.

It is our view that the Bill seeks to provide specific content or meaning as well as clarity to some sections of the principal Act, where otherwise the intentions of the legislation were not clearly spelled out. Whilst we welcome the establishment and recognition of one representative council of learners at a school by a member of the executive council, this should not be construed to mean that other learner bodies shall be forbidden.

The representative council of learners is the umbrella body. It funds and controls the activities of other formations. Considering the critical role and responsibility of the governing bodies, there is justification for the intervention by the head of the department to ensure that the governing bodies continue to perform their functions in terms of the law. But it is equally important for the department to provide a clear mechanism as well as to identify and act upon situations that create a vacuum in the performance of functions by school governing bodies..

There are reported cases where some schools run either without a governing body or a full complement thereof, for an unreasonable length of time. While section 36 of the principal Act permits a governing body to take all reasonable measures within its means to supplement the resources supplied by the state in order to improve the quality of education, it may not, in terms of subsection 2, enter into a loan or overdraft agreement without the written approval of the MEC. It is hoped that such written approval by the MEC will be obtainable with the least possible delay.

Regarding the amendment of section 37 of Act 84 of 1996, subsection 3, the UDM is in full support of the keeping of one banking account by a governing body of a public school, obviously for purposes of proper control. The governing body of a public school may, however, with the approval of the MEC of Education, invest surplus money in another account. We are also satisfied, after a thorough briefing by the department, that the amendment of subsection 6 as a precautionary measure only prohibits the payment of school fund money into a trust or that the said school fund should not be used to establish a trust. If a trust was established from a school fund of a public school or if such money was paid into a trust prior to January 2002, such trust or payment is invalid and the money must be paid back into the school fund.

The amendment must not be construed as prohibiting the establishment of a school trust. Former learners, their parents and interested persons may establish a school trust. The amendment prohibits the use of schools funds to establish a trust. [Applause.] Mrs D G NHLENGETHWA: Madam Speaker, hon Minister, hon members, we come from a thorny past where we were packed in bags and couriered to training colleges to become teachers, and couriered to Hammanskraal to train as policemen. Lettuce was speed-serviced or e-mailed to universities and technikons to become doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. This Bill is amended so as to boost the morale of our teachers, so that they will produce lettuce, not cabbages. The ANC’s policy is to make every workplace productive and transparent. Every person has the right to a fair trial and to be heard before being condemned and found guilty.

Section 38 of the principal Act is amended to make provision for a school governing body of a public school to prepare annual budgets, according to the prescription determined by the MEC in a provincial Gazette. This budget will show the estimated income and expenditure of the school for the following year. This prescription, not the guidelines, provides for assisting those disadvantaged public schools and governing bodies by giving them an easy and understandable way of doing the school budget. The provision will also ensure that budgets reflect specific budget items, which will be in a format that all parents can understand when approving the school budget. It also encourages uniformity of budget standards in a province, so as to transform the public schools to the same level of education.

This Bill also amends the Employment of Educators Act, Act 76 of 1998. The purpose of this amendment is to transform the education system into one that serves the needs and interests of all the people of South Africa and upholds their fundamental rights. If an educator is accused of misconduct, he or she must be subjected to disciplinary measures. By disciplinary measures we mean corrective measures and not punitive measures. That is why the ANC sees to it that discipline is applied in a prompt, fair, consistent and just manner.

The disciplinary procedure has a number of forms. Forms A to D are included in this Bill so as to assist the accused educator to appeal or object when the presiding officer decides on an appropriate sanction against the educator. The educator is entitled to bring witnesses, additional written evidence, legal representation and/or organised trade unions. This poses the challenge for us that all presiding officers will have to be trained in labour relations. With regard to the disciplinary procedure, if the educator is accused of misconduct, the employer, meaning the presiding officer, summonses the educator to appear before a disciplinary hearing by sending him or her form D.

Lomhwashabula wencwadzi latawunikwa wona thishela kufanele uchaze lilanga, indzawo kanye nesikhatsi lapho kutawutsetfwa khona lelicala. Sitfunywa kanye nathishela kufanele basayine ngalesikhatsi sitfunywa sinika thishela lomhwashabula wesamanisi. (Translation of siSwati paragraph follows.)

[The summons with which the educator is served should state the date, place and time of the disciplinary hearing. Both the messenger and the educator must sign when the messenger delivers the summons to the educator.]

The nature of the transgression is explained in form C.

Thishela ubhalelwa secwayiso atiswe kutsi unelicala lekungatiphatsi kahle esikolweni, kuchazwe nekutsi yini lalakwentile kuze atfolakale kutsi sewephule umtsetfo. Lesi-ke secwayiso lekufanele thishela asitfole emalanga lasihlanu lingakefiki lilanga lekutsetfwa kwelicala. Ngaleyo ndlela utakwati kutfola sikhatsi sekutsi abugcogce kahle bufakazi bakhe.

Ngalelilanga lekutsetfwa kwelicala, lomTsetfosivivinyo lesikhuluma ngawo uyamniketa thishela lilungelo lekuletsa ummeli wakhe losatimtsetfo. Kufanele kube ngummeli lobuya kutinyonyani tebasebenti, njengobe bese ngike ngasho ekucaleni, futsi kufanele kube yinyonyani leyemukelekile ngekwemtsetfo.

Ngekuvumelana nemcashi wakhe angabaletsa bofakazi bakhe nome bufakazi lobubhaliwe, engete kulobu lobukhona labebuletse ekucaleni. Nakatfolakala anelicala kubhalwa secwayiso sekucala lekutsiwa yi-first warning. (Translation of siSwati paragraphs follows.)

[A written warning is sent to the educator informing him or her that he or she is being charged with misconduct and also describing the nature of the transgression. The educator should receive this warning five days before the date of the disciplinary hearing. In this manner the educator will have enough time to put together his or her defence.

In terms of this Bill, on the day of the disciplinary hearing, the educator has the right to bring a legal representative. As I have already mentioned, this legal representative should come from a registered trade union.

By agreement between the educator and his or her employer, the educator can bring witnesses or additional written evidence. If found guilty, the educator is issued with a written warning referred to as the first warning.]

On concluding the disciplinary hearing, if the educator is found guilty, a first warning, which is form A, is written.

Leso secwayiso sifakwa efayeleni lalowo thishela lasemsebentini, futsi lesecwayiso lesi sihlala tinyanga letisitfupha. Lesecwayiso lesi futsi siyamnika thishela lilungelo lekuticelela shwele, akwati kutsi endlulisele embili licala lakhe nakangeneliseki ngesigwebo lasinikwe nakutsetfwa licala.

Nakatfolakala kutsi thishela sewuphindze wenta lelinye licala kantsi atikapheli tinyanga letisitfupha atfole secwayiso sekucala, ubhalelwa secwayiso sekugcina, lekutsiwa yi-final warning. Lesecwayiso sekugcina sibitwa ngekutsi ngu-form B. Nakuleso secwayiso thishela uyanikwa litfuba lekutsi abhale incwadzi lephikisana naleso sigwebo lesikhishiwe nangabe akeneliseki, aletse lobunye bufakazi bekutikhalela. (Translation of siSwati paragraphs follows.)

[This warning is put in the educator’s employee file for a period of six months. This warning also affords the educator the right to appeal if he or she is not satisfied with the sentence passed at the disciplinary hearing.

If, within a period of six months of the first warning, the educator is found guilty of misconduct a second time, he or she is issued with a second warning referred to as the final warning. This final warning is called form B. In respect of this warning, too, if he or she is not satisfied, the educator has the right to write a letter appealing against his or her sentence and to bring additional evidence for his or her defence.]

I want to thank the ANC-led Government, which has made it possible to transform this legislation. This ensures a better life for all. I just ask myself about those who are confused and always opposing everything. What is it that they are going to gain, after all, in return? Since I have been here, Mr Geldenhuys has only participated in this debate regarding the issues of money and trusts. [Interjections.] Sorry, I am protected. He is only interested in money and trusts.

In conclusion, allow me to wish all members a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year, and to those beasts that we call rapists, I wish them life sentences behind bars. That is where they belong. [Applause.]

Mr L M GREEN: Madam Speaker, with reference to the amendment of section 25 of Act 84 of 1996, this concerns governing bodies which are not functioning properly. This amendment may or may not solve the problem of nonfunctioning governing bodies. If a governing body fails to perform its functions, what is more important is the building of capacity of newly appointed members, but this cannot be done without the necessary resources. The replacement of members is not necessarily a solution.

The question must be asked: What resources will the Minister and the Department of Education make available to empower governing bodies because it is in the empowerment of governing bodies that one will find a solution. Changing the laws is not enough. If governing bodies of poorer communities do not perform because they lack skills and resources, this must be corrected by capacity-building workshops.

The ACDP agrees with the amendment of section 36 regarding unauthorised overdrafts or loans. We agree that colleges must work within their budgets. However, where we disagree, is to legislate that a governing body may not enter into an overdraft agreement without the written agreement of the MEC. For us this is unpractical, and it will never work. Let me give a practical example. If 30 000 schools in a province have a need for an overdraft facility of R500 to R1 000 for a month or two, the Bill says that they should all apply to the MEC for approval. The provincial departments do not have the administrative capacity to handle all these requests.

The amendment does not stipulate the criteria that would be used by the MEC to accept or refuse an overdraft. This is a subjective power of the MEC, and I can only foresee huge bottlenecks. A better alternative is workshops for governing bodies to teach them to live within their means. This Bill for us represents too much control, and we therefore cannot support the Bill.

With regard to the governing bodies of public schools, they should have the right to establish trust funds. We agree, however, that this cannot be done with school fees, but they should be allowed to establish a trust fund with other fees raised by school bazaars, donations, etc, in the private sector. I understand why the school fees are so high. It is the failure of the Department of Education to employ sufficient teachers which causes a teacher-pupil ratio as high as 1:50. [Time expired.]

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Mev die Speaker, ter aanvang wil ek sê dat die VF nie die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Onderwyswette sal ondersteun nie.

Die agb Minister en die ANC regering kom aan die een kant en sê die fondse en geld van ouers is die fondse en geld van die staat en dat daarmee op ‘n sekere voorgeskrewe wyse gehandel moet word. Die VF is ten gunste van reëls, regulasies en riglyne waarvolgens geld bestee moet word. Daar moet allermins geleentheid vir korrupsie wees.

Daar word egter van die ouergemeenskap verwag om geld aan die skool te verskaf sodat die skool sekere toerusting kan koop. ‘n Goeie voorbeeld is geld om rekenaars te koop. Daar word van die ouer verwag om sy bydrae te lewer. Wanneer die ouers egter optree en die geld in ‘n trust sit, word gesê hulle mag dit nie doen nie, want daar bestaan kommer omdat die geld in ‘n trust wanbestee en korrupsie gepleeg kan word.

Ek wil vir die agb Minister vra: As ‘n amptenaar in sy departement korrupsie pleeg, gaan hy as Minister bedank? Aanvaar hy daardie volle verantwoordelikheid? Want dit is wat hier gebeur. Omdat daar ‘n geval was waar ‘n trust wanbestuur en geld verkeerd aangewend is, word almal nou gestraf en verbied om ‘n trust te vestig. Wat die VF betref, is dit onbillik en onregverdig. Aan die een kant vra die staat ouers om van hul kant bydraes te lewer, maar hy wil sê hoe hulle dit moet doen.

Ek wil ook vir die agb Minister sê belastingbetalersgeld is nie die staat se geld nie; dit is die belastingbetaler se geld en behoort ook aangewend te word tot die beste voordeel van die belastingbetaler. Die staat kan nie eenvoudig voorskriftelik wees en sê hulle mag nie ‘n trust stig nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Speaker, to begin with, I want to state that the FF will not support the Education Laws Amendment Bill.

The hon Minister and the ANC Government say on the one hand that the funds and money of parents are the funds and money of the state and that they should be dealt with in a certain prescribed way. The FF is in favour of rules, regulations and guidelines in terms of which money should be spent. There must be no opportunity for corruption.

However, parents are expected to supply money to the school in order for the school to buy certain equipment. A good example is money to buy computers. The parent is expected to make his contribution. However, when the parents act and put money in a trust fund, they are told they are not allowed to do that, because there is concern that the money in the trust fund could be misappropriated or corruption could be committed.

I wish to ask the hon Minister: If an official commits corruption in his department, will he, as Minister, resign from his job? Does he accept full responsibility? Because this is what is happening here. Because there has been a case where a trust fund was misused and money was applied incorrectly, everyone is being punished and prevented from establishing a trust fund. As far as the FF is concerned, this is unreasonable and unfair. On the one hand the state asks the parents to make contributions but it wants to prescribe how they are suppose to do so.

I also wish to say to the hon Minister that the taxpayer’s money is not the money of the state; it is the taxpayer’s money and should also be applied in the best interest of the taxpayer. The state cannot simply be prescriptive and say that they are not allowed to establish a trust fund.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Chairperson and hon members, the Bill seeks to amend three Acts; the South African Schools Act, the Further Education and Training Act and the Employment of Educators Act.

In an effort to bring stability in public schools with learners in Grade 8 and higher, the Bill provides for the establishment of representative councils of learners which should be the only recognised and legitimate learner body at each school. This measure will put paid to the current situation which has learners concerning themselves with political activities because of the movements they belong to. The business of learners is to learn and hone their leadership skills under the guidance of their school teachers.

School governing bodies are called upon to use the Employment of Educators Act of 1998 and the Labour Relations Act of 1995 when they make recommendations to the heads of department on the appointments of educators. Procedures laid down in these Acts guide how appointments should be made. This will bring an end to appointments made on the grounds of familiarity. All appointments of educators have to be made on merit.

We call on parents to develop and take an interest in the education of their children and, in keeping with education norms elsewhere, determine what their children should be taught. Parents must rise to the occasion and influence the education of their children to the extent of being involved in the development of the curriculum, otherwise others will do it for them.

All public schools and public further education and training institutions will be prohibited from raising loans or even entering into collateral agreements in the name of the institutions. They may not establish trusts with money belonging to the institutions, as in the end such transactions will end up hidden from the school governing bodies who take office later. The only regret is that when this legislation finally becomes law, it may be too late for institutions to effect the closures in time to beat the beginning of 2002.

The UCDP supports the Bill.

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, it is acknowledged that this Bill plugs the loopholes found in three Acts, namely the South African Schools Act, the Further Education and Training Act and the Employment of Educators Act.

In terms of the amendments made to the South African Schools Act, satisfaction is expressed regarding the establishment of a representative council of learners at every public school. This wil prevent the common trap of prefect bodies being established by the management and not by the learners, at the same time providing a framework of legal parameters with which learner representative councils must comply.

It has often occurred that school governing bodies have hidden moneys, and mislead parents as to the financial standing of the institution. Clause 6 certainly introduces a provision to avoid the recurrence of such treachery and is hereby applauded. The reasons for allowing trust funds are supported and it is gladly noted that parents may receive tax benefits for a direct contribution to school funds.

The provisions made in terms of a school’s annual budget are supported. It is felt that lots of communication between departments is required to ensure that these budgets are drawn up adequately and efficiently. In terms of the Employment of Educators Act, the amendments made appear in order, and satisfaction is expressed in terms of the loopholes that have now been plugged.

With reference to the Further Education and Training Act, clause 13 is fully supported and its provision should be strictly adhered to. The seeking of approval from the MEC will certainly put a handle on the situation and ensure that overdrafts are in fact not taken. Further provisions expressing the situation as to when the absence of liability will avail are in order and should receive full co-operation.

The MF supports the Education Laws Amendment Bill. [Applause.]

Mr L M KGWELE: Chairperson, as a fundamental point of policy, the ANC has always believed that public schools embody the broad public interest in education and need to be organised, governed and resourced in a manner which is faithful to the Constitution, and which enables Government bodies to discharge their obligations under the Constitution. Foremost among these obligations is the need to base the public provision of schooling for all South African children on the principles of equity and redress of past inequalities and discrimination. It is within this context that we support the Bill before the House this afternoon. The hon the Minister, Comrade Benji Ntuli, and I were honoured, on behalf of the Portfolio Committee on Education, during the weekend of 21-23 September 2001, to be part of an epoch-making conference which was a milestone for people’s education - the launching of a nonracial, progressive National Association of School Governing Bodies. Delegates representing school governing bodies from across all nine provinces of our country assembled in Johannesburg under the theme ``Towards enhancing democratic and effective school governance for quality public education’’.

The historic launching conference, attended by parents of learners, learners, educators, student formations and teacher formations, expressed its unequivocal support for Government’s transformation agenda and in particular endorsed its support for this particular Bill before the House - the Education Laws Amendment Bill of 2001.

As the ANC, we appreciate and support the courage and commitment of the Education Ministry to review and strengthen policy frameworks to ensure that South Africans have the knowledge, values and skills required to facilitate social and personal development and economic growth, and to strengthen our democracy, our people and our nation.

It is for this reason that we strongly feel that we need to remind the ``Deurmekaar Alliance’’ and the opportunistic ACDP that the people of South Africa have charged the ANC with the responsibility of transforming the South African society, and that while they might have the luxury to play politics, misrepresent and distort our policies, the ANC has a mandate which we cannot fail to execute - the acceleration of the transformation of the education system on the basis of access, equity and quality. In this process, new regulations, policies and legislation remain the indispensable skeleton framework architecture of our future.

The attitude of the ``Deurmekaar Alliance’’ towards the positive change in education and their motivation for objecting to this specific Bill have nothing to do with accountability, democracy and transparency, which the Bill seeks to entrench, particularly in school governance and management. While post-apartheid education legislation identifies the objective of quality education as a core principle driving education reform, we find it intriguing and deplorable that there is not a single piece of legislation related to education tabled before this assembly that was ever supported by the DP, the New NP or the alliance.

The DP and its alliance opposed and voted against the National Education Policy Act, the South African Schools Act and the South African Qualifications Authority Act. They opposed and voted against the Educators’ Employment Act and the South African Council of Educators Act. Again, they opposed and voted against the Higher Education Act and the Higher Education Amendment Act. They opposed and voted against the Education Laws Amendment Bill of 2001.

I can go on and on, but in the interest of time, I wish to conclude that they also voted against various other measures aimed at ensuring equality and improving the quality of the education system. [Interjections.] The DP and its leadership are not patriotic enough to identify with and contribute towards the transformation process under way in our country.

It is obvious that their attitude, programme and strategy is to delay and obstruct the transformation of the education system, to rubbish, belittle and undermine any transformation effort by the Government. They will always strive to maintain the status quo. However, their attempts to delay the process of change, to enhance their political strategies at the expense of the nation, are sure to meet with ignominious failure. South Africans will definitely not tolerate opportunistic charlatans and demagogues for long.

The provision for the establishment of a representative council of learners at every public school that enrols learners in the eighth grade and higher in terms of the South African Schools Act, brought about the realisation, after a long struggle by learners, of democracy and representivity at the level of the public school. Most schools simply regard these structures as a mechanism to provide learner representatives to school governing bodies. The prefect system, in terms of which prefects are nominated by educators, is in most instances still maintained and preferred to the democratically elected council of learners.

The ANC supports the amendment to section 11 of the South African Schools Act, which aims to make the representative council of learners, the only recognised and legitimate body of learners at public schools because we regard these structures as important to providing a coherent strategy to promote leadership, accountability and democratic values among learners. The amendments also give the MEC concerned authority to determine the functions and procedures for the establishment of the council and the election of members to the council. This will provide a uniform approach in all public schools in a province and also ensure that the council takes its rightful place in the school system.

These amendments are intended to remove any uncertainty and ambiguity that existed as to how other learner structures should relate to the learner representative council. Learner representative councils, as the hon the Minister said, are legislative bodies that should represent the collective views of and aspirations of learners.

We, therefore, support the position that they should not be seen as an authority to themselves. They should contribute towards improving relations among learners, between student organisations, and between learners and educators, respect the authority of the school management, and mobilise learners to support programmes and resolutions of the school governing body. Among others, we expect them to play a leading role, together with student organisations, in mobilising learners to respect and protect school property.

As the ANC, we wish to encourage these structures to support ``operation Mazibuye’’ by encouraging fellow learners to return departmental books and school property in their possession at the end of the school year. Their co- operation with other stakeholders within the school and other community organisations and organs of state, is critical to ensuring that learning and teaching take place in a safe and clean environment that is free of violence, intimidation, harassment and abuse of fellow learners, particularly girls, and drugs as well as gangsterism. Representative councils of learners should contribute towards the establishment of a culture of learning and discipline among learners in their respective schools.

As the ANC we have always maintained that whoever misuses resources meant to alleviate the plight of our people is an enemy of the people. We are serious about combating corruption, in this instance the misuse of school fees by educators and school governing bodies. It is a pity that the opposition condones these practices. [Interjections.] There was a point earlier onÿ.ÿ.ÿ. [Interjections.] The hon members have just demonstrated today that they do condone corruption and do not associate with the fight to eliminate it. They were not interested.

There was a point earlier on made by the FF, the New NP, as well as the DP, that these measures are being implemented simply because there is corruption that relates to trust funds. We have never made the point that we are simply amending this in order to deal with trust funds. We said that if moneys are deposited into a school account, they should not be transferred to trust funds because we expect that trust funds are meant to mobilise resources for communities and ensure that those resources find their way into the school, not vice versa.

As far as the hon Green is concerned, I do not think that he understands what this is all about. The last time he brought a poster of human anatomy here, which he called pornography. We call on the national association of school governing bodies and all other role-players to join the Government in fighting corruption, ignorance and abuse of children. The ANC supports the Bill. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Chairperson, hon members, may I thank the chairperson of the portfolio committee, the hon Prof Mayatula, who in his very quiet, dignified and learned way, just like a good headmaster, has corralled his committee. I am grateful for the work that he has done.

I am also grateful to those members of the committee who actually turned up at the committee to debate these Bills. Not all the members turned up, but that has not been a disqualification from pontificating at length on what is not in the Bill.

I like Rev Douglas … He looks like a reverend, does he not? [Laughter.] I liked his statement about the nostalgic banalities that came up. But, I will tell hon members why. I have sat here for seven years now, and I have never heard the opposition, that is the New NP and DP, support any progressive piece of legislation on education. Listen to their appalling statements.

Mr Koornhof has pointed out that there are actually two worlds, whether one likes it or not. [Interjections.] There is the world of privilege that the hon member articulated, and the privilege comes out when one talks about these trust funds. Because it is not the corruption that matters, but the abuse of these funds. And I can give the hon members chapter and verse on how these funds have been abused to send teachers on overseas rugby trips, to buy cars for them and build extensions to principals’ houses - all from the trust fund - because of the fundamental matter that parents do not have access to and control of the trust fund, as they do over the school funds. We are trying to provide a remedy for a mischief.

And we must get rid of the idea that the ANC wants to centralise the funds. [Interjections.] The hon Groenewald should know that we are not saying that the school fees are, therefore, Government moneys. We are saying that public moneys must stay in the school to be used by the parents. [Interjections.]

The functions here are about the MECs of the provinces and the MECs of provinces have agreed to this. They are not transferred to Pretoria. Let me remind hon members that governing bodies appoint teachers. They decide on the language of instruction and on the form of religious worship. These are the ANC-led Government’s proposals. Nowhere else in the world do governing bodies have powers over these three enormous matters.

I am saying to the House that we have to evaluate this. We will have to look at how this works. And the trouble with the opposition is that they never once made a proposal, in education to say: Let us look at this together collectively because something has gone wrong. There is a creative aspect of the opposition which they have to recognise. [Interjections.] No! No! My door is open. The hon member must not prattle here because they have never made any concrete suggestion about a governing body. Every year we review these things. We bring them before members.

And, of course, we must tell Boy Geldenhuys to get off his high horse. In section 60 it says, the state is liable for any damage or loss caused as a result of any act or omission''. [Interjections.] I challenge the hon member to obtain legal advice to clarify this ambiguity -any act or omission’’. Mr Geldenhuys must come clean. He can use certain arguments for debating purposes, which are dishonourable. I want to see his opinion regarding my request to him to come clean on this because there is no ambiguity. I am not listening to him. [Interjections.] Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairperson, is the hon the Minister prepared to take a question? [Interjections.]

The MINISTER: Chairperson, no. The hon member, Boy must sit down because I have to finish this. I think that he brings disrepute to debates. He does not look at debates. He insulted the reverend from the IFP, because he does not know how to debate against him, for he made sense.

I want to say that Mr Green is quite right. We need to assist governing bodies. [Interjections.] This is the baying of wolves. Wolves have nothing to say. Mr Green is right. We need to build up the governing bodies in the rural areas where they are totally nonfunctioning. He came up with a benign proposal here, and does he know what he must do? He needs to train the next one, whereas one would have to remove the one that is not working in order to bring about another one to work.

I am grateful to the comrades here, particularly two or three comrades, who have actually made increasingly powerful interventions as to how we could improve the education system. I regret to say that the speakers from the opposition party have not added value to the debate. It is a pity, because these are rather minor changes that we are bringing about. We look forward to the fact that one day, apart from the ANC, the IFP and the other party’s benches, there will be truly national mobilisation in support of education and its progress in this country. But, we still have to wait because these yokels here do not understand a thing. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time (Democratic Party, New National Party Freedom Front, African Christian Democratic Party and Federal Alliance dissenting).

  GENERAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING QUALITY ASSURANCE BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Mr Chairperson, I have pleasure in introducing this Bill before the House. It brings about fundamental changes and completes the whole reform process which was started in 1994. [Interjections.]

The quality of education has become a priority area of focus for our Ministry and department, after spending the first years of our democracy establishing a single national education system in the country. Foreign commentators have commented on the fact that one of the great revolutionary things was to combine approximately 19 departments into one and the nine provincial departments.

One of the instruments which we are currently using is systemic evaluation of learner achievements, which will measure the progress of learners across the country, at grades 3, 6 and 9. Again, we will be doing this for the first time. This will ensure that we are able to measure the quality of learning at an early stage, and not wait until the end of the 12 years before picking up any problems.

Another instrument is the policy of evaluating the whole school, which I have recently determined. This instrument will look at the functioning of a school as an organisation, through an in-depth investigation by a team of trained evaluators. They will look at what is actually happening in the school - the teaching, the quality of teaching, the physical circumstances and the whole tone or atmosphere in the school. I am looking forward to the results of both these instruments, which I will make available to the public and to this House to ensure accountability.

But, the above attempt to intervene in the process of schooling in order to ensure that acceptable standards are being maintained along the way, is only part of the process. The third leg of quality assurance relates to the exit standards which are achieved. These are reflected in the final examinations and their results.

Historically, we have made use of the SA Certification Council, Safcert, which has certified the results of provincial matric examinations. This council, particularly in the last four years, has done much to maintain public confidence in the matric examinations. I must extend my appreciation to it for the valuable work. But, we are expanding the boundaries of quality assurance based on the view that this cannot be just a post facto process after the events of certification. It should rather be a continuous process which feeds quality imperatives back into the system. It is not enough simply to monitor learning achievements. The aim must surely be to improve these, and we know of the close relationship between the national curriculum and the assessment system. They are very closely associated and this, of course, is in the preamble of the Bill which I am tabling in order to improve those systems.

So, we are, therefore, proposing, through this Bill, the establishment of a new body which will replace Safcert and take responsibility for the quality assurance of institutional programmes in the general and further education bands of the National Qualifications Framework. This proposal is based on extensive international research and thorough consultation. The new body will, in future, recognise learner achievements and award qualifications, certificates or credits towards a National Qualification Framework qualification.

Its scope will be limited to programmes offered by institutions established, declared or registered under the South African Schools Act, the Further Education and Training Act or the Adult Basic Education and Training Act. In other words, it will not include higher education. It will also not affect other quality assurers or processes in regard to programmes offered outside these institutions. In addition, the new body will have the power to delegate and assign any of its duties to other bodies with the capacity to assist, while remaining primarily responsible for quality assurance in the two bands.

The sector education and training authorities, Setas, are very important bodies and will, therefore, continue to play a quality assurance role in respect of programmes offered by employers and training agencies within their own economic sectors. The SA Qualifications Authority will maintain oversight of quality assurance structures and processes across all bands of the National Qualification Network.

One of the major tasks of the new body will be the accreditation of both public and private providers. Once criteria have been established, all general and further education providers, including provincial departments of education, will be compelled to comply with such criteria, or face sanctions. In the case of a provincial department, the education MEC will be required to give a detailed report to the Minister on why they have not done so, and in the case of a private provider their accreditation will be withdrawn. This is very important, because at the further education and training level, there are thousands of providers of education who have not been regulated up to now.

In higher education, in the past three years we have had a satisfactory form of accreditation and recognition and, therefore, of regulation and control. Of course, hon members know of horror stories that take place of people who are writing certificate examinations which are not recognised anywhere, particularly at the level of ICT. Therefore, it is important that all private providers of education in the provinces must be registered, so that parents who are spending thousands and thousands of rands are not taken for a ride. These are very powerful instruments which are strongly in the interests of the public.

The new body, unfortunately, is designated as the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Council, an accurate but rather lengthy description of its function. We had a competition, and we offered money to find a better title for this body, but the Genfetqa Council seems to be the only one that is available.

So, if the House approves of this Bill, I will further invite nominations from organisations involved in education, from which I will appoint 15 persons, including the chairperson. These appointments will take into account, of course, professionalism, knowledge of education, representivity in the sector, expertise and experiences of different nominees. I must be clear: I want maximum participation, but an efficient professional body, not one which will end up tied up in petty- political bickering over unrelated issues which gives itself large amounts of money as expenses for attending these meetings.

I believe that the country is more than ready for the rigours of a systemic quality assurance programme. We have been improving examination results over the past year and we have to do so again this year. These achievements have been the result of an uncompromising stance on the commitment of teachers and officials through close monitoring of the outcomes. The Genfetqa council, if approved, will be another tool which will prepare our education system and learners for the 21st century, as I promised the President on taking office.

I am delighted to record that except for minor amendments, all the provinces, at this time, have indicated their support for the draft legislation. In recognition of its purpose and ability to improve quality in education, as the Department of Education together with the provincial departments, we are placing ourselves before the public, and establishing a structure which will report to them on our performance. This is a brave move but we owe it to the public. We are confident that in working with this council we will continue to improve the quality of education at general and further levels. [Applause.]

Mr R S NTULI: Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues, I think that I must preface my speech with some remarks to highlight the fact that when we come to the podium, this sacrosanct place, we should treat it with respect. When we make remarks, they must be completely truthful. It is not true that the DP opposes all the Bills.

The first time I came to this podium, I spearheaded the DP’s support of the South African Council for Educators Bill. I can go on giving other examples. [Interjections.] We do not oppose for the sake of opposition, and it must be clear that we are supportive of transformation without any qualification, but we are concerned that it must move in the right direction. [Interjections.] Having said that, I want to point out that this is another Bill which we are going to support. [Applause.]

The quality assurance is currently done in terms of the South African Certification Council Act of 1986. As this Act emanates from the time of the apartheid government, some of its provisions are outdated and the language used is neither gender-friendly nor user-friendly.

The new Act will apply to all education institutions that are below the band of higher education. The Bill aims to provide for the establishment of a quality assurance body. This body will ensure quality in the delivery and outcomes of the two bands with which it is primarily concerned. It also aims to regulate the relationship between the Department of Education, the SA Qualifications Authority and other education and training quality assurance bodies provided for in the council.

The aim of this Bill, among other things, is to outline the functions of this body. They include the following: to accredit general and further education and training providers; to monitor the suitability and adequacy of standards and qualifications; to assure the quality of learner assessment at exit points; to recognise learner achievements and award qualifications and credits toward qualification; to issue certificates of learner achievements; and to co-operate with relevant bodies appointed to moderate quality assurance against specific standards or qualifications.

The functions of providers and assessment bodies regarding external assessment are stipulated in clause 18. They include taking measures - this is critical - to combat irregularities at the assessment and marking centres and making sure that assessment is representative of the prescribed subject matter.

The good intention of clause 18 is given more muscle by clause 21 which empowers the council to refuse to issue a certificate of assessment where necessary. The council can also cancel a certificate if a learner has not met the requirements for qualification. The Bill further states that persons who do not comply shall be found guilty of an offence and liable to a fine or imprisonment.

The DP has pleasure in supporting this Bill. [Applause.]

Ms E GANDHI: Comrade Chairperson, Comrade Minister, comrades and colleagues, in supporting this Bill, I want to say with pride at the outset that the ANC Government has, since coming into power, recognised the centrality of education to the development of our communities and our country.

The education budget has grown and remains among the largest allocations. For over 300 years, there has been a systematic imposition of an education for service for the black people of this country. In seven years, it is difficult to change and transform those indoctrinated over decades.

This Bill, among other things, seeks to ensure that the quality of our education is transformed from apartheid education to an education for the empowerment of the people. The annual report says, and I quote:

Central to the development of the quality assurance policy, is the establishment of an education and training quality assurance body for the general and further education and training bands, including Abet and early childhood development.

The department has begun the legislative process that will establish the education and training quality assurance body towards the end of 2001, that is this Bill. The functions of this council will be to accredit providers, that is to make sure that providers of education are able to provide quality education. It will also monitor and audit education and training achievements and system in terms of national qualifications and standards.

In order to do this, the council will ensure that providers adopt quality management systems. The council will, in addition, have the power to issue certificates of learner achievements in line with the National Qualifications Framework. In order to ensure that the standards are maintained, it will also have to assure the quality of learner assessment at exit points and promote quality improvement among providers.

In addition to this, clause 18 provides for the functions of an assessment body regarding external assessment. This also includes the taking of measures to combat irregularities at the assessment and marking centres and making sure that assessment is representative of the prescribed subject matter.

For too long our children have been exploited by fly-by-night schools. The measures that the council will put into place and the powers that it will have will certainly provide protection for our children. The emphasis in this Bill is on quality control and how it will enhance the general and further education and training system and protect people from being exploited.

Whilst there were no specific provisions for representivity on the previous council, the council set up by this Bill will be representative and appointed through a participative process. The Minister, as he has already said, will advertise for nominations, and the public can then nominate persons they consider to be suitable. The Minister will then appoint councillors from this list of nominees - there are set criteria for this purpose. With this council in place, we can be sure that our education system can only improve and produce the men and women we need for the development of this country, and certificates which have meaning and are respected. I just want to make one suggestion to the Minister and that is that our vision is, and I quote from the annual report:

Our vision is of a South Africa in which all our people have access to lifelong education.

I want to suggest that it be a quality lifelong education. [Applause.]

Mr B M DOUGLAS: Chairperson, I want to thank the Minister for conferring the title of ``Reverend’’ on me. Maybe this will assist in making the comments made by Boy Geldenhuys a little more polite.

The vision to change the education landscape, which I have mentioned in my earlier deliberation, is given further impetus with the tabling of the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill, Genfetqa. Indeed, there is not much economy in this short title, Genfetqa, but one is sure it is African and, in particular, South African, if one thinks of Namaqua, Outeniqua, Griqua, Qwaqwa and KwaZulu.

Genfetqa was necessitated by the fact that SAQA dates back to days gone by. It has done its fair share, but there are some flaws we have inherited and some inequalities. Remarks by MEC Helen Zille that this certification will lead to a lowering of standards and will not be worth the paper it is written on, are really of the lowest level. We are grappling with mud politics. I call this consternation for transformation. While I was sitting there, I wrote something for Boy Geldenhuys. I got confused in that I did not whether he is Boy or baas or baasboy. So, I thought I would write something for him in Afrikaans. It goes something like this:

Diagnose vir Baas Boy. Hy suffer van konsternasie vir transformasie, want sy apartheidbagasie benodig purgasie vir die vooruitgang van ons nuwe nasie. [Gelag.] [Diagnosis for Baas Boy. He is suffering from consternation for transformation, because his apartheid luggage is in need of purgation for the betterment of our new nation. [Laughter.]]

Genfetqa is an instrument that looks at a school’s functioning as a coherent organisation and monitors that standards are not only established but also maintained. To quote the Minister, it is indeed true that the quality assurance cannot be a post facto process of certification but a continuous process which feeds quality and imperatives back into the system.

Whilst the criteria of the Bill are used for accreditation for private and public providers, including provincial departments, criteria for accreditation need some acceleration to avoid immediate lacunas and confusion and to deal effectively and quickly with fly-by-night computer schools and other institutions that we see mushrooming these days.

The IFP believes and trust that the chairperson of this envisaged council will be elected on merit only. The IFP is concerned about section 23 of the Bill and hopes that there will be no need for trepidation on the possible capacity problem that may arise here because most schools have been filled with trepidation.

We had many overtures by independent schools, the Pestalozzis and home schoolers, who tried to slip into the process their concerns on religious adherence. On Tuesday, we had marches and those marchers accused the hon the Minister of lying. I was worried because I read about one placard which said ``Lying is the prerogative of the Government, just as giving medicines is of the physicians’’. I did not study the placard. I just read about it recently. I do not want to sound like Mark Anthony or Brutus, but our esteemed Minister is an honourable man.

Even Karl Marx made the following remarks. He said that commodity-producing societies are societies where labour products do not become commodities whereas socialist governments had a deliberate production of social and moral values for others, which is wholly owned by the state and the state only to serve the conscience of the state and not the nation. Here, again, the Government is accused of unrealistic application of humanism. But, our Minister is an honourable man.

Allow me to go further. The impression is being created that Christian children shall be fed a diet of Voltaire and that the Bible is an ancient relic of superstition that belongs to dusty museums. Let me go even further than that. They give the impression that Muslim children will be made to recite The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. The Jewish community is also filled with trepidation because they get the impression that they will be forced into incorporating into their personality structure Sergei Nilus’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

The IFP supports the Bill.

Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Chairperson, the previous speaker is a poet, and he does not know it. Before I deal with this Bill, let me just go back to clause 61 of the previous Bill. The person who proposed that clause 61 …

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, we are dealing with Bill 57B-2001 and not the previous one. Please deal with this Bill.

Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Then we will continue this debate at another time.

Die wetsontwerp onder bespreking maak onder meer voorsiening vir ‘n raad vir gehalteversekering vir algemene en verdere onderwys en opleiding, wat die ou senior sertifiseringsraad sal vervang. Die raad moet nou kwaliteitonderrig in die openbare en private sektore verseker. Die sleutel tot gehalteonderwys in die klaskamer is nie soseer die aantal kwaliteitsversekeringsliggame nie, maar wel toegewyde en goedopgeleide onderwysers. Die heropleiding van die 85 000 ongekwalifiseerde of ondergekwalifiseerde onderwysers durf as ‘n saak van dringende prioriteit nie langer uitgestel word nie.

Die Nuwe NP ondersteun die wetsontwerp, maar wil tog die volgende onder die agb Minister se aandag bring. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The Bill before us provides, inter alia, for a quality assurance board for general and further education and training, which will replace the old senior certification board. This board must now assure quality tuition in the public and private sectors. The key to quality education in the classroom is not so much the number of quality assurance boards, but rather dedicated and well-trained teachers. Retraining the 85 000 unqualified or underqualified teachers, as a matter of urgent priority, dare no longer be postponed.

The New NP supports the Bill, but would still like to bring the following to the Minister’s attention.]

In terms of clause 23(1), every private provider or school must apply for accreditation. Now, there are approximately 2 000 independent schools and more or less the same number of other private providers whose application for accreditation might take months or perhaps even years to be approved. A possible solution is that these independent schools associations, in any case, quality assure their members, and then be deemed to be accredited initially, as is the case with provincial education departments. Another area of concern is the fees charged for services by the council in terms of clause 13(1).

Now, not all independent schools are rich. There are many poorly resourced private schools which are nevertheless providing good education and training to learners from poor communities. These communities will not be able to afford high fees charged for services by the council. Therefore, we suggest that consultation with private schools in determining such fees be seriously considered.

Ons ondersteun die wetsontwerp. [We support the Bill.]

Prof L M MBADI: Chairperson, Minister of Education and members, the UDM supports the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill, 2001. The Bill, amongst other things, seeks to provide for the establishment of a General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Council, to provide for the composition and functions of the council, to provide for the conduct of assessment, and to provide for the repeal of the South African Certification Council. The council, which is a juristic person, is deemed to be accredited by the SA Qualifications Authority as an education and training quality assurance body, primarily responsible for quality assurance and further education and training at education institutions.

Should the council fail to comply substantially with accreditation requirements for an education and training quality assurance body, the SA Qualifications Authority must give the council timeframes within which it must comply with the criteria. Failure to comply is reported to the Minister who must request the chairperson of the council to give a detailed report on why the council has not complied with the criteria.

The Council consists of 15 members appointed by the Minister, who also appoints one of the members as a chairperson. The UDM holds the view that whether the chairperson of the council is appointed by the Minister or is elected by the council from among the members, the position should be purely on merit.

The deputy chairperson is elected by members from amongst their number. The council may establish one or more committees which may perform such functions of the council as the council may determine. The chairperson of such committee is appointed by the council from among its members. The council must have a chief executive officer who is appointed by the Minister on the recommendation of the members of the council. The chief executive officer is accountable to the council.

With the council meeting the criteria for accreditation and performing the functions of education and training quality assurance for general and further education and training in respect of the National Qualifications Framework, the country is assured of quality education and training for all. The UDM hopes that the leaks of examination papers will be a thing of the past.

Mr L M GREEN: Mr Chairperson, in principle, we approve of the view that there should be a national council to ensure that national standards are maintained. We do, however, have concerns that were raised by Christian organisations such as the Pestalozzi Trust, and other organisations.

I can assure the hon member Mr Douglas that it is not because those people just want to pick a fight with the Minister, but it is because of legitimate concerns. One of the concerns that they have raised, and which I want to raise here today, is that there is no comparable protection provided in this Bill for the psychological integrity, the human dignity and the privacy of learners in any of the educational laws we have, even though these rights are recognised in the Constitution in equal or greater measure, and even though South Africa is bound by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to give effect to those rights in legislation in equal or greater measure compared to the right to be protected against corporal punishment.

We remember the debate we had about corporal punishment. Our position is that we cannot understand, when it comes to the prohibition of offence to human dignity and the invasion of privacy … [Time expired.] Mr I S MFUNDISI: Mr Chairperson and hon members, the South African Certification Council has done good work in its tenure, but changes have to be brought in so that a new body is responsible for establishing education and training standards or qualifications for the affected levels.

The council will have a measure of autonomy as it will receive allocations from Parliament while it will be at liberty to receive donations and contributions, and also charge fees for services. The council will have to introduce measures to combat irregularities at the assessment and marking centres, and ensure that examinations cover the entire subject matter, as prescribed.

At the moment, we notice that the credibility of the Grade 12 examinations is at stake. It is particularly so with the five subjects that are being examined nationally. Where are the cracks that let examination papers leak? We call on the department to put in place a council that will be vigilant and ensure that integrity in external examinations is not compromised.

We welcome provincial education departments being regarded as having been accredited by the council and hope that the council will consider their accreditation of private providers speedily and fairly. The UCDP supports the Bill. [Applause.]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Mr Chairperson, our country, like the rest of Africa, needs a massive and radical educational programme. We must maximise the study of modern science and technology in all our institutions of learning. These are the two factors which generate economic power. As Francois Partant has put it:

It is technological economic power that determines the places of nations in the world.

It is in this context that the PAC welcomes the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill.

Any effort which promotes knowledge must be appreciated. Education is the acquisition of knowledge. Knowledge liberates a nation. The PAC supports this Bill but hopes that more institutions of learning will be opened instead of being massively closed down, as has happened especially in the Eastern Cape.

How can colleges be closed down when the population is growing? This country must aim at being self-sufficient in education. We cannot import mathematics teachers forever where there are no teachers, while there are teachers who can be trained to teach mathematics in this country, instead of being retrenched while foreign teachers take their jobs. [Time expired.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Mr Chairperson, with the past inequalities in education and other services which were provided on the basis of colour, the new Government was challenged to correct these injustices, which is by no means an easy task.

In terms of our Constitution, which is our supreme governing authority, all persons have a right to education. It is our duty to deliver. The General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill is aimed at enabling the Department of Education to bring consistency in quality assurance and assessment in the country, ie education being delivered, and its standards and means and quality of deliverance.

The ability to keep a check on this via a monitoring process certainly gives an air of confidence as to the standard of education delivered. Having the policy in place and the ability to deliver requires the means to activate this to the best of its abilities, ie with reference to educators and teachers that are skilled in the profession to ensure effective delivery.

The MF supports the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill. [Applause.]

Mr R P Z VAN DEN HEEVER: Mr Chairperson, as far as the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill is concerned, everyone has agreed that it has had a smooth passage through the Education Portfolio Committee on Education.

During the public hearings that were held on this Bill, there was also general agreement amongst the various stakeholders that there was a legitimate need for a quality assurance body for the general and further education and training bands. And, during the deliberations on the Bill in the Portfolio Committee on Education the various parties were generally at one about the need for a quality assurance body to monitor and audit education and training achievements in terms of national standards and qualifications. The establishment of a quality assurance council, therefore, to provide for control over norms and standards of curriculum and assessment, was generally accepted by all.

Dit was duidelik dat alle rolspelers, die onderskeie politieke partye inkluis, dit eens was dat ons ‘n beheerliggaam nodig gehad het wat standaarde sou bepaal en monitor in soverre dit die kurrikulum en die evaluering van die werk van leerlinge aanbetref. Almal wil hulle seker daarop roem dat hulle staan vir standaarde in die onderwys en dat hulle nie enigsins met minderwaardige prestasies in die klaskamer te doen wil hê nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[It was clear that all role-players, including the various political parties, agreed that we needed a controlling body which would determine and monitor standards as far as the curriculum and evaluation of the work of pupils was concerned. verybody probably wants to boast that they stand for standards in education and that they want nothing to do with inferior performances in the classroom.]

However, when it dawned on certain right-wing groups that have already been named in this Chamber that the envisaged council would be tasked with developing criteria for accreditation to which all provincial education departments had to adhere, including all other providers and assessment bodies, then a new desperation set in. This desperation was now not focused on the quality assurance council per se, but on the fact that compliance would be demanded by the council to the standards set by the curriculum. It was at this point that the various fundamentalist groupings, who were battling the Minister of Education on the national curriculum statement, shifted their gaze to the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill for redemption.

All the different parties were then inundated with faxes and telephone calls, as it has become the custom of the particular pressure group, urging all of us to consider some kind of amendment to this Bill in order to regulate the assessment of the curriculum to the extent of preventing what was called intrusive practices into the curriculum. There was a discussion in the committee about that. From our side, as the ANC, we acknowledged, in the formal stage of that discussion, that we had been approached by these groups to bring about some kind of prohibition to the assessment of what these groups refer to as intrusive practices.

However, the position that the ANC stated in that meeting was that it was not the intention of this particular General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill to address the content of the national curriculum statement. Rather, it was the intention of the Bill to establish a council which would ensure that whatever the curriculum, all general and further education institutions that were either declared or registered in terms of education legislation would have to abide by the criteria laid down in the curriculum.

As far as I can recall, all other parties agreed in that meeting that this Bill was not legislating on the curriculum, and as a portfolio committee we could not consider any amendment proposed to the content of the curriculum. It therefore comes as a surprise to me to hear in this debate this afternoon Mr Green saying that the Bill does not provide protection to learners with regard to the curriculum when he agreed in the portfolio committee to the view that this Bill was not addressing the aspect which these people wanted it to address.

There are other forums and other policy documents in which the Government and the Department of Education give adequate opportunity to those who have reservations about the national curriculum statement. On Tuesday the Ministry of Education held public hearings in which the Minister patiently and without interruption listened to all the views of the various stakeholders with regard to the content of the national curriculum statement.

Our democratic laws allow those opposed to Government policies to hold peaceful marches to Parliament as various of these groups indeed did on Tuesday. This courtesy, or should I say this fundamental human right, was not allowed under apartheid rule, because any dissension like they showed on Tuesday would have been ruthlessly crushed by the then apartheid government.

The ANC does not have a problem with dissenting views being expressed towards the various policies which they adopt in the interest of transformation. However, the ANC has an even greater responsibility towards the majority of the people in our nation who concur with the approach that policies, Bills and Acts would have to be in line with transforming an undemocratic and authoritarian society, and would have to take into consideration the undeniable fact that South Africa is a multicultural and diverse society in which a multitude of religions and lifestyles compete for recognition.

Therefore, the policies of Government have to be in line with the demands of diversity rather than conforming to the constraints of exclusivity. In so far as this Bill ensures that order and discipline are established in the domain of the presentation and the assessment of the agreed curriculum, whatever the nature of that curriculum may be, we believe that it represents another building block in the establishment of a democratic order in which all of the diverse demands of a multiracial, multicultural and multireligious education system are successfully accommodated. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Chairperson, I have had a pained letter from Mr Lee of the DP saying that he was awaiting my response to their support of the Bill with bated breath. Can I ask him to unbate his breath? My response is that I greet this like I would greet snow in Cape Town in summer or a cobra sliding out of my pants. I greet this with all the enthusiasm of a cobra coming out of my pants. [Laughter.]

Can I, therefore, thank the DP for their support. I never said that the DP opposes all the Bills. I said that to my knowledge they oppose every progressive piece of legislation. [Interjections.] I said that and Hansard will bear that out. I would like to thank them for that.

I think that this is the combination of a process that began in 1996, the culmination to bring together and integrate all education factors, particularly assessment. We have always said, let me reiterate, we want equity and fairness, and quality with it too. We do not want to choose between quality and equity, and equity and quality. That is why it is so important, and there will be some great surprises where we now have a system for assessment of higher education. Therefore, for benchmarking against the rest of the world, we get some surprising results when we see the quality assessment carried out at different levels of higher education. Members will be very surprised. We want quality and equity. Therefore, can I say to Dr Geldenhuys that thousands of schools come for assessment. We cannot assess them all at once. It will take them three or four years to be assessed. That is the correct thing to do.

Fees are being charged; ultimately the budget has to come to me. If in terms of the budget the fees are too high, I have the right to say that I do not accept it. I think there is a gap there. I think the rises in fees should not have taken place without some kind of regulator, and the regulator could have been the Minister for the time being. So, there is a gap which, I think, we will have to correct next year.

The third thing concerns what Dr Pheko said. We are not closing down institutions. We have had a large number of inefficient institutions. Now we are trying to professionalise them. I do not think that the antiforeigner thing should work in this House. Most of our technikons are staffed by overseas people, from formerly eastern Europe, because we do not have technically qualified people in South Africa. We should not go on with this xenophobia here in this most august place to say that foreigners should keep out.

Finally, regarding values, the fundamental values are laid down in the South African Schools Act. The fundamental values will carry throughout every part of our national curriculum statement. If hon members have the South African Schools Act, they should look at it very carefully. As Mr Van der Heever said, we shall use the extraordinary strength, richness and diversity against the bigoted uniformity that some people in this House would like to impose on us, in the faith and morals part of it.

We will combat them on that, and we will reply to every point raised, including the one that Grade 12 pupils have to be involved in oral sex in classroom, which is the so-called evidence given to us on Tuesday. We will reply to every demonising of the democratic tradition in our country, rather than to destroy all that we have achieved in the five years, so that everybody in South Africa could feel comfortable. If they do not feel comfortable at the school then the school is betraying them. We will not allow the hon member’s disgraceful essay to make foreigners of our people in our own schools in South Africa. Therefore, the Bill will help in ensuring that we have the kind of quality control that can allow better students to achieve better results in South Africa for a better South Africa altogether. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time (African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).

                     ANIMAL IDENTIFICATION BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, the Bill we are discussing in this House today is not about identifying new animal species that were not in existence, as other members might have thought. It is merely about the marking of our livestock. Interestingly, however, we are, in this Bill, creating a framework of marking other animals such as pets and wildlife, which did not fall under the Livestock Brands Act of 1962. Just after 1994, we ensured that all other magisterial districts that were not covered by the Livestock Brands Act of 1962, particularly those which fall under the homeland areas and self-governing territories, were actually brought in line.

The livestock industry is very important for our country’s economy. It is also one sector where it is easy to find those farmers who were previously disadvantaged. For our rural households, livestock are an important asset. The majority of our people here in this House and others outside this House have been beneficiaries of a situation where households sold livestock in order to pay school fees for them to attain their education. For rural and urban communities, the livestock industry also provides for essential nutrition and food security in general. For the majority of livestock farmers, this industry is a lifeline of their revenue and thereby a source of their livelihood. The benefits from value addition in this industry are also enormous, particularly in the use of skins and hides for leather bags, car seats and many others that I cannot mention today.

Like any other industry, livestock farming has had its own challenges such as stock theft and infectious animal diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease. The many legal instruments that are there to deal with some of these challenges need review at some stage or another. This is done in order to strengthen or correct some of the anomalies that do not fit the current times. The current legislation has come as a result of the review undertaken by various stakeholders both within South Africa and also in the Southern African Development Community in the region.

Stock theft has been a challenge for ourselves, as governments in the region, and farmers. Farmers of KwaZulu-Natal, the Free State and the Eastern Cape have been the most affected by stock theft. The trans-boundary action of the SAPS and the role that Foreign Affairs has played - one must commend them - has tried to help to recover some of these animals that find their way into other countries in the region. However, it must be noted that we still face this challenge. We are therefore endeavouring through this Bill to help lessen this illegal trade in some way.

Through this Bill, we are creating an opportunity that all our livestock are marked in a manner that ensures that the value of the income on skins and hides is not lost. Secondly, we want to ensure that traceability is possible, even for the animals that have not reached the age of fourteen days. Thirdly, it will help us to monitor the movement of animals for disease control purposes, but also to curb the issue of cattle rustling. I say this because we have agreed with my counterparts in the region that this legislation was not only necessary for South Africa or for some, but it was necessary for all of us.

In the SADC meeting of agricultural and natural resources Ministers, there was an agreement that various legislatures in the region should pass an Animal Identification Bill so that we are able to deal with the problem of stock theft and animal disease. The Bill also provides a framework for registration of markers in order to protect the public against inexperienced markers.

I must say the journey to arrive where we are today has been a long one. Consultations were held with farmers, both commercial and resource-poor farmers in traditional areas. Given that agriculture has a concurrent function, enormous time was also given to the provinces in order to consult further with other stakeholders and give some input into the Bill. Another important phase has been the role that has been played by our public representatives here in Parliament in the portfolio committee. I wish to thank hon members, particularly those in the portfolio committee, for the work that they have done in ensuring that the Bill is strengthened and is tabled for debate today. I wish to thank Dr Moepudi and the team in the department for their hard work. More importantly, it is necessary for me to thank the various stakeholders for their input and the way in which they helped us to identify some of the problems in the current Livestock Branding Act. I trust that this product, which this Parliament will pass, is not only going to be our product, but is going to be the product of the industry. [Applause.]

Nks B M NTULI: Mhlalingaphambili, aboNgqongqotjhe namalunga ahloniphekileko, umthetho-mlingwa esikhuluma ngawo namhlanje ngathana kade waba khona. Uqakathekile begodu udlulelwe sikhathi. Ngizokukhuluma ngeenhlokwana ezithile emthethweni-mlingwa lo. Isihlokwana sokuthoma ngesokuthi woke umuntu onefuyo ufanele ayibeke itshwayo. Ngilokho okuqakathekileko. Bona uneenkomo ezimbili namkha amakhulu amabili akukaqakatheki. Yoke ifuyo ifanele ibe netshwayo lomnikazi ngaphasi komthetho-mlingwa lo. Ngilokhu esithi kutshwaywa okukatelelekileko. Ngakho- ke ngibawa bonyana abantu nabezwa kuthiwa ifuyo ibekwa amatshwayo bangarareki, basikimele phezulu ngombana kuzakuba nesikhathi sokubekwa kwamatshwayo isihle. Ekukhambeni kwesikhathi kuzokuba nemadlana ethile ebhadalwako. Ngakho-ke abantu abeze ngokurhabako nabezwa kumenyezelwa.

Kwesibili, abalimi benarha yekhethu kufanele babe netshwayo lenarha, khulukazi abalimi abakhulu. Itshwayo lenarha njengele Sewula Afrika, Namibia, Zimbabwe nezinye iinarha. Lokhu kwenzelwa bona ifuyo ebuya kwezinye iinarha ibonakale masinyana, begodu lokho kuzosirhelebha ukwazi namtjhana kunezifo, njengesifo samatele, sazi bona enarheni ethile kunesifo iinkomo zakhona zingadluli zize enarheni yekhethu. Nanoma kunabalelesako sizakukgona ukuzibona nabazidlulisako ngetshwayo lenarha leyo zivinjwe zingadluli. Kwesithathu, akusiwo woke umuntu onelungelo lokubeka amatshwayo. Kuzakuba nabantu abakhethekileko abazokwenza umberego lo esibabiza ngabatshwayi ebabongcweti.

Bazakubhadalwa ke abantu labo, kodwana sizakuba khona isikhathi sokurhelebha abantu bona babe netshwayo. Begodu bafanele babe nerherho lokutshwaya bona nabatshwaye iinkomo zakho bakgone ukutjho bona zingaki, ngezikabani nokuthi umnikazi uhlala kuphi ngombana banengi abazokuvela badlelezele abantu bathi sibeka amatshwayo kanti benza okungakafaneli. Kwesine, kuzokuba lula ukwazi bunqopha bona ifuyo ngekabani namkha ukufanisa ubunikazi. Abantu abazokubeka amatshwayo bafanele babe nerherho lokutshwaya bakwazi ukutlola bonyana iinkomo abazibeke amatshwayo ngezikabani, zingaki begodu uhlala kuphi.

Okhunye kukwenza lula umberego wamapholisa. Amapholisa azakukgona ukujamisa noma yilori elayitjhe iinkomo - bangayijamisi kwaphela kodwana kube lula ukwazi bona iinkomo lezo ngezikabani, ziyaphi, ngemvumo kabani, ngombana zizokuba netshwayo umuntu azikhethele lona, netshwayo lenarha nencwadi yokuthwala ifuyo leyo. Okhunye kukuthi iinkomo nazilahlekileko, kube lula ukuzibona bona lezi akusizo zenarha yangekhethu bese kufunyanwa umninizo.

Mhlalingaphambili akhe ngigcine ngalokhu-ke: Nakungenzeka iingozi endleleni begodu akwaziwa bona iinkomo ezenze ingozi ngezikabani, ngamatshwayo la kuzoba lula bonyana amapholisa wendlela athole umnikazi weenkomo, aqalane nomlandu wakhe. Sithi yelusani bantu bekhethu zimbi izinto ngaphandle. Neendrada eendleleni azilungiswe ningazisiki siyokwakha iimbaya zethu emakhaya. (Translation of Ndebele paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs B M NTULI: Chairperson, Ministers and hon members, the Bill that we are discussing today should have been implemented long ago. It is important and long overdue. I will address myself to different topics in this Bill. Firstly, it is important that all people who have animals should mark them, whether one has two beasts or 200 is not important. According to this Bill all animals should be marked according to the owner’s identification mark. This is what we call enforced marking. So I appeal to people if they hear that animals are being marked, they must not be surprised, they must heed the call because there will be a free marking period. After some time a certain amount will have to be paid for that. So let people come if such an announcement is made.

Secondly, our farmers should have a national identification mark of our country, especially big farmers. A mark should exist for South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe and other countries. This helps in identifying animals from other countries easily, and this will help us to identify them when there are diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease, so that we know that in such a country there is a disease and do not allow their animals to enter our country. Also, when animals are stolen we will be able to identify those animals because of the marking and will be able to impound them.

Thirdly, it is not everyone who has a right to make markings. There will be people designated for that job which will be called marking operators. Those people will be paid, but there will be a period to help people to have a mark. The marking operators should also have a register of markings so that if they mark one’s cattle they should know the number, to whom it belongs and where the owner resides, because a number of people will go around and claim to be marking operators only for people to find out that they are bogus. Fourthly, it will be simple to know exactly to whom the animals belong or to identify the owner. There will be a time to mark the animals so that they can be identified and know where they belong. The marking operators should have a register so that they can write down the owner of the cattle, the numbers and location of the owner.

This will make the work of the police officials simpler. Police will be able to stop a truck carrying cattle and be able to identify the owner of those cattle, where they are taken to and on whose authority, because they will be marked with a marking that the owner has chosen for himself, as well as with a national identification mark and a permit to transport those cattle. Also what is important is that when such cattle have been lost it is simple to identify them, ascertain that these animals do not belong to our country and identify the owner.

Let me end by saying that if an accident were to take place on a national road and it is not known whose cattle caused the accident, with these markings it will be simple for traffic officials to find the rightful owner of these cattle so that he can face the justice system. We are saying: Take care of your animals, repair broken fences, do not remove them to build your own kraal fences at home.]

Bakithi imfuyo yilona bhange lethu thina bantu abampisholo. Asiyinakekele sibe negugu ngayo. Yimpilo yethu leyo. Noma ziyingcosana izinkomo zethu ngoba sathathelwa ngabahlakaniphileyo ngezindlela eziphansi basenza sabampofu obaba babe ngamadoda. Ngesikithi kuthiwa indoda yindoda ngesibaya sayo. Sisho njalo ukuze sikwazi ukubambisana nomnyango wezolimo mayelana nobusela nezifo senze njengoba umnyango usicela. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)

[To us black people, livestock farming is our bank. Let us protect it and be proud of it. It is our life, although today we have few cattle because those who are clever, took them from us in a deceitful way and made us poor while our fathers were men. According to our culture, a man is a man according to the number of cattle he has. That is what we are saying, so that we can co-operate with the Department of Agriculture regarding livestock thieves and diseases, as the department has requested us to do.]

Bagaetsho, ke tlile go kopa gore batho kwa magaeng ba leke go tshwaya dikgomo tsa bona gore mapodisi a kgone go ba thusa go di batla fa di timetse, le go thibela malwetse le bogodu. Re lapisitswe ke magodu le gore batho ba itirele boithatelo ka leruo la rona. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[I would like to ask people in the rural areas to brand their livestock so that the police can help them if they happen to lose them, to prevent diseases and stock theft. We have had enough of people doing as they please and stealing our livestock.]

Mr G B BHENGU: Chairperson, Minister and the honourable House, we are, indeed, delighted as the IFP that the Department of =Agriculture has introduced this Bill, which has been thoroughly scrutinised by the portfolio committee, with the aim of promoting animal health and controlling animal diseases. This country and some parts of the SADC region, as well as some European countries, experienced an outbreak of foot- and-mouth disease. Although this outbreak was a catch-22 situation, the department was able to see it through.

The IFP welcomes the contemplated designation of a departmental veterinarian who shall become the national executive officer to consider applications for extensions, render advice on animal health, and carry out examinations on animals and inspections on land and premises with regard to animal health issues. These checks and balances will, indeed, promote animal health and plug any loopholes with regard to the outbreak and spread of diseases.

The restriction on the importation and exportation of animals, or things, will surely contribute to the control of diseases and the promotion of animal health. Moreover, these restrictions will curtail stock theft, which is a thorn in the flesh of farmers and stock owners. We believe, in this regard, that branding will also play a pivotal role in preventing stock theft. The issuing of health certificates to animal exporters and permits to importers is a positive step, and a holistic approach to all envisaged problems.

The IFP applauds the provision, on the part of the Minister, to establish animal health schemes as and when it becomes necessary to do so. Life experiences have, indeed, shown that preventive measures are more effective than curative ones. We appreciate the fact that the establishment of such schemes is done according to very comprehensive guidelines. We realise that this process will never be a slipshod exercise because of the magnitude of problems and the after-effects of the outbreak and spread of animal diseases.

Concerning the disposal of stray animals that pose no threat of disease, we wish to point out that the two-day period allowed by the national executive officer, in terms of this Bill, to restore on request the stray animal to the owner may be too short. Some animals may stray because they have been stolen in a very remote area and dumped in another for some reason. For example, the thieves might have noticed a roadblock or may have experienced a vehicle breakdown. Stock owners believe in looking for the lost animal for up to a week or more before they actually give up the search.

Lastly, we believe that branding of animals plays a significant role in combating stock theft. [Time expired.]

Mnr A S VAN DER MERWE: Mnr die Voorsitter, agb Minister en lede van die Raad, dit is tydig dat hierdie wet, wet 87 van 1962, verander word. Hierdie wetsontwerp het ten doel om byvoorbeeld ‘n boervriendelike wet daar te stel. Dit het ten doel om met praktiese probleme van die vorige wet te handel. Ek kry die indruk dat die opstellers van die wetsontwerp baie moeite gedoen het om alle aspekte deeglik in ag te neem, en daarvoor het ons baie waardering.

Wetsontwerp 49 van 2001 het ‘n paar belangrike komponente, maar die Minister en vorige sprekers het dit volledig gedek. Ek wil tog die volgende uitlig: dit poog om mee te help om diefstal te ontmoedig. Vir ‘n veeboer is diefstal ‘n groot probleem. Diewe steel nie graag gemerkte vee nie.

Dit is egter jammer dat die veediefstaleenhede afgeskaf is. Hierdie wetsontwerp moet help om veediefstal teen te werk, maar dan skaf ons ‘n spesialiseenheid soos die veediefstaleenhede af. Hierdie eenhede was baie suksesvol met die bekamping van veediefstal. Selfs potslagters was onder beheer. Ek weet dit ressorteer nie direk onder die agb Minister nie, maar ons hoop die Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit hoor dit ook.

Veediefstal-ondersoeke verg ‘n gespesialiseerde kennis. Hierdie kennis het nou verlore geraak in die opname van die betrokke personeel in die totale SAPD. Dit is ‘n verlies vir die landbou. Met die veediefstaleenhede en die beleid van die SAPD om so spoedig moontlik geld te bestee om potslagters skuldig te bevind te kry weg, het hierdie element feitlik ‘n vrypas om te slag soos hulle lus het.

Dit is darem nie die boere se plig om honger mense op hierdie wyse van kos te voorsien nie. Dit is die totale verantwoordelikheid van die staat om om te sien na mense sonder kos. Daar moet kennis geneem word van die feit dat die meeste potslagters slag om geld te verdien en nié omdat hulle honger is nie.

Hierdie wetsontwerp maak dit moontlik om verskeie wyses van identifikasie te gebruik om onder meer ‘n mens se diere op wettige wyses te kan identifiseer. Soos meer gesofistikeerde metodes beskikbaar en bekostigbaar word, kan die eienaars van diere dit toepas. Die wetsontwerp omskryf deeglik die vereistes waaraan identifikasiemerke moet voldoen.

Die portefeuljekomitee het ‘n belangrike versoek gerig dat mense wat nog nie aansoek gedoen het om die registrasie van ‘n merk nie, dit ‘n tyd lank kosteloos moet kan doen. Dit sal die eienaars van byvoorbeeld een bees en ‘n paar skape baie help, want ons moet ook hulle vee gemerk kry. Streek- of landmerke sal diefstal oor grense help bestry, en ons is dankbaar dat daar voorsiening hiervoor gemaak is.

Die wetstoepassing word tans met ‘n sagte hand gehanteer. Dit is nodig om almal se samewerking te kry om die wetsontwerp geïmplementeer te kry. Diefstalle sal ook aan bande gelê word indien almal in die toekoms saamwerk en die voorskrifte uitvoer. Hierdie wetsontwerp maak ook voorsiening dat telersgenootskappe met nuwe vorms van identifikasie na vore kan kom terwyl die kleurmerkmetode van krag bly. Die Nuwe NP steun hierdie wetsontwerp. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr A S VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and members of this House, this Act, Act 87 of 1962, is being changed timeously. This Bill aims, for example, to put in place a farmer-friendly act. It aims to deal with practical problems of the previous Act. I get the impression that the drafters of this Bill went to a lot of trouble to take all aspects thoroughly into account, and we have a lot of appreciation for that.

Bill 49 of 2001 has a few important components, but the Minister and previous speakers have dealt with this thoroughly. I would, however, like to highlight the following: It aims to help discourage theft. For a livestock farmer theft is a big problem. Thieves do not steal branded livestock easily.

It is, however, a pity that the stock theft units have been abolished. This Bill must help to combat stock theft, but then we abolish a specialist unit such as the stock theft unit. These units were very successful with the combating of stock theft. Even people who slaughtered animals just for the pot were kept under control. I know this does not fall directly under the hon the Minister but we hope that the Minister of Safety and Security hears this as well.

Stock theft investigations require specialised knowledge. This knowledge has now been lost with the inclusion of the staff concerned in the total SAPS. This is a loss for agriculture. With the stock theft units gone, and the policy of the SAPS to spend money as quickly as possible to get people who slaughter for the pot convicted, also having disappeared, these people are virtually free to slaughter animals whenever they wish to.

It is surely not the duty of the farmers to provide hungry people with food in this way. It is the total responsibility of the state to care for people who do not have food. We should also take cognisance of the fact that many potslaughterers slaughter to earn money and not merely because they are hungry.

This Bill makes it possible to use various methods of identification to enable one to identify one’s animals in a legal way. As more sophisticated methods become available and affordable the owners of animals can implement them. The Bill thoroughly defines the requirements with which identification marks should comply.

The portfolio committee has made a very important request that people who have not yet applied for the registration of a mark, should be able to do so free of charge for a certain period. This would, for example, help the owners of one beast and a few sheep a great deal, because we should also get their livestock marked. Regional or land marks will help to combat cross-border theft and we are grateful that provision has been made for this.

At present the law is being implemented very leniently. It is necessary to get everyone’s co-operation to get this Bill implemented. Thefts will also be curtailed if everyone co-operates in future and carries out the prescriptions. This Bill also provides that breeders’ associations may now come forward with new forms of identification while the colour branding method remains in operation. The New NP supports this Bill. [Time expired.]] Mr S ABRAM: Chairperson, at the outset, I wish to congratulate the Director of Genetic Resources in the Department of Agriculture, Dr Moepudi and the legal advisers for having prepared a Bill which I called, at the original information session, a ``very clean Bill’’. I may tell the House that this Bill did not require any amendments because, from the word go, it was properly drafted.

Yes, we have to agree whole-heartedly that animals, particularly cattle, occupy a very special place in African society. It is a means of bartering for food and other commodities. It is a means, as the hon the Minister has said, of paying for the costs of education, university fees and many other things. Of course, it is also a means of acquiring a wife. If one does not have animals, one is not a man, and one cannot afford to keep a wife. One has to pay lobola.

Ja, en mag ek ook vir my vriende hier sê: ‘n Mens kan hulle brandmerk, maar ongelukkig bestaan die DA-merk nou nie meer nie. Hulle is nou die Dooie Alliansie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Yes, and may I also say to my friends here: One can brand them, but unfortunately the DA-brand no longer exists. They are now the Dead Alliance.]

May I just say that I support this Bill, and may I tell the national Department of Agriculture that we must be very, very circumspect in assisting people who will not be able to afford identification marks, especially those people who live on farms and have very few animals. To go and register an identification mark and buy all the necessary equipment is going to be cumbersome. We need to assist such people, but we also need to see to it that such people make use of the identification marks of the farmer on whose land they live, so that at least those animals are marked.

Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, the ACDP supports this important Bill. Anything we can do to stop stock theft is a good thing, and this Bill will act as a deterrent in the event of a dispute to prove ownership.

Of course, in the light of the new technology available these methods are very old-fashioned, and Government should be looking at using more advanced technology, such as a microchip in the animal’s ear. The information recorded on the microchip, such as age, weight, vaccinations, etc, would be linked to computers and would improve levels of stock farming. State veterinarians handle every herd once a year or even twice a year for vaccinations, and could easily implant the microchip into the animal and register the fact. According to my information this technology is already available to every state veterinarian.

Skins are a major export commodity, and major car companies source leather in South Africa, and branding damages the leather, resulting in less money for the skins or very light branding. This Bill is an improvement and our only reservation is that it does not take us into the 21st century. The ACDP supports this Bill.

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Chairperson, we view the Animal Identification Bill of 2001 as providing a mechanism that will protect animals by way of regulation, by ensuring that each and every owner registers the animals they have. Clause 5(2)(b) of the Bill is not only appropriate, it is also relevant, because if the animal is registered under its own name it would become difficult to trace the owner, and as such it would make it difficult to implement clause 15(1) of the Bill. It is imperative that owners of animals are educated and have access to this Bill once it becomes an Act, so as to make it possible for them to appreciate the implications and obligations of owning an animal.

Clause 7(2)(a) does in a way protect animals from being exchanged as gifts to other people at the whim of an owner. In some cases, the animal ends up in the wrong hands. That is where it is important to give more powers to the registrar to inspect and monitor the welfare of animals in our country. Those without registration certificates for their animals must be punished.

We must also monitor the implementation of this Bill once it becomes an Act. [Time expired.]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Mr Chairperson, the title ``Animal Identification Bill’’ sounds a bit funny to people who have never reared animals such as cattle, horses and sheep. The purpose of the Bill, however, is to consolidate the law relating to the identification of animals. In these days of escalating crime, including stock theft, this Bill is timely.

Clause 1 deals with lists of definitions which make the Bill clearer. For instance, mark'' means to place an identification mark on any animal, marking instrument’’ means any instrument used or intended to be used for marking animals. The Animal Identification Bill is farmer-friendly legislation.

The advantages of identification are that permanent visible marks on animals act as a deterrent because stock thieves are more inclined to steal unmarked animals. Marked animals are easy to identify when stolen. The Bill contributes to more effective policing, which results in an improved recovery rate of lost and stolen animals.

In the opinion of the PAC, this Bill is farmer-friendly and protects farmers’ interests, especially with regard to stock theft. We support the Animal Identification Bill.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I think the Bill on the marking of animals will be an important Act and will help quite a lot as regards a number of issues. The question of stock theft has been mentioned, as well as that of disease control. I think one of the important things is that all animals in South Africa should be marked, especially those of small farmers with one or two animals, where stock theft becomes a problem and brings down the business.

Ek dink dit is belangrik dat daar ‘n tyd sal kom waarin elke individu wat ‘n dier het vrylik sy merk kan registreer, sodat so ‘n dier werklik opgespoor kan word indien dit sou wegraak. [I think that it is important that there should come a time when every individual owning an animal, can freely register his mark, in order for such an animal to be found, should it get lost.]

I would like to mention a subject which I think is quite important at this stage. With the high price of animals, especially beef cattle in South Africa, and the lucrative export market due to the fact that the Zimbabwean industry has collapsed, there are a lot of animals in Zimbabwe for which there is no market, and these animals can very easily come over the border into South Africa. As we know, there is an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Zimbabwe. I would like this marking of animals to be applied very strictly in those areas, so that we do not have any smuggling of animals over the border. If we were to have an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease again it could seriously affect our economy. So, I think it is an important factor which we have to look at and emphasis should be placed on that area.

A second thing regarding the marketing of animals is the question of mad cow disease in the future. The EU has laid down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissable spongiform encephalopathies, or BSE as it is known. That was done on 2 May 2001. Countries wishing to be retained on the list of Third World countries approved for the export of beef to the EEC should submit an application to determine their BSE-free status. Should South Africa not be categorised in category 2 or 3 by 2 January 2002, a number of further measures will be compulsory. One of them includes a permanent identification enabling bovine animals intended for export to the EEC to be traced back to the dam and herd of origin. Although these regulations apply to the EU, some non-EU members have already included some of these guidelines in current certification requirements.

As far as I could determine, the Veterinary Services of SA have not yet applied for categorisation in category 2 or 3 even after various requests to do so have been made in this regard. This matter is of the utmost importance since all endeavours by exporters to develop export markets will be in vain after January 2002 with no red meat exports leaving South Africa, and a further compulsory marketing of animals to be traced back to the father and mother of an animal and the farm. So, this is an important factor. With this legislation we have we could seriously jeopardise our situation if we do not give attention to these other methods which correspond to that.

We will support this Bill and hope that it will apply especially on the borders of our country to keep the smuggled animals out which pose a serious threat in terms of diseases, especially foot-and-mouth. [Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, it appears that the theft of livestock has become a larger problem requiring some form of identification mark for livestock to enable policing of the crime.

It is agreed that permanent visible marks made on animals to prove ownership is certainly a means to control this, but how effective will the system be if thieves get their hands on unmarked livestock prior to their being marked and in turn mark the animals themselves? It would therefore be wise to introduce a receipted document when animals are marked, to be kept by the owner and supplied to authorities. Perhaps some form of registration would serve the purpose. However, the system of animal markings would certainly serve to ensure tighter control over the situation, and it is hoped that though this system will be to the advantage of the agricultural industry, the markings will be made on these animals in the least painful manner.

The MF supports the Animal Identification Bill. [Applause.]

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Madam Speaker, as was stated by the hon the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, this Bill will replace the Livestock Brands Act of 1962.

As we have said before, the drafters of this Bill must be congratulated, including the department, for a piece of user-friendly legislation. The need for farm animals to be identified has become increasingly important. Barely 10 years ago, the Pietersburg magisterial district was still the only area proclaimed for compulsory animal identification, or branding as it was known. Subsequent to the reincorporation of the former homelands and the need to contain stock theft, compulsory identification of livestock has been expanded to the whole of South Africa.

Stock theft is endemic to South Africa, and although statistics indicate that there has been an alarming increase, it is also safe to assume that many cases are presently reported and recorded, which had remained unattended to in the previous dispensation. It is also appreciated that the relative impact of stock theft on our small, emerging and subsistence farmers is far greater. If one has 10 animals and two are stolen, the impact is greater than if one has 1 000 and 20 are stolen. Although 20 is still a large number.

Despite the present obligatory identification, these very farmers in the outlying rural areas have, in many cases, not complied. In virtually every case it is not in defiance of the law, but because of practical problems. In many instances, this is due to ignorance, but it can also be ascribed to the expense of the required equipment. In the case of cattle branding the cost of irons, tongs, oven and immobiliser are in excess of R1 500. Similarly, a good tattooing tong for sheep and goats will cost approximately R500. Obviously these costs are prohibitive for many of the small farmers.

It is therefore welcomed that the hon the Minister has indicated that the department is willing to assist these farmers during the phasing-in period. Required assistance should, in the first place, enable farmers to register a personal identification mark free of charge. The implication of a personal identification mark is, however, that each farmer will have to acquire his or her own branding or tattooing letters or hire a professional marking operator.

The registrar has also indicated that a single identification, viz a three- letter sequence, can be registered for a specific communal or tribal area, followed by a numeral digit, to identify individual owners. The wellknown system of ear notches can also be used in this regard.

The phasing-in of this system into a herd, viz the marking of adult animals, is probably the most difficult, as special infrastructure, such as kraals and runs, is required. Once this has been completed, the progeny are usually marked at the weaning stage, while any acquired animals have to be marked within 14 days. In such instances, of course, the necessary documentation has to be kept.

The advent of the new South Africa and the strengthening of ties within Southern Africa has also resulted in increasing cross-border activity, which includes the movements of animals. As has been pointed out, the fact that this legislation has been put on the table, in conjunction with the SADC countries, is welcomed.

The legislation also provides for sophisticated methods of identification, such as the implantation of microchips, etc. This is to be welcomed in view of the fact that this allows for a multiplicity of information to be scanned onto and off such a chip.

Although this Bill may be seen as being in the exclusive interest of the producer, it goes much further. Ideally, the consumer should be able to trace his or her roast leg of lamb, T-bone steak or braai chop back to the producer. In future, producer identification marks will probably be encapsulated in the bar codes of the meat one buys, which ensures traceability.

It should be noted that the definition of an animal in clause 1 is given as any animal declared by the Minister. Concern was expressed in the committee that the Minister could declare certain human beings as animals. In the present political climate, it would, however, not be surprising if certain political party leaders were to welcome such a step in order to keep their flock together. [Interjections.]

The Bill is undoubtedly in the interests of the livestock industry. It is in the interests of the farming community as a whole, it provides for the necessary sophistication to be in the interests of the consumer, and it will ease the task of those police deployed in both our stock theft units and elsewhere. The ANC supports this Bill. [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, hon members will be assured that I do not have the power to actually declare human beings animals, other than those I am responsible for. So, with regard to some hopes that my comrade, the hon Schoeman, might have, I am sorry to say, I am not going to be able to deliver on the promise.

I must, however, say to some of the hon members who have raised some of the issues of concern, particularly the hon Dudley on the use of technology in order to advance in this century, that the Bill does accommodate this. Obviously the framework created by the Bill allows for the level at which people are, and also for the level at which people might be, relevant to the resources that they have had.

So this does not mean that people cannot use microchips or any other form of identification. That is why we have actually changed the name of the legislation to the Animal Identification Bill instead of the Livestock Brands Act as it was known before. I would also like to say to the hon Abram that I concur with him about the need for support to resource-poor farmers. This is a matter that the committee may have to look at: how, with the current resources that we have as a department, we can actually assist those poor communities who may not have resources to perform this important task.

I also want to assure the hon Van Niekerk that the matter of legislation, which will be promulgated in this House, with regard to identification, as I said earlier, is a matter that was also discussed with our SADC partners. A number of SADC countries have already passed this Bill. We have been a bit behind, if I may say so.

However, the challenge for all of us is the enforcement that has to go on in terms of ensuring that we indeed deal with matters of stock theft and cattle rustling. I would also like to say that other hon members, rightly so, raised the issue of the responsibility of our citizens in that they themselves must be serious in ensuring that we co-operate with the Police Service and any others to ensure that we protect this industry, not only for ourselves, but for our country’s income as well as that of our great- grandchildren.

I hope, as I said earlier, that the farming community and all of us will be happy with the products of this Bill. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time.

IMPORTANCE OF SUCCESSFUL LAND REFORM PROGRAMME, AS WELL AS LAND INVASIONS AND UPHOLDING OF RULE OF LAW

                      (Subject for Discussion)

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, hon members, to understand the huge task that the Government is confronted with, one has to put land reform in its historical and political context.

Land reform in South Africa arises from the scale and scope of the land dispossession of African people that took place since 1652. The dispossession was aimed at control and domination over the black majority of this country by the white minority. By the end of the nineteenth century, millions of African people had been displaced from their ancestral land to small and poorer patches of land, resulting in overcrowding and environmental degradation. These areas were later known as native reserves, and served as a pool of cheap migrant labour for white-owned farms and mining companies.

During the first three decades of the twentieth century, there were struggles within the white ruling class over the precise nature of the uniform native policy that they all agreed was necessary. The difference arose from the inheritance of the different systems of African administration in the four provinces, and the contradictory views of white farmers and mining companies on the principles of African reserves. White farmers did not support the idea and white mineworkers did not share the interests of their bosses on the mines and in the factories.

When the National Party government came into power in 1948, it started to review the native policy. The ultimate result was the introduction of the separate development policy. Blacks were divided along ethnic lines and grouped together accordingly, to form what was called separate self- governing bantu national units. This policy entrenched systems of traditional leadership, some of which had a very good basis before. However, it was prostituted by ensuring that certain elements were incorporated in that administration system which was not compatible with what those people were used to.

It must be indicated that the implementation of the separate development policy resulted in the second spate of mass forced removals, which took place from the 1960s through the 1970s. Africans in black spots, the areas where Africans had acquired freehold title to their land outside the Bantustans, were forcibly removed to the Bantustans as a matter of urgent government priority. About 3,5 million were people were removed from either urban or rural land.

It is necessary that all of us understand this history, so that as we debate the land question in South Africa and land reform in general we understand where we come from, the history and the challenge of where we were, and what we have sought to do in trying to reverse that legacy. Therefore, it is prudent for all of us to remind ourselves of that painful history in order that we may confront it correctly, in a manner that seeks to take us forward as a nation.

Notwithstanding these challenges, I may say, since 1994 this Parliament and Government decided to put in place a constitutional and legal framework for the implementation of land reform, in a manner that is transparent and accords the public as well as us as public representatives the opportunity to determine the pace and the scope around which we want land reform to be undertaken.

All South Africans, I dare say, through the Constitution and the White Paper on Land Policy, reached consensus that to effect land reform Government had to implement a programme on land restitution which was about social redress, land redistribution and land tenure reform. The objectives, if I can remember, and I am sure members will all recall this, were aimed at bringing about national reconciliation, because on the one hand we underscored the property rights of those who had them, but at the same time land reform was to allocate new rights to those who had never had the right to property before. It was therefore a means of balancing to ensure that all of us as South Africans can share the benefits of this national heritage.

One of the objectives of land reform was to ensure that we deal with the social and economic development of our country by ensuring that we provide land for settlement and agricultural purposes. I must say that, from the beginning, the intention of South Africa’s land reform was to deal, on the one hand, with issues of agricultural needs, and, on the other, with the issue of settlement. There were three programmes that we ourselves set as this Parliament and Government. One was the restitution programme which had to deal symbolically with issues of social justice. There were 67 314 claims that were lodged at the end of the cut-off date. Members will all agree with me that even although the process might have been slow, and there were many legal processes in between, we have, however, in these seven years, managed to move somewhat in the positive direction.

Today we have settled about 16 000 claims out of the claims that were lodged. Others may say that it is too slow. Yes, that may be justifiable, because the expectation of our people is that this legacy should be resolved as soon as possible. But the reality dictates that we balance the pace at which we move with the quality of what we do.

Other critics have been asking: How can the Government boast of having resolved 16 000 claims when a number of those claims are actually financial compensation? Yes, that may be true, but I think we must also realise that, as this Parliament, we created a choice in terms of compensation. We said: land restoration, alternative land or financial compensation. Sometimes it is not good to use political expediency when we try to appeal to our constituencies. We need to state what we have agreed upon in this House.

Concerning land redistribution, we must say that we have moved, again, towards a positive direction. On the one hand, this was to deal with issues of landlessness both for settlement and agricultural development. On the other hand, it was about dealing with the acquisition of land by people who needed it, again, for settlement and economic use.

We must say that the quality-of-life survey that was done in 1999 by an independent agency, which monitored the effects of the programme, concluded in its report for the year 2000 that both the performance and the impact of the programme had improved since the previous survey in 1998.

According to a recent survey, conducted in August 2001, approximately 87 000 households have benefited from the redistribution programme since 1994, through accessing land for both settlement and production. We must also say that regarding land reform, particularly land redistribution, we have acknowledged in this House that in the first five years we had to deal with quantity and numbers, and sometimes very little with regard to quality. We corrected that, because to us, it is not just about the allocation of land, but about how that land can be utilised to be useful.

As I have said earlier on, the third programme was about the land tenure system - tenure for farmworkers and labour tenants. We introduced legislation here and a programme to ensure that we target those who are vulnerable in our communities. I must say that, in our view, we have moved towards a positive direction. But, tenure reform is not only about accessing land for labour tenants and farmworkers; it is also about granting farm rights to those who were staying in urban areas through the 99-year leasehold.

I will leave this subject for my colleague, the Minister of Housing, who will participate in this debate, because the view of Government is that land reform is not just a Land Affairs matter, but an integral programme of Government which has many facets.

I must say that the challenge that we still face is: How do we deal with tenure reform for rural communities? How do we ensure that the land administration system is also effective for development and economic use? To that effect, we have decided to convene a national land conference which will take place from 27 to 30 November. The purpose of that conference will be to allow an opportunity for various political parties and other stakeholders who will be affected to voice their opinions, so that all of us can reach a system where we can say that this is the legal framework around which we can build a better land registration system, also for rural South Africa.

There have been challenges. Some of the challenges that were acknowledged have been as a result of the lack of human capacity within the department. Having said that, one must also acknowledge that in the process some of us have never thought of land reform as a problem which concerns all South Africans. It has been treated as a black or native problem. We therefore did very little to interact with our constituencies to explain the processes. And I must say, perhaps the Zimbabwe question made all of us as South Africans realise that this is a problem which concerns all of us, not just a particular sector of our society.

To that extent, we saw a number of points of interest from other stakeholders who have started to find a way regarding what they could do.

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, your time has expired.

The MINISTER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Interjections.] Well, my colleague the Minister of Housing will deal with some of the matters that will arise. Perhaps if I could have one minute, Madam Speaker …

The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, your time has expired. [Interjections.] [Applause.]

Dr W A ODENDAAL: Mevrou die Speaker, ek is eintlik jammer die agb Minister vir Landbou en Grondsake het nie nog ‘n minuut tyd gehad nie, want ek het ‘n idee sy het die beste gebêre vir laaste. Ons hoop sy kry die geleentheid om dit vir ons te sê.

Dit is vir my ‘n voorreg om hierdie belangrike onderwerp namens die Nuwe NP en ons leier, mnr Marthinus van Schalkwyk, wat een van die lede was wat die debat aangevra het, in te lui. AGB LEDE: Waar ís hy?

Dr W A ODENDAAL: Hy is besig met konstruktiewe dinge, nie met destruktiewe goed nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] As gevolg van die herskedulering daarvan en ander verpligtings kon hy nie self hieraan deelneem nie.

Die Afrikaner het ‘n passie om grond te besit, al is dit nie ‘n plaas nie, maar net ‘n klein stukkie grond. Dit gaan nie net oor die nutswaarde van grond, of die mark- of produksiewaarde daarvan nie. Dit gaan oor die verhewe verantwoordelikheid wat eie is aan vrypag; die reg om kaart en transport van ‘n stukkie grond te besit.

Miljoene ander Afrikane hunker met dieselfde hartstog daarna om grond te besit. Die Afrikaner verstaan hierdie grondhonger, en ook die woede wat moontlik ervaar is in gevalle waar grondonteiening en die gedwonge verskuiwing van mense in die loop van die geskiedenis van Suid-Afrika plaasgevind het. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Dr W A ODENDAAL: Madam Speaker, I am actually sorry that the hon the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs did not have another minute, because I suspect that she kept the best for last. We hope she gets the opportunity to tell us later.

It is my privilege to introduce this important subject on behalf of the New NP and our leader, Mr Marthinus Schalkwyk, who was one of the members who requested this debate.

HON MEMBERS: Where is he?

Dr W A ODENDAAL: He is engaged in constructive affairs, not destructive ones. [Interjections.] Owing to the rescheduling of this debate and other commitments he could not participate in this debate.

The Afrikaner has a passion to own land, even if it is not a farm, but simply a small piece of land. It is not only about the usefulness of the land, or its market or production value. It is about the lofty responsibility which is inherent in owing property; the right to own the title deed to a piece of land.

Millions of other Africans also desire passionately to own land. The Afrikaner understands this hunger for land, as well as the anger which was possibly experienced in cases where land dispossession and the forced removal of people occurred in the course of the history of South Africa.]

Many South Africans have suffered from land dispossession, denial of adequate access to land, inappropriate types of title to such land and restrictions to the use thereof. This unacceptable situation can still be rectified through an aggressive land reform programme, including the restitution, redistribution and tenure reform of land, as the hon Minister has mentioned. The New NP therefore supports the land reform programme embarked upon by Government. It should, however, be stepped up, and we will suggest ways and means to achieve this.

The biggest single mistake any government can make is to try and dump hundreds or thousands of unemployed people on agricultural land as peasants, small-scale farmers or farm labourers. Agriculture may never be deemed the creator of large numbers of job opportunities. Other sectors of the economy, especially the secondary and tertiary sectors, will have to provide for economic growth and job creation to fight poverty.

We therefore commend the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs on her stance aggressively to promote the settlement of commercial black farmers on available agricultural land, rather than creating pockets of poverty by settling too many people on too small pieces of land all over the country. Unfortunately, this is what happened under the regime of her predecessor, who would not listen to reason.

The subdivision of agricultural land on a large scale in order to put large numbers of people back on the land will, without a doubt, lead to lower productivity, less profitability, more poverty and, within a short period of time, the growing inability of the farming sector to feed and clothe the people of South Africa and, as is expected to happen next year, its neighbouring countries.

However, as an urgent matter, to promote a market-driven economy in South Africa and address the plight of the poor, all South Africans should be enabled to acquire property, including land, with secure title and the right to hold, use, sell, let and mortgage such property.

Private property ownership lies at the heart of a successful economic system, and all the people should have access to it. A poor man must be given the chance to own a piece of land, even a stand in a township, which he can later sell at a profit and on which he does not even have to pay capital gains tax. By so doing, one would have created an instant entrepreneur in a free-market environment who would have acquired the taste to excel, learnt to believe in the economic system, become willing to compete and be raring to care for his family with dignity.

It is of paramount importance that we should all understand that agricultural land is a very scarce commodity. It is, therefore, necessary that every possible piece of available land that is owned by the state should be targeted immediately, in the short term, and be utilised for the establishment of economically viable farming units for black commercial farmers. Every piece of land becoming available via the Land Bank in cases, for instance, where white farmers go insolvent or for whatever other reason, should be earmarked for the settlement of black commercial farmers.

The need for security of tenure is probably the most important facet of land ownership that needs to be addressed. Zimbabwe has proved this by setting a very bad example. Owning a farm where people are allowed to invade one’s land, without the owner being protected by the state, results in such land becoming worthless. The entrepreneur loses faith and all end up in a devastated economy, which in turn reflects worst on the poor and the vulnerable.

We therefore praise the Government’s stance during the recent invasion of land near Bredell. South Africa was immediately awarded with investors from within South Africa and abroad showing more confidence in the South African economy.

Secure land property rights should be underpinned by the constitutional principle that land should only change hands according to the principle of a willing buyer and a willing seller. Anybody understands that more land will always be needed for strategic regions. The expropriation of such land should always take place according to the same principle.

There is a very important difference between landownership rights and land use rights. Black farmers on tribal land often experience insecure land rights. Those are land use rights. They do not own the land they farm because it is state-owned and they are dependent on decisions by tribal authorities for security of land use rights.

These areas, which constitute about 20% of all available agricultural land in South Africa, occur mostly in the eastern parts of South Africa. They mostly fall within high rainfall and potentially high agricultural production areas. With the close co-operation of the responsible tribal authorities, a system of more secure land use rights, for instance long- term lease rights, and better scientific agricultural production programmes could be put in place, and that would at least double or triple the income from agriculture in these areas.

With the aid of the necessary extension programmes, these goals can be achieved. The process of enabling meaningful numbers of black commercial farmers to settle as commercial farmers should be fast-tracked and the necessary financial support schemes to buy land and finance production inputs be put in place. Existing commercial farmers should have an earnest look into models of co-ownership for their farm labourers in the common agricultural business which they run together.

Supportive extension programmes, painstakingly executed to introduce emerging farmers of all races to the most recent scientific knowledge in the fields of technology and financial management, are of paramount importance for the successful settlement of any beginner farmer.

As die skewe rasseverdeling van die kommersiële boere nie oor die korttermyn betekenisvol reggestel kan word nie, sal niemand in Suid-Afrika rustig slaap nie. Wie ook al die grondhonger onder veral swart Suid- Afrikaners onderskat, speel met vuur. Ons vra die samewerking van elke regdenkende mens om grondhervorming in Suid-Afrika te laat slaag. Die breë boeregemeenskap en die SA Landbou-unie is begerig om alle moontlike hulp te verleen om ‘n katastrofe te voorkom. Die Nuwe NP is gereed en gewillig om in belang van Suid-Afrika ‘n konstruktiewe bydrae te lewer om grondhervorming te laat slaag. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[If the skewed racial distribution of the commercial farmers is not significantly rectified in the short term, no one will sleep peacefully in South Africa. Whoever underestimates the hunger for land, especially among black South Africans, is playing with fire. We ask for the co-operation of every right-minded person to allow land reform to succeed in South Africa. The farming community in general and the South African Agricultural Union are eager to lend all possible assistance in order to prevent a catastrophe. The New NP is ready and willing, in the interests of South Africa, to make a constructive contribution so that land reform succeeds. [Applause.]]

Mr W J SEREMANE: Madam Speaker, perhaps it is due to time constraints that we have such a long-winded heading as the subject for debate, namely ``The importance of a successful land reform programme; land invasions and the responsibility of parties represented in Parliament to uphold the rule of law’’.

Perhaps, also, I should use some buzzwords to explain this a little, namely this is the land reform programme, those are failures and successes, land invasions, the negative impact on the economy and the sociopolitical order, parliamentary parties and the obligation of upholding the rule of law, and a proposed way forward.

Under land reform I wish to state that it is no longer an academic exercise whether or not the land reform programme needs to be in place. For us it is a constitutional imperative to recognise and support the land reform programme that is already in place. Without ignoring the pros and cons of this land reform programme, we should guard against projecting to the public this programme as a sectarian or party-political programme, or using it as a tool to pull out at election time in order to garner votes here and there.

The land issue is serious business, emotive, and, without exaggerating the issue, a matter of life and death. The seriousness of this topic calls for a high degree of responsible involvement by all and sundry.

Much has already been said and churned out about land reform in this country, and the Minister has just given us the background. We need only remind ourselves that the programme has three cardinal component parts, and I do not know why the Minister used the past tense. These parts are redistribution, restitution and land tenure reform with special reference to ESTA - the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, and that is not my wife. [Laughter.]

The problems or weaknesses bedevilling the programme can be listed, amongst other problems, as follows: slow delivery in respect of and meeting the concomitant demands of land delivery budgetary constraints: inadequate budgets and the contradictory lack of capacity to expend allocations; the difficulties relating to the concept of willing buyer or willing seller, juxtaposed with property rights; and the inadequate participation of stakeholders and interested parties across the spectrum. These are but a few of the hurdles facing us in the implementation of our land reform programme.

We, however, recognise the efforts that have been made since the review policy, but wish to state that whilst some progress has been made, more still has to be made. The Government must not shy away from listening to criticism and accepting valuable suggestions from whatever quarter, as long as these inputs are constructive and within the constraints of the Constitution and the laws of our country.

What needs to be done? We need to continue refining and fine-tuning the process in order to speed it up, without jeopardising equity and fairness to all stakeholders. We need to ensure that the process is conducted to enhance the intentions of the Constitution, namely redressing past injustices and reinforcing the reconciliation of a previously fragmented society. We also need to bolster the so-called integrated development programme approach, and we need to take serious cognisance of improving and stabilising freehold-title landownership and tenure of previously disadvantaged communities.

We should search for innovative models of harmonising the forms of landownership, that is, communal landownership and private freehold-title landownership. We also need to encourage, with incentives, more young people to choose agricultural and veterinary sciences as careers.

What about land invasions? Land invasions cannot and should not be condoned or encouraged, especially for political expediency. Our neighbour Zimbabwe is on that suicidal road. If this is not so, why do Zimbabwean citizens risk life and limb to migrate to South African farms? [Interjections.]

The Government should not brook any political mavericks who encourage and manipulate land invasions with spurious statements. [Interjections.] Whilst recognising that homelessness, like poverty, is linked to landlessness, the Government has to look at squatter camps as a form of land invasion, if such camps are not regulated and controlled according to proper land and housing development norms.

The Government needs a strong will to deal with this sore point. The ANC, more than admonishing others such as the PAC and some NGOs, needs to admit its share of the blame in land occupations, culminating in a myriad of squatter camps that continue to subject the majority of our citizens to abject poverty and health hazards, including crime.

Last but not least, it is the responsibility of all parties represented in Parliament to respect the Constitution regarding national programmes such as the land reform programme, and not to indulge in actions that violate the imperatives of this very Constitution. Issues must be debated in appropriate structures and through acceptable and responsible processes.

The Constitution can be lawfully and responsibly amended in a democracy, if needs be. Reckless rebel-rousing tactics that undermine the sociopolitical climate and economic stability should not be entertained. However, it is also the Government’s responsibility to take note of suggestions from a variety of groups such as political parties, NGOs and so on. It is in the interest of all South Africans that this programme be speeded up and made successful to meet the expectations of the citizens of this country. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER: Order! The hon Mr Komphela will be delivering his maiden speech. [Applause.]

Mr B M KOMPHELA: Madam Speaker, hon members and comrades, land ownership in South Africa has, for a long time, been a source of conflict and continues to be a central problem in the socioeconomic and political arena in this country. Our history of quest, dispossession, forced removals and racially skewed distribution of land has been a problem in this country. Up until today it is still a problem.

An important clause was provided for in the Constitution to ensure that the consequences of this legacy are redressed and the question of land is dealt with peacefully, in an orderly manner. This clause was introduced by the Government led by the ANC. A national land reform programme is a centre that is supposed to drive all our efforts and there should be clearly designed programmes that people and political should follow. These are very important. This process should also not antagonise anyone, and should be implemented peacefully.

The ANC-led Government has accelerated the implementation of three key elements of the land reform programme as adopted in this House. The hon the Minister has spoken about land distribution. But I think I have to make an attempt to show the key importance of land redistribution. This programme has attempted to provide for the marginalised people of this country, especially Africans. A large percentage of the population of this country, about 80%, do not own land yet. Twenty per cent of the people of this country own 80% of the land. This problem needs to be addressed. The Minister and the ANC have made suggestions on how this problem can be addressed.

The strategic objective of land distribution for agricultural programmes is also one of the important key elements in this picture. I will cite one or two very important facts contributing to the redistribution of that 30% of the country’s agricultural land. The redistribution is to be done over the next 15 years and will help with the eradication of poverty. It will improve the nutrition of the rural poor and increase the income of people who want to farm on a smaller or a larger scale.

These opportunities should also be extended to women, because they are the people who suffer most when there is no food at home. They are also experts at tilling the land.

I will not speak much about land restitution. I want to sketch to the House what happened when the Minister visited the town of Kroonstad in the Free State, where I come from. The people of Marabastad cried tears of joy. They suffered for many years. The previous government destroyed them by repossessing all their land and thus stripped them of their dignity. The fathers sat there and cried. They said: ``At long last we can come back to the land of our forefathers.’’ For a long time misery and pain were instilled in these people. [Applause.]

Recently the invasion of land was propagated to us in the ANC. We view that as the actions of reactionary forces that want to derail our process. Our people are under much tension, but understand that land redistribution is a slow process. But they remain prisoners of hope. Those who own the land must realise that the time has come to give the land back to those it was taken from a long time ago. This should not be done by forced removal or by grabbing the land.

Such actions have consequences. We should negotiate, follow certain guidelines and the rule of law. We in the ANC, and nobody else, urged our people to exercise maximum patience and not to grab land. They understand that although the process is very slow, they will achieve their dream.

Vandag wil ek soos ‘n Vrystater praat. My pa het 40 jaar lank op ‘n plaas by Kroonstad gebly en gewerk. Die dag toe die eienaar van die plaas weggaan Nederland toe het my pa op die plaas gebly. Dit is nou al agt jaar.

My pa het geen akademiese kwalifikasies gehad nie, maar my pa het bo alles ``experience’’ gehad. Hy was baie bekwaam en het geweet wanneer die mielies geplant moet word, wanneer die koring geplant moet word, wanneer die bulletjies gesny moet word. Al daardie goed het my pa sonder enige mens se hulp en sonder enige skoolopleiding gedoen. Wat is die probleme wat keer dat ons ons mense die geleenthede gee om die grond self te bewerk, om kos vir die kinders en die mense te gee? [Applous.]

Dit is nogal ‘n probleem. Mense soos Dries Botha en mnr Van der Merwe weet presies. Terwyl hulle in die Parlement is, sal die plaaswerkers die skape dip, en alles doen wat gedoen moet word. Wat is die probleme? Hoekom kan ons mense nie ‘n kans kry om boere te wees op plase in die Vrystaat nie wat so ‘n groot en goeie plek is? Dit is nou tyd vir daardie kans. Ons moet nou saamwerk en vir die mense sê dit is tyd om swart boere in dié land te maak sodat ons vir die mense kan kos gee. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Today I want to speak as a Free Stater. My father lived and worked on a farm at Kroonstad for 40 years. When the owner of the farm moved to the Netherlands, my father remained on the farm. That was eight years ago.

My father had no academic qualifications, but, above all, he had experience. He was very competent and knew when the maize had to be planted, when the wheat had to be planted, when the bullocks had to be castrated. My father did all those things without anyone’s help and without any formal education. What is preventing us from giving our people the opportunity to cultivate the land themselves, to provide food for the children and the people? [Applause.]

It is quite a problem. People like Dries Botha and Mr Van der Merwe know exactly what I mean. While they are in Parliament, the farm workers will dip the sheep and do everything that has to be done. What is the problem? Why can our people not get the opportunity to be farmers on farms in the Free State, which is such a large and beautiful place? The time has come for us to give them that opportunity. We must now work together and tell the people the time has come for us to make black farmers in this country so that we can provide our people with food. [Applause.]]

INkosi M W HLENGWA: Somlomo namalungu ahloniphekile, nanxa kudabukisa ukuthi sekuphele iminyaka eyisikhombisa udaba lomhlaba lungakalungiswa, kuyathokozisa ukuzwa ukuthi kukhona amaphuzu umuntu angahambisana nawo kulawo abekwe umhlonishwa uNgqongqoshe wezoLimo nemiHlaba.

Uma ngibuka ngapha elungwini elihloniphekile le-New NP, ngizwa ngingezwa nje kahle uma kulula kuyena lapho ekhuluma ngendaba ka-willing buyer no- willing seller ngoba ngesikhathi okhokho bakhe befika lapha imali abathenga ngayo umhlaba kwaba yizinhlamvu zesibhamu, kodwa namhlanje kukhulunywa indaba ka-willing buyer nowilling seller. Angazi ukuthi okhokho bangathini uma bezwa lolu limi.

Angiqale ngokuzwakalisa ukuthi angihambisani nalabo abathi kukhona ingqinamba ngendaba yokubuyela komhlaba kubaniniwo. Uma kungenzeka ukuthi kubukeke sengathi lesi simo sikhona, kungabe senziwa yilabo abafisa sibukeke sikhona sibe singekho, ngoba phela izwe laseNingizimu Afrika alikaze lingabi nabo abanini balo bempela, kuphela nje okwenzeka ngukuthi lake laphathwa ngabamhlophe ngendlovuyangena nangemibhobho yezibhamu. Lokho- ke akukaze kusho ukuthi lalingelabo. Nakhu phela salilwela, salifela, saliboshelwa ngoba siveza ubufakazi bokuthi izwe liyafelwa. Futhi noma nini uma into kungeyakhe umuntu akayiyeki ithathwe abanye abafana sengathi wadla iphaphu elicwiliswe emanzini. [Ubuwelewele.] Kungalesi sizathu-ke ngithi ayikho ingqinamba odabeni lomhlaba, kepha okukhona ubuxoki bokwehluleka ukukhuluma amaqiniso enjengoba enjalo.

Okokuqala amakhosi alilwela leli zwe. Okwesibili, kanti ngabe yini eyasusa umzabalazo uma kungekona ukuthi kwathathwa izwe elaliphethwe ngamakhosi lithathwa ngabamhlophe. Kukhona izimpi ezaziwayo lapho kwakubhekene khona amabutho ezizwe zomdabu nabamhlophe kubangwa umhlaba wezizwe ezahlukene zamakhosi. Namhlanje ngubani ongathi umhlaba awaziwa ukuthi owezizwe ezahlukene ezaficwa abelungu eNingizimu Afrika?

Isizwe esimhlophe sokuqala esaphatha iNingizimu Afrika kwaba ngamaNgisi aseNgilandi ngaphansi kombuso kaJoji. Emuva kwalokho ngo-1948 kwathatha amaBhunu. Kuze kube namhlanje izwe laseNgilandi liphethwe ngobukhosi bakhona futhi bulinomhlaba wabo.

Lo mkhandlu uke walalela indlovukazi yamaNgisi ikhuluma lapha endlini, futhi ingakhohliwe ukuthi umbuso wamaNgisi wake waphatha lapha eNingizimu Afrika emuva kokwephuca amakhosi amandla nomhlaba. Okwamangalisa ngukuthi indlovukazi ayizange ikhunjuzwe ukubonana namakhosi, ngoba yazi kahle ukuthi leli zwe linobukhosi bezizwe ezahlukahlukene ezinomhlaba wazo.

Kungayihlazo uma kungakhona isiphukuphukwana nje somuntu esingazenza sengathi asazi ukuthi isizwe samaMpondo sinezwe nobukhosi baso nokuthi isizwe samaXhosa sinezwe nobukhosi baso. Kukhona isizwe samaZulu sinezwe nobukhosi baso, kukhona isizwe sabeSuthu - ngingazibala ngithini! NamaNdebele akhona njengesizwe, anobukhosi bawo.

Ubugovu bamaNgisi bazama ngawo wonke amandla ukudunga le mibuso. Emuva kokuvota uma sikhuluma ngokuvuselela isakhiwo sobu-Afrika kanti sikhuluma ngani, uma sizokwehluleka ukulungisa okwakuhlasela ngenhloso yokubhidliza lokhu okwenziwa yizizwe ezimhlophe. Uma lo mKhandlu uzokwehluleka ukuvuselela izimiso zendabuko, kusho ukuthi wemukela ukuba yindlalifa yalabo abacekela phansi loko ebesingazizwa ngako singama-Afrika empela, hhayi amakhukhunathi noma amazemtiti wona ansundu ngaphandle kuphela ngaphakathi angabelungu abamhlophe kunabamhlophe. [Ubuwelewele.] (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Inkosi M W HLENGWA: Madam Speaker and hon members, although it is said that the land issue has not been resolved even after seven years, it is pleasing that there are facts mentioned by the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs that one can sympathise with.

When I look at the hon member of the New NP, I do not understand why it is so easy for him to talk about willing buyer and willing seller, because when his ancestors arrived here, the money that they used to buy land were bullets, but today they talk about willing buyer and willing seller. I do not know what our ancestors would say if they could hear this language.

I must first mention that I do not agree with those who say there is a land redistribution problem. If such a situation exists, those who want us to believe that there is a problem, while we do not have such a problem have created it. South Africa has never been without its real owners. What happened was that it was once ruled by whites by means of guns and force. But that does not mean that it was theirs. That is why we fought for it, we died for it and were even arrested for it, because we were giving evidence that land is worth dying for. At any time in life one does not allow other people to freely take what belongs to one as if one is a coward. [Interjections.] That is why I say there is no problem with land redistribution, what we have is a situation where people are failing to speak the truth as it is.

Firstly, amakhosi fought for this land. Secondly, what initiated the struggle if it was not the desire to reclaim the land of amakhosi from whites? There are well-known wars where African warriors fought whites because of the land that belonged to amakhosi of different nations. Who can now say he does not know that land belongs to different nations that were in South Africa before the whites came?

The first white nation to rule South Africa was the British from England, under the leadership of King George. In 1948 the Boers took over South Africa. Even today England is still ruled by a queen and the people of England have their own land.

This Parliament once heard the Queen of England talking in this House. She still remembers that South Africa was once governed by England after they had taken the land from the indigenous amakhosi. What was surprising was that the Queen of England was not reminded to visit amakhosi, since she knows very well that this country consists of many different kingdoms that have their own land.

It would be an insult if a foolish person came along and pretended he did not know that the Mpondo people have their own kingdom and king. And that the Xhosa nation has its own kingdom. There is a Zulu nation, and it has its own land and kingdom. There is also a Sotho nation, the list is endless! Even the Ndebele have a nation and their own kingdom.

The greed of the whites caused them to try by all means to destroy these kingdoms. After elections, when we talk about rebuilding Africa, what else do we talk about if we fail to correct those destructive things used by whites. If this House fails to rebuild traditional structures, it means it accepts that they are the heirs of those who destroyed the things which would have made us real Africans, not coconuts or exempted people who have dark skin while inside they are even whiter than the white people.] [Interjections.]

Mr W J SEREMANE: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: It has been ruled here recently that racist terms such as coconuts'',abamhlophe ngaphandle’’ [white on the inside] or whatever, are not acceptable in this august building, Parliament. [Interjections.] The hon speaker is using those terms again.

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, could you please repeat what you said?

INkosi M W HLENGWA: Ngiyathokoza Somlomo, Ngiyokhuluma ngabo labo, kuphela nje uma belokhu bekhona kuleli zwe, ngiyokhuluma ngalokho. [Uhleko.] [Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will talk about these people as long as they shall exist in this country. I will talk about that. [Laughter.]]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, if you used those terms, you are out of order. Would you please withdraw them?

INkosi M W HLENGWA: Madam Speaker, that is an allegation. I am not out of order. The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, I asked you first to repeat what you said so we could be clear what the allegation is. If you are not prepared to repeat it, or indicate what you did say, then you are out of order. So please, I am allowing you to repeat what you said.

Chief M W HLENGWA: Somlomo, sengizwile. Ngiyayivumela le ndoda ngizobuye ngikhulume nayo emnyango. [Uhleko.] [Madam Speaker, I understand. I agree with this man, I will talk to him outside. [Laughter.]]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, I am sorry, but you cannot speak with people outside. There is a debate going on. [Interjections.] You can speak outside, but the terms you use in this House … I will look at Hansard and you will withdraw the statements if they are out of order. However …

Mr M W HLENGWA: Useless intimidation!

The SPEAKER: Order! Would you please sit down. However, if you are going to continue now, would you please not repeat those terms, if you did in fact use them. So please, will you now proceed. INkosi M W HLENGWA: Somlomo, ngibona kuyiphutha ukuguqula imigomo yalabo abasungula amaqembu omzabalazo. Kwakungesiyona inhloso yabo ukuthi bayolwisana nezakhiwo zabo zomlando nezomdabu, bese bephenduka ophangubude abagcina ngokuphatha izwe ngalezo zindlela zalabo ababengabacindezeli.

Kufanele ngabe siyakhumbuzeka ukubaluleka kwemvelaphi yethu, nangendlela esabunjwa ngayo. Uma sihambela amazwe angaphandle, mina njengomZulu waseNingizimu Afrika ngiye ngithokoze uma ezinye izizwe zibubona ubuZulu kimi. Lokho kuye kungenze ngikhumbule ukuthi ngingumsebenzi weSilo sakwaDukuza, iNkosi uShaka uDlungwane lombelebele, iLembe eleqa amanye amalembe ngokukhalipha. Ngiye ngikhumbule ukuthi leli qhawe labumba, lahola futhi lahlanganisa isizwe ngeminyaka eyishumi nanye nje kuphela.

Wonke lo msebenzi inkosi yami eyaqinisa umhlaba wonke yawenza ingazange ikwazi ukufunda nokubhala igama layo. Kunye okwaba khona lapha ezweni. Kwakuyizwe elikhululekile. Ngiyabuza-ke kulabo abangama-Afrika, mhlawumbe abangamaZulu, sekusele iminyaka emine vo kuhlangane iminyaka eyishumi nanye niqalile ukuvota, imfundo yenu isivikele ngani isizwe senu esakhiwa ngaphandle kokuzuzwa kwemfundo?

AbangamaXhosa ngiyababuza ukuthi imfundo yabo bayisebenzise kanjani ekuvikeleni isizwe sikaPhalo, noma okukhulu ukugxisha amasiko ezinye izizwe ezagcina sezizithokozisa ngesifazane sakithi. AmaMpondo aseNingizimu Afrika akhuluma isiMpondo. Akhuluma isiMpondo nabamhlophe ngelanga lokuqala bebonana. Namhlanje ezweni esithi likhululekile, elinezilimi eziyishumi nanye okuthiwa zisemthethweni, isiMpondo sona asikho kulezo zilimi. Kodwa lezo ezafika nabaninizo zona ziyabalwa, kuthi isiMpondo esingumnsinsi wokuzimilela sikhishelwe ngaphandle okwenyongo yenyathi.

Kulolu daba esikhuluma ngalo, kubalulekile ukuthi siphawule ngesimo sokulondolozwa kokusebenza komthetho nanxa sikhuluma ngomhlaba owake wathathwa kithi ngabantu abangazange bakunake ukulondolozwa komthetho nelungelo lethu lobuzibulo kuleli zwe.

Ngifisa ukusho ukuthi thina njengama-Afrika asizange sifundiswe ngabelungu ukulondoloza isiko lokugcinwa komthetho. Imibuso yethu yayivele inemithetho eyayakhiwe yisizwe ngokuvumelana, igcinwe ngokufaneleyo. Uma kuqalwa ngokuthi akugcinwe imithetho eyasephuca ilungelo lethu njengezizwe zaseNingizimu Afrika, kuyothanda ukuthi kungehli kahle.

Omunye umbandela okulindeleke ukuthi siphawule ngawo kulolu daba yilokho okungumthwalo obhekene namaqembu ezombusazwe amelekile lapha kule Ndlu yakho ehloniphekile eshaya imithetho. Kubalulekile ukuthi amaqembu abeke uvo lwawo esigcawini esifanele lapho kukhona khona izizwe lezo ezaphucwa umhlaba wazo zibe ziholwa ngabaholi bazo ezinhlakeni zobukhosi.

Kungaba yiphutha ukulawula kwamaqembu aze athathe izinqumo engakaze abe ngabanikazi bomhlaba owahlwithwa ngabamhlophe emibusweni eyayikhona yendabuko. Indlovukazi yaseNgilandi ingumnini womhlaba wobukhosi. Iqembu lezombusazwe alikwazi ukuthatha lelo lungelo ebukhosini.

Ngithi angikhumbuze ukuthi kwachitheka igazi phakathi kwethu nalabo ababezodla izwe lethu. Emuva kwalokho sabheda nathi ngoba sagcina sesishayana sodwa. Asingaqhubeki-ke manje sizame ukukhuluma indaba yomhlaba sibe sazi ukuthi wathathwa emakhosini nezizwe zawo. Kufanele leso naleso sizwe kube yiso esizokhomba indlela efanele ukulandelwa ngomhlaba waso.

Uma singahloniphani, kuyoba kuhle ukuthi zonke lezi zikhali ezasungulwa yilaba abafika nazo, keziphinde kubo lezo zikhali; ukuze siqoqe kahle sikhumbuzane ukuthi ubani ungubani, ngoba phela lezi zikhali zidala izinsizwa neziqhwaga nalapho zingekho khona.

Ngiyaphakamisa ukuthi labo abafanele ukuhlela lezi zingxoxo ezimayelana nomhlaba wezizwe zamakhosi ukuthi kukhona izifundazwe ezintathu namhlanje ezingasenabo ubukhosi kepha babukhona. Lobu bukhosi-ke budinga ukuvuselelwa. Ngikhuluma lapha ngeNyakatho Kapa, iGauteng neNtshonalanga Kapa.

Kusemqoka ukuthi ama-Afrika kulezi zifundazwe ezintathu nawo azizwe efudumele ngaphansi komlando nesiko nobukhosi bawo. Abaholi abakhethiwe abasoze bakhululeka noma behluleke ukusebenza bebodwa, kodwa bayophumelela uma besebenza phezu kwezinhlaka zobuholi bomdabu zisekelwe ubukhosi.

Azibuyele ekhaya ziyodla khona ukuze kube nokuthula kwempela ezweni lakithi. Ngiyathokoza! [Ihlombe.] (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[Inkosi M W HLENGWA: Madam Speaker, I think it is a mistake to change the principles of those who initiated political organisation. It was not their aim to oppose traditional structures and then become people who are ambitious for power and who end up leading the country by means of the oppressors.

We should have been reminded of the importance of our background and how we were established. When we visit other countries, I as a South African Zulu man become happy if other people recognise Zuluness in me. That makes me remember that I am the work of the King of Dukuza, His Majesty King Shaka, Dlungwane of the Mbelebele kraal, the hoe that surpasses other hoes in sharpness. I then remember that this hero built, led and united a nation within only 14 years.

All this work to strengthen the world my King did without even being able to read or write his name. One thing came into existence in the land. It was a free land. I want to ask those who are Africans, perhaps the Zulu we have only four years to reach 11 years since we started voting: How did your education protect your nation?

I am asking the Xhosa people how they had used their education to protect the nation of Phalo? Or what is important to them, to assimilate the cultures of other people who ended up enjoying themselves with our women? The South African Mpondo people speak isiMpondo. They spoke isiMpondo the moment they spoke to the whites for the first time. Today in a country we call a free one, and which has 11 official languages, isiMpondo is not one of them. Those who are not traditional are included, but isiMpondo, which is traditional, is isolated.

Regarding the issue that we are discussing, it is important to mention the situation pertaining to the preserving of law when we talk about land that was taken from us by people who did not care about preserving the law and our right as pioneers in this country.

I would like to mention that whites have never taught Africans how to preserve the culture of respecting the law. Our nations had already had laws that were made in agreement with people and they were obeyed in the proper manner. If we start by saying we should obey the laws that deprive us of our right as South African nations that would not be proper.

Another thing that we should talk about in this debate is the challenge facing political parties who are in this House. It is important that political parties put their opinions in the right place, where those nations whose land was taken from them will be present under the leadership of their leaders in the structures of amakhosi.

It would be a mistake if political parties were to govern, since they had never been owners of this land that was taken by whites from traditional kingdoms before. The Queen of England is the owner of the land of the kingdom. A political party cannot take that right away from the kingdom.

Let me remind you that blood was shed between us and those who were plundering our land. After that, we went astray because we ended up killing one another. Let us not continue talking about land because we know that it was taken from amakhosi and their nations. Each nation must pave the way that needs to be followed regarding its land.

If we are not respectful, it would be better if all these weapons, invented by those who arrived with them, are returned to them, because they create marauders even where they do not exist.

I propose to those who should arrange a discussion regarding the land of the nations and amakhosi, that there are three provinces today which do not have their kingdoms although they had them before. These kingdoms need to be rebuilt. I am talking here about the Western Cape, Gauteng and the Northern Cape.

It is important that Africans in these provinces feel secure under the history and culture of their kingdoms. Elected leaders will never be free nor fail to work on their own, but they will succeed if they work upon the traditional structures supported by kingship.

Cattle must go back home and graze there so that we will have real peace in our land. Thank you! [Applause.]]

Mr S ABRAM: Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon member Komphela on his maiden speech.

Hy het uit die grond van sy hart gepraat. Mag sy Here dit vir hom moontlik maak om eendag in Kroonstad sy eie plaas te besit. [He spoke from the depths of his heart. May his Lord make it possible that he can one day own his own farm in Kroonstad.]

The debate is intended to highlight the responsibility of parties represented in the constitutionally created structures of our country to uphold the rule of law. However, any discourse on such responsibilities needs to take into account various historical factors which contribute to certain behavioural patterns.

May I say that the importance of any policy can only become tangible if it is implemented successfully. It is therefore important that all role- players, civil society, NGOs and political parties voice their dissatisfaction and criticism through the relevant structures. That is the nature of democracy.

When members of parties were elected to represent their constituencies in Parliament they took an oath to uphold the rule of law. South Africa has a Constitution which creates a framework for democratic participation. It is then irresponsible, for example, of a member of Parliament or political parties to encourage their members to break the law.

In its 1998 White Paper on land policy, the department set the following objectives: Firstly, to redress apartheid injustices; secondly, to foster national reconciliation and stability; thirdly, to underpin economic growth; and fourthly, to improve household welfare, and alleviate poverty. A holistic approach, therefore, becomes a necessity.

The recent land invasion at Bredell shows almost 10 000 people cramming into 32 hectares of land. Whilst many of the invaders were South Africans, many were from SADC countries and even further afield. It follows that many people from SADC countries are in South Africa seeking to escape poverty, unemployment, instability and war where they come from.

We need to have empathy for these fellow Africans, and it becomes even more compelling for us to ensure that the SADC region is stabilised and developed so that the causes leading to south-bound migration are removed.

To achieve this, we all have an important contribution to make. Within the borders of our country, we witness a constant mobility of people, particularly from the rural areas towards metropole in the hope of finding better opportunities. In many instances these fellow South Africans have comfortable homes in the rural areas, but are forced by economic circumstances to make their trek and live in overcrowded and often squalid informal settlements on the outskirts of our cities.

It is guesstimated that at least 2,8 million homes are needed to satisfy the current housing need, which no government has the capacity to provide. The challenge before us is to play a major role in promoting, firstly, the development of the SADC region. The success thereof will stabilise SADC generally and South Africa in particular, and boost the African Renaissance. Merely criticising failures in the region is not the answer, and we should desist from doing so. It quite clear that in order to stem the tide of mobility towards the cities from our rural areas, a massive campaign to develop identified nodal points in the rural areas is necessary. And let us admit, progress has been reasonably slow. An integrated, all-encompassing plan into which all role- players can buy is necessary to achieve this objective.

Whilst Government can create the climate and conditions to make this happen, it cannot absolutely deliver the desired results. In order achieve this, all sectors of society need to be brought on board. The housing backlog must be addressed by completing what housing departments are doing. People, and particularly South Africans, take pride in what they own.

Land Affairs should consider laying out surveyed sites in planned living areas and make these available to the homeless. Naturally, services can only be provided as the availability of funds dictates. But by giving our people title deeds and equity we will be making sure that they are able to rise to the occasion, because they take pride in their possessions. [Interjections.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker, hon Minister, hon members, Botswana’s President Festus Mogae, has launched a scathing attack on his Zimbabwe counterpart, Rubert Mugabe, for his failure to deal with the land resettlement programme in his country in a peaceful way. Mogae said regional leaders were becoming frustrated with the situation in Zimbabwe because it is affecting their economies.

He singled out war veterans and the Harare administration’s failure to deal with the violent occupation of white farms as potential obstacles to peace and stability in the region, while equally blaming commercial farmers for refusing to relinquish land voluntarily. Mogae argued that the programme would have been successful had it follwed the correct structural and legal reform frameworks, instead of turning to violence. He believes that the Abuja Agreement provides a good framework for the restoration of law and order. The ACDP congratulates Mogae on courageously speaking out when others have chosen to keep silent.

South Africa’s land reform programme consists of land restitution, land redistribution and tenure reform and its aim is to ensure the transfer of 30% of all agricultural land over a period of 15 years. The ACDP recognises the importance of a successful land reform programme and commends the hon the Minister for her and her department remaining steadfast under pressure in their determination to uphold the rule of law and to retain and improve existing standards of utilisation. With this in mind, we encourage all South Africans to take up the challenge of working together towards achieving a fair and just society for all South Africans.

Africa is a continent blessed with abundant resources and is capable of feeding the entire world, yet poverty and hardship abound. The ADCP believes that when our leaders and our Constitution acknowledge the God of creation, not just my King, but the King of Kings, curses and poverty will be lifted off of our land, making way for blessing and prosperity.

A wrong can never be put right if the same means are used simply to reverse a situation. This is true when it comes to the rule of law, and parties represented in Parliament have a responsibility to uphold law and order.

It has to be said, of course, that laws which violate God’s law are not legitimate. The Almighty God is a God of justice. We please Him when we do what is right, just and fair, neither showing favouritism nor denying justice to the poor. If we compromise in doing right, we will reap the consequences; violence and suffering will continue to be our portion.

God, family and property are closely linked; if one is touched the others are also touched. This is why socialism and communism target family and private ownership of property in their opposition to God. Private ownership of property was ordained by God and firmly grounded in His law. Now I will impress members by quoting Karl Marx, and probably irritate members as well. He wrote in the Communist Manifesto of 1847: ``The theory of the communists may be summed up in a single sentence: Abolition of private property’’. He saw clearly that property is power; whoever controls property has liberty and whoever surrenders it surrenders liberty.

God places this power and liberty in the family’s hands and not the state’s. When the state grows in its control over property, it grows by the same degree towards totalitarian power and tyranny will result. We cannot, however, oversimplify the matter by seeing capitalism as an antidote to socialism. All ``isms’’ are man’s futile attempt to exclude God and do things our way. God’s way does not fit our categories; it requires His constant guidance and brings positive results and a nation blessed.

Mr G D SCHNEEMAN: Madam Speaker, comrades, hon members, over the past three centuries countless millions of our people have been dispossessed of their land. They were dispossessed of their land in the most brutal manner, which resulted in hundreds of thousands of our people losing their lives, and many others living without any security of tenure and without the knowledge of where they will live tomorrow, living and yet not living, because they were not able to enjoy a living experience of a place called home, not being able to say, this is my home, my land'' andit will also be the land and home for my children and their children’’. For many hon members in this House and millions of our people this was their daily living experience.

Since 1994 our Government, the ANC-led Government, has been able to change their previous living experience into a new living experience. Millions of our people now have a place they call home. They have a home and land that belongs to them. They have homes with water, sanitation and electricity, which protects them from the rain and the sun; to put it simply, a home called home.

The housing policy which the ANC-led Government has put in place not only delivers a house, it also delivers land and the ownership thereof. Beneficiaries receive a home and land that they can develop and shape according to their needs. Over five million people have benefited from the more than 1,2 million houses that have been built. These are homes with water, sanitation and electricity. These are homes which have had an impact on communities throughout our country. Communities’ lives have been changed, because they are able to live securely and have security of tenure.

The People’s Housing Process is a programme where communities and individuals actively participate in the construction of their own homes. The homes built are often bigger, better and built in the design they choose. But what is most important is that the house and the land belong to the beneficiary. In particular, I want to indicate that women are by far the most active participants in the People’s Housing Process. For the people of South Africa this is a wonderful opportunity to actively take part in helping communities and individuals to rebuild their lives. I would encourage religious institutions, youth groups and other community organisations to volunteer to help build homes in the PHP programmes in their areas.

Rental housing is another programme which forms part of housing delivery. The beneficiary has the option of just renting or renting with an option to buy. Recently the national savings initiative was launched. This encourages individuals and communities to save towards the building of their own homes. The hostel redevelopment programme involves the conversion of hostels into family units. The more than 350 000 council homes that have been transferred to families living in them includes ownership of the land. All of these programmes which I have alluded to - and there are others - form part of the ANC-led Government’s commitment to reducing homelessness and to providing security of tenure.

The rapid land release programme is aimed at helping the poor settle on permanent land. The land is serviced with water, sanitation and electricity. Ownership of the land is transferred to the beneficiary. To date, 32 839 hectares of land have been transferred through 2 114 projects. The Gauteng Department of Housing will release 30 000 sites every year with an objective of upgrading all informal settlements by the year 2004. This will include the provision of title deeds and basic services.

This clearly indicates the ANC-led Government’s commitment to creating a better life for all through the delivery of land and housing. However, we must ensure the integration of our cities. All people have the right to live within cities, to live on land that is well located, to live in suburbs which have access to amenities, and to live in suburbs which are close to places of work.

The sad and true reality is that there are still citizens in our country who do not want to see real integration. They want to see the vast majority of the people of this country live far away from the suburbs, far away from places of work. The question I want to ask is: Why? The answer is because the majority of our people are black, poor and vulnerable.

I want to make an impassioned plea to those South Africans who continue to act in this way to become part of our country. Take part in helping to correct the wrongs of the past, in helping to build this country, in helping the poor and vulnerable to achieve a better life, in helping them to restore their dignity and self-worth. My plea is that we all accept each other as equal human beings.

In my constituency of Randfontein, which is in the west end of Gauteng, we continually have to deal with workers being evicted from plots and farms. This in itself leads to homelessness and landlessness and often results in the mushrooming of informal settlements. In each and every situation those evicted are black, poor and vulnerable. Again I urge landowners to think seriously about the actions that they take and reflect on the wellknown saying that goes: ``Do unto others as you would have others do unto you’’.

There is a new tendency that is starting to take place and that is that landowners divide their properties into small stands and then charge people a monthly fee to live there and erect a dwelling. However, they do not provide services. In particular I wish to draw attention to the Zandspruit area. This is an area which has sadly been in the news lately. I live in that ward and I belong to the ANC branch in Zandspruit. Some of the landowners around Zandspruit have embarked on this practice of dividing their land into small plots. As a result, a few thousand people have moved onto these properties. There are no services provided, no access to water, no access to toilets. They have made money and we have heard reports quoting figures of up to R600 000.

Now these landowners have turned around and are saying that Government must purchase these properties and upgrade the area. Surely this is wrong. Is this not an illegal land use practice? We call on such landowners to desist from these practices which increase poverty, homelessness and landlessness. They are playing a destructive role in our country. We call on them to join us and make a positive contribution to the future of our country.

The housing policy we have in place requires that we address the needs of the landless poor for landownership. Landownership by the poor is central to the RDP policy. The UN Centre for Human Settlements has adopted a resolution encouraging governments of the world to provide land for the settlement of the poor. The global campaign for secure tenure was launched two years ago in Durban in recognition of the work South Africa has done in securing tenure for the poor.

In conclusion, I wish to quote from the speech of the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, to the General Assembly in November 2001:

The world’s people will judge us by our ability to perform specific tasks, not by the resounding speeches we make or the number of decisions we reach, but by the quality of those decisions and of the service we provide. For the sake of all those whom we hope to save, whether from terrorism, from war, from poverty, from disease or from environmental degradation, let us resolve that only the best is good enough. Let us equip ourselves so that in the future the best is what we give.

The reconstruction and development of our country is not just the responsibility of the ANC. It is the responsibility of all South Africans. Let us all roll up our sleeves and together build a better life, a better country, a better continent, a better world and a better future. [Applause.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Chairperson, a successful land reform programme is a programme that addresses equitably the land needs of the people who need it most. The challenge facing South Africa today is threefold: to allocate land to the disadvantaged section of our society for residential purposes; to allocate land to emerging farmers for commercial purposes; and to accelerate the land restitution programme.

The question of land reform in South Africa is highly political and contentious for a number of reasons, the chief reason being that many of our people do not have access to land for residential purposes. The land is mostly owned by the state and is also in the hands of private people. This situation has also resulted in the proliferation of squatter camps and thousands of our people are cramped in an area that can only accommodate a fraction of the population that live there.

It should also be noted that political parties’ rights to pursue the policies of their choice should be balanced with the responsibility to uphold the rule of law, no matter how political parties differ on policy approach with regard to land issues. Political parties should promote dialogue on policy issues affecting the country without compromising their stand on these issues. We are not saying that to be responsible one has to agree with what the Government is saying or to legitimise the Government’s land reform programme as it is.

We are entitled to listening to our people’s needs for land. It is not a secret that many of our people need land, and that land reform programmes have to be accelerated to address this need. It is also the responsibility of political parties to educate their members about policy-making processes in Parliament. Above all, it is the responsibility of the political parties represented in Parliament to operate within the bounds of law and uphold the law. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Mr Chairperson, the land occupation in Bredell by the landless, who in the midst of a severely cold winter did not have a place to sleep, is not an isolated incident. The tragedy of this country is that there are many Bredells. The African majority remain dispossessed - it is landless, homeless and poor. Africans are the only people in this country who live in filthy houses and unhealthy squatter camps. Many of these pigsties bear the names of living pseudo-liberators of this country.

Equitable redistribution of land has been betrayed. Claiming land from 1913 consolidates land dispossessions of Africans. There is no land reform programme that can come out of 13%, on land colonially allocated to the African people in 1913. To blame the PAC for sympathising with the landless and homeless is insensitive and treacherous in the extreme. The primary contradiction of our liberation struggle and our ancestral wars was about national colonialism and over the land opposition.

Instead of making the PAC the scapegoat for land occupation by the frustrated landless African people, this Parliament must legislate against the sale of our land to foreigners while our own people need land. Excessive ownership of land by a few must be prohibited. One farmer in this country is reputed to own farmland the size of Belgium or the state of Maryland in America, or, closer to home, Lesotho. This is unacceptable to the PAC and all the right-thinking people of the world. Bredell has exposed those who claim to care for the poorest of the poor as hypocrites engaging in political lumpenism and shedding crocodile tears. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order!

Dr S E M PHEKO: Lest we forget, the rule of law goes hand in hand with human rights such as housing and liberation from genocidal colonial apartheid laws and land dispossession. Tiko ra hina! The land is ours! [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, I wish to request that when the presiding officer indicates to you that your time has expired, you should recognise that your time has expired and not be in breach of the call of the officer.

The MINISTER OF HOUSING: Chairperson, fly-by-night political parties like the PAC who are short of political programmes and programmes of action spend their time on emotionalising the land issue. They have no programme for addressing the inequalities. That is why they manipulate individuals, including the aged, to attend to their desperate goals. They have enjoyed championing the cause of adventurous individuals by mobilising around illegal land occupations. They get involved in shack farming and land sales on properties they do not own. Anarchy, irresponsible and opportunistic action should have no room at all on our transformation agenda.

It is very difficult to address issues of land needs without putting them within the context of what happened in the past. But it also does not help much to be fixated on the wrongs of the past. It only limits one’s chances of resolving the problems of inequality in a sustainable manner.

My party, the ANC, understands these facts, and we have laid the foundation with strategies for redressing the injustices of the past, of fostering national reconciliation and stability, of understanding the economic implications of strategies proposed and also ensuring that households do access land as we forge on with the process of alleviating, and ridding ourselves of, poverty. There are huge challenges that require extraordinary measures through policies, legislation, programmes and procedures that will enable us to empower the historically disadvantaged communities.

The South African political landscape lobbed groups and communities into residential settlements that were patterned and serviced in line with required racial norms, but the new dispensation, since its inception, has been consistently re-examining the laws, policies and procedures and we are now gradually changing these through a nonracial approach.

Deracialisation of landownership and settlement remains one of the biggest challenges confronting the nation. Though our policies and programmes are in place and are guiding us in the redistribution of land and services to the historically disadvantaged, we still need a consolidated national consensus and approach on how jointly, as a people, to speed up the processes.

There are a number of crucial role-players linked to land, and they have the power to determine how that land can be utilised. We have land that is public and land that is private. So far state land has been distributed to households through the Government’s housing policy, which has currently afforded more than 5 million people security of tenure. Different Government programmes are directed towards improving the quality of life of our people, and the rapid land release programme in housing has enabled Government to release at least 32 839 hectares of land.

Through policies of the Land Affairs department, more land has been allocated to the poor through redistribution and restitution programmes, including tenure reform. Secure tenure has been central to Government’s housing programmes, because it is our understanding that providing certainty to families greatly increases the value of their assets. It also helps people to plan for a future. That in itself encourages them to invest in their property. Secure tenure has also often had a greater multiplier impact on improvements and income generation.

Through the Government housing capital subsidy, we have forged a partnership with the urban and rural poor in encouraging people to take charge of their lives. The poor are increasingly playing an active role as agents of their own development. They build on their own, and they change their circumstances. The homeless have proved that they can create, innovate and also enhance what they have not just through skills imparted to them, but also through teaching each other how to improve their lives. Where there has been no lending from the banks, they have formed saving schemes that are now growing into an instrument that will ultimately empower and liberate them from the cycle of poverty. They are getting more organised and more confident.

This partnership is growing by the day. It has moved from single-purpose agreements to more institutionalised arrangements addressing issues of interrelated long-term goals. We need a stronger interaction with the business community as well, so that issues that commonly impact on Government’s work can be resolved with the participation of landowners. One of these is the high land prices in cities caused by speculative investments. These prices contribute to and perpetuate the construction of homes away from the inner cities, where we already have available amenities.

Sometimes we acquired suitable land, well located and technically appropriate and available for residential development, but failed to develop it owing to land costs. Potentially significant housing projects have been stopped or delayed in the past owing to this problem. We have competing needs such as open space and social facilities, and delays in housing development processes have resulted in additional costs in terms of holding the land. The financial viability of housing development is often jeopardised by unforeseen delays that result in additional costs relating to the servicing of bonds, rates and service charges, including security.

We need a joint exercise between relevant stakeholders to identify land that is lying fallow, but which can be utilised at reasonable cost. A plan of land supply and promotion of efficient administration of land matters is also critical to our success. There are farmers, though, who have already ceded or donated their land for housing development and this must be applauded. We need more such patriots.

However, in affluent communities some residents have refused to share neighbourhoods with poorer households, and continuality propagate the view that poor neighbours bring in crime and unrefined habits. But the residents of Dunsevern in Gauteng have proved that their million-rand mansions have not declined owing to low-cost housing in their neighbourhood. What we need in this country is a change of mind and attitude, which is necessary for transformation and change.

Development located next to high-cost housing should not necessarily be viewed as impacting negatively on valuations, but the developmental potential of the land should rather be the issue. We still have problem areas that need our attention, and one of these is the subjective nature of valuations which complicate property price negotiations.

We still have to make sure that local public land audits are conducted so that they help us to update and maintain the land database. This will also enable us to verify suitable land for development purposes. It will help identify well-located land in rural and urban areas that is technically suitable and safe for housing.

We have to make sure that state land disposal processes will also help us prioritise the release of land for low-cost housing. In all spheres of government, officials should be involved in state land development processes and be empowered to understand, catalyse and manage state land disposal processes.

Gradually, the legacy of apartheid is being overcome. Water, electricity and homes are reaching many, and will continue to do so until it reach even those who do not have it.

In order to work at a more advanced pace and efficient level of delivery, be it in land or other services, political stability and order should be the order of the day. We are pleading with the PAC that this should be the order of the day. Breaking the law through land occupations will only consume the time that we all need to change the phase and character of the country.

Recent research confirms the view that most families and individuals need land for settlement purposes in the urban areas. That is where most job opportunities exist and where infrastructure and services are accessible. Rural areas have in the past been ignored and denied development opportunities, hence migration to the cities at this considerably high rate.

Our Integrated Rural Development Strategy and urban renewal programmes are structured in a way that seeks to create a balance between rural and urban dwellers. These strategies will ensure that needs are addressed in a much more effective way and at an accelerated pace. These strategies have to be given a chance to deliver to the poor. Our Government has delivered and will continue to deliver. [Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, may I, at this point, compliment the hon B M Komphela on his maiden speech.

Land reform has been an issue in South Africa for years now. Though its main aim is to provide for land redistribution, restitution and tenure reform, there are many concerns as to how to attain these ends successfully.

Group areas, the colour bar, the dompas, land evictions, forced removals and many other horrific apartheid abuses, squeezed people into little locations, with minimal living space and exposing them to the most harsh living conditions, with little or no sanitation system available. Our aim is to correct this, or rather, to give back that which was forcibly taken from us.

It is satisfying that a legal framework has been put in place so as to facilitate land reform and avoid any illegal action in the process. Land invasion is by no means the way to attain this, and those who fuel it should be criticised for their ignorance.

The MF feels that this is by no means an easy task to accomplish. But with the right system in place, and adequately, efficiently and successfully implemented, the policies for land reform will meet with success, as any policy would.

The importance of all sectors, be they civil society, NGOs or political parties, in the establishment of a framework compliant with our constitutional democracy, cannot be overemphasised. All efforts and actions to address the issue of successful land reform are fully supported by the MF, as long as policies are put in place and precautions taken. [Applause.]

Mr A J BOTHA: Chairperson, I am sorry that the hon the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs is no longer here, because I would have liked to congratulate her on an excellent land reform programme and also on her ability to listen to other people, as this big conference that we will be having at the end of the month in Durban illustrates.

Let me start by saying that the land settlement pattern in South Africa is the result of historical migration and legal intervention. The original population was displaced by the migration of more powerful peoples from both the north and the south. During the first half of the 20th century, legal impediments restricted the expansion of landownership almost exclusively to whites. During the second half of the 20th century, black- owned land was expropriated on a vast scale. The cumulative result was a wholly unrepresentative land settlement pattern favouring whites.

The DA, together with the vast majority of the population of South Africa, believes that this untenable situation requires dramatic reform in landownership.

There is a tendency to regard state-owned land as the primary target for land reform. Clearly such land, ranging in extent from one million hectares to one and a half million hectares, should not be excluded. However, since this is essentially undeveloped land suitable mainly for extensive grazing, the necessary infrastructural development to put it into use will be very costly. Additional land for land reform must therefore be sought mainly in the commercial sector.

Commercial agricultural land in South Africa is privately owned and privately farmed. Land reform should likewise be privatised. Anybody who disputes this need only examine the present experience of the Government programme to privatise state assets. Most importantly, the management, mentoring and training of emerging farmers must be privatised.

A very wise man long ago advised that centres of management excellence should be established, from which we should modernise and commercialise traditional agriculture. Every single commercial farming enterprise in South Africa is in fact such a centre of management excellence. Otherwise South Africa would not be one of only seven countries in the world that are net exporters of food and fibre. In South Africa’s case this is more remarkable given our water-scarce status.

Many of these farming enterprises are already involved in land reform in a variety of ways. But I would like to add another one that I believe could contribute markedly and is not at present being utilised. I am referring to insolvent or imminently insolvent enterprises, of which there are an alarmingly large number at the moment. An immediate concern that would be raised is that insolvent enterprises would prove unsuitable or unprofitable for land reform.

The reality is different, because in most cases it was the sudden change in the marketing environment that placed many enterprises on the wrong side of the interest curve or debt- equity ratio, from which they simply could not escape: Remove the debt burden through land reform and many, if not most, would be highly profitable again. The great advantage of the proposal is that the whole enterprise can be taken over as a going concern, including the farmer, the employees, the livestock and equipment. Not only will the movable assets be acquired at a fraction of the cost of new assets, but the manager trainer, in the form of the erstwhile farmer, and candidate emergent farmers in the form of the erstwhile employees, are all in place, thereby saving on relocation costs and trauma as well as huge difficulties in the selection process.

A special development trust or some other suitable body can be established and the contractual management undertaken by an agency such as a merchant bank, to which farmers in financial difficulties or facing imminent foreclosure can apply to join the land reform programme. The advantages for employees of such a farm are obvious in that they become candidate emergent farmers instead of facing eviction after a bankruptcy dispersal sale of the farm. Most farmers who face bankruptcy not only face eviction and unemployment, but are probably unemployable when they are beyond middle age. The opportunity to remain on the farm, securely employed on a performance-based contract, by the land reform process would be a huge incentive to make it work.

Given the very large percentage of commercial agriculture in financial difficulties, such a programme can contribute to land reform not only on a large scale but also very quickly. Most importantly, everybody should contribute to a positive climate for land reform by avoiding generalisations of negative elements that obviously do exist, as though these elements portray the norm. Land reform is such a crucial element in the normalisation of our society that it should be above party-politicking and all should contribute to depicting the majority of existing commercial farmers in their true light, as reasonable people, not as demons out to deny others their lawful rights. In conclusion, it must be emphasised that agriculture, which now contributes only 4% towards the GDP, cannot solve the poverty and unemployment problems of the majority of our population. To suggest so would be to raise expectations which cannot be realised and would do a serious disservice to this most important duty of our nation.

I hope people will not laugh at me when I pronounce the name incorrectly again. Mohlomphehi, ntate Komphela. [Hon Mr Komphela], laat ek u verseker dat die wil om ‘n sukses te maak van die grondhervormingsproses daar is en saam sal ons dit regkry. Kom kuier gerus die vakansie vir my op die plaas en dan kan ons saam daarna kyk. [Applous.] [let me assure you that the will is there to make a success of the land reform process. Together we can achieve this. Do come and visit me on my farm during the holidays and then we can take a look at it together. [Applause.]]

Mr J DURAND: Mr Chairperson, in a country where 87% of the people until recently had access to, and not really ownership of, only 13% of the land, everyone should admit that something is amiss.

The entire subcontinent of Africa was colonised by European powers. Land ownership changed without legal transfer into the hands of the colonisers. The indigenous people had lost all rights to the land. In 1913 the Natives’ Land Act was passed, which legally destroyed successful black and coloured farmers. Access to land was made virtually impossible. Farmers lost their land and were forced to go to the cities and try to earn a living for which they were not trained in a hostile environment.

We must individually and collectively identify the obstacles to meaningful land reform in our region. Apart from the lessons to be drawn from the actual experiences of land reforms, or the lack thereof in Southern Africa, it is vital that we explore pressing land issues such as the role of land restitution, the importance of gender parity in questions of property rights, sustainable rural development and how best to approach land held in tribal or communal trusts. These issues form the core of what is far more than just another regional talk-shop. They constitute the basis of a real African Renaissance, a move away from the rhetoric and bluster of socialism towards concrete action plans and real delivery.

Land reform is such an important issue that we should try our utmost to get Government and opposition parties working together towards this national goal, and to seek broad national consensus on the approach.

In die Wes-Kaap is daar voorbeelde van hoe die staat, die privaatsektor en plaaswerkers saam oplossings gevind het. Die praktyk waarvolgens plaaswerkers saam met kommersiële landboubeleggers en entrepreneurs aandele in ‘n gemeenskaplike boerderyvennootskap kan bekom, is ‘n aantreklike proposisie wat al in die Wes-Kaap stewig posgevat het. Daarvolgens help ‘n ervare entrepreneur met boerderybestuurskundigheid om ‘n onderneming winsgewend te vestig en uit te bou. Só word die herverdeelde landbougrond met die hulp van plaaswerkers of opkomende boere meer produktief ontwikkel. As aandeelhouers word hulle in staat gestel om hul lewensgehalte te verbeter en word hulle blootgestel aan die soms vyandige landbou-omgewing en sy werklikhede. Dié blootstelling gaan somtyds ook gepaard met ‘n goeie, steil leerkurwe.

Die plaaswerkers, of opkomende boere, finansier hul aandelekapitaal uit die R15 000 wat die Departement van Grondsake beskikbaar stel, en dit kan nou gedoen word deur middel van die sogenaamde geïntegreerde program. Dié skema staan op vier bene, naamlik die Departement van Grondsake, kredietfasiliteite vir landelike hervorming, handelsbanke en die Nuwe Boere Ontwikkelingsmaatskappy, ‘n waagkapitaalfinansier met sy hoofkantoor in Durbanville.

Die bogenoemde ontwikkelingsmaatskappy is gemoeid met die ontwikkeling van opkomende boere. Hulle belê in projekte met ‘n goeie verdienstepotensiaal en sal hul ná ‘n tydperk winsgewend onttrek wanneer die projek suksesvol op sy eie bene staan. Die boerderyprojekte word as maatskappye of trusts bestuur en word deur die direkteure of trustees beheer. Die plaaswerkers of opkomende boere wat aandeelhouers in die plaas is, dien ook in die direksie. Winste wat uit hierdie projekte gemaak word, kan uitbetaal word en die trustees kan besluit wat om daarmee te doen.

Die Land Reform Credit Facility, die LRCF, is in 1999 deur die Departement van Grondsake gestig. Dit is aanvanklik gekapitaliseer met R63 miljoen. Geld dáárvoor is deur die Departement van Grondsake en die Europese Unie beskikbaar gestel. Die LRCF stel lenings aan banke en beleggers beskikbaar, met uitgestelde terugbetalings. Sedert sy stigting het die LRCF lenings ter waarde van R26 miljoen aan agt aandeelvennootskapprojekte goedgekeur, ses in die Wes-Kaap en twee in Mpumalanga. Lenings word aan banke en beleggers beskikbaar gestel, wat weer op hul beurt die risiko moet dra deur lenings vir projekte beskikbaar te stel. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[In the Western Cape there are examples of how the state, the private sector and farmworkers have found solutions together.

The practice according to which farmworkers, together with commercial agricultural investors and entrepreneurs, can acquire shares in a communal farming partnership, is a lucrative proposition that has already been firmly established in the Western Cape. In this way an experienced entrepreneur assists with farm management expertise in order to establish an enterprise profitably. In this way the redistributed agricultural land can be developed more productively with the assistance of farmworkers or emerging farmers. As shareholders they are empowered to improve their quality of life and they are exposed to the sometimes hostile agricultural environment and its realities. This exposure sometimes goes hand in hand with a good, steep learning curve. The farmworkers or emerging farmers finance their share capital with the R15 000 that the Department of Land Affairs makes available, and this can now be done by means of the so-called integrated programme. This scheme has four branches, namely the Department of Land Affairs, credit facilities for rural reform, commercial banks and the New Farmers Development Company, a venture capital financier with its head office in Durbanville.

The abovementioned development company is involved with the development of emerging farmers. They invest in projects with a sound earning potential and, after a certain period, they will profitably withdraw once the project is successfully established. Farming projects are managed as companies or trusts and are controlled by the directors or trustees. The farmworkers or emerging farmers who are shareholders in the farm also serve on the board of directors. Profits that are made from these projects can be paid out and the trustees can decide what to do with it.

The Land Reform Credit Facility, LRCF, was established in 1999 by the Department of Land Affairs. It was initially capitalised with R63 million. Money for this was made available by the Department of Land Affairs and the European Union. The LRCF makes loans available to banks and investors, with deferred repayments. Since the its establishment the LRCF has approved loans to the value of R26 million to eight share partnership projects, six in the Western Cape and two in Mpumalanga. Loans are made available to banks and investors who, in turn, must carry the risk by making loans available for projects.]

I trust that we will continue this process of land reform in South Africa and continually engage in vibrant policy dialogues between role-players. We have a responsibility to strategise and brainstorm to find effective ways to deal with this problem within a framework of certain principles. The principles of a free-market economy with a social conscience; the promotion and protection of human rights and the rule of law; the expansion of property ownership to the landless and previously disadvantaged; the protection of property rights; a commitment to multiparty democracy, and the use of peaceful means to achieve change have proved to be successful around the world.

Our approach to land reform should stand in direct contrast to that of Zimbabwe, whose approach is characterised by a disregard for the rule of law and property rights. It stands in direct contrast with the approach that has led to the destruction of agricultural opportunities, investment confidence and food security in many African countries and in the rest of the world. Our approach to land reform is a responsible one, aimed at protecting private property, expanding property ownership and making maximum use of opportunities for the development of the agricultural sector, always bearing in mind the imperative of ensuring that this development does not occur at the expense of the environment.

Without properly developing the agricultural sector as an integral part of our rural land reform process, we will not be able to kick-start rural economic development and make property available. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Before I recognise the next speaker, let me say that the House is too orderly. Could I please request hon members to stick to decorum. [Interjections.]

Mr B A RADEBE: Deputy Chairperson, hon members and comrades, this debate comes at the right time, just before the start of the constituency period. As we go back to service our constituencies, it is important that we go and tell the truth about the state and history of our country. That is why I will start this debate by telling the truth about what happened before the indigenous people of South Africa experienced landlessness.

An HON MEMBER: Khuluma, Baba! [Speak, Father!]

Mr B A RADEBE: In the whole of South Africa there was always land to cater for all the needs of our people. That is the reason why it was always the norm that when one person moved from the service of one king, he was given land and stock by the new king he was to serve. This was done to banish hunger, landlessness and poverty and no orphans were left destitute, because members of society had ubuntu, and took care of one another.

This trend was reversed when the indigenous people hosted a certain group of people who came from abroad. Although they treated those settlers well by giving them land and stock, these settlers never appreciated that generosity, kindness and hospitality. Instead, they demanded more land and stock from their host, the indigenous people.

The settlers also recruited more people from their land of origin. Driven by greed, they tried to rob the indigenous people of their land. This led to the first resistance wars, which were gallantly fought by kings such as Hintsa, Moshoeshoe, Cetswayo, Sekhukhune and others.

When some of the kings, like Hintsa, were decapitated, and others sent to prison, the young generation continued to fight. The last resistance war was fought by Bambatha and was against the herd tax. Although the indigenous people were eventually defeated, they continued to live peacefully with their settlers.

After the formation of the Union of South Africa the government of the day passed Act 27 of 1913, which was entitled the Native Land Act. By coincidence, that Act was assented to on 16 June 1913 by the then governor- general.

If hon members remember correctly, that was not only the day on which Black people were enslaved to land, but also the day on which the youth of South Africa rose against the apartheid regime to fight for their rights. [Interjections] [Applause.]

That land Act described the native'' asany person or female who is a member of an aboriginal race or tribe of Africa, and shall further include any company or the board of persons, corporate or unincorporate, and the persons who have the controlling interest.’’ This Act effectively racialised the land question in South Africa. The first section of the land Act restricted transactions relating to land between natives and other persons, that is whites.

This meant that no native was allowed to enter into any agreement or transaction for the purchase, hire or acquisition of any land from any other person who was white, except for his own native land. The natives were supposed to acquire land only in a scheduled native area. If there was deviation from this, the permission of the governor-general was to be sought first.

The governor-general would institute a commission to investigate such a transaction. If any person was found in contravention of this Act, they were fined 100 pounds. This was the first legalised land grab in South Africa, which condemned the indigenous people to 13% of the South African land and gave 80% of the land to whites. This land grab exacerbated the land hunger and poverty of the indigenous people.

The indigenous people, having experienced a further blow by their exclusion from the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910, formed their own parliament in 1912, which was valiantly led by Langalibalele Dube. This parliament was all-inclusive, because it involved all the kings of different tribes in South Africa. It was used to petition the Queen of England and the South African government. This parliament of the African people was the African National Natives Congress, which later became the African National Congress. This parliament of the people provides the strategic political leadership to the African people to this day and will do so for many years to come.

In 1955, after many years of petitioning, the ANC called a congress of the people where the Freedom Charter was adopted. What was significant about that congress of the people was that it included all the different racial groups of South Africa. The preamble of the Charter declares that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white.

Clause 4 of the Charter made a clarion call that the land should be shared among those who work it; restriction of landownership on a racial basis should be ended; and all land should be redivided among those who work it to banish famine and land hunger. This fundamental principle of the Freedom Charter was adopted during the constitution-making process that took place between 1994 and 1996. That is why even section 25 of the Constitution also provides for protection of the property rights of the people.

Through the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs, the Government has initiated various programmes of land restitution and land reform. The land restitution involves the people who were forcefully removed from their land by the apartheid regime. Through the Land Claims Commission the people launched their claims, which the commission investigated. The Land Claims Court settled the claims. This process was necessary for transparency where there were disputes and it also provided for an appeal process so that no person could be unfairly disadvantaged.

The administrative process of settling land claims was adopted to speed up those claims in which there were no disputes. This led to thousands of people who were staying in places like Sophiatown receiving the once-off payment grants for compensation of the land they lost through forced removals. This legal framework is very important to ensure future stability and peace in the country.

The land reform programme involves land redistribution for agricultural purposes and community settlement. At the centre of the programme is the deracialisation of agriculture. This involves the transference of state land to small-scale farmers and previously disadvantaged commercial farmers. For example, in the eastern Free State, 55 000 of the 60 000 hectares of state land were transferred to emerging farmers and municipalities for redistribution purposes.

Since the Charter demanded that the state help the peasants with implements, seeds, tractors and dams to till the soil, the Department of Land Affairs introduced the subprogramme, Land Redistribution Agricultural Development, LRAD. Through this programme the emerging farmers are helped to get land, and are assisted with start-up capital and skills in order to become commercial farmers. The role of the white commercial farmers is also important, since they are the people who have the skills and land to help the black farmers.

Since the formation of Agri-SA, a lot of farmers have contributed positively to the land redistribution programme. For example, a farmer in the North West, Roger Roman of Hartebeespoort Dam, gave up 65 hectares of his farm to 12 families residing and working on his farm for settlement purposes. Already 12 low-cost houses have been built on this farm at a cost of R132 000. This is what Mr Roger Roman had to say, and I quote:

I have learnt that, as farmers, we have an opportunity, especially those of us who got the farms during apartheid, to contribute in giving land back to the Africans. Our Government has given us an alternative, unlike in Zimbabwe.

People like Roger Roman must really be commended for playing a positive role in changing the legacy of apartheid.

During the state-of-the-nation address by President Thabo Mbeki, he called on all organs of civil society to work together with Government to speed up change and fight poverty. Former organisations like Agri-SA and Nafu, had worked together with an official of the President’s to make a sector for agriculture, since it was identified by the President as one of the sectors which would help economic growth in South Africa.

This sector plan emphasises bridging of conflicts and the creation of a shared vision. This involved the elimination of apartheid deficits in landownership patterns by increasing access to land by black farmers. The core strategies of the plan are participation, competitiveness and sustainability. Participation would involve the Government, farmers, the Farmworker Union and the banking sector, like the Land Bank, in speeding up land restitution. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I would like to say to Dene Smuts that I will take into consideration her concern.

Chairperson and hon members, I must say that the way in which members contributed to the debate has been very constructive. They have raised issues of concern to them and, I am sure, to all our constituencies. The challenge is for us to move with speed in dealing with the legacy of our past. There is room for all of us to participate in a constructive manner to find solutions to the problems that we face.

It is my view that we have all turned the corner as South Africans. It might be that some instances, such as Bredell and many others, have continually reminded us of our interdependence as a society; that while some people are poor and others rich, neither of the two can be happy and comfortable.

I would like to share with the House some of the work that we have done with various nongovernmental organisations, and with farmers and the business sector. In their small way, they have participated in ensuring that the various communities are assisted in actually dealing with the challenges, also taking into consideration the Government’s programmes.

I want to highlight a few. The Border Rural Committee, Inkunzi Development and many others, some of whom are national land committee affiliates, must be commended on the role they played in assisting the land claimants as well as farmworkers.

I also want to say that it was worrying, at the beginning of this year and at midyear, to hear some of the statements that were made by the land committee supporting the land invasions. We have raised our concern with this organisation, because we believe it has a critical role to play. If it is to do that constructively, we will be able to work together in finding solutions.

I also want to thank individual members of this House for the way in which some of them quietly did their work in their constituencies. They have always touched base with us and the Ministry in finding solutions to speeding up the land process.

I also want to say that the relationship we have developed with Agri SA in trying to find constructive solutions in dealing with the problem has been commendable.

Lastly, I need to highlight the role played by and the contribution made by some traditional leaders, whom have been commended. I also want to highlight the role played by Chief Shongwe in Mpumalanga who was able to release many hectares of land for agricultural development, because he appreciated, as a chief, that if his society is poor, he will never be successful in governing them.

These are the ways in which we as South African citizens, in my view, will continually have to find ways of working together for the betterment of our society. Criticism is necessary at times, but that criticism must be constructive - not to destroy but to build. It is sad that one of the parties in this House, the PAC, sought to come and raise many issues of concern, but decided to leave and not dare to listen to others who had very constructive suggestions. I hope next time they will be able to be part of all of us in finding a solution for the challenge we face. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                           WORLD AIDS DAY

                             (Statement)

The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, I am glad to have been given this opportunity to make this statement, just two weeks before World Aids Day. The theme of this year’s World Aids Day celebration is ``I care. Do you?’’ I want to assure members that our Government cares and this is witnessed in the progress we have been making in responding to HIV/Aids. As a country, we firmly embrace the ABC principles of abstinence, faithfulness and condom use a part of a comprehensive approach to our efforts.

We will soon increase the number of female condoms’ pilot sites from 114 to

1. We should all be proud that life skills and the HIV/Aids education programme are now a compulsory part of the curriculum and will be available in all primary and secondary schools by the year 2003. In the last year, the Department of Health collaborated with the Department of Education to develop resource materials on life skills and HIV/Aids education for parents, to ensure that messages provided in schools can be enforced within the home. There has been a dramatic increase in calls to the HIV/Aids helpline as a result of our public awareness efforts. Legitimate calls for help to the helpline have increased by more than 130% in the last two years.

A new tender for the information, education and communication arm of the HIV/Aids and TB programme was awarded early this year to three agencies, which amounts to R90 million over two years. This mass communication campaign will focus on safer and healthier sexual behaviour, as well as care, support, openness and acceptance of people living with Aids in the community, and the promotion of awareness about Government initiatives and how to access them. This year we expanded access to voluntary HIV counselling and testing. Three hundred and twenty-five sites have been identified for the implementation of the strategy. Thirty percent of these are already operational.

There are benefits to knowing one’s status, whether positive or negative. For people who are HIV positive, the post-test counselling provides important information on issues such as treatment, care and support opportunities, nutrition and prevention of further transmission, in order to improve the quality of life. For those who are HIV-negative, the post- test counselling focuses on those lifestyle choices that will ensure that the person remains HIV-negative.

The expansion of HIV counselling and testing sites is, thus, an important policy direction for health. We are targeting 25% of the adult population by the year 2003. Last year, I launched the HIV/Aids STI strategic plan for South Africa 2000-2005, in order to deal comprehensively with HIV/Aids. To this end, I have also launched nine HIV/Aids-related guidelines in October last year. These include guidelines for rapid HIV testing, managing HIV infections in children, management of HIV positive pregnant women, feeding infants of HIV-positive mothers, tuberculosis and HIV, treatment of opportunistic infections in adults, ethics in HIV/Aids clinical and epidemiological research, nutrition for people living with TB and HIV/Aids and other chronic debilitating conditions. To further strengthen the ability of health care workers to correctly diagnose and manage the health manifestations of HIV/Aids, we have allocated more resources in the last year to the training of health care workers on those guidelines.

The debate around treatment for people with HIV/Aids in South Africa dominates the media. It is also characterised by gross misrepresentation. The wrong impression is being created that individuals who are HIV-positive have no access to treatment within the public health care system. The reality is that the Government has placed its emphasis in treatment on improving quality of life through the effective management and treatment of opportunistic infections and sexually transmitted infections.

However, there is also no running away from the fact that the cost of antiretrovirals is still prohibitively high. We have to attend to the issues related to poor compliance, which leads to speedy resistance. In this regard I refer hon members to the article by Simon Barber, a Washington Post correspondent in today’s Business Day.

I want to reiterate that Government continues to place primary importance on improving quality of life through the effective treatment and management of opportunistic infections and sexually transmitted infections. We have reduced syphilis infections among women attending the antenatal public health facilities by more than 50% over a period of two years. We also continue to address issues of treatment within the public health sector. I can assure hon members that treatment of acute and chronic opportunistic infections is provided to every person in public health care facilities, irrespective of HIV status.

World Aids Day marks the first anniversary of the Diflucan partnership that our Government entered into with the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. We have facilitated, through this partnership getting the offer of free Diflucan extended to other countries in the SADC region. Some countries are now interacting with Pfizer in this regard.

Misinformation and very negative perceptions created around Government policy with regard to treatment undermine such progress that has been made in caring for people living with Aids. The establishment of the prevention of mother-to-child transmission programmes in 2001 will bring hope to many mothers and babies. This project will provide the Department of Health with an opportunity to identify gaps in the delivery of health care in the context of mother-to-child transmission programmes.

Despite the criticism of this programme, we have placed great thought into the actual package of care provided to women and their babies. All 18 MTCT sites and the 153 access points are now operational. At the last count, approximately 7 000 women had accepted the VCT programme in the MTCT sites and approximately 500 babies have been born into the programme. The comprehensive package of care for MTCT includes the provision of HIV counselling and testing, breast milk substitutes for women who choose not to breastfeed, multivitamins for pregnant women to ensure that their health status during pregnancy is elevated, nevirapine for both mother and infant during birth and the treatment of any opportunistic infections during and after birth for both mother and child.

Already the information obtained from these MTCT sites have highlighted some of the challenges in implementing such a programme and the implications for wide-scale rollout.

The main challenges relate to the lack of adequate space to ensure confidential HIV counselling and testing, inadequate staffing levels to promote HIV counselling and testing, the need for support groups, especially for women who choose to formula feed, the impact of lack of access to water, electricity and transport on the efficiency of the intervention, and poor uptake and coverage in some of the sites, despite the clamour for the immediate expansion of this programme to all pregnant women. The pilot programme does provide for an opportunity to gather essential data to properly inform policy for scaling up such a programme. It is unfortunate that this approach is continuously presented as a sign of not caring, because I sincerely believe that when it comes to women and children, the record of the ANC and our Government speaks for itself. [Interjections.] I want to report to this House that our focus is on the outcome, which should be HIV-negative, healthy babies at the ages of 18 to 24 months. This Government cares about the people with HIV/Aids and babies born of HIV-positive mothers. Our ultimate goal is to ensure that mothers stay well for a long time and that their babies are free from HIV and are healthy. [Interjections.]

We are piloting home-based care. This we are doing in collaboration with the Departments of Agriculture and Social Development. A rapid appraisal of home-based care projects in existence is currently in progress. Based on this report, existing projects will be strengthened and over 200 new home- based initiatives will be opened very soon. A tender to provide home-based care kits is already in the pipeline. We provide information to the public on issues relating to stigma, particularly in the workplace, caring for people with HIV/Aids and basic information on HIV/Aids. I am happy to report that the reported underspending on the Aids budget has been drastically reduced this year, from 40% last year to 26% this year. This clearly shows that we are making good progress in addressing the problems of slow tender and procurement procedures, including slow delivery by contractors, which the department has been facing for a number of years.

We are concerned about issues of quality, especially when it comes to condoms being distributed through the public health care system. I would like to commend the South African Bureau of Standards for the sterling work they did in certifying the condoms that were purchased. I am happy to report that within Government and civil society significant progress has been made in operationalising the strategy plan.

We are engaged in a process of ensuring that health workers are better trained and prepared for dealing with HIV and Aids. One should remember that most of our health worker professionals were trained when there was no HIV and Aids. In the past six months we have trained 100 health care workers with regard to HIV/Aids guidelines in the workplace with funds provided by the EU. There is no doubt that Government alone will not do much to reduce the impact of HIV and Aids.

We have entered into a training partnership with the nurses’ organisation, Denosa, which includes the distribution of fact sheets on HIV and Aids. The interaction with the unions and the training provided to shop stewards to ensure adequate levels of HIV knowledge are amongst the work that we do. This year we are funding NGOs to the tune of R28 million.

I want to encourage all members of Parliament to participate fully in the coming World Aids Day celebrations. A major aspect of the celebration will be the lighting of a flame of life at 7 pm on 1 December 2001. [Time expired.][Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! One hon member has suggested to me that it is past his bedtime. I suggest that he should perhaps look to the Whip for a sleeping bag to provide some relief.

Mrs S V KALYAN: Mr Chairperson and hon members, in South Africa being diagnosed HIV positive is a death sentence. With no cure or treatment, all that those diagnosed as being HIV positive can expect is discrimination, stigmatisation, ostracism, unemployment and long, lingering suffering while watching one’s family members struggling to take care of themselves. For most people it is better not to be tested.

There are very few areas of our lives that are not affected by HIV/Aids, irrespective of gender, race, culture or religion. There are only two kinds of people in South Africa, those infected by HIV/Aids and those affected by it. It is estimated that approximately 4,7 million people in South Africa are infected by HIV and that by 2010 about 2,5 million children under the age of 15 will be orphaned by Aids. Our infection rate is close to 1 700 per day and the Department of Health puts Aids-related deaths at about 700 per day.

Three main reasons for this bleak picture can be identified. Firstly, South Africa is in denial about the depth of the epidemic. Secondly, we lack a coherent, unified approach, and thirdly, the epidemic has become a political tool.

Brazil’s Aids programme is considered to be one of the most successful in the world and that is because it has a strong, unwavering political commitment. President Mbeki’s stance on HIV/Aids is puzzling, to say the least. Brazil is a developing country, yet has managed to drop its HIV/Aids mortality rate by 50% simply because it has provided free antiretroviral treatment for all its citizens who have HIV/Aids since 1997.

The high cost of antiretroviral drugs has long been cited as a barrier to treatment. While the Government is engaging in denials and distractions, the DA is offering solutions. The DA proposes two key steps which should be taken immediately to cut costs. Firstly, we should introduce an amendment to the Patents Act to allow instant access to generic drugs in a national health emergency. We believe that the Aids crisis in South Africa is undoubtedly a national emergency and by declaring an emergency the Government would be able to authorise the competitive sector to supply particular types of patents relevant to resolving the emergency.

The Minister cites the cost factor again in that medication is not available to all. She omits to mention that a pharmaceutical company has offered neviropine free for the next five years. A recent survey commissioned by the Department of Health on the costing of the mother-to- child transmission programme states that the cost will be less than 1% of the total Health budget, and that the benefits far outweigh the risk.

Provision of antiretrovirals is well within South Africa’s capabilities. We have no real excuses to sit back and watch people die, nor can we justify the R4,137 million roll-over on the Government’s part, money set aside for the Government Aids action plan.

The second proposal of the DA is to remove VAT on essential medicines. Many countries around the world exclude medicines entirely from the tax net, including the UK, Sweden, Ireland and Austria. South Africa must do the same. We propose that VAT on all drugs on the EDL be removed, and the EDL should be amended to include ARV. I would like to compliment the Joint Monitoring Committee on the Improvement of the Quality of Life and the Status of Women on its report on how best South Africa can address the impact of HIV/Aids on women and girls. Well done on breaking the silence. I would also like to congratulate the Treatment Action Campaign on receiving a prestigious international award from MTV called ``Free Your Mind’’.

In conclusion, I would like to call on all members to support the DA’s proposed amendment to the Patents Act and make a difference. Instead of uttering meaningless platitudes and lighting candles, let us shred the myths and light the way collectively in the partnership that Government so often refers to. [Applause.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Chair, in 1981 doctors identified a syndrome and called it Aids. Now, 20 years on, as we approach World Aids Day, we know a great deal about the cause and need only the will to contain it. Recently we have seen the world unite in the wake of a terrorist threat and act in a focused fashion to eradicate it.

Where Aids is concerned, the United Nations has pledged its support and would rally the world to help us fight the scourge, provided we have a clear plan of action. First and foremost, let us eradicate contradictions in our policy. The worst one centres around our human rights priorities. They elevate the right to privacy above the rights to safety, to information, to treatment and to no unfair discrimination. This sets in motion a chain of contradictions. We have drafted laws and regulations that foster secrecy, and the most crucial of these surrounds testing. Testing is one way to roll back denial.

The budget for Aids is a minute 0,08% of the national Budget. To date, of R200 million budgeted, only R105,5 million is spent. Funding NGOs is difficult, but funding Government work in clinics, hospitals and schools should be easy, provided we have commitment, clear programmes of action and no confusion about who is responsible for what.

Our current approach to testing promotes secrecy. It is done in selected clinics and pilot programmes are only gradually being expanded. We demand one-on-one counselling, for which there is not enough staff, and we do most surveillance with anonymous testing. No wonder a mother who passed on Aids to her baby is suing Government for not informing her she had HIV after she had tested positive. We should test for Aids as routinely as for a full blood count. We should do group pretest counselling, and one-on-one counselling if people test positive, and deny patients the choice of refusing to know their results. There is another contradiction with respect to patient privacy. Doctors are required to withhold positive test results from a sex partner or spouse. That implies becoming a partner in homicide. We share information about TB and cancer, why do we not do it with Aids and roll back denial? The more people who know and talk openly, the less prejudice they will face.

We even shelter rapists and prisoners from testing, claiming it invades their right to privacy. We also fail the public in having laws that make it difficult to prosecute those who negligently pass on Aids. The criminal law puts the onus on the victim to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was negligently or wilfully infected by a particular person. Our vacuous approach to testing renders this virtually impossible. The civil law is costly, because it requires the infected person to pay for their own defence, and their partner or spouse would probably not pay the damages awarded.

Another obvious way to promote openness is to offer antiretroviral treatment. For this we require huge funding outlets and an efficient infrastructure, which we lack. We do not need to distribute drugs to everyone. We can source medicines free or at rock-bottom prices, and we can work with any number of donors or private teams who are waiting in the wings. Let us stop talking and do it. The first people to receive these medicines must be pregnant women, newborn infants, children and rape victims.

Support for orphans and home-based care require a complete rethink of constitutional requirements. At present, these do not place authority, capacity, financial resources and accountability in the hands of those best placed to deal with the crisis, the people on the ground at local and provincial levels. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, your speaking time has expired.

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Deputy Chair, let me just say that pragmatism in Aids will unite us, and allow me … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, your time has expired. [Interjections.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Yes, I would like to wish you … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member! [Interjections.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Chair, please allow me Chair to wish you and our Muslim friends well over the Ramadan fast … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member! Hon members, I previously asked you to abide by the ruling of the presiding officer. You cannot proceed beyond the time that is allocated to you. [Interjections.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: I merely wished to wish you well over the Ramadan fast. [Interjections.]

An HON MEMBER: Hamba! [Go!]

Dr S J GOUS: Chair, it is already late in the evening both for this Parliament and for Aids, but thanks anyway for this opportunity to promote World Aids Day. However, it is our position that it should be World Aids Day every day. All we have to do is to create some hope, and it is now very clear that in South Africa one is either infected or one will be affected by Aids.

We experienced the epidemic in three waves. The first wave would be that of HIV infection and after about eight years the second were of Aids sufferers, in other words, sick patients. Then after another two years, the third wave of a horrible, undignified and untimely death.

Unfortunately, at the same time, the first and second waves continue unabated. An early visit to a state or private hospital or a mortuary will confirm that the epidemic is now in full force and the reality is therefore that we can no longer afford any form of denial.

While we are waiting for a cure or vaccine, which appears to be elusive, everything possible must be done to stem this tide, and absolutely no effort must be spared in the prevention of the disease.

Firstly, we must educate, educate, and educate. Secondly, we must promote the ABC, which we know so well: abstain, be faithful, and condomise, and we can add a D' to this, `die if you do not’’. Thirdly, regarding mother-to- child transmission prevention and accidential exposure, which would include rape, it is now clear that antiretrovirals after rape are no more an option, but an obligation.

As far as treatment is concerned, we have to look at voluntary counselling and testing, which are becoming imperative. We have to expand home-based care. It is absolutely essential, because it is obvious that our hospitals are already overflowing.

We have to treat opportunistic infections. The fact is that, whether we like it or not, antiretroviral treatment is becoming inevitable, despite the objections, and it is already applied with great success in the private sector.

But, let us also not forget poverty alleviation. It is clear that we shall have to mobilise a whole society in a multisectoral and co-ordinated way, otherwise the country will be crippled.

Therefore, there is an obligation on every single parliamentarian to spread the message every day and in every possible way. The New NP would also, on this occasion, like to pay tribute to the numerous homes, hospices, sanctuaries, NGOs, individuals and health workers who make it their task to improve the lot of our fellow South Africans who are Aids sufferers or orphans. At the end of the day, we will all be either infected or affected. There is no getting away. [Applause.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, when Finance Minister Trevor Manuel substantially increased spending on HIV/Aids in the interim Budget, he implied acknowledgement of the increasing devastation caused by the disease.

According to the latest MRC report, there are about 10 000 Aids-related deaths every two weeks. However, it has been reported that Government has responded to this by threatening to cut the MRC’s funding if it does not toe the line on Aids. Providing antiretroviral drugs to prevent mother-to- child HIV transmission is the least that should be done in the light of our circumstances. By treating parents as well we would be investing in the family, which will pay big dividends.

The use of antiretrovirals in the US led to a dramatic decline in both deaths and the number of Aids patients admitted to hospitals. As the pharmacy bill increases, the in-patient bill decreases, and in the end drugs pay for themselves. Having recently visited hospitals in Mpumalanga and having witnessed the desperation in overcrowded wards filled with HIV patients waiting to die or committing suicide, this option looks even more imperative. Other countries, such as Brazil, have experienced the same cost benefit, and South Africa is in the enviable position of being able to benefit from the lessons of these other countries.

Medical data shows that antiretroviral therapy also significantly decreases the incidence rate of TB and may be a powerful strategy for the control of HIV-associated TB. The ACDP calls on the Minister to be brave and to stand up in support of making antiretrovirals available to all the people of South Africa. As for planned parenthoods/life-skills, they are despicable, and an affront. All I can say is: Shame on you, hon Minister. [Interjections.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Chairperson and hon members, there is a school of thought which says while medication and drugs are hard to come by there is increasing recognition that public health often provides an added and compelling justification for safeguarding human rights, despite the respect, protection and fulfilment which they merit in their own right.

In the context of HIV/Aids, an environment in which human rights are respected ensures that vulnerability to HIV/Aids is reduced, that those infected with and affected by HIV/Aids live a life of dignity without discrimination and that the personal and social impact of HIV infection is alleviated. Government should establish organisations such as a national Aids council in this country. Such a structure should be extended to the provinces and other role-players such as religious bodies, business and NGOs, who should do likewise and have a special day on which they reflect on what they did over a period of time in relation to HIV/Aids victims.

To this end the African Methodist Episcopal Church across the globe has set aside the second Sunday of April as a day on which they review their work and raise awareness as a denomination. May we, as we rise to go our constituencies, spread the simple message that the public health interests do not conflict with human rights. [Time expired.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, there is no need for an introduction to this horrific epidemic of Aids. It has made its mark globally and it is renowned for its rapid growth and being the cause of death, leaving many orphans, which cause not only a social breakdown, but also affect the communities’ economic status.

Aids has made its presence felt in South Africa and is rapidly adding victims to its list. It has been reported by Anthony Kinghorn and Malcolm Steinberg of the HIV management service at the Aids Foundation of South Africa that projections indicate that within three years, from 1999, almost 250 000 South Africans will die from Aids each year, rising to more than 500 000 by 2008, with an average life expectancy declining from 60 to 40 years between 1998 and 2008.

These dreadful statistics are so scary, but it is also a reality. Many attempts have been made to depreciate this, but unsuccessfully. We and our Government have the power to make a difference. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr A S NKOMO: Chairperson, I thank you for the opportunity to participate in this debate about mobilising our people - all the people - in spite of my friend over there, to participate in the 1 December World Aids Day celebrations, precisely because it is an opportunity, I wish to tell the hon Mike Ellis, for us to empower people with whatever knowledge there is. The greatest cruelty that can be would be for us to hold and hoard whatever wisdom we have and not use it to liberate and release the creative energies and wisdom that there is in the people.

We have had the opportunity to move around the people and amongst them. And we have learned great lessons of the creative energies and wisdom which are there amongst the people. Witness, for instance, the statements which have been made by a number of people who are living with Aids, because they insist that they are not going to be objects, or guinea pigs, but that they are going to be equal participants in the delivery of health care, not only for themselves, but also for all of us as humankind. [Applause.]

One day books will be written, tomes and volumes, and all those will entail this knowledge that we acquire every time when we meet with the people and share their experiences. [Interjections.] The people tell us: Look, we live with Aids, but we are not going to sit down and wait to die. We are going to live. We are here, healthy, and we can survive every day, if we eat and exercise.

People have made these testimonies at various rallies and meetings in order to encourage people so that they must know that, in fact, the diagnosis is not a death sentence, but a challenge for people to renew and to gather more strength to be able to survive.

We had contact with the first nations, or aboriginal people. Some people call them Red Indians, just so that people know what we are talking about. I do not call them Red Indians. They told us that, as communities, they have been able to create awareness amongst themselves and, as a result of that, they have been able to gain the greatest prize in this war and struggle against HIV/Aids, because they were able to affect and effect a behaviour change.

This is a lesson that we want to know, because we have spent lots of money and energy in this country on awareness programmes. But we had a singular experience very recently, amidst the whining and whinging. One Steven Lewis, who is a special envoy of the United Nations, came here and testified that, in fact, the highest levels of awareness have been experienced here, as a result of this Government, whether one goes into a taxi, wakes up and listens to a talk show. But, there are those who are so blind that they will not see. These messages are there and they are bound to be seen by all of us.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Carry on, hon member.

Dr A S NKOMO: Chairperson, quite seriously, there is this broad framework 200 and 205. There is broad agreement that this framework is correct and has identified the real issues. There may be nuances, little differences of emphases about the speed with which it is implemented, but there is general agreement. And certain people have taken out of this beautiful tapestry a little strand, maybe the most shining strand in that tapestry, and they have concentrated on it, and that strength is the one of antiretrovirals. And yet the people have told us that in fact there comes a time, because of the viral role and the CD cells, that that is the time to begin with antiretrovirals. [Time expired.] [Applause.] The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! That was the hon member’s swan song. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                 DETERMINATION OF PRESIDENT'S SALARY

                         (Draft Resolution)

The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move:

That the House -

(1) notes -

   (a)  the recommendation contained in Clause 5.2 of the Annual Review
       2001 of the Independent Commission on the Remuneration of Public
       Office Bearers (Goldstone Commission) with regard to the salary
       and allowances to be paid to the President; and


   (b)  that, at the President's request, the House has not reconsidered
       the remuneration of the President since 1998; and

(2) resolves that -

   (a)  in terms of section 2(1) of the Remuneration of Public Office
       Bearers Act, 1998 (Act No 20 of 1998), and having due regard to
       the criteria listed in that subsection, the salary and
       allowances payable to the President of the Republic be
       determined at six hundred and eighty-nine thousand nine hundred
       and sixty-eight rand (R689 968) and one hundred and seventy-two
       thousand rand and four hundred and ninety-two rand (R172 492)
       per annum, respectively, with effect from 1 April 2001; and


   (b)  in terms of section 2(2) of the said Act, the amount of forty
       thousand rand (R40 000) per annum be determined as that portion
       of the remuneration of the President to which section 8(1)(d) of
       the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 58 of 1962) shall apply. Agreed to.

    CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND  CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT - MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATY BETWEEN RSA AND
                               LESOTHO

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

    CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND    CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT - EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN RSA AND LESOTHO

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

    CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND    CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT - PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW STATUTE OF HAGUE
                             CONFERENCE

Order disposed of without debate.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 20:18. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    Assent by the President of the Republic in respect of the
     following Bills:


       (i)   Agricultural Research Amendment Bill [B 25B - 2001
                (Reprint)] - Act No 27 of 2001 (assented to and signed
                by President on 12 November 2001);


       (ii)  Financial Institutions (Protection of Funds) Bill [B 23B -
                2001] - Act No 28 of 2001 (assented to and signed by
                President on 12 November 2001);


       (iii) Alexkor Limited Amendment Bill [B 29 - 2001] - Act No 29
                of 2001 (assented to and signed by President on 12
                November 2001); and


       (iv)  Repeal of Volkstaat Council Provisions Bill [B 59 - 2001]
                (National Assembly - sec 75) - Act No 30 of 2001
                (assented to and signed by President on 12 November
                2001).

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

 (1)    The Report of the Investigating Teams into the Arms Deal tabled
     on 14 November 2001 is also referred to the Joint Standing
     Committee on Defence for consideration of matters falling within
     its area of competence and in particular Chapters 3-7 and 10-12.
 (2)    Ms P Tlakula gave notice on 31 October 2001 of her resignation
     from the South African Human Rights Commission with effect from 31
     January 2002.


 (3)    Bills passed by National Assembly on 15 November 2001: To be
     submitted to President of the Republic for assent:


     (i)     Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 55B - 2001] (National
          Council of Provinces - sec 76).


     (ii)    General and Further Education and Training Quality
          Assurance Bill [B 57B - 2001] (National Council of Provinces
          - sec 76).

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Minister of Safety and Security:

 Government Notice No R.1044 published in Government Gazette No 22750
 dated 19 October 2001, Repeal of the South African Police Service
 Grievance Procedure Regulations, 1995, made in terms of section
 24(1)(f) of the South African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No 68 of
 1995).

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the Competition Tribunal for
     2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2000-2001 [RP 179-2001].


 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of Ntsika Enterprise Promotion
     Agency for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2000-2001 [RP 198-2001].


 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the National Lotteries Board
     for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2000-2001.

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

 (1)    The President of the Republic submitted the following letter,
     dated 13 November 2001, to the Speaker of the National Assembly
     informing Parliament of the employment of the South African
     National Defence Force:


     Dear Madame Speaker,


     REPORT IN TERMS OF SECTION 201(3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
     REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, 1996 (ACT 108 OF 1996) ON THE EMPLOYMENT
     OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL DEFENCE FORCE IN TERMS OF SECTION
     (201)(2)(c) OF THE CONSTITUTION, 1996 IN THE FULFILLMENT OF AN
     INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATION TOWARDS THE ORGANISATION FOR AFRICAN
     UNITY PEACE EFFORT IN THE COMORES


     This serves to inform the National Assembly that on 12 November
     2001, the Acting President authorised the employment of South
     African National Defence Force personnel to the Federal Islamic
     Republic of the Comores in fulfillment of an international
     obligation. This employment was authorised in accordance with the
     provisions of Sections 82(4)(b)(ii) of the Constitution of the
     Republic of South Africa, 1993 (Act No 200 of 1993), [which
     continues to be in force in terms of Item 24(1) of Schedule 6 to
     the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No 108
     of 1996)], as well as Section 201(2)(c) of the said Constitution
     of 1996, as read with Section 227(1)(b) of the Constitution of
     1993.


     This employment is in response to a request from the Organisation
     of African Unity to employ a Member of the Permanent Force of the
     South African National Defence Force for service as Military
     Advisor in the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comores. The
     deployment is in compliance with the Republic of South Africa's
     international obligations towards the Organisation of African
     Unity, for participation in the Organisation of African Unity
     efforts in the Comores and to advise the Sub-Committee on Weapons
     Collection and Reinsertion of the Youth on the weapons collection
     programme in terms of the Fomboni All Party Framework Agreement.


     The deployment will consist of one French speaking officer in the
     rank group major to colonel. The estimated period of deployment
     will be from 12 November 2001 until 25 November 2001.


     The breakdown of the costs for the deployment of one officer for a
     period of two weeks is as follows:


     (a)     Allowance @ FF467 x 14 days = FF6538 (1FF = R1,24)R 8
             107,12


     (b)     Accommodation @ US$ per day x 14 = $1680 (US$ 1,00 =
             R9,70)R16 296,00


     (c)     Standby Allowance @ R22,15 x 14 days R   310,00
     (d)     Air TicketR 8 000,00


     (e)     Total CostR32 713,12
     I will also communicate this report to the National Council of
     Provinces and wish to request that you bring it to the notice of
     the Members of the National Assembly.


     Yours sincerely,


     T M MBEKI


 (2)    The Third Economic and Social Rights Report of the South African
     Human Rights Commission for 1999-2000.

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly:

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Labour on the Unemployment Insurance Bill [B 3B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 15 November 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Labour, having considered the Unemployment Insurance Bill [B 3B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, p 1378), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 3C - 2001].

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Communications on the Telecommunications Amendment Bill [B 65B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 15 November 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Communications, having considered the Telecommunications Amendment Bill [B 65B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, p 1282), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 65C - 2001].

Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Pension Fund Second Amendment Bill [B 41B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 15 November 2001: The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the Pension Fund Second Amendment Bill [B 41B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, p 1377), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 41C - 2001].

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Standing Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions on Petition of Mr O B van Schalkwyk, dated 14 November 2001:

   The Standing Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions, having considered the petition of Mr O B van Schalkwyk, referred to it, recommends that Mr Van Schalkwyk not be granted his petition.

Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Standing Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions, dated 14 November 2001:

   1. Committee activities

    (a)   The Committee met eight times, and conducted one set of
           public hearings during 2001.
   
   
    (b)   The Committee finalised three private members' legislative
           proposals, and is considering a fourth proposal.
   
   
    (c)   Two private members' legislative proposals have been
           withdrawn.
   
   
    (d)   The Committee finalised its deliberations on three special
           petitions, and is in the process of considering two
           others.
   
   
    (e)   The Committee is planning a joint workshop to empower its
           members to deal more efficiently and effectively with
           their work. At this stage, the only guidelines the
           Committee has, are the Rules of the National Assembly
           which, for example, do not give any clear indication of
           standards to be applied when decisions need to be made
           regarding special petitions. The Committee is at present
           pursuing all avenues to ensure that its members receive
           optimal training and guidance in this respect, also from
           foreign parliaments.
   

   1. Administrative arrangements

      (a) Providing the members with copies of documents remains a problem. The few copying machines at the Committee Section are in constant use, and often out of order. The so-called “big copying machine” is not on the parliamentary premises anymore, but at 18 St Johns Street. Arrangements have been made to copy documents on other machines in Parliament, such as at the library, but those machines do not have the capacity to service the Committee’s needs effectively. Alternative copying arrangements are vague, cumbersome and impractical.

      (b) Another major problem this Committee has experienced over the past few years, is the high turnover of support staff in the Committee Section. This affects the Committee’s ability to keep a good record of its documents, and makes it difficult to track Committee activities over a period of time.

      (c) The Committee therefore recommends that in future Committee Chairpersons be consulted when rotation of staff is to be considered, to ensure the most effective support to parliamentary committees.

   2. Parliamentary programme

      (a) Several of the members of the Committee serve in a number of parliamentary committees, with the result that meetings have to be postponed to ensure that meetings are quorate. Also, the Committee has found itself in a position where it has made arrangements for a meeting, only to find that the parliamentary programme has been amended and the Committee is not able to meet at its pre- arranged time. This results in meetings being cancelled, sometimes at the last minute, resulting in other administrative difficulties, such as informing members of changes in arrangements and finding a suitable venue for meetings at a later date and time, especially as there are so few committee rooms in Parliament.

      (b) Whereas the Committee realises that finding a solution to this vexing problem is no easy matter, it requests the Programme Committee to inform Chairpersons and Committee Secretaries as soon as possible when programme changes will take place, in order to minimise the effect of such changes in the programme, and to enable the support staff to make suitable alternative arrangements.

Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development on Designation of Ireland , dated 17 May 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Designation of Ireland in terms of the Extradition Act, 1962 (Act No. 67 of 1962), referred to it, recommends that the House, in terms of section 2(3)(a) of the Act, approve the said designation, subject to the following conditions:

   1. No person surrendered by Ireland shall, in the Republic of South Africa -

    (a)   be proceeded against, sentenced or detained with a view to
           the carrying out of a sentence or detention order, or
           otherwise restricted in his or her personal freedom, for
           any offence committed prior to his or her surrender other
           than the offence in respect of which his or her
           extradition was sought or an offence of which he or she
           may lawfully be convicted on a charge of the offence in
           respect of which extradition was sought, except -
   
   
           (i)  with the consent of Ireland; or
   
   
           (ii) where the person, having had an opportunity of
                  leaving the Republic of South Africa, has not done
                  so within 45 days of final discharge in respect of
                  the offence for which the person was surrendered by
                  Ireland or, having left the Republic of South
                  Africa after being so surrendered, has returned to
                  the Republic of South Africa;
   
   
    (b)   where the description of the offence charged is altered in
           the course of proceedings, be proceeded against or
           sentenced in the Republic of South Africa in respect of
           that offence, except so far as the offence under the new
           description is shown by its constituent elements to be an
           offence which would allow extradition from Ireland.
   

   1. A person surrendered by Ireland shall not be surrendered by the Republic of South Africa to another country for an offence committed before the surrender of the person by Ireland, except -

      (a) with the consent of Ireland; or

      (b) where the person, having had an opportunity of leaving the Republic of South Africa, has not done so within 45 days of final discharge in respect of the offence for which the person was surrendered by Ireland or, having left the Republic of South Africa after being so surrendered, has returned to the Republic of South Africa.

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs on Statutory Measures in Wine Industry, dated 6 November 2001:

   The Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs, having considered the application by the National Agricultural Marketing Council for the implementation of proposed statutory measures in the wine industry, reports, in terms of section 15 of the Marketing of Agricultural Products Act, 1996, that it has approved the recommendation of the Council.

   The Committee further recommends that surplus funds be utilised at the Minister’s discretion within the industry in which they were collected.

2. Thirteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 8 November 2001:

 The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered certain
 papers submitted to it and having heard evidence from Ms S Gillwald,
 Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr S
 Patterson, Audit Committee, Mr V P Pikoli, Director-General: Justice
 and Constitutional Development, and Mr A Mackenzie, Chief Financial
 Officer: Justice, reports as follows:


 A.     Introduction


     The Committee has held a hearing with the Department of Justice in
     order to fulfil its obligation in accordance with its Tenth Report
     for 2000, to set up a system of monitoring progress made by the
     Department in improving financial management.


     In that Tenth Report, the Committee expressed its view that if
     there was no significant improvement in the management of public
     finances of the Department of Justice, the Committee would request
     the National Treasury to intervene, in terms of the Public Finance
     Management Act, in the financial management of the Department.


     The Committee notes with guarded optimism the appointment of the
     new Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in the Department, as well as
     the organisational restructuring and the establishment of the new
     Board of Justice. The Department appears to focus on fixing the
     crisis in financial management that has been plaguing it. While
     the Committee welcomes these new developments, it remains
     concerned that the Department still faces a number of obstacles in
     overcoming challenges to improve and consolidate improvements in
     systems of sound financial management that remain.


     The Committee further notes that the new changes at the
     Department, particularly the Performance Enhancement Programme
     (PEP), appear to have been replaced, in large part, by the
     Financial Management Improvement Plan (FMIP), which previously had
     been submitted by the Department for the Committee's attention.


     The Committee has received the Auditor-General's Report on the
     2000-01 accounts of the Department, and will hold further hearings
     with the Department, as and when required.


 B.     Financial Management - new CFO and change management


     On previous occasions the Committee has expressed its concern at
     the need for a committed CFO to lead the Department out of its
     financial management malaise. The Committee notes the secondment
     to the Department of the current CFO, that this is an appointment
     for a year and that the Department will have to take steps to
     ensure that a new CFO is in place on a more permanent basis and
     that a substantial amount of skills transfer will be required from
     the current CFO to the new CFO.


     The Committee is therefore concerned at the sustainability of the
     significant macro-organisational changes initiated by the new CFO
     and the overall sustainability of the new approach, pending either
     the extension of the CFO's tenure - which would imply a new
     arrangement between the government and Business Against Crime - or
     the appointment of a new permanent CFO.


     In this regard, the Committee has noted with concern the Director-
     General's comments that the search for a CFO, prior to appointment
     of the incumbent CFO, proved difficult and that this may again be
     the case in future. The Committee firmly believes that in order
     for the turnaround in the Department to be viable and sustainable,
     a strong CFO will be needed, with the complete support of the
     Board of Justice, to effect the changes proposed.


     The Committee recommends that it be informed of succession
     planning in respect of the CFO. The Committee has noted the grave
     concerns expressed by the Audit Committee about the incumbent
     CFO's short tenure and the need to ensure that the new CFO is
     sufficiently skilled and competent to carry the restructuring
     forward. The Committee further requires a more comprehensive
     briefing on the new structure of the Business Units in the
     Department as well as the Board of Justice, in the event that this
     might affect the accountability arrangements of the Department
     with regard to the Committee.


     The Committee is further concerned at delays in skills training to
     improve financial management skills in the Department. In terms of
     the previous FMIP, skills training was due to commence in February
     2001. Due to the comprehensive skills audit initiated by the new
     CFO, the training deadlines initially envisaged in the FMIP have
     been pushed back.


     While the Committee commends the approach of a comprehensive
     skills audit, it remains concerned that the training deadlines
     have not been met in a Department in which the upgrading of
     financial management skills is fundamental to addressing its
     financial management crisis.


 C.     Decentralisation


     The Committee has expressed concern at the impact of the policy
     decision on decentralisation and its role in exacerbating the
     difficulties and problems in financial management.


     The Committee has noted the statements by the Deputy Minister for
     Justice that there is a clear policy decision that the
     decentralised Regional Offices must be phased out. The Committee
     notes statements by the Deputy Minister for Justice and
     Constitutional Development that the eventual goal is for each
     office to be a cost centre in the new financial management plan of
     the Department. It is clear that the "exit strategy" appears to
     entail an incremental approach, with pilot projects being launched
     in the Eastern Cape Regional Office in East London.


     As the decentralisation question is fundamental to changing the
     public finance management fortunes of the Department, the
     Committee looks forward to receiving details of how the policy
     decision on decentralisation will find expression in the "exit
     strategy", which was submitted to the Board of Justice. The
     Committee will take this "exit strategy" into consideration in
     preparation for its next engagement with the Department, as the
     area of decentralisation remains a key concern to the Committee.


     The Committee welcomes the Deputy Minister's commitment to brief
     the Committee on deadlines, time-frames and the detail of the
     decentralisation "exit strategy", and request that the relevant
     information be submitted as soon as possible.


     The Committee requires further detail on the manner in which the
     Department envisages centralising the Budget and then devolving
     responsibilities to the respective "cost centres" mentioned by the
     Deputy Minister.


 D.     Information furnished to Committee


     In its Tenth Report, the Committee called for the Department of
     Justice to, firstly, submit monthly reports on the FMIP adopted by
     the Department and, secondly, quarterly reports to be submitted by
     the Audit Committee. The Committee called for these regular
     reporting lines because of the severe problems in the Department
     and the need to have a more active oversight role in the context
     of the difficulties within the Department.


     It is of great concern to the Committee that the Department failed
     to meet these reporting obligations requested by Parliament. The
     Committee raised these concerns with both the CFO and the Director-
     General, and the Committee will continue to require substantive
     quarterly reports from the Department, in the light of the
     substantive organisational change at the Department. In addition,
     the Committee will be receiving copies of the monthly progress
     reports with the implementation of the Departments' PEP, submitted
     by the CFO to the Board of Justice. The Committee has received the
     monthly report for June, submitted to the Board of Justice. The
     information will be used as part of the preparation for the
     upcoming hearing. The Committee also notes the willingness of the
     CFO to brief members of the Committee on a more regular basis.


 E.     Audit Committee
     The Committee notes comments by the Deputy Minister and the
     Director-General that an Audit Committee is being set up that will
     provide appropriate direction to the Internal Audit Unit.


 F.     Deposit Account


     The Committee remains concerned about the negative situation
     surrounding the Deposit Account. The Committee has noted that
     financial statements for the 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98
     financial years were due to be produced by the end of May. It is
     of concern to the Committee that these statements may be
     unauditable. A report by the Auditor-General in this regard has
     been tabled recently [RP 100-2001], and will be dealt with during
     the upcoming hearing.


 G.     Unauthorised expenditure, 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000


     The Committee heard and considered evidence on the following
     instances of unauthorised expenditure reported on in the reports
     of the Auditor-General for the 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000
     financial years:


     1. 1997-98 financial year - expenditure totalling R157 415 769,28
          (par 2.2.1, p 5)


          (a) Over-expenditure on voted funds relating to personal
              expenditure amounting to R24 754 954,15 was mainly due to
              inadequate financial control and the lack of reliable
              management information. Consequently, the amount was
              unauthorised in terms of section 33(1)(b) of the
              Exchequer Act, 1975 (Act No. 66 of 1975), applicable at
              the time.


              The Committee has taken note that since 1 April 2001,
              monthly management reports are being produced and that in
              future the Department should foresee instances of likely
              excess expenditure, provided that the monthly reports are
              reliable and the information is used regularly for
              corrective steps.
              In view of the above, the Committee recommends that the
              amount be authorised. However, the Committee wishes to
              point out to the Director-General that in terms of the
              regime established by the PFMA since April 2000, excess
              spending on voted funds is regarded as financial
              misconduct.


          (b) A column-2 item relating to the Legal Aid Board amounting
              to R102 633 298,84 exceeded the amount voted due to
              misallocation of expenditure. Authority of the Minister
              of Finance was not obtained as prescribed by section
              7(1)(b)(ii) of the Exchequer Act. However, there was no
              loss to the State.


              The Committee recommends that the amount be authorised,
              but will in future not accept similar instances of poor
              control.


          (c) Virement approval by the accounting officer was not given
              for the utilisation of savings to defray excess
              expenditure totalling R29 568 550,43, which resulted in
              unauthorised expenditure in terms section 33(1)(b) of the
              Exchequer Act. Included in the amount is an amount of
              R166 645,80, which constitutes a saving on a column-2
              item, which may only have been used for defraying the
              expenditure with the specific approval of the Minister of
              Finance in terms of section 6(2) of the Exchequer Act.


              Strict adherence to the legal requirements for virement
              approval will be expected in future. Such consideration
              should also always be supported with proper and timely
              management information. As the State did not suffer any
              losses, the Committee recommends that the amount be
              authorised by Parliament.


          (d) Non-compliance with State Tender Board directives gave
              rise to an amount of R458 965,86 being unauthorised. The
              expenditure was related to the appointment of consultants
              for employment equity workshops and for the compilation
              of business plans relating to the transformation of the
              administration of justice project. The State Tender Board
              did not grant ex post facto approval for the non-
              compliance.


              As the Committee has been informed that the Department
              had certified that the services rendered were to its
              satisfaction and benefitted the State, it recommends that
              the amount in question be authorised by Parliament.


     2. 1998-99 financial year - expenditure totalling R79 074 324,32
          (par 2.2.1, p 5)


          (a) During the 1998-99 financial year, excess spending on
              voted funds gave rise to unauthorised expenditure of
              R47 046 814,09 in terms of section 33(1)(b) of the
              Exchequer Act.


              As in the case of paragraph 1 above, the excess seems to
              be the result of inadequate financial control and a lack
              of complete management information necessary to take
              timely corrective action in curbing over-expenditure.
              However, in view of the improved position with regard to
              regular management information and the fact that, with
              effect from the 2000-01 financial year, over-expenditure
              is regarded as financial misconduct, the Committee
              recommends that the amount in question be authorised by
              Parliament.


          (b) Virement approval for utilising savings amounting to
              R21 162 076,18 to defray excess expenditure was not given
              by the Accounting Officer, as required by section 6(1) of
              the Exchequer Act, with the result that the amount is
              unauthorised. This reflects poor financial management
              discipline. However, as the State did not suffer any
              loss, it is recommended that the amount be authorised by
              Parliament.


          (c) Expenditure of R10 654 131,64 relating to Legal Aid prior
              to 17 October 1997 was incorrectly charged to the
              Department and is therefore unauthorised in terms of
              section 33(1)(a) of the Exchequer Act. Given the
              precarious financial position of the Legal Aid Board at
              the time and since then, the Committee is of the opinion
              that claiming the amount in question from the Legal Aid
              Board at this stage would not be supportive of the
              rendering of legal aid envisaged by the Constitution.


              The Committee therefore recommends that the amount in
              question be authorised.


          (d) An ex gratia payment of R67 450,74 was made without
              obtaining Treasury approval, resulting in unauthorised
              expenditure in terms of section 33(1)(c) of the Exchequer
              Act. The payment relates to overtime remuneration to a
              senior magistrate acting as a regional representative for
              KwaZulu-Natal for the period October 1996 to July 1997.
              As ex gratia payments are not uncommon, the overtime
              worked was in the interest of the Department and the
              payment was made on recommendation of the State Attorney,
              the Committee recommends that the amount in question be
              authorised by Parliament.


          (e) An instance of non-compliance with State Tender Board
              directives relating to an amount of R143 851,85 was
              listed in the General Report of the Auditor-General for
              the year in question as expenditure that "is not material
              or has not resulted in a loss to the State, or the
              question of mala fides did not arise, or the expenditure
              is only unauthorised due to a technical contravention of
              the regulations".


              The Committee therefore recommends authorisation of the
              amount in question.


          (f) Backlogs in capturing batches of expenditure vouchers: The
              Committee is very concerned about the backlog that has
              existed for a number of years with respect to the
              capturing of expenditure vouchers. In the 1998-99
              financial year, this possibly gave rise to departmental
              expenditure for the year being understated by
              approximately R91,5 million. The Committee has been
              informed that a dedicated task team has been constituted
              to eliminate the backlog, but that the project may only
              be fully completed in 2002.


              The Committee wishes to give notice that it will await
              the proper completion of the project, but that as from
              the 2002-03 financial years, no backlogs will be
              tolerated.


     3. 1999-2000 financial year


          A cost overrun of R1 176 738 on a contract of R2 172 726
          approved by the State Tender Board, relating to information
          technology services for Y2K preparation, was unauthorised.
          No mala fides was involved and the Department benefitted from
          the service. Although the State Tender Board should have been
          approached for extension, the State did not suffer any loss.
          The Committee therefore recommends that the amount in question
          be authorised by Parliament.


          With respect to the remainder of the 1999-2000 unauthorised
          expenditure, the Committee has requested certain explanations
          from the Director-General of the Department.


     Postscript


     The Committee wishes to point out, however, that in recommending
     the approval of the above instances of unauthorised expenditure,
     it does not condone any form of non-compliance with applicable
     law, nor wasteful or fruitless expenditure. The Committee is
     cognisant of the efforts of the Accounting Officer, assisted by
     the acting CFO during this year, to instill financial management
     discipline within the Department. These efforts are strongly
     supported by the Committee. However, at the same time the
     Accounting Officer's future achievements in this regard will be
     measured against the highest standards of public accountability
     and stewardship.


 Report to be considered.

1. Fourteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 8 November 2001:

 The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having heard and considered
 evidence on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
 Statements of Vote 13 - Foreign Affairs for the year ended 31 March
 2000 [RP 122-2000], referred to it, reports as follows:


 Unauthorised expenditure (Par 2.2.1, page 2)


 1.     Expenditure in excess of vote


     The total provision under the vote for the 1999-2000 financial
     year was exceeded by R35 896 255,87. The Department of Foreign
     Affairs explained that the excess was due to severe exchange rate
     losses against all major international currencies.


     The Committee noted the Accounting Officer's commitment to
     containing expenditure by, inter alia, having taken the following
     steps:


     (a)     Placing a moratorium on the filling of vacant posts not
          regarded as critical, or delaying the filling of such
          vacancies.


     (b)     Not adjusting foreign allowances in line with the
          increased cost of living indices of a number of countries
          abroad.


     (c)     Deferring the replacement and maintenance of capital items
          not already committed or in progress.


     The Committee further noted that the impact of exchange rate
     movements is an exogenous factor, which the Department cannot
     predict or control. The fluctuations, however, have severely
     impacted on the budget of the Department, as more than 75 per cent
     of that budget is spent in foreign currencies. It was also noted
     that the Department has not been granted approval to purchase
     foreign currency as a contingency against fluctuations in the
     currency market, and the Committee recommends that the situation
     again be raised with the Treasury. (For example, when the Treasury
     granted an allocation for the 2000-01 financial year, the budget
     rate of exchange was R7,52 to US$1,00.)


     In view of the inevitability of the excess expenditure and the
     steps taken by the Accounting Officer to prevent such future
     excess expenditure, the Committee recommends that the amount in
     question be authorised by Parliament.


 2.     Amalgamation of foreign affairs departments of former TBVC
     countries with national department


     The Department paid an amount totalling R6 777 768,78, without
     supporting documentation, to certain provinces for personnel
     expenditure.


     In the Committee's Thirteenth Report for 2000, it was suggested
     that the Department should establish an audit trail to ensure that
     the amount has been spent properly. As this was not possible, the
     amount was regarded as unauthorised and was brought to account.


     The Committee has been informed that a firm of consultants had
     tried to establish whether documents were available to
     substantiate the expenditure on personnel costs. They could not
     identify an audit trail owing to a lack of supporting
     documentation. The Committee, recognising the poor state of record-
     keeping by the former TBVC states, is firmly of the view that it
     will be a futile exercise to spend money to reconstruct a
     documentary history of the expenditure involved. In the light of
     the improved financial management of the Department, the Committee
     recommends that the expenditure in question be authorised by
     Parliament.


 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on the Road Accident Fund Board, dated 24 October 2001:

 The Portfolio Committee on Transport, having conducted a hearing with
 the Road Accident Fund Board, reports as follows:


 1.     The Committee conducted an extensive hearing with the Board of
     the Road Accident Fund on 10 October 2001. The Minister of
     Transport, in accordance with the Road Accident Fund Act,
     appointed the Board on 1 June 2000. The Committee sought to
     establish what progress has since been made by the Board in
     identifying problems within the Fund, and with introducing
     corrective measures.


 2.     In its report to the Committee, the Board indicated that shortly
     after its inauguration, the Board had initiated a forensic audit
     by external consultants. The independent audit identified a number
     of serious problems, including:


     (a)     A lack of capacity at senior management level. The Fund
          had been without a substantive Chief Executive Officer since
          September 1998, and some critical senior positions were either
          vacant or non-existent.
     (b)     Very high levels of staff turnover.


     (c)     Poor systems, including outdated and unwieldy information
          processing, and the conflation of different functions in the
          handling of claims.


          These poor systems also created conditions in which fraud
          could more easily occur, and the audit indicated several areas
          in which there was strong circumstantial evidence suggesting
          fraud and the existence of syndicates within the Fund.


 3.     In their report, and in responses to questions from the
     Committee, Board members indicated that active steps were being
     taken to remedy these and other problems. Such steps included:


     (a)     The appointment of a CEO, and the filling and/or creation
          of senior management positions.


     (b)     The progressive re-engineering of claims administration
          and more effective use of information technology.
     (c)     Close co-operation with the National Directorate of Public
          Prosecutions and its agencies to deal with fraud. Following
          the audit, there have been eight dismissals, and 22 staff
          members are under investigation.


 4.     The Committee commended the Board for its activism, and for the
     remedial steps it had undertaken. However, the Committee expressed
     concern that interim arrangements, like members of the Board being
     directly involved with the management of the Fund, not be seen as
     permanent. It is desirable that the functions of the Board and the
     management of the Fund should not be conflated. The Committee also
     expressed disappointment that the independent audit had not been
     made available to the Road Accident Fund Commission and to
     Parliament, as it could greatly assist the Committee in its
     oversight function.


 5.     The Committee also raised questions about allegations made in
     the public domain about possible conflicts of interest in respect
     of some members of the Board. Board members responded that they
     had never hidden the nature of their private business activities;
     indeed, these issues were expressly raised during the selection
     interviews. They pointed out that the Road Accident Fund Act
     requires certain skills to be represented on the Board, and that
     some of these skills were only to be found among professionals
     doing active work, either for the Fund or for claimants in respect
     of the Fund. Board members further insisted that Board
     deliberations could have no direct bearing on any of their private
     business activities. The Committee noted these explanations, and
     indicated that ongoing engagement on this matter was required.


 6.     Board and Committee members alike agreed that many of the above
     problems could only be fully addressed by considering fairly
     substantial changes to the character of the Fund itself. These
     changes would require legislative amendments. The Committee was
     encouraged that the Board had begun to discuss a number of
     legislative amendments, and although the Board's own discussions
     are not fully complete, it is proposing that the following areas
     are among those that could be considered with a view to amendment:


     (a)     To remove the current limitation to R25 000 of the
          liability of the Fund in respect of the claims of all
          passengers in order to give the same unlimited cover enjoyed
          by other claimants also to this category of claimant.


     (b)     To abolish the procedural right of medical suppliers to
          claim directly from the Fund.


     (c)     To limit the liability of the Fund in respect of claims of
          non-residents of the Republic to a reasonable amount to be
          determined.


     (d)     To authorise the Fund to provide managed treatment plans,
          under an outreach programme, to injured persons with medical
          needs extending into the future.


     (e)     To exclude the application of the Assessment of Damages
          Act, 1969, which prevents the deduction of insurance and
          pension monies when assessing compensation for loss of
          support.


     (f)     To render deductible all collateral benefits in the case
          of a claim for compensation due to bodily injury.


     (g)     To ensure better provision in respect of undertakings to
          pay future loss of income and of support by way of
          instalments, instead of in the form of a predetermined cash
          lump-sum.


     (h)     To pay substantial general damages for ongoing pain and
          suffering by way of instalments, rather than by way of a cash
          lump-sum.


     (i)     To exclude compensation for emotional shock (allegedly)
          induced when a person, not actually involved in an accident,
          witnesses or hears of the injury or death of another person in
          an accident.


     (j)     To provide for mediation/arbitration as the primary
          dispute resolution mechanism for claims against the Fund.


     (k)     To provide for compensation on a no-fault basis in respect
          of the stabilisation of trauma victims during a "golden hour"
          period after an accident.


     (l)     To bring the costs of medical treatment of road accident
          victims in line with a dedicated Road Accident Fund tariff.


     (m)     To extend the fuel levy to natural gas and green/bio-
          diesel used as fuel in motor vehicles.


 7.     The Committee is of the view that such legislative amendments
     would make a major contribution to improving the financial
     viability of the Fund, to ensure that a much greater proportion of
     the awards find its way to actual claimants and to remove many of
     the features of the Fund that have exposed it to the dangers of
     abuse and fraud. The Committee notes the ongoing work of the Road
     Accident Fund Commission, and further notes that the Commission's
     report is now only scheduled for public release in July 2002. The
     Committee believes that interim legislative amendments are
     urgently needed, and that such amendments would not prejudice
     further restructuring of the Fund once the Commission has
     reported. Indeed, based on our interim hearings with the
     Commission, we are convinced that the amendments proposed by the
     Board are substantially congruent with the broad strategic
     direction that the Commission's report will recommend.


 8.     The Committee believes there is one other legislative amendment
     that might be considered. While the final appointment of the Board
     should still be the prerogative of the Minister, the relevant
     parliamentary committees should make provision for public hearings
     for the purposes of short-listing. Such hearings could help to
     build public confidence where there are concerns about conflicts
     of interest or representativity.


 9.     The Committee therefore recommends that:
     (a)     For the purposes of enhancing our public oversight role,
          the Road Accident Fund Board make available to Parliament the
          Independent Forensic Audit of the Fund that the Board had
          commissioned.


     (b)     The Minister of Transport give urgent attention to the
          possibility of introducing to Parliament early next year
          legislative amendments to the Road Accident Fund Act in the
          areas noted in paragraphs 7 and 8 above.