TUESDAY, 19 JUNE 2001 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:07.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICE OF MOTION

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

That the Council -

(1) salutes the organisers of June 16th rallies at Ulundi and Orlando Stadium which were attended by leaders of both the African National Congress and Inkatha Freedom Party;

(2) believes that the rally organised jointly by young heroes and heroines at Ulundi and the attendance of the rally at the Orlando Stadium by the leaders of the two parties will have a positive spin- off, as this will contribute to political tolerance and nation- building;

(3) congratulates the various organisations that contributed to the success of these events; and

(4) therefore applauds and encourages initiatives of this nature and gives its unequivocal support to unity for change.

         CONGRATULATIONS TO ANDREW KELEHE AND RETIEF GOOSEN

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr N M RAJU: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council - (1) noting the splendid performances of individual South African sportsmen during the past weekend, extends the congratulations of all South Africans to -

   (a)  Andrew Kelehe, of North West, for his magnificent victory in the
       world-famous Comrades Marathon, the down-run from Umsundusi
       (Pietermaritzburg) to Tekweni (Durban), thereby recording the
       third victory by a black South African, following in the
       footsteps of Sam Tshabalala (1989) and Jetman Msutu (1992) -
       when Andrew Kelehe crossed the winning line on Saturday
       afternoon in Kingsmead, Durban, all South Africans were
       literally captured in a motionless frieze, moist-eyed but united
       in an emotional moment of unrestrained joy and pride; and


   (b)  Retief Goosen, the South African golfer, for his magnificent
       victory in the prestigious 101st US Open Golf Tournament held at
       Southern Hills, Tulsa, Oklahoma, after a brief hiccup at the
       eighteenth hole at the end of four rounds on Sunday, resulting
       in a play-off with American Mark Brooks, which the South African
       won convincingly by two strokes;

(2) notes that Retief Goosen becomes the third South African golfer after Gary Player and Ernie Els to capture this highly coveted US Open Title in world golf; and

(3) acknowledges that Andrew Kelehe and Retief Goosen are our new shooting stars in the world sporting firmament - a real boost for the African Renaissance from two outstanding sportsmen from South Africa.

[Applause.]

Mr M I MAKOELA: Chairperson, I move as an amendment:

That, in paragraph (1)(b), after Retief Goosen'', be insertedof the Northern Province’’.

[Laughter.]

Amendment agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution. Motion, as amended, agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution, namely:

That the Council -

(1) noting the splendid performances of individual South African sportsmen during the past weekend, extends the congratulations of all South Africans to -

   (a)  Andrew Kelehe, of North West, for his magnificent victory in the
       world-famous Comrades Marathon, the down-run from Umsundusi
       (Pietermaritzburg) to Tekweni (Durban), thereby recording the
       third victory by a Black South African following in the
       footsteps of Sam Tshabalala (1989) and Jetman Msutu (1992) -
       when Andrew Kelehe crossed the winning line on Saturday
       afternoon in Kingsmead, Durban, all South Africans were
       literally captured in a motionless frieze, moist-eyed but united
       in an emotional moment of unrestrained joy and pride; and


   (b)  Retief Goosen of the Northern Province, the South African
       golfer, for his magnificent victory in the prestigious 101st US
       Open Golf Tournament held at Southern Hills, Tulsa, Oklahoma
       after a brief hiccup at the eighteenth hole at the end of four
       rounds on Sunday, resulting in a play-off with American Mark
       Brooks, which the South African won convincingly by 2 strokes;

(2) notes that Retief Goosen becomes the third South African golfer after Gary Player and Ernie Els to capture this highly coveted US Open Title in world golf; and

(3) acknowledges that Andrew Kelehe and Retief Goosen are our new shooting stars in the world sporting firmament - a real boost for the African Renaissance from two outstanding sportsmen from South Africa.

                  BIRTHDAY WISHES TO THE PRESIDENT

                         (Draft Resolution)

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

Where nine provinces converge as one,with representatives from the North, South, West and the place of the rising sun;where three spheres of government meet as one,united in action, we speak for everyone.

Today in different tongues we say:

Mr President, we wish you a belated very happy birthday!

Ons sal strewe om saam te werk vir: [We shall strive to work together for:] ukuze ibe munye i-Afrika [a united Africa] Afrika a maatle [an Africa that is strong] Afrika e e senang botlhoki [an Africa free of poverty] Afrika yeo e sedimositswego [an Africa that is enlightened] Afrika e e nang le sa yona [an Africa that is wealthy] Afrika e e ikgantshang [an Africa that is proud]

Nkosi sikelela i-Afrika [God bless Africa] Mpilonde Mongameli, ukhule ungakhokhobi [May you live long, Mr President, but not age.]

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

    RECOGNITION OF POLITICAL LEADERS' PARTICIPATION IN YOUTH DAY

                         (Draft Resolution)

Ms C BOTHA: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council wishes to commend all political leaders who participated in Youth Day, both for their recognition of the wrongs of the past and their sincere efforts towards reconciliation for the future.

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

                         APPROPRIATION BILL

                           (Policy debate)

Vote No 19 - Correctional Services, Vote No 20 - Defence, Vote No 22 - Justice and Constitutional Development, Vote No 23 - Safety and Security and Vote No 21 - Independent Complaints Directorate:

The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, thanks very much for the privilege and honour you have bestowed upon us as a cluster to address you and the hon members gathered here this afternoon on our Budget Votes.

I think I must state at the very outset that we are addressing you and the hon members as a cluster rather than as individual Ministers, so that whatever we are about to say as such, should be seen in the context of the arduous task with the execution of which our cluster of Ministers and departments is charged. I will, within the time allotted me, highlight just a few issues pertaining to the Department of Justice as it is located within the work of the cluster.

The first issue that I would like to address is the issue of traditional leaders, in the context of dealing with justice, particularly civil and criminal jurisdiction of the traditional leaders. Hon members will remember that in terms of Sections 12 and 20 of the Black Administration Act, Act 38 of 1927, the Minister responsible for the administration of justice may authorise a traditional leader to hear and determine civil and criminal claims arising out of black law and custom brought before him by blacks against blacks, resident within his or her area of jurisdiction.

In some provinces there is other legislation relating to the appointment and conferment of such civil and criminal jurisdiction, for instance, the KwaZulu Amakhosi and Iziphakanyiswa Act of 1990, Act No 9 of 1990, which is applicable in the province of KwaZulu-Natal.

The former Minister for Justice, my predecessor, in terms of a mandate given to him by the former President, suspended the conferment of jurisdiction upon traditional leaders in 1996. The Minister requested the department to research a legal position regarding the appointment of and conferment of jurisdiction on traditional leaders and the nature and extent of their jurisdiction, as well as the consolidation of the various pieces of legislation applicable to them.

In particular, the Minister indicated that clarity was required with regard to the following issues: the requirements for appointment as chiefs and headmen and for the conferment of civil and criminal jurisdiction upon traditional leaders, the nature and extent of their jurisdiction and, if possible, the application and constitutionality thereof.

After researching these issues, the department submitted a report to the Minister on 13 December 1999, recommending that the Minister should lift the embargo on the conferment of civil and criminal jurisdiction upon traditional leaders. Indeed, I am happy to inform the House that after the cluster of Ministers considered the report, we then decided that the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development should lift that embargo, and we started conferring upon traditional leaders the necessary civil and criminal jurisdiction so that they are playing a very important role in the administration of justice and in combating crime at the levels of the communities in which they operate. The letter, which I then dispatched to the traditional leaders, indeed states what the jurisdiction is with regard to each of the traditional leaders enjoying the sort of jurisdiction that they continue enjoying. I am saying this because I am sure that hon members will wonder why these laws are still in place. The reason is that the institution of traditional leaders continues to live and is part of our constitutional and political reality. Therefore, as long as we do not have new legislation which, indeed, clarifies the position and deals with the whole panoply of constitutional issues in this regard, I am afraid that the appointments will continue to be made, and that the conferment of civil and criminal jurisdiction will continue to be made under these laws. In other words, they are the legal tools we have to make do with, as long as the issue of the institution in our new constitutional dispensation has not yet been conclusively debated and discussed by us as a country.

The second issue that I would like to deal with relates to initiatives to improve court efficiency. Suffice it to say that we are, indeed, embarking on a process of having properly trained professional managers appointed to serve in our courts, both lower and higher courts. Hitherto, what has tended to happen is that a person with the necessary legal qualifications would be appointed to do what they are not professionally well suited for, namely the management of human, material and financial resources. Indeed, we want to change that. And particularly, we want to change this so that the judicial officers in the lower courts, because this is where the problems reside, perform judicial functions rather than a combination of judicial and nonjudicial functions. In other words, we want the magistrates to walk into court and do what judicial officers do, and not be saddled with administrative tasks. We will, instead, actually weed those tasks out and replace the magistrates who are performing them with the necessary people with the necessary skills and, in the fullness of time, we will also appoint professional managers to manage the courts.

The other issue that I would want to mention in this connection is the court process project, which is our flagship dealing with the development of our case and court management system. Again, this is going to help us to address a whole panoply of problems relating to case and court management. I am sure the whole lot of hon members have had all sorts of experiences which emanate particularly from poor management, if any at all, of cases and, indeed, the courts themselves.

I have collided with a number of hon members who drew my attention to the situation in courts where, for instance, witnesses are invited and have to spend long hours in the corridors without being called to give evidence in the cases in respect of which they are expected to. By the time their turn to give evidence comes, they have, indeed, may I say without any fear of contradiction, wasted a lot of time in the passages in the courts, and some of them may even be threatened with the loss of their jobs, etc. With proper case and court management and with planning, these problems are going to be easier to tackle.

Of course, one may ask why this has not been the case hitherto. I may say that this is not surprising at all, because we inherited this from our past. This morning I informed the Cabinet committee responsible for justice, crime prevention and security issues that we discovered in the system, for instance, in excess of 800 magistrates without any formal training to write home about, and in excess of 600 prosecutors again, without any training. These people are being trained either at the Justice College now, or actually on the job, under the supervision of people with the necessary skills, because we could not just turf them out into the streets once we came into office. We had to grapple with this.

I am sure my colleagues can describe similar situations which they found. For instance, when we went to some police stations in KwaZulu and other former homelands, we found a high degree of functional illiteracy - people, in other words, who could not even take measurements in an ordinary car accident. This is it. But we cannot turf these people out into the streets. We are in the process of training them so that they have the necessary skills and tools without which they cannot effectively and efficiently do their jobs.

The other project that we want to mention is the awaiting-trial prisoner project, which is aimed at reducing the detention cycle time of awaiting- trial prisoners in custody. I am sure that when the Minister of Correctional Services speaks later, he will be able to describe the situation much more pithily. Therefore what I may say is, indeed, that once we started embarking upon this project, we were able to reduce the numbers in the prisons. But, of course, they keep growing, because the police are doing their work and are picking them up. Those people who are behind bars do not arrest themselves. So one must not believe anyone who says that the police are not doing their work. If they were not doing their work, the prisons would not be bursting at the seams.

The next project that I want to mention is the training of our judicial officers, prosecutors and court staff - I have said this. What I must add in this regard is that, indeed, we are also exposing our personnel in these institutions to sensitivity training, so that, indeed, they can deal with blacks and women - the sort of education that is necessary if people are to be able to deal with fellow human beings properly.

We have also established court operations rooms which, indeed, help us establish a sound planning base for courts to monitor court performance and proactively deal with actual crisis points.

We are able now, sitting somewhere, to identify the problem areas and intervene timeously and assist people working at those places. What I may add before I proceed to the next point is that, for instance, we are also creating facilities that will enable young children, especially, but also people who, for all manner of reasons, may not wish to be seen by the people who have tormented them, and who are standing trial as they give evidence or as they identify them.

We have certain types of glass screens that are used behind which one cannot see a witness, but a witness can see, and be able to identify, the person. The witness gives evidence behind the screen, and so on. We are actually using these facilities. Some police stations and courts already have them. We have made the necessary investments in those.

The next issue that I want to deal with is the rationalisation of the courts. On 2 April, my Ministry, together with senior officials of the department, met in Cape Town with the President of the Constitutional Court, the Acting Chief Justice, and other senior members of the judiciary to discuss policy issues relating to the structure and functioning of the courts.

The commitment of the judiciary to transformation was, once again, reaffirmed by the leaders of the said institution who had this meeting with us. The meeting agreed on the following broad principles relating to the judiciary. Firstly, the head of the judiciary should be the head of the Constitutional Court, who will be the chief justice and will chair the Judicial Service Commission, and perform other constitutional and statutory functions currently divided between the President of the Constitutional Court and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Secondly, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal will not be merged. May I take a pause and say, by the way, it was an invention, a figment of the imaginations of some people in the media, that I had ever said that these courts must merge. Those who want to dispute this are free to come and collect this last R100 note from me if they can produce evidence that I ever said so. All I said - and if they were prepared to listen carefully, they would have understood this - was that there were many options people were proposing, and a choice would at some stage have to be made. Personally, I made no choice.

I was prepared to be guided by the processes that led to the justice colloquium that we had last year in October as well as two subsequent meetings we have had with the heads of courts in this regard. Indeed, I reported to the Head of State and to Cabinet about these developments, and everybody is happy about the position taken.

I have never been an advocate of the merger, so I want to plead with all those who found a moment to be sufficiently silly to say I preached a merger to accept that I never did so, and if they have proof, they should produce it and collect this R100. It is theirs if they have proof to the contrary.

Thirdly, the Labour Appeal Court will continue to be the final court of appeal in all labour matters. A little pause is necessary again here. If one looks carefully at the Constitution, one sees that it is silent on the highest court grappling with labour matters. It stands to reason that, therefore, we may have to deal with this question in the Constitution itself.

There is a debate amongst the judges themselves as to whether or not this is right, but some of the judges are advising me that we might have to clarify the matter in the Constitution itself. Otherwise, some lawyers may want to appeal against the decisions of the Labour Appeal Court to the Supreme Court of Appeal and so on. Indeed, some kind of clarification of the matter, they argue, is warranted. The issue is clearer in the Labour Relations Act than it is in the Constitution, which, as I have said, is silent on the matter.

Lastly, all impediments to the complete independence of magistrates should be removed. So, indeed, the Southwood judgment is not telling us anything new, or anything we have not yet started addressing. Of course, it reinforces what we are trying to do, it helps us by proffering some solutions and so on. But it is not telling us much that is new, if anything.

The next issue I would like to deal with is that of making our courts more accessible to all. I think that hon members know that because of the nature of apartheid, there are many parts of our country where basic resources and basic infrastructure for the administration of justice never reached them.

It may be easy for someone who has a farm, tractor, car, van or something to drive a long distance when they need to have access to justice. But the indigenous blacks, in particular, travel long distances, and they have to pay to reach those centres.

We are trying to address this problem by way of establishing new infrastructure where none existed, so that people travel shorter distances. Significant progress has been made in this regard. We have actually built 56 new courtrooms at 19 court buildings. We completed these in 1999.

We have, actually, built 88 new courtrooms at 28 court buildings since the beginning of last year. Some of these have already been completed. Some of these projects include five community safety centres founded on an integrated and one-stop service basis where, for instance, one would find a police station, welfare or social development facility, and so on, and even facilities for correctional services. These, indeed, are also in existence in some areas now, and some of the Ministers have joined with us to open some of them.

The following areas in provinces with the highest overall levels of crime have been identified and will be addressed as a matter of urgency. The Alexandra project is complete now. We actually dealt with it by means of a donation that we received from a private company called Vodacom. They gave us R22 million to do the project. That one has been done. They have also given us money to build a police station which is just one or two blocks away from the court. That one, too, has been completed.

May I say to hon members that these facilities are fully equipped with modern-day means of communication. Our people have been trained by Vodacom to use these computers. In many instances, even where Vodacom was not directly training our people, they were also paying those who were training the people for us. They have entered into a last agreement regarding maintenance which is going to cost them about R1,2 million at the end of this contract, which ends next year in about May or June. We will then, as the two departments, and generally as our cluster, have to take these projects over.

May I say, they have changed the situation somewhat in Alexandra. People go to a much better court building and police station now.

The next one is Katlegong in Gauteng; then Inanda in KwaMashu, KwaZulu- Natal, Mitchells Plain and Khayelitsha in the Western Cape and Mdantsane and Motherwell in the Eastern Cape. These are the ones which we have chosen as priority areas requiring urgent attention. Indeed, we are in the process of addressing these.

We have also recently refurbished and constructed seven new courts in the west wing of the High Court in Cape Town, just here behind me. This has been done and we opened the facility about 10 or 12 days ago now. The hon member says a week ago, and thanks very much.

As regards general security measures in our courts, we have allocated additional resources to increase our security cover this year by 100%. We will therefore be catering for at least about 40% of our offices countrywide. We intend to intensify our efforts in the coming years.

May I say that we are actually doing this in conjunction with the SA Police Service, which is providing the necessary personnel.

The next point I wish to deal with is to do with commercial courts. We have, on a pilot basis, established a commercial court in Pretoria at the regional level and because it is so successful we have started doing planning to move to Durban, Cape Town and Johannesburg. May I say that in the fullness of time one will have similar courts established elsewhere.

I do not have the figures with me here, but the rate of success in the Pretoria court is so high that it was unavoidable for us to roll out that process as this cluster. We will, maybe at a later stage, report on the redemarcation of magisterial boundaries so that indeed, again, we promote easier access to our courts. We would address this also on the basis of the population density in the areas to be served, the prevalence of crime and civil litigation in the areas, existing infrastructure in neighbouring areas, etc, and the need to provide cost-effective services. So we will be taking these aspects into account as we do our planning.

I know that my other colleagues are going to speak on crime-prevention strategies, but may I just mention some of the things we are doing in the hope that they cover them in a bit more detail themselves. As this cluster, we are indeed involved in the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice to work on the issue of transnational organised crime. We attended a few meetings, the last one of which was in Palermo, Italy, where we entered into a certain convention, as a result of which there are certain obligations resting upon us as the Government of South Africa to co- operate with the world in dealing with these issues.

We have been to other countries as well where we have entered into treaties relating to extradition and mutual legal assistance. This is so that, indeed, we make sure that our country does not provide a bush for a criminal who is being sought in other parts of the world to hide. There is a lot of work that we are doing. Even within the context of SADC we have similar arrangements so that people cannot commit crime here in our country and run to a neighbouring country and hide there, inasmuch as they cannot commit crime in any of those countries and run to South Africa and hide here. So, indeed, there is quite a lot which is being done in that area as well.

The last area but one that I want to comment on, just in passing, is the issue of demand reduction for drugs and narcotics. Hon members will accept, surely, that whilst we should put a lot of emphasis on the maintenance of law and order in this regard, we should arrest, detain, charge, arraign, prosecute and jail a whole lot of people who are involved in drugs, whether as consumers, purveyors or traffickers. The fact of the matter is that we also have an obligation to assist those people who are consumers of these drugs and narcotics out of the quagmire of consuming them.

Together with a lot of countries we are studying what we can do to reduce demand because, obviously, if demand for drugs and narcotics is as high as it is, not just in our country, but in many parts of the world as well, then indeed those who are at the supply end of the scale will strive even harder to find ways to reach those markets. We are embarking on a whole lot of research projects to deal with the problem of demand so that, hopefully, as demand is reduced, suppliers do not easily find a market here.

We are focusing particularly on the youth and children. In conjunction with other departments, especially the Department of Education, we want to look at programmes to assist our children who are being lured by all sorts of criminal elements into drugs. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, first of all I would like to welcome the Ministers in the justice cluster, the MECs, special delegates from provinces and my colleagues. The main challenge facing those working to reform the criminal justice system is to create a safe environment in which our people can enjoy their democratic rights, while, at the same time, promoting their constitutional guarantees of equality.

Before we can determine whether we are indeed successful in meeting this challenge, it is important to establish how our criminal justice system is perceived. In other words, how do some sectors of our society, and society as a whole, perceive the criminal justice system? How much actual knowledge do people really have of the criminal justice system? Do people know how the system operates and, moreover, from where do these perceptions originate?

These are a few important questions delineating the important relationship between our criminal justice system and the society of which it is a key component.

Over the past year or so, we have witnessed a sustained campaign by opposition parties, aimed at undermining our criminal justice system. One of my colleagues seated here with me said he does not seem to understand the Ministers involved in the criminal justice system, but he could not say what it was that he did not understand. Unfortunately, he is not here now.

They have exploited certain crimes, such as the farm murders, which affect a small minority of people who, in the past, were shielded from crime by virtue of their skin colour. These incidents are held up as signs of the imminent collapse of our criminal justice system.

What is more disappointing is the fact that some sectors of the media are consciously, or perhaps unconsciously, colluding with these opposition parties by focusing on negative aspects, and failing to highlight the important changes that have occurred in the system, because they have indeed occurred. By only focusing on the negative aspects, they are doing the country a major disservice. Not only are their messages scaring away potential investors, they are also promoting feelings of despondency among the masses. In the same vein, they are encouraging criminals to commit more crime by painting a bleak picture of our criminal justice system. I think civilised people would not normally do such things to their own country.

They should remember that before they are members of any political party or the media, they are South Africans, first and foremost. As such, they have a patriotic duty to put the interests of their country before their own narrow political and financial interests. [Interjections.] They should understand that their own future’s wellbeing depends on the wellbeing of this country, and that includes the lady who is shouting. Her presence in this House was brought about by the ANC. Her party did not accommodate women. [Interjections.]

It is certainly not in the interests of the country to cynically manipulate the public into believing that our criminal justice system is in the process of collapsing. The criminal justice system is one of the cornerstones of democracy. Any threat to it is a threat to our democracy.

Our people have struggled very hard to achieve this democracy and we will most certainly not allow anybody, least of all those who have made absolutely no contribution to our democracy, to spread lies and falsehoods about our justice system and, in doing this, endanger our democracy.

We are not denying that there are problems in our justice system; in fact the problems experienced by the system and its administrators are immense. These problems are a direct result of the undemocratic and insensitive nature of the previous criminal justice system. It is the direct result of a justice system that sought to strip our people of their human dignity and feelings of self-worth, that criminalised our freedom struggle. The system put millions of our parents in jail for refusing to carry the dompas and detained thousands of our children and young people who rejected their gutter education as well as their minority rule.

It will take some time before we can completely transform the criminal justice system into one that will serve the needs of the majority of our people. We are getting there. In fact, we will make even greater progress if opposition parties, the media and ordinary citizens realise that they are co-producers of justice as well as co-consumers of justice.

Crime prevention is not only the responsibility of the police, magistrates and prosecutors. Successful programmes to combat crime will need the active co-operation of people who are formally outside the criminal justice system, people who are prepared to testify against criminals, report crime and report family members or employers, people who can keep a person released on community correction on a straight path. This includes students who say no to drugs.

The Minister has just indicated some of the issues that I am raising. Since 1994 the Ministers responsible for the criminal justice system have taken a number of steps to create the kind of conditions and environment which have made it possible for ordinary people to feel part of the system. Important gains have been made in previously disadvantaged areas such as our townships and the former homelands. The Minister has just told us about some of these areas. Criminal justice resources, such as police stations and magistrates’ courts, have been made available to our people in those areas. The existing court infrastructure has been changed to make it more people-friendly by including, for example, a citizens’ advice desk, change room facilities for mothers with children, one-way glass partitioning and close-circuit television to make testifying for women and children more easy.

At least five family courts have been established to deal specifically with family matters under one roof, and 17 sexual offence courts have been established with another 12 planned in neglected areas such as Umtata, Umlazi, Thohoyandou, Zwelitsha, Butterworth and Mitchells Plain.

It is not only in terms of infrastructure that major progress has been made. In terms of internal court procedures, a number of exciting changes have been implemented, such as the court process project, which aims to further improve the interactions between participating departments.

The overall performance of our courts has also improved, with district, regional and high courts sitting more hours per day to reduce court rolls to acceptable levels. Our Police Service has also made significant gains in the fight against ordinary crime, organised crime and urban terror. The back of urban terrorism has indeed been broken.

The overcrowding of our prisons is proof of the success of the police in apprehending criminals. Only last week the select committee visited Pollsmoor Prison. We saw a lot of people behind bars. That proves exactly what the Minister was saying.

The prevention of crime is a priority of the ANC Government, but its success will ultimately depend on the collective co-operation between Government and the people through innovative approaches by national, provincial and local government.

The local government elections have provided a perfect opportunity for all communities to come up with innovative approaches. Community safety should form an important part of integrated development plans. We have already seen how planning by residents in informal settlements has led to safer environments.

Members of the committee will reflect on many other aspects like defence and correctional services. Our country does indeed need a defence force that is well capacitated, and therefore we welcome and support the acquisition of munitions for our country. We also welcome the efforts that the Minister of Defence has made to review the Defence Review.

We also support the initiative of the SANDF in their operations supporting the SAPS in the combating of crime. Likewise we welcome the initiatives by the Minister to deal with the racism perceived within the Defence Force. We also commend the participation of our Defence Force in UN missions.

In conclusion, during our visit to Pollsmoor Prison, certain questions came into our minds. I refer this to the Minister of Correctional Services.

We came across inmates who have very good money in the bank. We wondered whether it was not time to consider charging the expenses incurred to keep them behind bars against their assets. This is perhaps something that we should start talking about. It could perhaps help us to put a few cents back into our criminal justice system. [Applause.]

Ms C SEOPOSENGWE (Northern Cape): Chairperson, Ministers in the justice cluster - I want to single out my wonderful Minister of Safety and Security, comrade Steve Tshwete - hon chairperson of the Select Committee on Safety and Security, Mr James Mahlangu, hon members of the executive from other provinces, permanent members and delegates, comrades and friends, days like 16 June will, from time to time, remind us of where we come from as a country. Then one realises that we have achieved a lot in terms of changing the face of the Police Service in this country.

In my province, the Northern Cape, which occupies a third of the total land area of South Africa, the government has introduced a system of governance in which regular meetings and debates are held with the public. The SAPS in many other parts of the country is still bedevilled by apartheid tendencies like racism and sexism, both in management composition and in the approach to service delivery.

I am going to focus on the police and safety and liaison. The department of safety and liaison is one of those government departments that are at the forefront of unprecedented public interaction between the management of the SAPS and the community. A number of issues like crime prevention, community policing, police conduct, illegal shebeens, gangsterism, alchohol and drug abuse and women and child abuse are discussed at these meetings and solutions are sought.

As MEC for safety in the province, I have led this process, which has proven to be an important instrument in getting rid of tension between the community and the SAPS. This is where members of the communities are encouraged to participate in the community police forums.

Although the South African Police Service Act clearly stipulates that the MEC in each province should give instructions to the provincial commissioner to set up local CPFs with the assistance of the station commissioners and community leaders, there are still some cases where the composition of such a structure is not inclusive. At one of the community meetings, the residents of the farming town of Hartswater adopted a vote of no confidence in the local CPF. Farmworkers in particular said that they had never been part of the formation of such structures. In the same town a number of racism cases have been reported to my office. I took it upon myself to visit a local police station in July last year where I was verbally abused by the station management. They later apologised, after learning that I was an MEC. The big question is: Does one have to be an MEC to be treated with dignity? The investigation is still on.

As I indicated earlier on, the Hartswater debacle is neither a unique nor an isolated incident. It is a realistic reflection of the magnitude of racist occurrences in the Police Service. I have been informed of incidents in which white farmers conspire with some police officers whenever a case of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm is laid against them. This is when a very representative CPF comes in.

I want to also raise the issue of women’s representation in the Police Service. Early last month we held an unprecedented workshop on SAPS women’s empowerment in Kimberley at which we addressed issues relating to and affecting women in the Police Service, as the topic clearly indicates.

If my department and the SAPS, in particular, share the belief that human development and empowerment are the process of enlarging people’s choices and raising their sense of wellbeing, we should then regard it as an organisational imperative rather than as an option. The only snag in the process of human development and empowerment has always been and still is - maybe to a lesser extent - racism, but human development and empowerment are still very sexist in practice.

It is a given fact that women, particularly black women, in the Police Service are still channelled mainly into reserved disciplines or fields with low payoffs and rewards. SAPS statistics based on gender clearly indicate this point.

In the Northern Cape only 16% of functional police officers are women, while women make up 74% of the civilian personnel. This tells us that women in the Police Service are still seen to be good only for doing typing and menial office jobs. The top management is still predominantly male and white, being only 11% female, while in middle management women make up only 20% of the entire personnel. At the 45 stations that we have, only four women are station commissioners and, of course, they are white women.

According to the White Paper on Safety and Security for 1999-2004, comparative evidence suggests that where visible policing programmes are vigorously implemented and offenders arrested, crime and the fear thereof decrease.

We recently launched a new bicycle unit, dubbed ``Pacific Blue’’ after a TV series with a similar name, as a pilot project at our main centres. I said in my budget speech last week to the portfolio committee that we need to see these and the mounted units patrolling the streets of our townships and those of other remote areas too. Underutilised vehicles need to be channelled into areas where they are most needed, such as historically black residential areas, if we are to defeat the scourge of crime in our midst.

This programme of crime prevention has as its objective the combating of the causes of crime to support and reinforce law enforcement and visible policing. A well-attended provincial crime prevention summit, in which some of my colleagues in this House, including our chairperson, participated, was recently held and hosted by the department.

Different stakeholders, from government to civil society, were brought together to design a practical, sustainable and implementable action plan that would target the following priority crimes and their causes - rape and violence against women, child abuse, alcohol and drug abuse and the impact of these crimes on the youth, both as perpetrators and victims.

Although the summit was well attended, deliberations and inputs were good and summit resolutions documented, we will, however, only be able to hail the summit as a success once these resolutions are implemented and we start to see a difference in crime levels.

Regarding crime prevention and combating, we have had a number of operations throughout the province, which have been at their peak particularly over long weekends and month-ends. Operation Crackdown, which was launched as a flagship operation in the Greater Kimberley and Upington crime-combating zones, has been very successful.

This has led to a decrease in serious and violent crime. The provincial crime picture, based on comparative statistics for the period between January and March 2001 and comparable periods since 1994, indicates there has been a decrease in murder, attempted rape, assault and housebreaking.

Operation Crackdown will continue for the financial years 2001-02 and 2002- 03, and has been expanded to the magisterial districts of Hartswater, Kuruman, Jan Kempdorp, Warrenton, De Aar, Sunrise, Kakamas and Groblershoop.

Successes in Operation Crackdown during the past financial year include a total of 733 crime-prevention operations held in these high crime areas, which led to 1 892 arrests for identified priority crimes such as murder, robbery, rape, etc, and to 7 625 arrests for less serious crimes and offences.

We will, however, continue to put more effort into and emphasis on dealing with priority crimes in the province. These, according to the latest statistics to be released, are stock theft, shoplifting, rape and assault, for which the Northern Cape holds first, second or third place. As I said earlier, campaigns and rallies are continually held to send the message home that crime does not pay. Programmes embarked on include the following: gangsterism; the knife-free programme; school safety; violence against women and children; and the Bongani O Bongani cast. All these programmes are well documented and continue to contribute immensely to the fight against crime.

With regard to the Independent Complaints Directorate, as we are all aware the ICD functions independently of the department and reports directly to the Minister of Safety and Security. It is also true that the capacity and public profile of the ICD need to be enhanced to ensure that it is able to carry out its mandate effectively.

We do have a cordial and close working relationship with the ICD in the province. The representative of this body has been very visible in exposing police brutality throughout the province. One of the cases that he exposed excellently was that of the death in custody of a young man suspected of stock theft in Fraserburg.

I am not going to waste much more time, but I just want to reiterate what my premier said in his opening address at the Public Service transformation conference in Kimberley in 1998. He reminded delegates of the significant process of democratisation, which has left no realm untouched in South African society. Indeed, it cannot be denied that the transformation of the SA Police Service is one of the toughest struggles facing our democratic Government. Because our Government anticipated this, this department was created with a specific constitutional mandate to monitor and oversee this transition and transformation of the SAPS from a force to a service. We are definitely winning! [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! The next speaker is the hon Piet Matthee. I hope our video monitors will reflect the correct names of speakers.

Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, I would like to start by thanking those committed members of the SA Police Service, Correctional Services, the Office of the Inspecting Judge, the SA National Defence Force, the Independent Complaints Directorate and the Department of Justice, as well as prosecutors, state advocates, magistrates and judges who are dedicated and committed to upholding the rule of law in our country to see that justice is done and who do their utmost to protect the rights of the law- abiding citizens of our country.

On a personal note, I also wish to thank Sgt Constable of Ravensmead police station, who, together with a taxi driver whose name I have unfortunately mislaid, saved me from a potentially dangerous situation when my car broke down in a notoriously dangerous spot in Elsies River late on Saturday evening 12 May 2001, whilst I was on my way from the airport to Acacia Park.

Because of the statements and accusations made by my ANC colleague Mr Mahlangu, I will use the recent statements and experiences of just two prominent professional persons who, as far as I know, have no links to any opposition party in South Africa. I will do so to indicate the moods, the anxieties and the desperate situation which many thousands of South Africans find themselves experiencing today as a result of the totally unacceptable violent crime situation in our country.

The first person is a Sebokeng-based specialist psychiatrist, Dr Nzo, the son of our former Foreign Affairs Minister, the late Mr Alfred Nzo, who spent 26 years in exile before coming back to South Africa in 1991. He said:

I am now at a point in my life where I am agonisingly contemplating emigrating or going back into exile … The criminals and criminality unique to South Africa have dealt a huge blow to my sense of patriotism …. My personal experience as a psychiatrist, practising in the black townships, and my experiences as a father to one of my sons have led to the agony I am experiencing.

The second person I wish to quote is Dr Pule Ramhitshane, a medical doctor in private practice in Pimville, Soweto.

He says, as reported:

There is no question that criminals rule our lives while law- abiding citizens have been cowed into silence. They instil fear with impunity as it seems there is nothing to deter them. I feel frustrated, more like helpless, actually, like I am living on borrowed time, that it is only a matter of time before they come back again. And if I am lucky, maybe I will escape with my life again, or maybe not. Dr Ramhitshane’s consulting rooms have been broken into four times, the last time being last Tuesday, 12 June, at about 6 pm, when two men, masquerading as patients, came into the rooms. They shot at the local doctor and they wounded him twice. They robbed the receptionist, the patients and the dentist next door. Dr Ramhitshane’s house was also broken into and valuable goods stolen.

On 6 April this year, his car was hijacked as he pulled out of the driveway at a friend’s house, and he was robbed of his cellphone and the R600 that he had with him. Because of the trauma they have all experienced in his consulting rooms, he closed the surgery in Pimville, Soweto, until yesterday. Even if my ANC colleague Mr Mahlangu does not wish to express the feelings of these South Africans, we will certainly do so, because it is important if we want to be the representatives of our people in this Parliament. [Interjections.]

In vanoggend se Die Burger lees ons weer van die verskriklike situasie ten opsigte van geweldsmisdaad hier in die Wes-Kaap, die onmoontlike druk wat dit plaas op die trauma-afdelings van die plaaslike staatshospitale en die gevare vir dokters en verpleegpersoneel op pad werk toe. Dit is vandeesmaand weer bevestig toe dr Ebrahim Hansa, ‘n neurochirurg, op pad werk toe geskiet is toe twee mans sy motor probeer kaap het. Dat hy geklee was in sy doktersjas, met ‘n stetoskoop om sy nek, het niks gehelp nie. Hy is nou van sy nek af ondertoe verlam.

Wanneer ‘n mens dan die drie seuntjies van die Visser-egpaar by die oop graf van beide hulle jong ouers sien staan, en net die volgende dag in ‘n koerant die foto van die drie Schoonwinkel kinders wat by die graf van hulle jong ouers staan, met die merke nog op die jong seuntjie se gesig soos wat hy aangerand is, en aan ‘n heining vasgebind is nadat sy ouers doodgeskiet is, kan jy nie anders as om te vra waarheen is ons op pad met die absoluut onaanvaarbare aantal geweldsmisdade in ons land nie.

Is daar realisties hoop dat die situasie gaan verbeter, of gaan dit net toeneem, soos die onlangste statistieke ten opsigte van geweldsmisdaad, behalwe in die geval van moord, aantoon? Gaan mense in Suid-Afrika net al hoe meer vreesbevange raak, soos wat daar tans amper drie maal soveel mense as in 1994 is wat onveilig of baie onveilig voel? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[In this morning’s Die Burger we once again read about the terrible situation in respect of violent crime here in the Western Cape, the impossible pressure this puts on the trauma units of the local state hospitals and the dangers this poses to doctors and nursing staff on their way to work.

This has been confirmed again this month when Dr Ebrahim Hansa, a neurosurgeon, was shot on his way to work when two men tried to hijack his car. That he was wearing his doctor’s coat, and had a stethoscope round his neck meant nothing. He is now paralysed from the neck down.

When one sees the three little sons of the Visser couple standing at the open grave of both their young parents, and the very next day in the newspaper we see the photograph of the three Schoonwinkel children standing at the grave of their young parents, the little boy’s face still bearing the traces of the assault on him, tied, as he was, to a fence after his parents were shot, one cannot but ask where we are heading with the absolutely unacceptable level of violent crime in our country.

Is there any realistic hope that the situation will improve, or is it just going to worsen, as the recent statistics relating to violent crime show, except in the case of murder? Are people in South Africa going to become increasingly terror-stricken, seeing that there are now almost three times as many people who feel unsafe or very unsafe as there were in 1994?]

The question we have to answer to the people of our country is: Is there, realistically speaking, hope that the unacceptably high levels of violent crime will be substantially reduced in the foreseeable future? That is the question that they want answers to. We will only succeed in that if we can show that we have specific goals in respect of the levels of crime, linked to timeframes, that our budgets are adequate to provide enough personnel and equipment, like vehicles, to enable the relevant departments to attain those goals and that there are good enough plans and strategies which can be implemented. We should also show on an ongoing basis that progress is being made in the achievement of those goals. [Interjections.]

In the White Paper on Safety and Security, adopted a few years ago already, it was acknowledged by the Government that:

It is also necessary to undertake an extensive strategy process that will outline the fixed goals and timeframes for action in the short, medium and longer term.

The question I therefore wish to pose to the Minister of Safety and Security, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and the Minister of Correctional Services is: Do they have specific goals as to what the levels of crime in this country should be by the end of the term of this Parliament? If they have, they must please tell us what they are, and whether they are satisfied, in their own minds, that their departments have sufficient personnel, equipment, etc, to enable them to reach those targets. And, of course, could they tell us whether their budgets are adequate, with those targets in mind.

If their budgets are not sufficient, or if there are personnel shortages and shortages of equipment which will hamper their departments in reaching those goals, they should tell us so that all of us can assist them in helping to put pressure on the Presidency and on the Minister of Finance to provide them, and their departments, with the necessary funds that they require. If they do not have specific goals, linked to these timeframes, they should please also tell us why not.

I ask these questions because, from the information at our disposal, it is clear that there is a severe shortage of personnel and vehicles at police stations, that because of the shortages detectives are working on from three to five times more cases than the international norm of between 20 and 30 dockets per detective, that all these shortages seriously hamper the police in their attempts to combat and prevent crime, and that this affects their morale negatively.

We understand that a national audit has recently been done in respect of personnel shortages in the Police Service. Is this so? Can they tell us what its results were? Is it, for example, correct that the police in the Western Cape have a personnel shortage of 47%, as reported?

We understand that the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development already identified two years ago the need for 300 more public prosecutors. We have also been informed that there is an urgent need for more courts and more magistrates. We are impressed by the steps that have been taken by the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions and the magistrates as far as Saturday courts are concerned, and the new pilot projects as far as court management is concerned. But the fact, unfortunately, still remains that the terrible backlogs in cases are clogging up the whole criminal justice system at present.

The situation in our prisons is, to say the least, shocking. Whilst the sentenced prisoner population has slowly increased, the number of awaiting- trial prisoners has almost tripled. The average period that awaiting-trial prisoners remain in prison has increased even more dramatically. Over the past four years, the number of awaiting-trial prisoners held for more than three months increased from about 4 000 to over 27 000. It also costs the state R88 per day to keep one awaiting-trial prisoner there, which comes to the enormous total cost of R5,6 million per day.

Although the number of awaiting-trial prisoners dropped between April 2000 and January 2001, it is still far too high. The aim should be to reduce it to 20 000.

In a recent interview with Business Day, the President was asked how we were going to succeed in getting a growth rate of 6%, which was, according to him, required for this country. He said that the Government was doing everything possible to manage that. He said that the private sector, or parts of it, was not doing its share. He asked why this was the case.

The very next day the Director-General of Trade and Industry gave the answer. He said that one of the greatest obstacles to that kind of investment was crime. [Interjections.]

I do not know what this member is talking to me about. But, in an authoritative survey of almost 1 500 companies in South Africa last year, crime emerged as the single most important investment inhibiting factor for small businesses, and as a major factor for large businesses. In the Autumn 2000 issue of the publication Perspectives, Mr Joffe of Bidwest said: Crime is a major and vital, almost a make or break, issue in South African terms.

All Government efforts need to be focused on eliminating crime from our society. [Time expired.] [Applause.] [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, the presiding officer is guided by what is written here. [Interjections.]

Mrs D MAGADZI (Northern Province): Mutshami wa xitulu, Vaholobye hinkwaswo, Vatirhikulorhi va ku huma eswifundheni swo hambana ni Vachaviseki va NCOP. [Chairperson, all hon Ministers, hon members from different provinces and hon members of the NCOP.]

I am both honoured and privileged to address this House today. This sitting, convened for the purpose of policy debate on the Budget Votes for Correctional Services, Defence, Justice and Safety and Security, gives us an opportunity to input into the direction, focus and resource allocation within the justice cluster.

The justice cluster as a whole is expected to implement legislation as passed by Parliament. It is, however, evident that owing to financial constraints, lack of capacity to a certain extent, inadequate training and, most importantly, attitudes, there is insensitivity by members when handling some social crimes.

Go fa mohlala, kgarebe ye ngwe e rile morago ga go katwa ke tatagwe ya ya go bega molato seteiseneng sa maphodisa sa Setale, lephodisa la fihla la e kata bosego ka moka. Se ke sesupo sa go hloka kwelobohloko ga maphodisa. Maloko a hlomphegago a tlo lemoga gore go bohlokwa gore re swanetse go ba le mananeo ao a tlago thusa batho bao ba hlokofatswago, gagolo basadi le bana. (Translation of Pedi paragraph follows.)

[For example, a young girl who had gone to the Shatale police station to report that her father had allegedly raped her, was repeatedly raped by a policeman on duty throughout the night. This shows how heartless some policemen can be toward rape victims. Hon members will realise that we need to put in place various projects to assist victims of such abuses, especially those perpetrated against women and children.] The Northern Province has been able to rally round all the stakeholders across this cluster during the floods, the cholera outbreak, as well as during the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease.

However, one of the major challenges facing the province is the unco- ordinated demarcation of roles of service providers. The Justice department is still using the old demarcations of the apartheid era, while social welfare and the SAPS are using their own, different demarcations. If for instance, a person from Apel in Sekhukhuneland has to attend a court hearing in Lydenburg, Mpumalanga, the distance travelled is about 150km. We have the Departments of Justice, Social Welfare and Safety and Security in Lebowakgomo, 50km from Apel, from which a person can get help.

I am appealing to the Ministers here to try and reorganise the demarcation, so that we can maximise the utilisation of resources which, as I speak, are thinly spread because of this anomaly.

The Northern Province has 87 community police forums out of 91 police stations. During March 2001, capacity building workshops were conducted throughout the province to empower the CPF’s to execute their mandates. During the workshop, the following observations were made: that the CPFs are not completely representative of the demographics of their area; and that the concept of community policing has been narrowed to the station commissioner, the Crime Prevention Unit within the SAPS and the committee of the CPFs themselves, to the exclusion of the community.

The major problem is that young people and women are neither involved nor active in CPFs. There is also the challenge of a lack of resources, which renders most of the CPFs nonfunctional.

With the support of the national Crime Prevention Unit within the SAPS, and in response to the President’s call for action regarding the crime situation in Thohoyandou, a project has been launched to deal with the problems relating to social crime prevention in that area. Different stakeholders are participating in this project, including Venda University, which is researching on behalf of the Government. There are a few other similar initiatives which seek to keep the Northern Province a true home of peace.

Government has adopted a White Paper on the Transformation of the Public Service, to serve as a basis for transformation within various Government institutions. The object of the White Paper was to provide a framework for employment practices that address the historical imbalances in respect of representation of designated groups as outlined in the Paper. The SAPS has not performed satisfactorily in the implementation of this White Paper and other pieces of legislation, especially in the area of affirmative action and the Employment Equity Act.

The management echelon of the SAPS in the Northern Province is male- dominated, with only three women out of 20 managers, and no disabled managers. While there is the employment equity plan, the plan is not considered in the process of filling posts.

The transformation of the Public Service, as envisaged in the White Paper, is a clarion call to all Government departments, and the SAPS is not immune to this call.

The challenge facing the 21st century is to find a solution to the problem of colour prejudice. It will take the country a long time before the apartheid legacy of racism is wiped out. Our home of peace, the Northern Province, has received its fair share of bad coverage as a result of sporadic acts of racism, from a girl who was accused of stealing at Pep Stores, and got painted white, to a boy who was accused of stealing and was forced to eat his faeces; from a boy that was killed and thrown into a crocodile-infested dam, to a man that was killed by a farmer who, allegedly, was shooting at an empty beer can.

For these reasons, the premier will be convening a conference on racism towards the end of this month. The acquittal of the white lady, and the suspended sentence given to the black person in the painting saga strengthen our people’s contention that there seem to be those within the criminal justice system who look at justice from a racial perspective. A perception that justice considers a person’s colour is a perception that we should not entertain at all. We applaud the decision to transfer the Matloga case to the High Court, as well as the people who engaged in the activities at Flag Boshielo dam. There is a need, though, to rationalise higher courts as a matter of urgency.

‘n Verdieping in die stryd teen rassisme, vir die ontwikkeling van ons gemeenskap, is ‘n sentrale deel van die legendariese missie van ons Regering. [An intensification of the struggle against racism, for the development of our community, is a central part of the legendary mission of our Government.]

I am pleased to indicate that our courts are performing on a par with the national average of sitting hours. The process of separation of functions and/or the total emancipation of the judiciary, as has been indicated by the Minister here, will help a great deal in improving the situation.

The financial implications on human resources of the various pieces of legislation that are to be implemented by our courts need serious consideration. For example, the Maintenance Act requires that officers should be appointed to follow up defaulters. This becomes impossible because of financial constraints.

Through the justice cluster, there have been joint operations meetings amongst member departments, resulting in cases being resolved more quickly. When a call was made to open our courts on Saturday, our officials responded positively. We saw remarkable success in respect of reducing the case backlogs, and we applaud that.

Ro zwi kona sa phurovintsi u thivhela vhalindi mulayoni, zwe zwa vha zwo no andesa vhuponi ha hashu, nga maanḓa thungo ya tshipembe. Mapholisa vho vha vha tshi khou shumisana zwavhuḓi na tshitshavha. Heyi ndi yone nḓila ye tshigwada tsha vhalindi vha sa tevhedzi mulayo, vha vha vha tshi khou i shumisa u nyadza ngayo.

Mbonalo ya u londa, u fara kana u valela vhaiti vha vhugevhenga uvhu, yo no ri thusa. Musi ri tshi khou amba ngaurali riṋe sa phurovintsi, ri khou … [Tshifhinga tsho fhela.] [U vhanda zwanḓa.] (Translation of Venḓa paragraphs follows.)

[As a province, we have managed to clamp down on corrupt security officers who were operating in our area, especially in the south. Police worked harmoniously with the public. Through corruption, these security officers used to dishonour the law.

The manner in which perpetrators of this nature are searched for, apprehended and arrested helped a lot. As a province, we are … [Time expired.] [Applause.]]

Mr J L THERON: Chairperson, hon Ministers, I will concentrate on the Defence Vote, Vote 20, in the little time available to me. At the outset I want to state clearly that the DP and the Democratic Alliance oppose this Vote. [Interjections.]

The increase of R2,086 billion in the Defence budget for the 2001-02 financial year leads to a 15% increase … [Interjections.]

Mr T B TAABE: Chairperson, on a point of order: Is there a thing called the ``Democratic Alliance’’ in this Chamber? [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Well, we do not have the Democratic Alliance, but the hon member may continue.

Mr J L THERON: The increase of R2,086 billion in the Defence budget for the 2001-02 financial year indicates a 15% increase in the budget from the previous financial year of R13,7 billion to R15,8 billion. This is not, however, a true reflection of the budgetary allocation to defence spending by the Government in the past year, a year which has witnessed limited participation in peace support operations and which has proved to be a turbulent period with regard to the strategic defence procurement package, currently estimated to be costing the taxpayer R43,8 billion, as compared with the original more modest figure of R30 billion quoted in December 1999.

Currently international trends indicate that defence forces are rightsizing and downsizing, with both words apparently becoming commonplace in their vocabulary, as ever-increasing demands are made in the spheres of social needs and development.

Our present Government, owing to a political decision taken by the executive, has experienced severe criticism for allocating vast sums to the acquisition of defence equipment in the face of possibly more pressing demands domestically, such as poverty and HIV/Aids alleviation measures, housing and infrastructure.

The DP firmly believes that the Government should honour only those parts of the strategic defence procurement contract to which it is committed and/or the cancellation of which would invoke large penalties, but should not take up its options to purchase a further 12 Hawk and 9 Gripen aircraft. This would lead to a saving of approximately R28,8 billion on the full contract price.

The DP still supports the purchasing of the four corvettes and three submarines as required by the SA Navy and nine Gripen fighter aircraft and 12 Hawk training aircraft as required by the SA Air Force. In addition, the purchase of 30 Augusta helicopters is also supported.

In terms of the latest figures, an amount of approximately R13 billion would be available to Government in the long term to enable it to introduce measures for poverty and HIV/Aids alleviation, the provision of basic infrastructure, education and other social development issues.

Considering the constitutionally entrenched duty of the Joint Standing Committee on Defence and the Portfolio Committee on Defence to exercise due and diligent oversight over the department’s actions and/or lack thereof, communication between the department and the committees is not what it should be, with the Secretary for Defence playing the role of hide-and-seek with both committees. Recent attempts to ensure the presence of members of the Defence Secretariat to attend these committees are a case in point.

It is important to note that in order for the Defence Force to remain strategically relevant in our region, the local defence industry will have to become internationally competitive. This is necessary especially in the light of the fact that smaller, highly technical and advanced military equipment is increasingly needed to maintain relevance in the changing strategic environment and to enable the SANDF to act as a deterrent force. The undertaking of the SANDF …

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, on a point of order: The speech being given by the hon member here is not true. He is misrepresenting the facts. We have never had a situation in which the Secretary for Defence has run away or played hide-and-seek with the committee. There is no such thing. He should tell us whether what he is saying is, in fact, true, and when that happened.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: It is true that misleading Parliament is not allowed. Would you respond, hon member? [Interjections.]

Mr J L THERON: That is not a point of order, Chairperson, I am sorry. The undertaking of the SANDF to reduce their personnel numbers …

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, it is, in fact, out of order to mislead Parliament.

Mr J L THERON: This is definitely not misleading Parliament. That is nonsense. [Interjections.] I am sorry to say that. [Interjections.]

Mr J L MAHLANGU: Chairperson, at no point did the select committee call on either the Minister or the Secretary for Defence, and neither of them did not turn up. I want him to tell us when that happened. He is misleading Parliament. He is misleading this House. It is not true.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, please, members.

Mr J L THERON: May I point out that I referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Defence …

Ms J L KGOALI: Chairperson, on a point of order: Is it parliamentary for an hon member to say to another hon member that he is talking nonsense? [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: It is used in this Parliament. [Interjections.] Will the hon member withdraw the word ``nonsense’’?

Mr J L THERON: I will withdraw that, Chairperson, but I just want to inform you that I referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Defence and the portfolio committee, and I never said anything about the select committee. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Will hon members make my work simpler by allowing me to hear when a member talks? I cannot when everyone is talking at once. [Interjections.] I am asking the hon Theron to withdraw the word.

Mr J L THERON: And I did.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Continue, please, hon member.

Mr J L THERON: The undertaking of the SANDF to reduce their personnel numbers from 74 000 to 65 000 members is an imperative step towards reducing personnel costs, which have increased considerably year after year, despite personnel figures dropping from an estimated 104 000 members shortly after the 1994 elections.

At present the SA National Defence Force has approximately 200 officers with the rank of general, with a total force of approximately 74 000 members. In comparison, the German armed forces …

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, unfortunately your time is up. I did take cognisance of the seconds which were wasted, but your time is over.

It is now time for the hon the Minister of Defence to reply. Hon Minister, please spare me the embarrassment of having to tell you that your time is over by taking note of the fact that you have been given 20 minutes. [Laughter.]

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Chairperson, my understanding is that, although I have been given 20 minutes, I am not compelled to speak for those minutes. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: But you are compelled not to speak for more.

The MINISTER: Chairperson, members of the House, I wish to start off by saying that, in dealing with the question of the Defence budget, it is important to understand that we are now in a world that is in transition, from the Cold War years to the conditions of the present, a globalising world, in which there are no blocs or tensions amongst nations which compel huge defence expenditure.

That fact focuses attention on the part of many countries on economic activity rather than on military expenditure. In this context, the disparity between the standing of the developed North and that of the underdeveloped South emphasises the poverty gaps between the two, which are a legacy that we have inherited from the Cold War years. South Africa, being one of those nations that were colonised for a long time, finds itself as part of the underdeveloped South. One of the legacies of the underdeveloped South is the tensions and conflicts that we have inherited from the Cold War period, from the powerful governments and nations of the North, which supported corrupt governments and practices, including, indeed, some who were very sympathetic to the government that, for a long time, was in power in this country.

These tensions, arising from that history and unequal distribution of resources, are preying on a number of nations of the South. This is what has made the elimination of conflicts in our region and continent and the South as a whole a very urgent issue if development is to begin to take place within the context of the developing nations.

South Africa’s defence expenditure must be understood in this context. Many people continue to ask why we are spending time and resources in the struggle in the DRC, Great Lakes region, Ethiopia, and Eritrea, and why we are considering the pressures to go to Sierra Leone. We are doing so because, if the South is to catch up with the North, and if the conditions are to be created for development, it is vital that conflict is limited and stability becomes the order of the day.

Indeed, the security of our people in this country, even at this time, cannot be assured unless we are surrounded by nations which are stable in themselves. If sometimes South Africans march down the streets of Johannesburg and other cities complaining about the pressures of people who are here from elsewhere, because of hunger and running away from conflict, it is because there is a threat to internal stability in these countries.

Of course, the Minister of Safety and Security, the Minister of Justice and I run around and do as much as we can, with correctional services, trying to contain all these elements domestically. I dare say to this House, unless we can close the tap outside from where the flow of illegal people comes by stabilising the situation out there, we will always be mopping up here, and we will not succeed.

Therefore South Africa must involve this country and, of course, we must prioritise the immediate security needs of our people: safety and security, correctional services, justice and so on. But a certain proportion of the nation’s investment must go towards making sure that we contain the disruption that is taking place beyond our borders and, therefore, leading to these problems here.

I must also say that, given the context of the continent as a whole, looking at South Africa alongside Nigeria and Egypt, and perhaps even Algeria, there are very few African nations with a capacity equal or comparable to that of our country. We are taking the approach at this time, in this globalising world, that if a conflict is going to be rooted out, the nations in the regions in which conflict is taking place must both initiate and lead in the implementation of the solutions that are proposed for the resolution of conflict.

To that extent, South Africa cannot sit back, given the fact that she is better endowed at this time relative to some of her neighbours. The need must come from here. I think that hon members are aware of the perspective of the international community. Even when it came to the Millennium Africa Recovery Programme, the responsibility was laid at the door of the leadership of this country, alongside Algeria - I forget the third country

• to evolve that programme. It is not sufficient, therefore, to present a programme to these countries outside of our continent to invite them to assist.

We must send them a signal that the continent itself and its leaders realise the urgency of the fact that they must contribute to its development. Therefore we intend sending that signal by making sure that we eliminate conflict, so that when they look at this continent, they see that Africa is indeed ready for investment in peace programmes and the evolution of an atmosphere conducive to economic upliftment.

That explains why the SA National Defence Force has been deployed constantly in keeping with our national policy in various situations around the continent. I draw hon members’ attention in this regard to some of those situations in which we have already been extremely active in the recent period in laying the basis for that in pursuance of the objective that was identified by my Cabinet colleaque the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In her speech dealing with priorities facing Africa and South Africa, she identified the need for partnership at various levels as crucial to the successful implementation of the millennium plan.

As a result, in order to attain that, we have therefore found ourselves convening and leading the process of preparing, that is now quite apart from the deployment which we have already done with Rwanda, Uganda, Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo, developing strategies for disarming the armed groups as part of the process of implementing the Lusaka ceasefire and standstill agreement.

This project is now awaiting completion, and we are about to proceed with it when we move to the third phase of the implementation of the Monuc, that is a UN project in the DRC. We have also been approached by our former President and, of course, the United Nations, to begin to lay the foundations of supporting the peace process in Burundi.

South Africa is now convening the Ministers of Defence of South Africa, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal and Belgium. We are scheduled now to begin the process of making contingency planning, so that there too we can stabilise that situation. Within the context of SADC, we are involved alongside our sister nations in the community to develop a strategic and comprehensive defence pact.

That pact flows from the SADC protocol on politics, defence and security co- operation. It is an important development, because it will, once again, send a signal to other countries of the world that SADC, as a region, is not only verbally committed, but in practice has in certain places, a mechanism by which it will deal with any conflict situation that may arise in future.

The planning at the present time is that we should be able to present the draft of that pact to the summit of the heads of state later this year. The SA National Defence Force must beef itself up in order to deal with both these responsibilities at home and outside.

We are taking a very close look at the present time at the Defence Secretariat, which is a critical arm that advises the Minister on policy, and adjusts the budget and resources to make sure that we comply with policy provisions and that we ally the budget and those policy objectives. Now, with regard to the problems of transition, the final report of the ministerial inquiry, following some of the disturbances that occurred at our bases, is now at the stage of being edited, and I hope to be able to share its findings with Parliament before Parliament rises.

I think the point has been made here and also in the National Assembly that it is important that the SANDF makes a contribution to the upliftment and development of the country. No one agrees with this point more than ourselves. Consequently, we are devoting part of our budget and recommending to Parliament that a service system be set up within the SANDF that will attract all those Grade 12 school-leavers who are available for training into the SANDF and retain them there on a voluntary basis for a period of no more than two years. During this time we will provide them with basic military training and at the same time, also with training that will make it possible for them, if they do not choose a military career, to civilianise once again, but this time to civilianise with some trade or skill that as civilians they can use.

Those who move in that direction, not choosing a military career, will be encouraged, of course, to constitute part of the reserve forces. Other than by going that route, it will be difficult for the SANDF to retain the necessary average age of rank-and-file members of the SANDF while, at the same time, continuing to tap quality human resources that will make it possible for it to sustain the capabilities that it is expected to sustain.

I would like now to turn my attention a little bit to the comments that have been made by Mr Theron, among other people. I may have missed others, but I would like to comment on some of these. First of all, I would like to say to Mr Theron that since we became a democracy we have reduced the Defence budget in this country from more than 4%, and brought it down to approximately 1% - what it is now. That is a huge reduction. When the NP and the then Progressive Party, or the DP, were in Government and we were on Robben Island, they were spending more than 4% on defence, at a time when there were not even resources devoted to giving our people financial support to build homes. [Interjections.] There was not, at that time, free medical care for children or pregnant mothers. There was not even talk of providing communities with a quota of free electricity and water.

I think, in some ways, people must be a little humble sometimes and look at the reality of the situation that is there. [Applause.] To have reduced budget spending to that extent is something that, I think, we must be grateful for. [Interjections.]

Secondly, of course, let me just say that the question of spending money on the defence and security of a nation is not a criminal act. No nation can exist without any defence, and this package - this strategic arms package that is now debated before this nation - was not done secretly somewhere in prison cells on Robben Island. We came out of jail and we came to this House and everybody in this country, including NGOs, took part in the debate on this - the White Paper process and the Defence Review. Now, of course, one of the difficulties is understanding democracy. When these issues were voted on in the National Assembly, the majority voted for this package, and the minority, although it was opposed to it, nevertheless lost. This decision is binding on all of us. One cannot, therefore, say that because I lost in the voting, therefore I will continue to complain. This decision was taken in Parliament, by Parliament. [Interjections.] It does not take us forward to continue to complain about a decision that was taken by Parliament some time ago and which we are implementing. I do not want to go and rehash the arguments that my predecessor Joe Modise raised at that time, so I am not repeating myself. I leave them there, and members can refer back to the Hansard to see what the situation there was.

I am sympathetic to the point that the hon member has raised, that we need to look at the correlation between officers that are there and the rank-and- file members of the SANDF. This is an important and relevant point. We are working on it. What, of course, the hon member does not understand is that we inherited a huge number of generals, some of them from the Ciskei and the Transkei, others from the SADF - the white section - others from Bophuthatswana and Venda, and so on. The whole lot of them we inherited.

There are constraints in how one deals with the elimination of all of these people. We cannot just throw them out, because there are laws and then one has to apply the budget in terms of dismissing them, and so on. I am not keen to just give them golden handshakes, and so on, of huge amounts of money for them to go and sit on some farm or some other place. We can work on this in such a way that we continue to retain resources that we can apply on other bases as well. But we are letting them go. Others are old and then, of course, they have to go, and I do not have to give them a golden handshake. Then, when they retire, they retire, and I will pay them a pension like any other pensioner I pay a pension to. In this way there is a bit of a saving on the part of the country. This issue is receiving attention indeed, but it is imposed by the historical circumstances in which we find ourselves, and not because we just want to have an excess.

I have heard the point being made before that the Defence Secretary ran away or absconded from a meeting of the joint standing committee, portfolio committee and so on. I think that is a most unfair allegation. The Defence Secretary was invited to a meeting of the joint standing committee and so on, but then there arose an international commitment that could not stand down. The Defence Secretary, after acquiring my permission, sent an apology to the committees to indicate that it was impossible. Of course, there was no other way, this had to be done. He had to travel to Europe on that occasion. That is not absconding. We then offered an alternative date at the convenience of the committees, and the Defence Secretary appeared there the whole day and answered each and every question they had, and even gave them extra information they did not ask for. I do not think that it is fair to continue to repeat that he was absconding and so on. He is a very respectable person and quite responsible in his duties.

Having made those comments, I would like to say that we in the National Defence Force are extremely encouraged by the fact that this cluster, working together with and in support of the SAPS, is now working at setting up, under the SAPS, a very special unit or force for rapid deployment and so on. We hold the view that that development in the SAPS will create a situation in which the SANDF will be relieved of some of the responsibilities today in which it has to be involved in support of the SAPS. It will not free us entirely but nevertheless, in some situations it will reduce that involvement.

With those observations, I would like to thank you, Chairperson, and I hope that I have not taken too much of your time. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: You saved me the embarrassment, hon Minister.

Mr H J BESTER (Western Cape): Chairperson, I am happy to follow upon the hon the Minister of Defence. I think he will understand that I am not going to respond to his speech. I do not think Defence, to the best of my knowledge, is a provincial function, so I will steer well clear of that, except to say that I think that the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Safety and Security have very different problems. They say that the budget of the Minister of Defence is too big and they say that the budget of the Minister of Safety and Security is too small. I suggest that the two of them come together, perhaps then they will have no criticism. They can equal that out in one way or another.

Everyone in this House is confronted daily with crime or victims of crime. It does not matter where one goes, one is confronted by them. When one visits victims of crime, one feels their pain and one sees the paralysing effect of crime on their lives, in their community, in this province, in this country, wherever one goes.

Although it affects one, it must motivate one to action, as I am sure it does the national Minister and each one of the MECs and members that are here today. What we need now, and what we are all trying to achieve, is action on crime. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that crime and the provision of safety should be this Government’s top priority.

One often hears the argument that there is a trade-off between job creation and safety. But there is no trade-off because jobs are created by employers who invest in safe environments. One has to take that into account and Government has to take that into account. To say that crime is under control in South Africa - I am not suggesting that anybody here is saying it - is simply not true. South Africans, who bear the brunt of it on a daily basis, have every right to be frustrated and angry.

The reality is that, in our efforts to fight crime, we are mostly responding to crimes that have already taken place. For example, when the police reacted to the 825 murders that were committed in the Western Cape in the first three months of this year, they were doing so knowing that it would add to a case load that already stood at 519 dockets per detective.

We have to move beyond this point. The question is: How do we do it? I would suggest the key to this is that we have to focus on crime prevention. I am not talking about social crime prevention. I want to acknowledge the importance, the absolutely critical importance, of social crime prevention. In the short and medium term, I am talking about crime prevention done by uniformed, functional police members. Only crime prevention through visible policing can do the trick.

It is not enough simply to know who committed the crime. What is critically important is that we must stop crime from happening in the first place. Going back to Sir Robert Peale’s basic principles of policing established almost 200 years ago at the beginning of the 1800s, he said that the first role of the police is to prevent crime from happening.

Visible policing in the Cape Town central business district, with the help of community patrol officers, has achieved enormous successes in bringing down crime in the nine sectors managed by the city improvement district. Overall a drop of 25% to 30% in the crime rate was recorded in the first four months of this year, compared to last year. In three of the sectors, it is down by more than 40%.

We need to take visible policing to the next level. We need to take it to the Cape Flats, we need it in Khayelitsha, we need it in Nyanga and in our rural areas, which are increasingly vulnerable to crime. However, there are no thriving business communities in most of those areas that will foot the bill as they do in the central business district.

It can, and must, only happen through trained police officers. The police are grossly understaffed. I simply use the Western Cape as an example. In the Western Cape there are 14 908 posts on the established list of the SAPS, but according to the latest annual report of the SAPS in the Western Cape, only 11 222 members are currently employed. That is an understaffing of roughly 24%. This means that there is a shortage of close to 3 700 officers in this province. In other provinces one finds similar situations.

The consequence of this is that 15 of the 138 police stations cannot deliver a 24-hour service because of this and 87 of them, in fact more than 60%, do not even have crime prevention units on a standing basis. This is not a unique picture. I should say that clearly, it is not unique to the Western Cape; we find it in Gauteng, the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, etc.

Understaffing in the SAPS is now, I would submit, a national crisis. The national Government - note that in my discussions with the national Minister I certainly do not refer to either the national Minister or the National Commissioner of Police, who, I believe, agree on this score - ignores this desperate national priority at great political peril. The alarm bells are ringing in every police station and unit in this province and across the country. I trust that the national Cabinet, which makes the budget allocations - it is not the responsibility of any individual Minister; it is a collective decision of the national Cabinet - will hear what I believe is a desperate cry.

In the Western Cape we need at least the additional 3 700 police officers that our staff establishment allows if we are to make a serious impact on crime. There are ideal establishments. I am not referring to those ideal establishments, I am simply referring to the current staff establishment.

In this year’s national budget for safety and security, which is, amongst others, under discussion here today, provision is made for only 1 200 new recruits nationally. I would be delighted if that could be more. We are advised that about 150 of these will be allocated to the Western Cape. A large proportion must actually go to protect the courts of our colleague the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development. We have incredibly high demands to protect the courts due to the threat of urban terror which we have had in the Western Cape for some time. That leaves far less than one new police recruit for every single police station in our province.

I call on the national Government to seriously consider an extraordinary budget to make provision for the recruitment and training of additional police officers throughout the country. In the meantime our energies must be focused on co-ordinating and implementing workable and practical initiatives, such as the implementation of municipal policing, that will boost crime prevention and help ensure the safety of all our people.

I think the President, in his opening-of-Parliament speech earlier this year, correctly placed an extremely high premium, as he did then, on the implementation of municipal police. We take that extremely seriously in this province.

As part of this approach, we also need to rethink and refocus our approach to policing, and understand that other countries that are successful in dealing with crime already know that small and public-order crimes ultimately lead to big or serious crimes. They are the weeds in the garden that eventually suffocate all the beautiful plants that we have planted, and they need to be weeded out.

Fighting gangsterism is currently our biggest priority in the Cape. It is the most intractable crime problem we face here. In many Cape Flats communities, gangs - and we have to admit this - are the strongest community organisations. They are stronger than the churches, stronger than the schools, stronger than the sports organisations and other societies. And this is the ultimate: They now even extort money from churches, from the tithes paid to churches. Overcoming gangs will require not only law enforcement, but also urban renewal and social renewal. Various projects are in place or are being put in place to deal with this form of criminality. However, to succeed in the fight against gangs it is critical for all three spheres of government to work together. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Umntwana B Z ZULU: Sihlalo ohloniphekile, oNgqongqoshe beminyango yomine abakhona naMalunga ahloniphekileyo ale ndlu, ngivumele ngiphawule ngalokhu engikholwa ukuthi kuyinselele ebhekene nathi sonke kuleli zwe, ubugebengu obuhlasele izakhamuzi zezwe lakithi. Lobu bugebengu buyisitha esikhulu esibhubhisayo nesibhekene nohulumeni wentando yeningi.

Imiphakathi yethu iyakudinga ukuhlangana ibambisane nabezomthetho ukuze sibhekane nale mpi ehlasele uhulumeni wentando yeningi. Iso kanye nesandla sezomthetho kuhle sigxile kulezo zindawo ezibonakala zinobugebengu obusezingeni eliphezulu. Ngikhuluma ngezindawo ezinodlame okubanjwa kuzo izimoto inkuzi, kubulawe abanikazi bazo, izindawo ezihlaselwe isihlava sezidakamizwa. Izakhamuzi eziqotho ezihlala kulezi zindawo ziyakudinga ukuvikelwa nobulingiswa. Leli zinga eliphezulu lobugebengu esibhekene nalo, liyimbewu eyatshalwa ubandlululo esisuka kulo. Uhulumeni wobandlululo wathuthukisa idlanzana labamhlophe kwathi iningi labantu baleli zwe baphila impilo yobubha. Lo mlando wesikhathi esedlule kuso namuhla sinamahloni okukhuluma ngawo ngenxa yomonakalo owenzileyo ezweni.

Siyakuncoma ukusebenza ngokubambisana okuphakathi kwale minyango yomine. Le minyango isebenza ngokubambisana ezakhiweni zayo ukulwa nezinga lobugebengu nokubhekana nalezo zinselele eziyizidingo zomphakathi. Lolu bumbano lwale minyango selunikeze isiqiniseko emiphakathini eyakhele leli zwe, sokuthi amaphoyisa namasotsha abonakale ehamba phakathi kwabantu njengabavikeli babo. Amasotsha ezwe lakithi yiwona abehambisa izincwadi ezikoleni ezisezindaweni ezingenayo imigwaqo emihle ukuqala kwalo nyaka.

UHulumeni kaKhongolose uthathe izintambo zombuso umonakalo wobandlulo usunezimpande ezigxilile, okungaselula ukulungisa leso simo ngesikhathi esifushane. Siyazi ukuthi bekunemithetho esicekelwe phansi yokucindezela abantu abansundu. Amaphoyisa ezwe ayeqeqes whelwe ukuvikela ubandlululo kanye namaqembu athile ezombusazwe. Ayesebenza ubusuku nemini ukuvikela idlanzana elincane kakhulu elakhele leli zwe.

Sivela esikhathini lapho amasotsha akithi ayegada imingcele yaleli zwe imini nobusuku ukuvimbela abalweli benkululeko yaleli zwe. Sivela esikhathini lapho izimantshi namajaji ayegweba abantu ngenxa yebala labo. Lapho ubulungiswa babungenayo indawo ecaleni lomuntu omnyama. Inhlabathi yaleli zwe iswakeme igazi labafowethu nodadewethu abafela ubulungiswa baleli zwe. Inhlabathi yaleli zwe ivundile izidumbu zabalweli bomzabalazo wenkululeko yaleli zwe.

UHulumeni kaKhongolose ususe ijoka emahlombe omcindezelwa, wathatha isiswebhu ezandleni zomcindezeli ukuze ocindezele naye akhululeke. Nanxa indima esaseleyo isenkulu kepha izithelo zenqubekela phambili ziyabonakala. UMnyango wezokuPhepha ubambisene nowezokuVikela uyakhuculula ezitaladini zezwe lakithi, izigebengu zigcwele emajele. Lesi simo sokugcwala kwezitokisi siwuphawu lokusebenza kwamaphoyisa.

UMnyango wezoBulungiswa ususebenza ngisho nangezimpelasonto ukuqula amacala. Abantu abaningi kakhulu ezitokisini yilabo abalindele ukuqulwa kwamacala abo kunalabo asebegwetshiwe. Inselele enkulu esibhekene nayo ngeyokuba siguqule imiqondo yalaba bantu abangafuni ukuba sihlale ngokuthula, abantu abaphelelwe unembeza wobuntu, izinswelaboya zoqobo.

Abanye babo sebeneziqu zokuba baziwe ngegama lokuthi bayizinkabi. Izinkabi lezi ezinye zazo bezicashe ezimbonini zamatekisi kanti ezinye bezicashe ngaphansi kwamaqembu ezombusazwe. Mhlawumbe ukuze siphumelele ekulweni nobugebengu eMzansi Afrika, kungakuhle sandise amaphoyisa angagqoki imifaniswano futhi siqashe amaphoyisa angama-reserve amaningi. Ama-reserve lawa ngikholwa ukuthi angasebenza kangcono ezindaweni ezingamalokishi kanti nasemakhaya angaba usizo olukhulu ekwelekeleleni abaholi bendabuko.

Kungakuhle futhi ukuthi aholelwe ukuze nawo abe nomdlandla wokusiza esimeni sokuphepha nokuthula. Ukuvikeleka kwemingcele yezwe nakho kungenye yezindlela ezinganciphisa ubugebengu bokungenisa izidakamizwa kanye nokuthathwa kwezimoto ezibanjwa inkunzi imihla le bese zitholakala sezikwamanye amazwe. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of Zulu speech follows.)

[Prince B Z ZULU: Hon Chairperson, Ministers of the four departments who are here and hon members, allow me to comment on what I see as a challenge that faces all of us in this country, the crime that is facing the citizens of our country. This crime is the big enemy that destroys everything, and which we as a democratic Government are now facing.

Our communities need to co-operate with the police so as to face this army that is attacking our democratic Government. The eye and the hand of the law should focus on those areas that experience a high level of crime. I am talking about the areas where violence is prevailing and car hijacking, as well as the killing of the owners of those cars, is the order of the day. I am talking about areas that are affected by the drug abuse syndrome. Citizens of integrity who live in those areas need to see justice being done and they also need to be protected.

The level of crime that we are facing is the seed that was planted by the apartheid situation that we come from. The apartheid government improved the lives of the minority and left the majority of our people in abject poverty. We are still shy to talk about our recent past because of the damage that it caused in our country.

We greatly appreciate the working together of the four departments. These departments co-operate in their structures to combat crime and to face the challenges, which entail the needs of the public. The unity of these departments has reassured the communities of this country by ensuring that police and soldiers are walking up and down in our communities as protectors. Early this year, soldiers of this country were the ones who transported books to schools in the areas where there were no roads.

The ANC Government came into power at a time when the damage had already put down deep roots, which makes it difficult to correct this situation within a short period of time. We know that there was legislation that has been removed which was aimed at oppressing black people. The police of this country were trained to protect apartheid and certain political parties. They worked day and night to protect the significant minority group in this country.

We come from a time when our soldiers were policing the borders of this country day and night, hunting for the freedom fighters of this country. We come from a situation where magistrates and judges of this country sentenced people on the basis of their colour. Justice was not supportive of a black person. The soil of this country is wet with the blood of our brothers and sisters who died because they wanted justice to be done in this country. The soil of this country is fertile today because of the corpses of the people who were fighting for freedom in this country.

The ANC Government has taken the burden away from the shoulders of the oppressed. It has also taken the whip away from the hands of the oppressor so that the oppressor will also be liberated. Although there is still a lot to be done, fruits of the progress are visible. The Department of Safety and Security, together with the Department of Defence, is cleaning up our streets and criminals have been flung into jail. The fact that detention cells are full of criminals shows that the police are really working.

The Department of Justice now tries cases even on Sundays. In detention cells the number of those who are waiting for their cases to be tried is greater than that of those who have been sentenced. The biggest challenge that we are facing is that of changing the minds of those people who do not want us to live peacefully. I mean people who have no conscience, people who are people just because they do not have hair like animals.

Some of them have honorary titles, such as those who are known as izinkabi, or hit men. Some of these hit men were hiding under the banner of political organisations while others pretended to be taxi drivers. Perhaps it will be a good idea to increase the number of police who wear no uniform and increase the number of the police reserve if we are to succeed in combating crime in South Africa. I believe that the police reserve can work better in townships and in the rural areas. They can play an important role in assisting traditional leaders.

It would also be a good idea if they could be paid so that they can be motivated to assist with creating peace. The protection of our borders is part of the solution in decreasing the level of drugs being imported and car hijacking, which results in finding those cars in other countries. [Applause.]]

Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, I would like, firstly, to refer to the annual report for 2000 of the Office of Inspecting Judge Fagan in terms of prisoners and prisons. I think Mr Justice Fagan was the author of this report, submitted to our President and to Mr Skosana by Justice Fagan.

Our President has had people in his house, our Deputy President’s wife was raped, the former chief of police’s car was hijacked the other day. I am telling hon members that there is not a person in this room who has not felt this awful reach of crime into their own homes.

Can I just say before I say anything about the report, that I think for us in this House to make crime and criminality, which know no fear or favour, an object of division in our society is for us to lose our sense of responsibility before history. This is because all of us, in our own way, are proud of what we have achieved in this country. But it will come to nothing unless we build something better in South Africa than what we have, not something worse. The criminals are not helping us. They are fouling our nest.

There is not only a linkage between those three Ministers sitting there, there is a linkage between them, all their colleagues, all of us and all members of society in South Africa.

I read only today that Mr Kopke, head of Daimler-Benz and chairman of the SA Chamber of Business, says:

When I try to persuade foreign suppliers to invest here, they talk about four things …

Then he mentions crime and Aids. Those Ministers know that they have to face it at every meeting they go to. They do not have to listen to us, they have heard it all before. There is nothing that we can say to them that they have not heard before. They must be very bored. I commend them for their courtesy, because they have heard nothing new. The question is: What are we going to do about it?

We have an awful situation in our prisons. They are overcrowded. According to Fagan, prisoners have increased from 101 000 to 172 000, of whom 64 000 are awaiting trial. It is those ones that are awaiting trial that really concern me. It should concern all of us, and I am sure it concerns the Minister. More than half of them are innocent, but they are in prison awaiting trial. When they are there they are sodomised routinely by people that have Aids. So we might not have a formal death sentence in South Africa, but if one gets put in prison, chances are somebody else is going to invoke the death penalty upon one by sodomising one. That is an untenable situation.

I know the soft-hearted and the faint-hearted say that we must not screen people. People come with all these Eurocentric, left-wing, European ideas. However, we need to be more realistic in South Africa, and we need to screen people to protect others from certain death, also in our prisons.

If one looks at the statistics - and this is not meant to embarrass the Minister; as a South African I am as embarrassed by these figures as he is, and I simply record them as a matter of fact - one sees that natural deaths in prisons have escalated from 186 in 1995 to 1087 in 2000. That is an increase of 584%. Seven thousand prisoners per annum are expected to die, increasing to 45 000 in 10 years.

I just draw that to the attention of the Minister. I do so in the knowledge that he is already aware of it. It is very easy to point out the problems. What are the solutions? The little time I have does not allow me to spell them out. I would say in principle they are based upon restitution and restorative justice. [Time expired.]

Mr M C MOKITLANE (Free State): Madam Chairperson, hon Ministers, members of the NCOP, my colleagues from the provinces, I think there is no dispute that the levels of crime in our country are unacceptable. I think it depends mainly on what is being done to reduce those levels. The Government of the moment, and especially the criminal justice cluster, is doing something about it. [Interjections.]

I want to take hon members back to the Minister of Safety and Security’s budget speech to try and refresh their minds about what is being done with regard to this matter. In our country surveys have been conducted which have indicated that, amongst certain categories of our youth, crime has become a matter of concern. We want to bring about conditions that ensure that the youth begin to have confidence and to enjoy the level of security which they need in order to grow up as children and, at the same time, prepare themselves for participation in the African recovery plan.

In his budget speech on 7 June 2000, the Minister indicated that the police are at the cutting edge of the Government’s overall strategy to bring down the levels of crime in the country. He also indicated in his budget speech certain improvements in terms of resources which would be placed at the disposal of the members of the SA Police Service to carry out their task. Further, the Minister has indicated the process of reorganising and restructuring the SAPS through the closure of some units, which were a creation of policing under an environment anachronistic to a democratic order, and putting in place new units aligned to the new Police Service thrust. That is testimony to the commitment of the Department of Safety and Security to bringing a decisive halt to any further escalation of crime in the country.

The establishment of crime prevention units, the deployment of a stability force for rapid intervention in instances of public disorder and serious and violent crime, the employment of reservists, the implementation of the Firearms Control Act and the regulations thereto and the implementation of the Afis system and the electromagnetic process for the retrieval of filed- out firearms numbers represent significant developments with the potential to significantly reduce the operational space for criminal elements.

In our province we have participated in all campaigns which have been developed, together with the provinces, in order to reduce the levels of crime. We have registered a number of projects on different types of crimes, and those projects have been very successful. Maybe that is why our province, at the present moment, lies second in terms of reducing the levels of crime. [Interjections.]

Whilst I welcome all the developments I have raised above, I wish to concede that indeed there is a lot which we still need to do in order to address the concerns and the needs of people. From my experience in the province, I believe we still have a lot to do in building the confidence of our people in the criminal justice system. To achieve this will mean that organs of the criminal justice system clusters will have to work solidly within their codes of conduct within the policy frameworks of the Government and also within the legal provisions which actually direct their actions.

It is true that there are communities in the province from which I come, especially in the rural areas, that feel that safety in their particular areas is not adequate. It is also true that there are still other members of the public, who might not be in the rural areas, who feel that the type of service which they get from the police is not what they had expected.

Despite that, I want to welcome, especially in the context of the rural problems which normally bedevil my province, the appointment of an independent committee of inquiry into farm attacks and the evaluation of the Rural Protection Plan in the provinces by a task team from the National Operational Co-ordinating Committee, or Nococ, structure. Within the context of the province we will be conducting two workshops, with, finally, a provincial workshop, during which the rural participants in the rural safety plans will be able to come up with solutions towards the issues of safety of our rural people. We include farmers and workers there.

I also want to say that the opposition needs to be cautioned, especially the DA. [Interjections.] Farm killings are not tragic only to them. There is no reason for them to try and shout at the top of their voices and drown every other voice raised in condemnation of the callous attacks on the farmers and the farmworkers. Many a time they are found wanting when the Mampurus of this world are dragged to death in the streets of the Sasolburgs and the police inspectors, the Mokayanes of this world, from the Welkoms, are shot dead because their dogs bark at night. [Interjections.]

What I have realised in many instances in the province is that the opposition, especially the DP, says nothing about that. They only speak when a farmer is killed, and that is using a tragic situation for purposes of political gain. I wish some of them were speaking the truth. Just now Mr Durr was saying that the nature of crime in our country means that we should come together as a collective and work to ensure that our country rids itself of this menace. However, I do not think that that is what the opposition parties are doing. They want to capitalise on incidents like these and, in the process, tarnish the image of our country. [Interjections.] I want to say that this is the height of selective morality. We are diverse, but our humanity should not be defined by race. There is a dire need to explain to our people, especially those who never had access to a fair and transparent criminal justice process in the previous dispensation, where South African justice processes begin and end. I have realised that this is a big problem with our communities, namely where the SAPS operates, and where the Justice Department operates. Until such time as we communicate sufficiently with our people and show them the distinctions and the relationships which have got to be there between the partners in this cluster, we will not succeed in enabling them to have the type of confidence which they should have in the police in particular. [Interjections.]

I also want to say that it is important that we should ensure that members of the SAPS in particular - that is the area in which I specialise - begin to internalise the policies of the Government, such as the Batho Pele principle. One of the most difficult things which I have experienced during my visits to more than 70 police stations in the province is that the people are always saying they are not getting feedback on matters which they have lodged with the police. It is imperative that we begin to change the way we do things, especially at that level.

I want to say that in the Free State much has been achieved in the transformation of the SAPS. From the ratio of 72:28 representivity in 1999, which favoured whites in the management echelons of the province, we have, through a transparent process guided by the Minister’s determination to bring about appropriate changes to the …

MONNASETILO WA KHANSELE YA BOSET[S]ABA YA DIPOROFENSE: Tidimalo

Nako ya gago e fedile. [Legofi.]

E rile fa ke bitsa Mokhuduthamaga Mokitlane ka Sesotho, ke ne ke eletsa go mo utlwa a bua Sesotho mo Ntlong e. Ke batla go itse go tswa go baemedi ba Ntlo e gore ke ka lebaka la eng re gana go bua maleme a rona? Mo lenaneong la rona la gompieno, ke lemoga gore maloko a le mantsi a tlaa bua Seesemane fela, mme jaanong ke ipotsa gore maleme a rona a fa kae. (Translation of Tswana paragraphs follow.)

[The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon member, your time has expired. [Applause.]

When I called upon the MEC Mr Mokitlane in Sesotho, I thought that he would address this House in Sesotho. I would like to find out from the representatives of this House why hon members do not want to speak their languages in this House. I have learnt from today’s programme that most of the hon members would address this House in English only. My question is, where are our languages?]

What I was saying, for the benefit of hon members who do not speak Setswana or Sesotho, is: what has happened to all the languages of South Africa?

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Ke a leboha, Modulasetulo. [Thank you, Chairperson.]

Ngiyabonga, Mphathiwohlelo. [Thank you, Chairperson.]

Hon members and delegates, I must say from the outset that it is a bit unfortunate that two other Ministers and I do not have MECs. We do not have this body of support which my friend here has. [Laughter.] So in my speech I will try to cover a lot of ground and even answer some of the questions which may have been raised.

Over the years Correctional Services has provided interesting examples of successful and creative programmes to assist offenders to reintegrate into society. When introducing the Correctional Services debate in the National Assembly two weeks ago, I stated that my department was stepping up its campaign to put rehabilitation at the centre of all its activities. This was, first and foremost, as a result of the commitments we made to Cabinet, Lekgotla, in January 2001, where we identified rehabilitation as a key departmental objective. But, secondly, it was also as a result of the department’s critical re-examination of its strategic role within the broader context of the criminal justice system, coming out of its strategic planning session, which was held from 17 to 19 April 2001.

As I stated in the National Assembly, our critical role within the broader criminal justice system is the reduction of recidivism, through the provisioning of effective rehabilitation programmes. We are therefore engaged in a vigorous transformation of our approach towards rehabilitation, which will involve the strengthening of partnerships with the community to rehabilitate offenders and ensure their successful reintegration into the community.

When I addressed this august House last year, I remarked that the challenge facing us was to strike an acceptable balance between the competing interests of public safety and offender care, on the one hand, and the rehabilitation of offenders, on the other, within our budgetary constraints, for that matter. The 8,8% increase, from an amount of R5,7 billion to R6,2 billion, in our budget is therefore welcome, and is a positive step in the right direction, which puts us in a position to start the process of laying the foundation for directing more resources towards rehabilitation programmes.

The recent departmental strategic planning session identified the following strategies for the attainment of our key departmental objective of enhancing rehabilitation programmes: the development of individualised need- based rehabilitation programmes; marketing rehabilitation programmes to increase offender participation; strengthening partnerships with the community to widen the scope of application of rehabilitation programmes, and to create a common understanding of the meaning of rehabilitation; promoting the restorative approach to justice to create a platform for dialogue between the offender, the victim and the community, in order to facilitate a healing process; combating illiteracy in prison by providing adult basic education and training to offenders; increasing prisoner- generated goods and services to enhance the self-sufficiency of the prison system and to contribute towards poverty alleviation, as well as the Government’s Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme; and, lastly, increasing training facilities for the development of offenders.

With regard to overcrowding, this problem persists in prisons. The interventions we employed in September and October 2000, to release low- risk, awaiting-trial prisoners and advance the parole dates of certain categories, managed to reduce our prison population from 172 000 to 160

1. However, our latest statistics indicate that the figure has, once again, risen to above 170 000 - thanks to my colleague here, the Minister of Safety and Security.

This reduction strategy is therefore only effective if utilised on a continuous basis. I did emphasise this point in the National Assembly Budget Vote debate, when I stated that there are no quick fixes to the problem of overcrowding. Much as we will continue to strive to secure additional accommodation, we do not believe that the department can afford to build its way out of overcrowding. No state has ever done that or will ever do that. What is required is a combination of durable, sustainable and long-term focused reduction and expansion strategies.

The recent departmental strategic planning session also identified the enhancement of the community corrections system as a key departmental objective to address overcrowding by diverting low-risk awaiting-trial prisoners to community corrections.

However, we acknowledge the fact that we need to develop an appropriate communications strategy to ensure a broad acceptance and understanding of the opportunities presented by community corrections as a viable alternative to incarceration. Somebody said that we were dealing with very suspicious communities and, therefore, it would not be very easy for some of them to accept prisoners to work amongst them. There is a lot of community education that we need to do.

A further 8 000 beds will be added to the system, with the commissioning of the following prisons: Ebongweni Maximum Prison in Kokstad, with a capacity of 1 440 beds, which will admit its first batch of prisoners within the next two months; then the Devon Prerelease Centre in Springs, with a capacity of 600 beds, due for occupation during July 2001. That is an institution that was given to us by the Defence Force, but I now see that it is on sale. I think the Minister and the department should check before they kick us out of there.

Through our public and private partnerships, the department will alleviate overcrowding with the opening of the following APOPS prisons. The APOPS prison in Bloemfontein, that is Mangaung Maximum Prison, with an accommodation capacity of 2 928 beds, is also at an advanced stage of completion, and is due for occupation on 1 July 2001, which is three months ahead of schedule. I think MEC Mokitlane can bear testimony to that.

The other APOPS prison, Kutama-Senthumule Maximum Prison in Louis Trichardt, with an accommodation capacity of 3 024 beds, is going according to schedule and its occupation is expected in February 2002.

To relieve overcrowding, the department is also embarking on a programme to rehabilitate and upgrade dilapidated prisons at a budgeted cost of about R214,55 million to be spent in this financial year.

Turning to unit management, the department has set itself the target of implementing unit management in 80% of our prisons by the end of the forthcoming MTEF period, that is 31 March 2005. After successfully piloting unit management in Malmesbury Prison in 1997, we decided that all new prison designs should conform to unit management principles.

Furthermore, in order to promote uniformity and consistency of the prison system, we will develop facility prototypes in accordance with the unit management principles. We have therefore identified unit management as the missing ingredient in the transformation of our prison system.

As stated in the National Assembly Budget Vote debate, the vision of the department outlined above necessitates the development of an effective human resource strategy that will address at least the following aspects: Firstly, the multiskilling of correctional officials through needs-directed training to support the implementation of unit management and enhancement of rehabilitation strategies; secondly, promoting correctional services as a profession and a career of choice; thirdly, improving the working conditions and remuneration of frontline staff; and lastly, transforming our work ethic to enhance service delivery.

During the past financial year my department has also been involved in a number of initiatives aimed at promoting rehabilitation, for instance rehabilitation workshops. As part of the process of developing our rehabilitation policy, a series of workshops involving community organisations and rehabilitated former offenders was held between September 2000 and March this year. The aim of these workshops was to develop a common understanding of the meaning of rehabilitation. The workshops assisted in identifying policy gaps and were instrumental in developing the first phase of the department’s intervention model and strategy for assessing rehabilitation needs. As part of our contribution to the Government’s integrated sustainable rural development programme, on 31 March 2001 the department launched a historic partnership with the community in Mpumalanga province, where INkosi Mthethwa donated a piece of land for crop production by the department and the community of Piet Retief. This project is intended to provide offenders with the agricultural skills and ultimately facilitate reintegration. It is called Amakhaya Farm Projects.

There is the St Albans production workshop which I recently opened in the Eastern Cape, and this is situated in Port Elizabeth, which will empower prisoners with market-related skills in the fields of woodwork, steelwork and textiles. There is also what we call or what is named the President’s Award Youth Development Programme. The patrons of the President’s Award Programme, that is His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh and the former President Mr Nelson Mandela, awarded the President’s Gold Award to 47 young offenders who excelled in the Youth Development Programme.

Coming to prison production, it would be fitting to highlight some statistics relating to the income generated by the department from the products manufactured by prisoners. In the 2000-01 financial year we generated an income of about R2 million from the sale of products manufactured by prisoners. This money is deposited directly into the national revenue. When I said this in the National Assembly, they applauded. [Laughter.] I do not hear applause, So I am worried.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! It is our practice not to conduct ourselves as the National Assembly.

The MINISTER: OK, I think that is understandable.

Coming to HIV and health issues in prisons, the department’s HIV/Aids policy or strategy has been reviewed, amended and circulated to all relevant stakeholders. The purpose of this review was to make provision for the inclusion of the following latest HIV prevention strategies, that is the promotion of safe sexual practices, the prevention of mother-to-child- transmission, the management and control of STDs, the distribution of condoms, access to voluntary counselling, testing, treatment, care and support.

I now come to the Correctional Services Amendment Bill, 2001. In the process of drafting subordinate legislation and implementing certain aspects of the Correctional Services Act of 1998, which is the principal Act, it became apparent, based on practical considerations, that certain amendments would be necessary in order to fully implement the principal Act, as well as to be more compliant with the provisions of the Constitution.

Central to this amending Bill is, firstly, the treatment of prisoners; secondly, the accommodation of disabled offenders and gender considerations; thirdly, disciplinary procedures for prisoners; fourthly, a new parole system; fifthly, the treatment of child offenders and, lastly, the use of firearms and other nonlethal incapacitating devices.

Owing to the contentious nature of some of the clauses contained in the Bill, this Council decided to refer the amending Bill for public hearings.

Then coming to the Green Paper on Correctional Services, which I am introducing, I have initiated a holistic policy formulation process to review existing policies and identify policy options that incorporate international best practices and provide the greatest value for public money spent in correctional services.

This initiative has been supported by the National Council on Correctional Services and the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services. A presentation to this Council on this matter is forthcoming.

I now turn to escapes, which I think are one of the greatest concerns of a lot of people. When I addressed this House last year I indicated that my department would bring down the number of escapes. In the year 2000 the department managed to further decrease the number of escapes from 459 to

1. [Applause.] But in the other House they did not applaud this one. [Laughter.]

Turning to corruption, as I stated in the National Assembly Budget Vote debate, in terms of the priority programmes presented by the Crime Prevention and Justice cluster to the Cabinet, Legotla, held in January this year, the Department of Correctional Services committed itself to stepping up the fight against crime and corruption in our prisons.

In this regard, I have tasked the National Council on Correctional Services to conduct thorough research, based on international practices and experiences, and advise the Ministry, taking into account the unique circumstances of the South African correctional system, and produce the best model for an independent anticorruption unit to investigate corruption and crime in our prisons.

In conclusion, the department will continue to build necessary intergovernmental relations in both provincial and local spheres of government to ensure that it plays a meaningful role in fighting against crime.

I want to pause briefly, and appeal to the MECs of safety and security from different provinces to assess whether it is possible for them, in their informal forums, to include our provincial commissioners, simply for purposes of information: informing them and being informed themselves. I think that will go a long way in enhancing this partnership that I am talking about. [Laughter.] I am simply saying ``informal gathering’’, and I can see my colleague is against that.

Lastly, I would like to thank all stakeholders - state departments, business, NGOs, parastatals, CBOs, and employee organisations - for assisting Government in promoting a crime-free society. In contributing to this year’s national theme, which, as we all know from the President, is ``Unity in action for change,’’ the department will continue to strengthen its partnerships with the community to speed up prison reform. [Applause.]

Manana C NKUNA: Muchaviseki Mutshami wa xitulu, vachaviseki vaComrade, Vaholobye havumune ka n’wina, ngopfu-ngopfu Holobye wa Vululamisi, nkulukumba Skosana, Vatirhikulorhi lava mi humaka etiprovhinsini na lava mi nga kwala kaya, va lava se hi nga aka kwala, inkomu. (Translation of Tsonga paragraph follows.)

[Mrs C NKUNA: Hon Chairperson, hon comrades, hon four Ministers, especially the hon the Minister of Correctional Services Mr Skosana, hon colleagues from our provinces and hon local members who are residing here locally.]

Our visit to Pollsmoor Prison, especially the children and the juvenile section, really touched my heart. It touched my heart, firstly, because I am a mother and, secondly, because I am a South African citizen who subscribes to the principle of:

N’wana wa wena i n’wana wa mina. N’wana wa mina i n’wana wa wena. [Your child is my child. My child is yours.]

I therefore base my speech on what one has observed at Pollsmoor Prison.

Eku sunguleni ka nhweti ya Khotavuxika kwala endlwini leyi, a hi tlangela siku ra vana, laha a hi ku, “N’wana wa wena i n’wana wa mina, kasi n’wana wa mina i wa wena.” Mavulavulelo lawa a ya kongomisiwi eka vana vo karhi ntsena, kambe ya kongoma vana hinkwavo ku ya hi tinxaka hinkwato ta vana. Mavulavulelo lawa, ya kongomisiwa eka vana lava endlaka leswinene, ya tlhela ya kongomisiwa eka eka vana lava nga endliki leswinene, vana lava nga ekhotsweni.

Namunthla ndzi ta vulavula hi xiyenge xa vana lava nga ekhotsweni. Vana lava va endlaka kumbe lava va endleke swo biha laha tikweni. Laha vatswari va ringeteke ku laya kambe va tsandzekile. Nhlayo ya vana va muxaka lowu ya kula swinene lomu tikhotsweni. Vana lava va nga gweviwa ni lava va nga tshama ekhotsweni va nga si tengisiwaka. Leyi i mhaka leyi karhataka Mfumo lowu wa hina wa xidemokrasi. Laha xikongomelo xa Ndzawulo ya Vululamisi xo sungula ku nga ku vona leswaku vana lava va nga si tengisiwaka va rhumeriwa eka vatswari va vona, va ya yima kona ku nga ri ku pfaleriwa ekhotsweni. Xavumbirhi, va fanele va yisiwa eka tindhawu ta vuhlayiseki va ya akiwa hi vuntshwa leswi hi xilungu swi vuriwaka RDP OF THE SOUL, na sw. na sw, va ri kwale, ku nga ri ekhotsweni.

Lava vatswari va vona va nga kumekiki, va yisiwa kwale ka vuhlayiseki loko va ri karhi va laveriwa vatswari, leswi vuriwaka Foster Parents. Afrika Dzonga, kun’we ni matiko ya le handle, yi amukerile tsala ra Convention of the Rights of the Child, leri sayiniweke hi 16 N’wendzamhala 1995, hi Presidente wa tolo, yena nkulukumba Nelson Mandela, leri vulaka leswaku n’wana loyi a khomiweke kumbe loyi a ehlekeleriwa ku va a endlile vubihi byo karhi, Mfumo wu fanele ku langutisa malembe ya yena. N’wana loyi u fanele a thleriseriwa eka vatswari a ya kurisiwa kahle ni van’wana. N’wana a nga tshami a ri karhi a vona makhumbi ya le jele ntsena.

Swa twala leswaku vana lava va dyohaka va fanele ku xupuriwa, va layiwa leswaku va nga ha engeti. Vo tala va vona va nga ha akiwa hi vuntshwa, va thlelela emakaya va hambanisiwa na masindza ya honyololo, lava va nga endla milandzu yo chavisa. Vana lava a va endlanga milandzu yo tika, xik. n’wana u yivile mangwa ya minharhu kumbe mune, kutani wa khomiwa ivi ku laveka R50- 00 yo beyila ha yona, vatswari a va na yona. N’wana u yive lofo ra xinkwa hikokwalaho ka ndlala, ku laveka mali yo beyila, vatswari a va na yona.

Nhlayo ya vakhotsiwa ya kula swinene, ku sukela eka lembe ra 1966 laha a hi ri na 121 000, ku fikela nhweti ya Ndzati 2000 laha nhlayo ya vakhotsiwa yi fikaka eka 162 000. Vo tala va vona a va si tengisiwa hikokwalaho ka swirhalanganya leswi ndzawulo leyi yi nga na swona. Hambiswiritano, ndzawulo yi ta aka tin’wana tikhotso ta ntlhanu eka malembe manharhu lama taka. Mpimanyeto wu tlakusiwile. Sweswi yi le ka R6 billion. Hi malembe ya 2003 ku ya ka 2004, yi ta va kwalomuya ka R12 billion. Hi ku vula leswi, a hi ri eka n’wina vana kwalomu mi nga kona thlelelani ekhotsweni. Mfumo wa ringeta ku hunguta lomu tikhotsweni hi ku endla swilo leswi landzelaka, ku tshunxa vabohiwa va milandzu yintsongo lava nga tshamanyana ekhotsweni; ku tirhela vaaka-tiko ekusuhi na le kaya ra mubohiwa; ku ta tisiwa leswi vuriwaka electronic monitoring ku pfuna vaaka-tiko naswona hi swi languteriwa swoleswo. (Translation of Tsonga paragraphs follows.)

[At the beginning of June in this House, we were commemorating Children’s Day, where we said, ``your child is mine, and my child is yours.’’ This type of expression does not refer to certain children only, but it refers to all children according to their races. This type of expression refers to children who are doing good things and to those who do bad things, who are locked up in jails.

Today I would like to address myself to those children who are in jail. Children who committed offences in this country. Children whose parents tried to guide them but failed to succeed in doing so. The figures in respect of such children are increasing tremendously in jails. Children who have been found guilty and those who are awaiting trial, in jails. This issue causes great problems to our democratic Government. The aim of the Department of Correctional Services is, firstly, to see to it that children who are awaiting trial should be sent back to their parents so that they could be kept at their homes and not locked up in jails. Secondly, they should be referred to places of safety so that they may be reformed afresh, what in English is called the RDP of the soul, etc, etc, so that they may be kept there and not in jail.

Where parents of children are not found, such children should be sent to places of safety while their foster parents are sought. South Africa, together with international countries, accepted the Convention on the Rights of the Child, signed on 16 December 1995 by the former president Mr Nelson Mandela, which stated that when a child is arrested or suspected of any wrongdoing, the Government should consider the age of such a child. That child should be sent back to his or her parents in order to enable him to be brought up properly with other children. A child should not be allowed to sit idly inside prison walls.

It is understandable that children who commit offences should be punished or reprimanded so that they should not repeat the same mistake again. Most of them can be rehabilitated, sent home and removed from hardened criminals who have committed serious crimes. These children did not commit serious offences, eg a child stole three or four mangoes, was arrested and bail was set at R50,00 and the parents have no money. A child has stolen a loaf of bread due to hunger, and bail must be paid and the parents do not have money to pay the bail.

The figures for prisoners are growing tremendously: the figure was 121 000 in 1966 and had increased to 162 000 in September 2000. Most of them are still awaiting trial due to problems faced by the department. However, the department is still going to build five additional prisons in the next three years. The budget has been increased. It now stands at R6 billion. During 2003-2004, it will be about R12 billion. By saying this we are not encouraging children to go back to prisons. The Government is trying to reduce overcrowding in our prisons by doing the following: releasing prisoners with minor offences who stay for short periods in prison, to perform community services near their homes; electric monitoring will be introduced in order to assist citizens, and that is greatly appreciated.]

I wish to commend the Department of Correctional Services for the inmate tracking system that is about to be introduced. This is going to assist us in tracing prisoners, like Tsakani, who escaped from the prison here in Cape Town and was arrested in the Northern Province, in Messina, using a different name. The inmate tracking system is going to assist us to realise that this is Tsakani.

Mfumo wa swi vona leswaku van’wana a va lo swi tsakela ku kumeka va ri ekhotsweni, i mhaka ya vusiwana no pfumala mintirho. Hikokwalaho ku ri na milandzu liya leyintsongo leyi ndzi nga yi vula. Mfumo a wu swi tsakeli ku fuwa vana lomuya tikhotsweni, lowu i ndzhwalo wa hina, vatswari, tiSocial Worker, Vafundhisi na vakhongeri, Psychologists, Vadyondzisi na vanhu hinkwavo, a hi khomisaneni, hi lwa no herisa vubihi lebyi nga kona laha tikweni.

Mundzuku loko ndzi vulavula, ndzi ta vulavula hi leswinene leswi hi swi voneke ekhotsweni hi ku ahi swilo swo biha ntsena. Inkomu. [Va Phokotela] (Translation of Tsonga paragraphs follows.)

[The Government is aware that some children did not find themselves in prison deliberately, but due to poverty and unemployment. That is why we find those minor offences which I mentioned earlier on. The Government is not interested in keeping children in prisons; this is not our task, it is the task of parents, social workers, ministers of religion, Christians, psychologists, teachers and all people. Let us work hand in hand in order to fight and wipe out crime that is prevailing in our country.

Tomorrow, when I deliberate, I will focus on the good things we saw in prison, because at prisons there are good things as well. Thank you. [Applause.]]

Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, as part of our oversight function, the select committee has visited courts, judges, prosecutors, state attorneys and prisons. These visits have been informative and beneficial. We were able to see for ourselves and assess the situation first-hand. I also visited the police station in my constituency. From all of these visits, it is apparent that there are a number of major problems relating to the services offered by the Departments of Justice, Safety and Security, and Correctional Services. I will deal with these problems in due course.

First, I must pay tribute to some of the men and women who provide the frontline services for these departments. In many of the magistrates’ courts we saw clerks who stepped into the breach to give effect to the Prevention of Family Violence Act and the Maintenance Act.

We saw some magistrates and prosecutors who clearly walked the extra mile, and judges dedicated to their work. All of these people carried out their duties in trying circumstances. In most cases, they lacked resources to do so efficiently. Yet, despite this, many of these people gave of their own time and used some of their resources to do their jobs. These are the people who kept the system going.

We saw unemployed people volunteer to assist in the magistrates’ courts with clerical work. These unemployed people used their own resources to get to work. The patriotism and dedication of these people from all our communities deserve our recognition.

However, for each of these public servants who walked the extra mile, there were others who did not know the meaning of public service''. We must find a way to recognise and reward dedication to duty and censure those who do not understand the meaning of the wordspublic service’’.

There was a general lack of resources, both human and material. Resources such as paper and photostat machines were in short supply. From time to time, severe restrictions had to be placed on the use of telephones by prosecutors. This is a severe impediment; one cannot arrange for consultation with witnesses or do any of the other bits of administration necessary to ensure that a trial proceeds to court and runs efficiently.

Many courts struggle with huge backlogs. All the magistrates consulted agreed that Saturday courts had an impact on the backlogs. This allows them to concentrate on court work on that day and to avoid administrative tasks. This confirms the soundness of the announcement made by the hon the Minister that court managers will be appointed.

There is a shortage of magistrates and prosecutors. These shortages are especially acute in the case of experienced prosecutors. There appear to be two main causes for the shortage of experienced prosecutors. Firstly, the pay and working conditions are not conducive to people making a career of prosecuting. Secondly, prosecutors who show promise are quickly absorbed into the magistracy. I am not advocating that we stop growing magistrates from the pool of prosecutors; I am suggesting that we take a fresh look at the problem. I would earnestly urge the Minister to investigate the feasibility of appointing retired magistrates to act as prosecutors on a contract basis.

In most cases these magistrates have many years’ experience as prosecutors. This is a short-term solution. In the long term we need to budget to improve the salaries and working conditions of prosecutors to make being a prosecutor an attractive career. We also need to budget to greatly increase the number of prosecutors.

Every year it is a common lament to call for larger budgets based solely on shortages suffered by the department, without being able to show that the budget is being optimally utilised. This year, there has been a new initiative which shows the promise of light at the end of the tunnel.

Business Against Crime has assisted by seconding Mr McKenzie to the department, to take control of the budgeting process. Mr McKenzie has rationalised the budget, introduced effective control measures and, in consultation with the department, reprioritised the budget. Together with this process the chairperson of the portfolio committee has driven a process to interrogate every branch of the department on its needs, practices and budget. In future, we will be able to supply an informed, reasoned and substantiated case for the budget necessary to provide an efficient and effective judicial system. We want to thank Business Against Crime and Mr McKenzie for their important contribution.

One of the major problems in the Police Service is a lack of investigative capacity. We are informed that nearly half the dockets presented to the prosecution are withdrawn. Urgent attention needs to be given to training to improve the capacity of our Police Service, in general, and particularly with respect to investigative skills.

This needs to be considered as one of the vital links in an integrated approach to dealing with crime. Without an improvement in investigative capacity, we will not make a significant impact on crime in this country.

On our visit to Pollsmoor prison we saw cells designed for 50 people holding 80. We, in the committee, are particularly concerned by the awaiting-trial juveniles, who ranged in age from 12 to 16 years, who spend months waiting for their trials to be finalised without any schooling to help them escape the cycle of criminality.

On enquiry, we were told that this was the responsibility of the Department of Social Development. We intend to take the matter up with them, but we would appreciate it if the Minister would do the same. The President of the Constitutional Court informed us that there were some 20 000 awaiting-trial prisoners who had been granted bail but could not afford to pay it. This included 10 000 prisoners who had been granted bail of less than R1 000, and some have bail set at R50 which they still cannot afford to pay.

These prisoners cost the state in the order of R80 per day to detain. Where their alleged crimes do not involve violence or sexual offences, alternatives to incarceration pending a trial need to be found. The system of electronic tracking of inmates, integrated with the automated fingerprinting system, and the electronic management of dockets, holds much promise in streamlining the criminal justice system. However, these systems still have to go through the pilot phase, and their implementation across the country appears to be some time off.

Plea bargaining, although it holds some inherent risks, has a great deal of potential to unclog our criminal justice system.

We must give urgent attention to implementing the system with the necessary safeguards.

The Departments of Justice, Safety and Security, and Correctional Services are moving in the right direction. They are dealing with these problems in a co-ordinated, integrated fashion. This does not mean we can rest on our collective laurels. The process has just begun and it needs to be managed at every step along a long and hard road. Each and every member of the select committee has a role to play in this process. Crime continues to sabotage our country at every level. We need to give substance to the saying that ``Crime does not pay’’. We cannot afford to lose this battle. [Applause.]

Ms P C P MAJODINA: Madam Chair of the NCOP, I would like to apologise on behalf of MEC Dennis Neer, who had to attend to the taxi violence that has just erupted in Umtata. I will present this speech on his behalf. We take this opportunity to express our congratulations to the justice cluster on presenting a Budget Vote that clearly outlines the challenges to providing a safe and secure environment for the people of South Africa.

We note its firm resolve in dealing with crime, and commit ourselves to taking up this challenge, in partnership with both the SA Police Service and the communities in the Eastern Cape.

Our province has not been unaffected by the spate of senseless killings of two members of the SAPS. The most recent killings were two members in the Motherwell and Umtata policing areas respectively in the preceding week. Community policing forums must form the bedrock of effective law enforcement and crime prevention. More importantly, as has been demonstrated in South Africa and internationally, problem-solving oriented partnership strategies for policing produce positive results in terms of reducing crime.

We must strengthen community policing forums in order to maximise their ability to act as agents of change. Despite their being a statutory structure and assisting the SAPS in the fight against crime, we have still not provided adequate resources for effective functioning and sustainability of community policing forums. This matter needs our urgent attention and intervention.

Initiatives like the Tirisano project and the urban renewal strategy should play a key role in providing positive activities that will provide the youth with incentives, other than being doomed to a life of crime.

Broader socioeconomic improvements, like poverty alleviation and unemployment, must now also enjoy a focus as we look to integration and sustainable intervention in order to reduce crime. The challenge for the provincial secretariats is to make sure that all these acts are implemented.

The Minister has highlighted probably the single most important inhibitor to effective law enforcement. Without adequate resources, our members cannot effectively serve communities. We appeal to the Minister to consider the dynamics of the Eastern Cape. Due to the fact that we are a predominantly rural province with a relatively poor infrastructure, our need for increased appropriations in the allocation of resources is greater. Vehicles are, of course, no exception.

Ongoing training is necessary as a component in developing the SAPS to attain increased levels of professionalism in the fight against crime. It is not only the training of the rank-and-file members that needs to be developed; our managers in the SAPS should also be empowered to adapt to the increased demands of policing in a democratic society.

We welcome the Minister’s decision to improve policing through our increased air support capacity. In a rural context, this mode of transport is crucial to apprehend criminals who seek shelter in dense vegetation and remote areas.

Reservists, like full members, must enjoy skills development. This must form part of the broader SAPS human resource strategy. The recruitment of reservists to serve rural communities must be seen as a priority. Coupled with skills development, this may be an initiative to address unemployment in these communities.

The fight against crime requires that we attack problems at a number of levels, including using the most sophisticated software. We believe that using the automated fingerprint identification system and the electromagnetic process for retrieving firearm numbers which criminals have filed off, will ensure the apprehending of criminals and their swift passage through our courts.

There are other initiatives like the community safety fora and the urban renewal strategy, which aims to deal with crime using a multidisciplinary approach. Local authorities must now enjoy our full attention in setting up necessary structures to realise their crime prevention role. Greater interaction between the SAPS and local authorities must occur in order for stakeholders to set up joint priorities and targets.

I want to conclude by quoting former President Nelson Mandela’s address to Parliament during February 1996 (Hansard, Joint Sittings, 1996, col 16):

Dealing with crime, violence and corruption requires a new morality for our new nation. Indeed, it requires a new patriotism among communities, the public and private sectors, and the security services - so at the end of each day, each one of us can answer in the affirmative to the question: Have I done something today to stamp out crime?

[Applause.]

Mr M R MZOBE (KwaZulu-Natal): Madam Chair, Ministers present, hon members, it is true that when two elephants are fighting, it is the grass that suffers. [Interjections.] It is also true that each and every country’s future is determined, guided and moulded by its history. South Africa is no exception to this truth and reality.

During the liberation struggle, South Africa suffered under the yoke of oppression and the draconian apartheid laws to such an extent that black South Africans, notwithstanding the fact that they were, and still are, the poorest of the poor, were extremely hard hit by the call for sanctions and disinvestment, the consequences of which were too ghastly to contemplate. It triggered the most unprecedented unemployment, which resulted in skyrocketing criminality which has not only devastated our social fibre, but scared off foreign investors.

Once democracy came, the democratic Government took over tremendous debts created by its predecessors. Today we are faced with a spiralling petrol price which is a problem for our Government and the electorate who elected us to these positions of authority.

Since the advent of democracy in South Africa, the criminal justice system has completely changed, particularly because the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa was made the supreme law of the country, compounded by the introduction of the Bill of Rights, hence doing away with the status quo completely.

It is my submission that the three sister Ministries of the justice cluster are trying their level best to put the situation right, but not enough has been done to change the mindset of our respective communities. Our people, particularly in our deep rural areas, still labour under the impression that laws like detention without trial still apply in our criminal justice system. They do not understand why a person cannot be detained for 24 hours without trial.

This exercise is being carried out through community policing forums, but it is not enough. We still have to put more effort and money into it. New blood, such as the youth, could be used to go out into the rural areas to make our people aware of the new justice system.

However, it is highly appreciated that the SAPS, in collaboration with the Department of Correctional Services and Business Against Crime, is in the process of re-engineering the court processes with a view to increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the criminal and civil justice system, in spite of extreme financial constraints compounded by the spiralling deterioration of the economy.

It is highly appreciated and extremely commendable that the Government cares so much for its citizens. This is evident through the fact that the Department of Defence is committed and determined to work in collaboration with the SAPS to control high-risk border segments to ensure security in priority areas. However, while one appreciates the assistance rendered by members of the Defence Force when they are deployed to deep rural areas, their behaviour can become deplorable and extremely appalling. The situation is exacerbated by the language problem. Some of them speak a language that the local people do not understand.

They assault members of the community, steal their property and break into their houses. What aggravates the situation is the fact that, when criminal charges are laid against them, they are mostly not found in their command posts because they are deployed to act on a specific contingency.

To surmount these problems, I propose that whenever they are deployed, they be accompanied by local police. In the province of KwaZulu-Natal alone, we have approximately 200 cases outstanding. These are crimes committed by members of the SANDF. The situation has worsened to such an extent that the committee on safety and security is seeking to meet with the committee on defence and safety and security from the national Government.

Finally, policing is increasingly becoming a multidimensional task when one takes into account the globalisation of criminality, which encompasses a variety of crimes such as professional crime, organised crime, white-collar crime and victimless crime. [Interjections.]

To deal with such acts of criminality, the Government is duty-bound to employ the services of highly skilled members of the SA Police Service and of intelligence services. Nonetheless, it is pleasing to note that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is to promote and maintain an effective system of judicial administration to transform the legal system to promote constitutional development in line with the constitutional dispensation. [Applause.]

Mr T B TAABE: Madam Chairperson, hon comrade Ministers, members of the House, in this debate this afternoon I want to set the record straight with regard to a number of issues, which have been used by the opposition parties in spreading what I shall call untruths. As far as I am concerned, ``untruths’’ is acceptable parliamentary language, rather than the language I should have used, quite bluntly.

These untruths about the ANC and about this Government are particularly on the area around crime statistics and the problems of overcrowding in our prisons. In doing so, I think we are going to have to put the facts straight this afternoon.

South Africans know for a fact that since last June the opposition parties in this country have unleashed a veritably venomous campaign, which campaign was vigorously supported by the allied media in this country and was meant to force our Minister of Safety and Security, Comrade Steve Tshwete, to release defective crime statistics in this country.

Underlying this campaign was the assumption from these forces that crime necessarily must be on the increase in South Africa. When a stance was taken to the effect that the moratorium on crime statistics could not be lifted at the time, the assumption, obviously, from their side was that that was only meant for the purpose of hiding particular realities in this country.

I think the reason why this assumption is strongly held - and this point has to be made - is that it is informed by the very racist conviction that black people are inherently prone to crime. [Interjections.] They contend that a predominantly black government would, therefore, never be able to contain crime precisely because it is black. Of course, they are not saying these things overtly. But covertly, this is exactly what they are saying in their darkest of corners. [Interjections.]

I am not going to spend quality time this afternoon responding to all sorts of trivialities from certain members in this Chamber. [Interjections.] According to this very racist perspective, they contend that a black government is therefore withholding the crime statistics from the public to hide its collusion in the perpetration of what is considered, in the darkest of corners wherever they are, antiwhite crime. They are not saying this overtly. They are not saying it in the open. The allied media is not making this point either. But, covertly, in the darkest of corners wherever they meet, these are the points they make. [Interjections.] And consistently so.

The point has to be made that those convinced of this view have therefore resorted to all manner of measures to produce their own crime statistics. We know for a fact that these opposition parties have gone out of their way to lure certain members of the SA Police Service to give them crime statistics. They have been threatening us over the past year, saying that they would make available their own statistics. [Interjections.] This is consistent with their antidemocratic stance - I am still referring to the opposition parties - and they have done this from time immemorial. They have said quite openly that they consider themselves as parallel to our Government, so much so that they have had to threaten us with all manner of very myopic actions to the effect that they were going to take this Government to court to force the Minister of Safety and Security, Comrade Steve Tshwete, to make available these statistics. [Interjections.] No responsible government, no responsible Minister, would have acceded to this somewhat myopic call to release misleading statistics in this country. [Interjections.] What would have happened to effective policing in this country? [Interjections.]

At the same time, the very same forces will make full-scale protestations about the value of good governance. In practice they are involved in very practical actions to make our very own country ungovernable through their collusion and connivance with certain elements within the SAPS to make available these very misleading statistics, which they wanted to use against this Government.

The point has to be made that our people have given us an overwhelming mandate to govern. Whether they make this call today or whether they make another call tomorrow, we just do not give a hoot or a button. We will only respond to the calls made by the majority of South Africans, who have given us this mandate to govern. [Interjections.] They continue to … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I am glad to note that hon members are awake, but we must proceed.

Ms N V MOKONYANE (Gauteng): Chairperson, I appreciate the fact that you called me ``Mokonyane’’, because some other surname is written on your speakers’ list. One of the things that we should seek to do in this House is not to let people who have failed to do things that have been proved possible even for puppies, tell us what to do. I am told that it takes a puppy seven days to open its eyes and see, but it has taken some members of this particular House, and some parties, seven years to see, and yet they still do not see. [Interjections.] I think we should not waste our time trying to help them to see, because it is not their priority to see the reality and appreciate the challenges. Therefore, what we need to appreciate is that we are alone in this crusade to bring about a better life for the people of this country. [Interjections.]

The President of our country, on behalf of Government, made a commitment to address the relationship between crime and poverty. We have concretised that symbiotic relationship in our work. We also have a responsibility to ensure that there is a balance between respect for human life and dignity and respect for the rule of law.

In keeping with the approach outlined in the National Crime Prevention Strategy and the White Paper on Safety and Security, we advocate a dual approach to safety and security which is effective and efficient law enforcement, as well as the provision of crime prevention programmes to reduce the occurrence of crime.

As a province, we have already started with an intense monitoring and evaluation exercise of police services within Gauteng by visiting a number of stations. The visits are sometimes unannounced, and some are structured and done with the police management and the police inspectorate. This approach necessitated that, together with the police management, we implement corrective measures that will ensure proper and efficient service delivery.

Through this monitoring and evaluation exercise, we have realised that there is a problem with data gathering, the recruitment policy, the utilisation of resources and the unavailability of senior officials, especially at the peak hours when crime occurs. One of the important interventions that we have come up with is the clustering of police stations so as to maximize the utilisation of resources, and this has had a great impact in terms of crime combating.

As part of utilising police personnel at our disposal better, we are going to remove senior officers from performing support services, and move them to functional services, where their skills are needed most. Currently in Gauteng we have been able to identify no fewer than 4 000 members who have been doing support services, and are now going to perform core function functional services at the client service centres. It is no secret that we, as the ANC Government, have made an undertaking that will better the lives of our people through interaction and partnerships with various stakeholders. In order to achieve this, a number of initiatives have been planned for this year, and our emphasis will be mainly on strengthening and capacitating community-based organisations, including our community policing forums, or CPFs.

One of our priorities will be to ensure that we embark on an integrated social crime prevention initiative. This involves taking into consideration external factors that impact on peace and stability in local communities. These include unemployment, illiteracy, housing infrastructure, health issues and the shortage of recreational facilities.

In order to deal with the problem of crime effectively, our priorities and focus have not necessarily changed. We will be prioritising the monitoring and evaluating of police, the building of good and sound community police relations, the co-ordination of the criminal justice cluster, ensuring the implementation and co-ordination of social crime prevention, the focus on violence against women, children and the elderly and lastly youth crime prevention, which includes the use of firearms and substance abuse, as well as gangsterism.

I assume that hon members will all agree with me that the active involvement of our communities in working with different law enforcement agencies is of critical importance. We have made and will continue to make appeals to communities, because Government and the police cannot deal with crime on their own. It is therefore imperative for various communities and individuals to get involved.

Since the last local government elections we have already started to engage the executive mayors, as well as my public safety counterparts in the three metros and district councils of Gauteng. We have sensitised them about the responsibility of local government in crime prevention, and they are in a process of developing their own local crime prevention strategies. Such strategies will form part and parcel of their broad integrated development plans, the IDPs. We are also expecting ward councillors to integrate their activities and form partnerships with various CPF subforums in order to take into account community needs in the development of their community plans.

Our ultimate target is to see local government dealing with issues that are within their own competences. It is a known fact that crime is not caused by one event, but rather results from a combination of many factors. Whether or not crime is committed usually depends on three sets of characteristics, which are: those of the offender, those of the potential offender, and those of the environment where crime is likely to be committed.

The establishment of the metropolitan police department in Johannesburg has enhanced visible policing, and within a short space of time a number of arrests have been made. We are now busy evaluating the applications of both Ekurhuleni and Tshwane.

The good results achieved after the installation of our close circuit television in Johannesburg’s central business district have made it necessary for us to put plans in place to roll out this particular project to other areas within greater Johannesburg.

Crimes against women, children and the elderly are of high concern to each and every member of the public. In conjunction with the departments of health and social services we will continue to implement various interventions in areas such as Alexandra, Soweto, Kathlehong and Sebokeng.

With regard to the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act, we have identified a number of shortcomings and made efforts to correct the situation. We will be providing further training and retraining sessions for police officials, as well as other entities within the criminal justice cluster. One of the weaknesses that we have identified is that police officials do not necessarily adhere to standing orders or the national instructions with regard to the implementation of this Act.

The fact that we have national departments functioning across the three spheres of government also creates a problem with regard to co-ordination and co-operation in the criminal justice system. Our department has been entrusted with the responsibility to co-ordinate the activities of the criminal justice cluster within the province. Though it may be informal, there has been a lot of co-operation, as well as appreciation from other Ministers here. This is something that we really appreciate. Therefore, a need for a co-ordination strategy for the cluster does exist at a provincial level.

In this regard meetings and workshops have been held with various components of the cluster in Gauteng. We have identified the following projects for implementation by the cluster: an integrated justice system, performance management systems, a management information system to monitor court performance, a feasibility study in terms of municipal courts, the upgrading of the jurisdiction of certain courts that have a huge backlog and the marketing of pretrial services. There was also a discussion around the demarcations, particularly of the criminal justice cluster, because the victims of crime end up becoming victims again because of the unco- ordinated boundaries that exist within this particular cluster.

Our Government has since 1994 introduced a policy on community policing. We make an appeal to our national Minister of Safety and Security to speed up the process of reviewing the regulations and making sure that we have guidelines that will ensure direct accountability and direct community representation in our own community policy forums. We have, as a department, responsibly established a complaints telephone line that operates on a 24-hour basis. In all seven policing areas, including the provincial commissioner’s office, we have police officials that are always available to help members of the public with their complaints against the police.

We did not shy away from the challenges. The good work that is being done by national Ministers at a national level is sometimes undermined by our own foot soldiers at local level. Here we definitely have to make sure that we crack the whip. One of the good things that we have seen happening in Gauteng is a co-ordinated effort by members of the criminal justice system at a provincial level to identify priority areas such as rooting out corruption within the criminal justice cluster. Here we have been successful in some instances.

In Soweto we had a magistrate who has now been charged on several counts relating to issues of fraud, corruption and collaborating with criminals. He was arrested by members of the SA Police Service and prosecuted by the Directorate of Public Prosecutions and we are sure that he is going to be put in custody by officials from the national Department of Correctional Services. We believe and hope that the nation will finally be able to curb crime. However, there has to be an appreciation of the fact that we have inherited an institution that was actually flooded with the baggage of some men and women who were not necessarily loyal to us. It is also important that, together, we make sure that we recruit new blood. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! The hon Fenyane seems to be the resident cheerleader here. [Laughter.] Order, hon members! Let us proceed.

Mr J S MABONA (Mpumalanga): Chairperson, I think before 1994 there was no criminal justice system in this country, but there was what one calls, in Afrikaans ``skop en donner’’ [a thorough beating]. That is the truth.

Ukukhahlela umnyango ubambe umuntu umfak’ejele … [To kick a door and take a person and throw that person into jail … ]

… without any investigation. I must say that from the perspective of Mpumalanga, I think everybody here knows about the issue of commandos, which have made sure that they have a territory to themselves only. But following the visit last year, on my invitation, by the criminal justice cluster, which was headed by the Minister of Defence, Minister Terror Lekota, I think everything has changed. Things have changed for the better for most of the people of Mpumalanga who were engulfed by this abuse of women and children on farms, who were beaten with no recourse to justice. Today, I must say, we in Mpumalanga are happy that progress has been made in this regard.

What has brought about this progress? The provincial commissioner, Commissioner Nkabinde, the community of Mpumalanga and I have said: Enough is enough''. The commissioner initiated operationGijima Tsotsi’’. With regard to the tsotsis or farmers, who are a very tiny minority, we have made sure that they are running. We have had 300 cases opened against some of them. They are, at the present moment, appearing in the regional magistrates’ court.

As all of us know, Mpumalanga was the base from which the apartheid government carried out oppression. We have farmers in a place called Rosenegan who kill people as they wish, who form vigilante groups of black people and use them against their black brothers and sisters. We are happy to say the SAPS has made an improvement in terms of arresting these individuals.

Maybe it is not parliamentary to name them, but I will name this one farmer, Landman, who has 52 cases against him. His cases include abuse, infringing labour tenancy regulations, abusing women and children, assault, causing grievous bodily harm and attempted murder. What is also critical is that one still has elements in the SAPS investigation who actually tip the very same Landman off before he is arrested. [Interjections.]

I must say that we thank the Minister and his commissioner, Commissioner Jackie Selebi. There is transformation in Mpumalanga. Transformation ranging from the top management to middle management has made sure that the people on the ground, even the members of the Police Service, now have confidence in the justice system and the police.

I do not think we need to listen to opposition parties, some of which do not really understand what abuse means, but just theorise about it. They have been enjoying the fruits of abuse or oppression, some of them for the whole of their political lives.

I must say that the Minister’s appointment of Commissioner Jackie Selebi has actually made sure that wheels in the police service turn. The transformation has begun to be visible in the Police Service.

I must also indicate that a lot of people have been talking about resources. Yes, indeed, the resources are not enough, and this is not of our making. It is because of our history. We are sitting, as the Government, with a situation where one has to choose between transferring resources from the health sector to the justice system and developing these two sectors simultaneously, and this Government is doing just that.

We need opposition parties to help us to change the mindset of the people that they have been lying to about crime. I think if crime were as bad as the opposition parties portray it, nobody would be alive in South Africa. Everybody would be dead.

We must commend the SAPS for the tremendous job they are doing. For instance, this Government has arrested more than 2 500 policemen who are corrupt. Before 1994 no policeman was arrested for corruption. We have done that, and the opposition parties have closed their eyes and minds to the successes of this Government.

Let us move forward with the process of transformation and democratisation in this country. We think that the majority of South Africans, black and white, are happy with the way this Government is taking this process of democratisation and of nation-building forward. Those who just want to be in Government and rule will only jeer at the ANC and speculate.

For this country to succeed, peace and stability are prerequisites. This matter of peace and stability for the citizens of the Republic of South Africa has equal relevance to our neighbouring countries, and vice versa. The ANC-led Government’s approach to peace and stability has, indeed, reflected the regional, continental and international dimension. The Government’s vision is to create structures of civilian oversight at a local level to ensure that the SAPS becomes accountable to civilian authority.

It has been mentioned that community policing forums are a necessary instrument to achieve the goal of a society where the members of the public are actively participating in handling matters of safety and security. In the past, when one saw a policeman or a policewoman one would run away. Today, when members of communities see policemen and policewomen, they ask: What is it that we can do to help you achieve the objectives of the country regarding crime? That is what our people are asking themselves.

The establishment of the community policing forums is being expanded to include the criminal justice system as a whole. A human resource training programme has been developed to empower members of the CPFs to participate maximally in all decision-making processes.

The President’s vision is to strengthen the economy of the country, hence the National Crime Prevention Strategy was drafted, focusing on enforcement and social crime prevention. The multidisciplinary mechanism was established to address all the nonpoliceable crime and root causes. As I have indicated, the appointment of Commissioner Jackie Selebi has strengthened the transformation. His strategic approach to transformation focuses on all dimensions and he has, among other things, included the introduction of the 70:30 ratio, which was tied up to an ultimatum. The output of this strategy features in the drastic changes visible in the SAPS senior management, as well as the operational impact created by effective distribution and redistribution of resources. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Chairperson, hon members and delegates, first of all, on behalf of the criminal justice cluster, I would like to thank all the speakers who have made positive contributions to this debate. I am sure I am speaking on behalf of the Ministers when I say that we are feeling much reinforced and elevated by some of the contributions. They were really outstanding. By the time we retire back to our departments, we should be able to effect some of the suggestions that have been put forward here.

Very much like the hon Mabona, I never thought, after so many years in this Parliament, that I could listen to a member of the DA making a contribution to any particular debate, either in this House or in the other one. But I must confess that today I was really moved by the contribution made by the hon member up there. [Applause.] I was greatly moved. The areas that he touched on are exactly the areas on which we are concentrating right now. The suggestions that he has made, particularly around our investigative capacity, we believe are going to be very beneficial to what we are doing.

I also want to thank Mr Matthee. I have been talking to him about a very sensitive matter and he has been very disciplined throughout, and he never leaked what our discussions were about, that is around policing, to anybody, and never even asked me a question about that. To me that established beyond doubt that his concerns about crime levels in the country are quite genuine. [Applause.] And I am pretty happy about that.

Of course, the points made here by the MECs are very valid, strong points. We endorse all of them, but I am not going to dwell much on what they have said because most of the time I am with them, discussing all the strategies together with them, and they are ready at any given moment, even on weekends, to meet with me, canvass ideas and map our way forward.

But there are some issues that I want to discuss, issues that have consistently escaped the attention of the Government’s detractors, and even universities for that matter, about the crime situation in the country. According to the media, it is as if we are operating in a situation where there are no researchers, no universities to do research, looking into the problems and all those kinds of things. So I said to my colleagues that I would just address these issues, otherwise I would have liked to go to town about some of the issues and about the support of my colleagues from the provinces.

That there is a serious crime problem in this country has never been contested by anyone in Government, least of all in the entire criminal justice system. What is contested, however, is the notion paraded all over in the media that South Africa is sliding into a hopeless situation of lawlessness which has overwhelmed the entire spectrum of law-enforcement agencies, particularly the police. Hysteria, exaggerations and the hurling of insults at the Government are not going to help redeem the situation. Neither will political point-scoring take us anywhere nearer the desired end, other than just providing short-term satisfaction to those politicians who have adopted this stance.

Yes, we do have a problem on our hands. But it is simply not true that the situation is out of control. It is not true that the criminal justice system is not working. The court process project and numerous other initiatives that we have launched in the last two years are an eloquent expression of our commitment to giving reality to the concept of an integrated criminal justice system - the first ever in the history of this country. And it is working. It is not true that it is not working.

It is equally not true that the police are overwhelmed by the situation. On the contrary, the police are on top of the situation. The proof of that is exactly what the hon Nkuna mentioned concerning the situation in Pollsmoor and other prisons. The situation is not unique to Pollsmoor, but, as the Minister himself stated here, applies to Pretoria Central Prison, Sun City and police holding cells. If, as the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development was saying, those people who are in those prisons today, in those holding cells, have put themselves behind bars, then we need to be examined upstairs. [Laughter.]

The proof of that, in very simple terms, is the fact that the prisons of this country and police holding cells are bursting at the seams as a result of our national crime combating strategy, particularly Operation Crackdown.

As South Africans we need a more sober assessment of our situation, the kind of self assessment that will lead us to a situation in which we begin to define, in very concrete terms, what roles each of us must play to bring about normality in our society.

We need a change of mindset and stereotypes, and I am referring in this instance to those of us who sit on the benches in this Parliament. Already, numerous South Africans have come forward and offered help in various ways

• advice, finance, information technology equipment, etc. They did so, and continue to do so, because they are inspired by the simple truth that South Africa is their country, and that no saviour from up above or just the police on their own will redeem the situation. There are those of us, however, who are still content to take a position in the pavilion, under the inscription, ``The onlooker sees most of the game,’’ and from that position of noncommitted spectatorship hurl abuse at the Government. It does not help to spectate. One should get involved in the act of one’s own liberation from crime. One should not ask what this Government is doing about the crime situation, but ask: What am I doing to contribute towards the strategies that are in place to combat crime in this country? [Applause.]

There is absolutely no serious-minded South African who would resort to the pavilion, stay there and spectate, while the SA Police Service and the criminal justice system as a whole are busy fighting the criminals in our country - who would say, ``I am going to be content with finger-pointing and asking the question: What are they doing?’’

In the media, in all their criticism, there is not even the suggestion of a better alternative to what the department has in place. All they have is silly cartoons, insults and all those things. That is all that they have. [Applause.] It is a moment of jubilation. They are in their element and happy, not coming forward to say, ``What can we do to help in this situation?’’ as many other South Africans are doing. Business Against Crime has been outstanding in this regard by coming forward. On behalf of the cluster, I would like to thank them most profoundly. In Xhosa they would say:

Umthi oneengwenye uyakhwelwa ngamakhwenkwe. [Boys climb up a tree that has ripe plums.]

I would like to take the matter further and say that the handiest instrument in the fight against crime is the improvement of the socioeconomic situation of our historically deprived communities, which, to this day, continues to be the mainstay of all kinds of violent crimes.

The townships, the creation of the apartheid system, remain ready incubators to hatch crime. Poverty and unemployment have forced some people in certain areas to collude with criminals in return for financial gain. The idea would be for the industrial and commercial houses of this country to take a bold stand and say: Alongside the Government, we are going to invest and create jobs in these historically and economically depressed areas. I listened to the hon member here, Hennie Bester, when he was arguing that what should be taking place was ensuring that, for starters, there was a safe and secure environment for business. That is a distortion of what should, in actual fact, be the reality. Why does he not say the reverse should happen?

It is the responsibility of business, alongside the Government, to create the climate. Business must come in to say they are going to invest in Manenberg, Langa, Guguletu, Mdantsane and Soweto, and are going to plough their money in there. Because once they begin to do that, they will directly be bringing down the levels of crime and offering job opportunities to people. I am not pleading in mitigation for criminals. I must be understood very well. But job creation is the essence of the matter, and we are not addressing it but instead are shunning that responsibility.

We can marshal a million men and women in blue across the face of this country, but will not succeed in vanquishing crime as long as we have not addressed the basic causes of crime, because poverty and crime are closely related. That is a truth that we cannot run away from. I think we need to address that. I have a specific experience, just here in Manenberg. The hon Bester is not far away from there. People were saying that they were in collusion with criminals, with drug lords, and were hiding their stuff and guns in our houses in return for financial gain, because there was a kid that had to be taken to school. We did not have the money to do that ourselves. And that is not just in Manenberg; it is a universal phenomenon across the face of the country.

We have to address that issue. We have to say this even to those of our friends abroad who are arguing that they cannot come and invest in South Africa because the crime levels are high. That is a hypocritical argument, because some of them were investing in this country when it was at its most violent, under apartheid. When bombs were exploding here, when we were pleading with them, and when war was going on in this country, they were investing here and talking about constructive engagement and all that kind of thing.

Why are we not saying to them that, actually, investing in South Africa is a direct contribution to stabilising the crime situation, because they are creating jobs, alleviating poverty and reinforcing the hand of Government in the programmes that it has unleashed? Why cannot we argue along those same lines, together with our friends there?

Another area, of course, is a single move by the private sector. While setting the scene for outsiders to invest in our country, they must, at the same time, address one other crime-related problem: the moral degeneration in our midst. That is a critical element.

If communities are going to say openly that they are going to collude with criminals, then there is a problem. If parents are chasing kids into the street, there is a problem in this country that is not the responsibility of the police: the social fabric, crime and moral decay. What is happening, particularly in the black townships, is terrible. So the ANC, the UDM, the ACDP and all the rest of us in this House need to do spadework to address the issue that the hon Mokonyane and hon Maduna were talking about: the need for demand reduction to combat these bad tendencies of buying stolen property.

In Soweto alone, in less than three months, police confiscated over a million cellphones. Soweto has become a lucrative market for thieves. They will kill a person for a cellphone, because they have a market. How are we helping to address that mindset among our people which tells them that it is better to negotiate with a thief for a car than to negotiate a deal with the bank? We need to move that mindset. That is a problem, and some of these communities have become what water is to fish for criminals. They swim there.

Those of us who fought here in the underground struggle know very well that if a community is supportive, the police will never uproot one from it. One can take cover and do one’s work there. We find a situation of that nature obtaining in South Africa. We need to turn it around. We need a culture of revolution that is going to address this problem here, and the police are never going to do that job. It is outside their ambit and mandate. It is us, the big talkers in these Chambers here, to get there when we go to do constituency work and address these problems that are there in the communities, which give that favourable atmosphere in which they can grow and flourish.

If a person is selling cabbages, and has a market and people love cabbages, that person is going to be rich because of having that market. But the day those people say that they do not want the person’s cabbages, and they want sweet potatoes, then the person will go hungry, as there is no market.

Why are we not closing this market? Why are we not turning this whole thing around to say we are not going to allow this ward or council area to become a lucrative market for stolen goods? We did it in the fight against apartheid. We have no business to encourage a situation in which we say, ``If crime is like this, I am going to leave the country.’’

I do not think we have a place for people who see South Africa as a second haven and who are not prepared to roll up their sleeves and say, ``This is my country and nobody else is going to resolve this problem other than myself.’’ Today some of them are being paraded on the front pages of the weekend papers every weekend. Perhaps even next weekend we are going to get another doctor. Some of us know of doctors or pharmacists practising in Soweto who have been subjected to attacks by criminals, but have vowed that they would not give in, but instead are going to work with the community in Soweto, stay and maintain their practices.

There is a war to be fought. Firstly, we want courageous, patriotic South Africans who, at any rate, know that history. [Applause.] Crime in this country has a long pedigree; it is not something new. Those townships were meant for nothing else other than to be the mainstay of criminal activities. That is what they are, and that thing is not going to end overnight. As for that thing of standing arms akimbo, asking, What are they doing about this crime?'' Let me ask the people who say that,What are you doing about it?’’ [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, I am speaking after two Steves. I join my colleague Steve Tshwete in thanking a whole lot of people who have assisted us, Business Against Crime and foreign countries through their embassies and also directly, etc, to deal with these problems.

I just want to respond within the five minutes allocated to me to just a few things. I must say, by the way, that we have had a very good, vibrant and interesting discussion. I join him again in thanking the House for that.

The hon member Matthee asks if there is hope. For anyone who struggled against apartheid when there was no hope, the answer to this question is bound to be in the affirmative, because one could easily have been tempted to say that the might of the SA Police, and the SA Defence Force, white racism and grinding poverty could not be overcome. But indeed there are those who came out and said they wanted to fight this scourge. They fought it and today, as a result, we are standing here in this House. So there is hope. The criminal element is in the minority. They are imposing on us and our communities a form of minority rule. [Applause.] So there is hope.

As some members were speaking about justice in the past, etc, I was reminded of a conversation I once had with a former Minister in Zambia, who said to me that a South African Minister quietly asked him one time, an apartheid Minister, of course, Why do you have a navy in Zambia?'' He replied,But why do you have a Minister of Justice in South Africa?’’ So, indeed, there was no justice in those days. That is why our national icon, a man who is highly regarded the world over, Nelson Mandela, had occasion to say, ``What justice can I expect from the white man when the white man denies me a bare vote, a bare say in the affairs of this country?’’ Apartheid and justice were thus not even as close as the most distant of twins.

I want to respond to hon member Hennie Bester, who says something very interesting, but it is telling again. Hennie Bester says crime is out of control, but then he qualifies his statement and says that however, here in the CBD, in Cape Town, they are succeeding against it. But they cannot do what they are doing here in the townships, and he mentions that, because there is no money to do it there. So what do you do? Keep the bloody kaffir out of the CBD. [Interjections.] Confine crime there, and then plead impecuniosity when it comes to managing crime there.

For God’s sake, that is what he told us. Let us prevent them from doing it here, and then say that we cannot prevent them from doing it in Nyanga, Guguletu, Langa, Khayelitsha, etc. [Interjections.] As long as it does not happen here where the white madam is going to see it, as she walks around in her stiletto shoes and painted nails - as long as she does not see it here - it is fine. It can affect them in Nyanga, Guguletu, etc. [Interjections.]

That is the purport of that statement. It is an innocent-sounding statement, but that is the essence. By the way, the hon Lever said something very important, but he does not do

something about what he is saying, because he repeats everything that we have been saying we are doing, and we are doing. This includes, by the way, the so-called self-appointment of Allan McKenzie. He was appointed by this Minister, after consultation with this cluster. If the member knew how Government works, he would acknowledge that Business Against Crime could not have imposed a man on us.

We went to them to ask them, as part of the assistance programmes, if they could also second someone and pay him, and they kindly obliged. Now to pretend that this did not happen and then say, ``No, we just thank those who have done it for them, because they were failing to do it’’, is sheer nonsense, for God’s sake. We went to them, and these are noble South Africans who are not doing it for any political reason or political gain. They are doing it because it has got to be done, and they are proud of doing it. [Applause.]

Lastly, I also want to say, because we do not want to confine ourselves to the CBDs, we mobilised the joint operations command, which included the police, the Scorpions, intelligence and some elements of the army, and took the war to Pagad and stopped the bombings. Had we confined ourselves to performance in the lily-white suburbs or CBDs, we would not have succeeded, at least to buy ourselves as this city some respite against the bombings.

For God’s sake I know she is running away, because she is running away from these basic truths. She is free to run away. [Interjections.] But the truth is … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Madam Chair, I also join my colleagues in thanking hon members for their participation in today’s debate. When I went outside, my colleagues said to me that I am the first to answer questions in the National Assembly tomorrow. I said, `Why do you disturb my spiritual tranquillity?’’ This was because I felt I was at home here, now they disturb me. [Applause.]

I just want to respond to a few members. To the hon member Matthee, I would like to say yes, we do have a shortage of personnel and resources. I believe the programmes that are outlined here this afternoon will also presuppose the fact that we are going to need more personnel for effective supervision in prisons, and also in training.

I also heard The Minister of Safety and Security saying that he is good at not asking questions about what he discussed with him. I discussed HIV/Aids with him recently. I am going to take umbrage at that spirit of his of not asking questions. He is not going to ask me questions about Aids any more, because he is good at hiding secrets. [Laughter.]

To the hon member Kent Durr I would like to say, about the report of the Inspecting Judge, yes, it is true that one does find some of these bad things happening in prison - sodomy, for instance, as he mentioned. That is why we are going to need more personnel to make sure that the supervision of what is happening in prisons, really, is more effective. I have always said that what is happening in prisons is also a mirror of what is happening in the larger society, where people, in fact, can run away from a rapist or a sodomist or something like that. But in prison one is confined. There is nowhere to run. Once these fellows are there, they are there and there is no place to hide. But we are trying to look at that. It is a gruesome situation.

About the statistics from the judge, well, I deal with the facts of what is actually happening and the numbers, and so on. The judge, on the other hand, deals with projections and diagnoses and things like that. We need to reconcile that situation of facts and projections with him.

Mof Nkuna ke nnete, ngwana wa hao ke ngwana wa ka le yena. [It is true, Mrs Nkuna, your child is my child also.]

On Youth Day, 16 June, I spent my day in Pollsmoor with the juveniles. Some of them were receiving certificates from Nicro for the learning programmes they had undergone in prison. They were being awarded the certificates. I was talking to them about the problems of our own history, of 16 June, what actually happened then and why we are all here, and why we want to go beyond that ourselves as young people.

Then there is the problem of young children. I think at this moment negotiations are going on between the judges’ and the magistrates’ offices, our department and the Department of Social Development. We as Correctional Services cannot do anything once a young child, whether he is 12 or 13 years old, has been directed to prison. They come there with an order and if we refuse them because they are too young, we are violating the Constitution. We cannot do anything. We just have to find space for them in prison.

We appeal to the magistrates and judges to make sure that another person accompanies these young people when they appear before the magistrate. The magistrate should look at other options rather than sending such a young person to prison.

An hon member talked about mangoes. I do not know whether hon members know about the case of a 14-year-old in Bloemfontein who was awaiting trial for four months. When asked, he said that he was there for stealing two mangoes

• but he was in there for four months, awaiting trial. These are some of the things that we need to deal with.

I think the Minister of Safety and Security and the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development levelled praise at the hon Mr Lever, which I will not do. I want to quote my colleague here, saying that one does not praise a fish for swimming. A fish has to swim, one cannot praise it for swimming. It must swim, it is its job to swim. [Time expired.] [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! I think hon members are aware that that concludes the debate. We must thank the Ministers of the justice cluster. I think this has, again, been a very important interaction which we hope we will see continued.

Debate concluded.

The Council adjourned at 19:22. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                        FRIDAY, 15 JUNE 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Minister of Home Affairs on 7 June 2001 submitted a draft of
     the Immigration Bill, 2001, as well as a memorandum explaining the
     objects of the proposed legislation, to the Speaker and the
     Chairperson in terms of Joint Rule 159. The draft has been
     referred to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs and the Select
     Committee on Social Services by the Speaker and the Chairperson,
     respectively, in accordance with Joint Rule 159(2).

Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 The following papers have been tabled and are now referred to the
 relevant committees as mentioned below:
 (1)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Education and to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation:


     (a)     Government Notice No 50 published in Government Gazette No
          21996 dated 2 February 2001, Regulations relating to the
          provisioning of educator posts within a provincial department
          of education and its institutions and departments offices,
          made in terms of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 (Act No
          76 of 1998).


     (b)     Government Notice No 106 published in Government Gazette
          No 22001 dated 2 February 2001, Approval for the extension of
          the experimental status of the pilot programme, health and
          community care in technical colleges, made in terms of
          National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (c)     Government Notice No 107 published in Government Gazette
          No 22001 dated 2 February 2001, Approval for the extension of
          the experimental status of the pilot programme, hospitality
          studies in schools and technical colleges, made in terms of
          National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (d)     Government Notice No 259 published in Government Gazette
          No 22154 dated 20 March 2001, Call for nomination to fill two
          vacancies, made in terms of the South African Qualifications
          Authority Act, 1995 (Act No 58 of 1995).


     (e)     Government Notice No 415 published in Government Gazette
          No 22154 dated 20 March 2001, National Policy regarding
          Further Education and Training Programme: Approval of
          adjustments to the Economic Higher and Standard Grade Core
          Syllabi for Grade 12, made in terms of the National Education
          Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of 1996).


     (f)     Government Notice No 416 published in Government Gazette
          No 22154 dated 20 March 2001, Approval of an amendment to the
          aggregate for Senior Certificate candidates offering technical
          college instructional offerings as part of the programmes,
          made in terms of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act
          No 27 of 1996).


     (g)     Government Notice No 417 published in Government Gazette
          No 22154 dated 20 March 2001, National Policy regarding
          Further Education and Training Programmes: Approval of the
          drafting and documentation of the National Education Policy
          regarding the Gauteng Youth College Programme, made in terms
          of the National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act No 27 of
          1996).


 (2)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Health and to the Select Committee on Social Services:


     (a)     Government Notice No R.127 published in Government Gazette
          No 22052 dated 12 February 2001, Regulations in terms of the
          Allied Health Professions Act, 1982, made in terms of section
          38 of the Allied Health Professions Act, 1982 (Act No 63 of
          1982).


     (b)     Government Notice No R.266 published in Government Gazette
          No 22157 dated 26 March 2001, Correction to the Government
          Notice No R.127 of 12 February 2001, made in terms of the
          Allied Health Professions Act, 1982 (Act No 63 of 1982).


     (c)     Government Notice No R.44 published in Government Gazette
          No 21983 dated 19 January 2001, Regulations relating to
          registration as a dental technician and related matters:
          Amendment, made in terms of section 50 of the Dental
          Technicians Act, 1979 (Act No 19 of 1979).


     (d)     Government Notice No R.156 published in Government Gazette
          No 22076 dated 23 February 2001, Regulations regarding the
          registration and training of Student Dental Technicians and
          Student Dental Technologists, made in terms of section 50 of
          the Dental Technicians Act, 1979 (Act No 19 of 1979).


     (e)     Government Notice No R.253 published in Government Gazette
          No 22148 dated 23 March 2001, Regulations relating to
          registration as a Dental Technician and related matters:
          Amendment, made in terms of section 50 of the Dental
          Technicians Act, 1979 (Act No 19 of 1979).


     (f)     Government Notice No R.43 published in Government Gazette
          No 21983 dated 19 January 2001, Regulations regarding
          processed foodstuffs, made in terms of section 15(1) of the
          Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No 54
          of 1972).


     (g)     Government Notice No R.239 published in Government Gazette
          No 22133 dated 19 January 2001, Regulations relating to salt,
          made in terms of section 15(1) of the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics
          and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No 54 of 1972).
     (h)     Government Notice No R.366 published in Government Gazette
          No 22258 dated 4 May 2001, Regulations governing the labelling
          of foodstuffs obtained through certain techniques of genetic
          modification, made in terms of section 15(1) of the
          Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act No 54
          of 1972).


     (i)     Government Notice No R.228 published in Government Gazette
          No 22133 dated 16 March 2001, Regulations defining the scope
          of the Profession of Optometry, made in terms of section 33(1)
          of the Health Professions Act, 1974 (Act No 56 of 1974).


     (j)     Government Notice No R.229 published in Government Gazette
          No 22133 dated 16 March 2001, List of approved health
          facilities for the purposes of performing community service by
          dentists in the year 2001-2002, made in terms of Regulation
          5.1 of the Regulations relating to Performance of Community
          Service by the profession of dentists.


     (k)     Government Notice No R.237 published in Government Gazette
          No 22133 dated 16 March 2001, Regulations relating to
          qualifications for registration of assistant clinical
          technologists and registration of persons qualified outside
          the Republic, made in terms of section 61(1), read with
          sections 24 and 25 of the Health Professions Act, 1974 (Act No
          56 of 1974).


     (l)     Government Notice No R.251 published in Government Gazette
          No 22148 dated 23 March 2001, Regulations relating to
          qualifications for registration of clinical technologists and
          registration of persons qualified outside the Republic, made
          in terms of section 61(1), read with sections 24 and 25 of the
          Health Professions Act, 1974 (Act No 56 of 1974).


     (m)     Government Notice No R.394 published in Government Gazette
          No 22284 dated 18 May 2001, List of approved facilities for
          the purposes of performing community service by medical
          practitioners in the year 2002, made in terms of Regulation
          5.1 of the Regulations relating to Performance of Community
          Service by persons registering in terms of the Health
          Professions Act, 1974 (Act No 56 of 1974).


     (n)     Government Notice No 407 published in Government Gazette
          No 22291 dated 14 May 2001, Nominations for representatives to
          serve on the Board of the National Health Laboratory Service
          (NHLS), made in terms of section 8(2) of the National Health
          Laboratory Service Act, 2000 (Act No 37 of 2000).


     (o)     Government Notice No R.395 published in Government Gazette
          No 22284 dated 18 May 2001, List of approved facilities for
          the purposes of performing community service by pharmacists in
          the year 2002, made in terms of Regulation 3 of the
          Regulations relating to Performance of Pharmaceutical
          Community Services.


     (p)     Proclamation No R.16 published in Government Gazette No
          22052 dated 12 February 2001, Commencement of the
          Chiropractors, Homeopaths and Allied Health Service
          Professions Second Amendment Act, 2000 (Act No 50 of 2000)
          from 12 February 2001.


     (q)     Proclamation No 30 published in Government Gazette No
          22287 dated 11 May 2001, Commencement of certain sections of
          the National Health Laboratory Service Act, 2000 (Act No 37 of
          2000) from 10 May 2001.


     (r)     Government Notice No 414 published in Government Gazette
          No 22293 dated 14 May 2001, Publication of Explanatory Summary
          of the National Laboratory Service Amendment Bill, 2001.


 (3)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Finance and to the Select Committee on Finance:


     (a)     Government Notice No R.349 published in the Government
          Gazette No 22219 dated 9 April 2001, Public Finance Management
          Act, 1999: Treasury Regulations, made in terms of 76 of the
          Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).


     (b)     Government Notice No R.357 published in the Government
          Gazette No 22248 dated 20 April 2001, Designation of an
          institution of which the activities do not fall within the
          meaning of "the business of a bank" ("Ithala Development
          Finance Corporation Limited" formerly known as "KwaZulu
          Finance and Investment Corporation Limited").


     (c)     Government Notice No R.303 published in the Government
          Gazette No 22234 dated 26 April 2001, Appointment of an
          authorised dealer in foreign exchange, made in terms of
          Paragraph 3(a) of the Government Notice No R.1112 of 1
          December 1961.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of
     Vote 9 - Defence, Trading Account for Medical Stock for 1999-2000
     and the Performance Audit on Naval Dockyard Simon's Town [RP 118-
     2000].


 (2)    The Financial and Fiscal Commission's Submission on the Division
     of Revenue for 2002-2003.

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 Report and Financial Statements of the National Gambling Board for 1999-
 2000, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
 Statements for 1999-2000.

1. The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:

 Report of the Independent Electoral Commission regarding the Management
 and Administration of the Represented Political Parties' Fund for 1998-
 99, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
 Statements of the Represented Political Parties' Fund for 1998-99 [RP
 46-2001].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs on Study Tour to Gauteng, dated 27 February 2001:

 The Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs, having
 undertaken a study tour to Gauteng on 18 and 19 May 2000, reports as
 follows:


 A.     Delegation


     The delegation consisted of Ms R A Ndzanga, Ms B N Dlulane, Ms B
     Thompson and Mr T C Thisani (Committee Secretary).


     The delegation held a meeting with representatives of the
     following claimants: Albertsville, Ellison and Steynberg, Lady
     Selbourne and Highlands. Present at the meeting were the
     following: Albertsville representatives - G J Braam, R J Goodall
     and D A Chota; Lady Selbourne representatives - M P S Makopo and V
     I R Sibiya; Ellison and Steynberg representatives - R R Mashego, J
     S Campbell, R E Motsei, J Molapo, K Molapo and M J Mutle;
     Highlands representatives - I Seckle and G Seckle; Regional Land
     Claims Commission (RLCC) - Ms E Mashinini (Regional Land Claims
     Commissioner - Gauteng and North West), T Sebola, M Hlekane, M
     Mutlou, M Mallane and B Mphela (Department of Land Affairs).


 B.     Albertsville


     1. Background


          All claims lodged, are in respect of loss of freehold title to
          individually-owned properties in the township of Albertsville.
          223 claims were lodged with the RLCC office for Gauteng and
          North West on or before 31 December 1998. The claims were in
          respect of 520 properties (some people were claiming more than
          one property). To date 188 claims have been gazetted, after
          thorough investigation and verification. This process is
          ongoing and is nearing completion.


          The claimants have formed a committee, known as the Community
          Association for the Restoration of Land (CAL). It represents
          the majority of the claimants. At present the body has power
          of attorney to lodge claims and assist in obtaining
          documentation for research in respect of the claims. Steps are
          currently being taken to obtain a mandate from the claimants,
          which will authorise the committee to negotiate and settle
          claims on their behalf. All claims that have been accepted,
          comply with the relevant provisions of the Act - in accordance
          with section 2, the claimants were dispossessed of their right
          in land after 19 June 1913 or are direct descendants of the
          persons dispossessed. Due to the racial laws and practices of
          the past, it may be deemed that the claimants have not
          received just and equitable compensation.


          The history of acquisition and dispossession of rights in land
          has given rise to the Albertsville claims.


          The claims are for restoration of land rights in the township
          of Albertsville. Albertsville is situated in a shallow valley
          south of Northcliff Ridge and is under the jurisdiction of the
          Northern Metropolitan Local Council of Greater Johannesburg.


          The first reference to the suburb of Albertsville, portion of
          the farm Waterval 211, was on 1 October 1896, when auctioneer
          H J Morkel offered stands of sale on behalf of the
          Albertsville syndicate. The area came to be known as
          Albertsville, named after the Alberts family who leased part
          of the farm Waterval from J P Ackerman. Initially only whites
          could own stands in Albertsville.


          Through application of the Slums Act of 1934, "coloured"
          occupiers of properties in the inner city areas were moved out
          to provide additional space for industry and commerce. In 1935
          the Johannesburg city council applied successfully to the
          Secretary of Native Affairs to declare Albertsville a coloured
          township. The suburb was rapidly built up as people moved in
          from Fordsburg, Jeppe and Doornfontein. Houses, shops and
          community buildings were erected, many by the community
          itself.


          As a result, by the mid-1940s, Albertsville had become a mixed-
          race area, occupied mostly by coloureds but also by Indians,
          Chinese and whites.


     2. History of dispossession


          The first intimation that "coloured people" were to be
          removed, came in 1949, when there was correspondence between
          the town clerk of Johannesburg and the then Native
          Commissioner, to the effect that Albertsville might become a
          whites-only area.


          During the 1950s, various laws and proclamations relating to
          the Group Areas Act were enacted, giving a legal basis to the
          dispossession of the "non-white" people of Albertsville. The
          first part of the removal procedure commenced in 1956 when
          "Searchers Reports" were circulated to property owners. This
          form required information as to the size, date of acquisition
          and mortgage bonds of the affected properties, as well as
          details of the owners and occupants, including information
          pertaining to their racial group.


          In 1957 notices in terms of section 17(1) of the Group Areas
          Development Act were sent to all owners, informing them that
          their property had been included in the list of affected
          properties. It also mentioned that any objections should be
          lodged by a certain date. Virtually all the owners submitted
          written objections.


          A valuation of all the properties was then conducted by the
          Group Areas Board. This valuation was also challenged and
          disputed by some of the Albertsville residents. The claimants
          brought a test case on the validity of the Group Areas
          Valuation, which was dismissed with costs. The culmination of
          resistance resulted in a public enquiry held in Johannesburg
          in December 1961. A significant number of organisations
          submitted written testimonies, contesting Albertsville's
          change of status to a white group area. Their submissions were
          turned down.


          From the date of the proclamation of 1956, which gazetted
          Albertsville for future occupation and ownership by whites,
          the residents of Albertsville began to sell their properties
          to the Group Areas Board. Others waited until after a public
          hearing and the final proclamation of May 1962. After this
          date the final removal of the people of Albertsville commenced
          in earnest.


          Albertsville land-owners were severely disadvantaged by having
          to move. No money was made available for relocation and
          transport. They were entitled only to a preferential first
          option to buy stands in Bosmont, where there were no services
          such as shops, post offices, etc, at the time. Also the
          enforced move to Bosmont involved very high costs because
          stands were expensive, Bosmont being close to an industrial
          area.


          Many residents chose not to go to Bosmont and migrated to Cape
          Town or emigrated. Less affluent families had to move to high
          density, low quality council flats in Riverlea and Western
          Native Location (which became a "coloured" area), and became
          tenants of the council.


          Although the Slums Act was initially used to remove coloured
          people from the inner city areas of Johannesburg to
          Albertsville in 1935, and such a removal was definitely
          racially motivated, this original removal is not the subject
          of the present claims, which are based on removal from
          Albertsville between 1956 and 1965. The legislation used, and
          the proclamations and practices which flowed from this
          legislation, was the Group Areas Act and the Group Areas
          Development Act.


          The initial indication of impending group areas legislation,
          which made removals a national competence, was correspondence
          in 1949 between the town clerk of Johannesburg and the Native
          Commissioner of the Transvaal, which mentioned that a
          possibility existed that the township of Albertsville may be
          zoned as a "European" area.


     3. Assessment of compensation


          According to the claimants, the valuation of their properties,
          conducted by the Group Areas Board, was cursory, many
          properties not even having been entered physically - the
          valuation was "done from the street". It would appear from
          extant files of the Group Areas Board (now known as Community
          Development files), that the valuations were done in the
          second half of 1957. In some cases the property owners (The
          Albertsville Ratepayers Association) commissioned their own
          valuation, as they were dissatisfied with the State's process
          of valuation. The amounts would differ, but the valuation done
          by the individuals was always disregarded, and an assessment
          was made at the time of actual dispossession, based on the
          original Group Areas valuation.


          A record of these State valuations done at the time is
          available in the registry office of the Gauteng Department of
          Housing, together with some independent valuations done by the
          claimants.


          In 1960 one of the claimants, Mr P A Down, with the backing of
          the Albertsville Ratepayers Association, brought a test case
          against the Group Areas Board, challenging section 69 of the
          Group Areas Act. The essence of the case was to challenge the
          powers of valuators in terms of the Group Areas Act. This case
          and the subsequent appeal were dismissed by the court with
          costs. (Down vs. Malan N O and others SA Law Reports vol. 2
          1960.)


          The court record confirms that the Group Area valuations were
          done on the basis of replacement cost and not current market
          value. In dismissing the case, the court decided that ...
          "there was no obligation on respondents to make any disclosure
          to the appellant ... There is no provision in the Act or
          regulations that the facts and information gained by the
          valuators ... In the exercise of their powers regarding
          inspections, enquiries etc. are to be specifically disclosed
          to the owner concerned, or that the owner should be given a
          hearing before the provisional valuation is made."


          Mr Down claimed that his property was worth 4 575 pounds, as
          opposed to the Group Areas valuation of 2 175 pounds.


          From the discussion on compensation, it is clear that the
          property market in Albertsville was abnormal, probably
          depressed by the uncertainties prevailing since at least 1951.


          The claimants were probably undercompensated by having their
          properties valued at replacement cost and by the manner in
          which the Group Areas valuation was conducted.


          In Mr Down's case, the undercompensation claimed by him at the
          time - 2 400 pounds in 1960 - would amount to about R150 000
          today, based on the consumer price index and on the basis of
          R2 = 1 pound, if the independent valuation is used.


          Argument as to why property valuations done at the time of
          dispossession should not be used or relied upon: Even if the
          valuations done at the time of dispossession were just and
          equitable, relying purely on this criterion to assess
          undercompensation ignores the historical circumstances at the
          time of dispossession. It assumes that restitution of
          claimants by using undercompensation as criterion will
          compensate for their loss. It ignores the historical
          circumstances at the time of dispossession. It assumes that
          restitution of claimants, by using undercompensation as the
          criterion, will compensate for their loss. It ignores the fact
          that dispossessions were forced human rights violations and
          abuses, which involved destruction of community networks and a
          loss of a range of opportunities in areas such as business,
          schooling, health, etc, not to mention the actual "pain and
          suffering" experienced. It assumes that, if compensation was
          correctly assessed by the valuation, payment sufficiently
          compensated claimants for their loss, and that the claimants
          should not receive restitution today.


          The compensation assessed by the Group Area valuation process,
          which resulted in expropriation, cannot be seen as normal
          compensation, as would be the case in respect of "normal"
          expropriation in a non-racial environment. This is because the
          compensation received could not fully restore rights as it
          could not be used to purchase equivalent property in the area
          of choice. Furthermore, in respect of normal expropriations it
          is required that expropriation be done for the good of the
          greater public. This would assume that the claimant would
          benefit in some way. Clearly that was not the case, for
          expropriation was based on racial legislation.


          With reference to the Down case, it is quite clear that even
          if the claimant had had the opportunity to take the valuation
          to court on review, it would have been a futile exercise, as
          the courts were bound by legislation of the time. Courts were
          bound to enforce racial legislation and could not challenge
          the constitutionality thereof, as Acts of Parliament were
          supreme.


          It should be determined whether the correct interpretation of
          "taking compensation into account" means deducting
          compensation received from the hypothetical market value of
          the property at dispossession, as calculated by a dubious
          "historical" valuation done today. "'Taking into account"
          means to take note thereof, and depending on the circumstances
          and/or merits of each case, whether or not it should be
          deducted.


          In conclusion, the claimants would ask that compensation
          received at the time not be used to calculate the monetary
          value of the claim, but that a method which takes into account
          the requirement for equitable redress without trying to
          establish the actual value of each claim, be used.


          The RLCC and the claimants are therefore of the opinion that
          to try to establish the monetary value of the claims of
          Albertsville through historical valuation is inadvisable. The
          principle reasons for this are as follows:


          (1) The lack of available evidence of the true nature of the
              properties at the time of dispossession.


          (2) There are serious doubts as to the accuracy of historical
              valuations.


          (3) Historical valuations fail to take the historical
              circumstances of the time into account in that they
              accept the Group Areas Valuation as legitimate, and do
              not take into account the fact that claimants were not
              able to fully restore their rights with compensation by
              re-establishing themselves in the area of their choice,
              or benefit indirectly from the use to which their
              expropriated properties would be put, as would be the
              case with a normal expropriation in a non-racial
              environment.


          (4) Applying historical valuations could lead to a situation
              which is at present pertaining to the Highlands Claims,
              where claimants might be eliminated based on historical
              valuations without other circumstances being taken into
              account, such as rights lost of business, community and
              pain and suffering. (This approach is currently being
              argued by the Department in the Land Claims Court against
              the recommendation of the Commission.)


          (5) The high cost of a historical valuation could be
              approximately R150 000, and this has not even been
              budgeted for in this financial year.


     4. Serviced site integrated approach


          (1) This alternative to historical valuations addresses the
              notion of equitable redress, and recognises the
              historical circumstances of the time.


          (2) The RLCC office for Gauteng and North West would like to
              link the value of the serviced sites of Albertsville to
              the restitution award for monetary compensation.


          (3) The Commission's reason is that this value would
              correspond to the amount the State would hypothetically
              have paid for a site for a claimant in Albertsville, had
              there been a housing development planned for the area
              today. Such an amount would be equitable in that all
              claimants would receive a benchmark award, the only
              variable being based on the size of the property they
              lost. It would therefore eliminate the tendency, as has
              been occurring with awards based on historical
              valuations, for awards to vary widely or for claims to be
              eliminated entirely. It also takes into account the fact
              that a human rights abuse occurred to all people who were
              dispossessed in Albertsville, irrespective of the
              compensation they might have received.


          (4) Awards made in this way could therefore be seen as
              recognition of the abuse suffered, rather than as an
              impossible attempt to find the exact value lost by the
              claimant. It would therefore address the notion of
              equitable redress as required by the Act.
     5. Recommendations of RLCC


          The majority of sites claimed in Albertsville were 248 square
          metres in size. Most claimants owned adjacent sites, meaning
          that they were claiming more than one property. The value of
          the 248 square metre properties, as valued by the municipal
          valuation roll of 1996, vary between R5000 and R20 000 each.
          While these figures do not reflect the current market value of
          the properties, they do give an indication of the lowest
          approximate market value. A further point to be considered, is
          that the existence of claims has probably decreased the
          current market value of the claims.


          Taking the above into account, we would recommend that a
          valuator be commissioned to find the average market value
          based on a representative sample of the properties in 1994
          (preceding the Restitution Act), as well as the current market
          value today (1999), to arrive at a value. This would establish
          the average market value per square metre of the claims in
          Albertsville. This value would be multiplied by the area of
          land actually lost by the claimants to obtain the monetary
          value of their claim. The Commission estimated that this
          amount should not exceed R30 000 per site of 248 square metres
          in size. This works out at a maximum of R120,96 per square
          metre.


          If the valuation amount is less than R20 000 per property, the
          amount would be dropped to R80,64 per square metre. We base
          this on a principle of equity, since claimants who did not
          lose registered rights have already been given sites valued at
          R14 500 each (Kipi award). We would argue that the
          Albertsville claimants lost a greater right in that they lost
          a registered right of ownership. In the cases where the
          properties are larger than 248 square metres, the compensation
          would be calculated by multiplying the average value per
          square metre by the size of the property lost. In these cases
          the amount payable would be higher, therefore the monetary
          value of the property will be based on a standard value per
          square metre of the size of the original property.


          The Commission foresees the settlement of the claims of
          Albertsville by means of the payment of monetary compensation
          based on the current market value of a serviced site in the
          present township. This is informed by the fact that the land
          claimed is substantially built up, and therefore is not
          feasible for restoration. Furthermore, there is no housing
          development taking place or planned in the area or the
          surrounding areas, which are also built up.


          In addition, the claimants could be awarded a solacium payment
          of R3 000 to be paid for each claimed property, to account for
          the consequential loss suffered by the claimants. As this
          amount cannot be individually quantified, it would serve as a
          recognition by the State of the pain, suffering, dislocation
          and additional financial loss suffered by the claimants when
          they were obliged to leave their homes and settle elsewhere.
     6. Claimants


          The individual claimants of Albertsville have, in a number of
          consultations with the Commission, indicated that they are
          interested in financial compensation. In a number of meetings,
          the Committee has expressed that they do not want to see
          widely varying awards which would be the case if the claims
          were evaluated by means of historical valuations. They have
          also indicated that they are willing to discuss the serviced
          site approach to negotiating the claims, as they recognise the
          difficulties involved in finding the exact value of what each
          claimant had lost by historical methods.


          However, the Claimants' Committee has a different view of the
          method to be used to calculate the monetary value of the
          claims. They would like an equivalent amount to the value of
          the 248 square metre site to be added on for consequential
          loss for each claimant, as opposed to the Commission's
          recommendation of R3 000. Their reasoning is that, as the
          serviced site approach ignores individual improvements on
          properties claimed, this amount is justifiable. They feel that
          the amount which would result from the Commission's proposal,
          is too small and would be rejected by the majority of the
          claimants, if put to them.


          The Northern Metropolitan Local Council is not a party to the
          claims, as the claims are for monetary compensation and the
          land claimed is privately owned. However, they have expressed
          their approval informally at meetings of the serviced site
          approach, as it would apply in other areas under their
          jurisdiction. (Pageview and Sophiatown.)


     7. Recommendations


          (1) That the Minister should decide which proposal for the
              calculation of financial compensation for the
              Albertsville claimants, as articulated by the RLCC:
              Gauteng & North West and the claimants, should be
              endorsed.
          (2) That the proposal be supported to conduct a market
              valuation to determine the average value of a serviced
              site in Albertsville.


          (3) That, if the RLCC approach is adopted, the proposal to
              make a payment for consequential loss be endorsed.


          (4) That the RLCC: Gauteng & North West be mandated to
              negotiate with the claimants as per the above-mentioned
              framework for the calculation of financial compensation.


 C.     Lady Selbourne


     1. Background


     The Lady Selbourne land claims were lodged by the originally
     dispossessed persons of the areas or their direct descendants as
     individuals. 868 individual claims for 962 properties were lodged
     with the RLCC for Gauteng and North West in terms of the
     Restitution of Land Rights Act, No. 22 of 1994, as amended.
     The history of acquisition and dispossession of land rights, that
     has given rise to the Lady Selbourne claims, is as follows:


          Lady Selbourne was established in 1905 as a freehold township
          for people of colour. It was incorporated into the City of
          Pretoria in 1949, by which date there were 1 696 registered
          properties. In 1959 notices were served on the owners of
          properties and their tenants in terms of the Group Areas
          Amendment Act, No. 29 of 1956, to vacate their properties, and
          removals began soon after. The inhabitants were either
          relocated in the "black" townships of Pretoria, or in the so-
          called homelands. By 1973 all the inhabitants had been removed
          and their houses demolished. All the properties were by then
          registered with the Pretoria city council.


          In 1975 the council resurveyed the Township and altered its
          layout. It remained a residential area for whites only and was
          renamed Suiderburg. The western half of the area was not
          developed and remained empty, as did portions of the eastern
          part. All the undeveloped land is still owned by the Pretoria
          city council, while the developed property is privately owned.
          In November 1999 the Pretoria city council agreed to develop
          the undeveloped western portion into serviced stands for
          future occupation by the claimants of Lady Selbourne, who
          sought restoration.


     2. History of dispossession


          The claims are for the restitution of land rights on
          properties dispossessed in the former Lady Selbourne, now
          known as the remainder of portion of the farm Zandfontein
          317JR and the township of Suiderburg. A large proportion of
          the land is vacant and undeveloped, but is currently being
          developed by the Pretoria city council.


     3. Claimants


          Investigation by the RLCC for Gauteng and North West has
          identified the claimants to be those persons, or their direct
          descendants, who were dispossessed of their right of ownership
          by racial laws and practices of the past. The claimants are
          individuals, or their direct descendants, who were
          dispossessed of the right in land after 19 June 1913, as a
          result of discriminatory laws and practices.


          The Office of the RLCC for Gauteng and North West has received
          868 individual claims, claiming 962 properties in the area of
          the original Lady Selbourne.


          The claimants formed a committee for the lodging and
          prosecution of claims to final settlement. However, it should
          be noted that agreements will have to be entered into
          separately with all the affected individuals who have lodged
          claims.


          The parties involved in the settlement of the claims are:


          (1) The individual claimants, who were dispossessed of their
              right in land.


          (2) The Pretoria city council, represented by Mr N Pillay.


          (3) The State, represented by the RLCC for Gauteng and
              NorthWest.


     4. Agreement


          The RLCC for Gauteng and North West office has had discussions
          with the claimant's committee about the broad approach to
          settling the claim. It was agreed that the Commission would
          endeavour to establish a monetary value of the claims without
          having to resort to historical valuations. In this regard a
          mandate to make an offer to the claimants was formulated and
          approved in general by the Minister. Within the options
          expressed by the mandate, the RLCC for Gauteng and North West
          chose the "flat rate" or Standard Settlement Offer Option.


          Most of the claimants are opting for restoration of their
          original land and/or alternate land in the original area of
          Lady Selbourne if their original site is built on. This land
          is currently being developed into serviced sites by the
          Pretoria city council, and were only to be ready in the second
          half of 2000. The Commission has agreed to pay R16 000 per
          site to the council. A minority of claimants are opting for
          monetary compensation only.


          The nature of the offer to the claimants, therefore, is as
          follows:


              Each claimant will receive, in effect, R40 000 per
              erf/lot, claimed as the monetary value of their claim.
              Those claimants opting for monetary compensation only
              will receive the full R40 000 per erf/lot claimed, in one
              sum. Those claimants opting for sites under development
              will immediately receive R24 000 per erf/lot claimed. The
              balance of R16 000 per site will be paid to the Pretoria
              city council when the sites have been serviced. Payment
              will be made on transfer. For those claimants receiving
              sites in the development of Lady Selbourne, a further
              restitution discretionary grant of R3 000 per claimant
              will be applied for by the Commission.


     5. Recommendations by RLCC


          It is recommended that the Minister of Agriculture and Land
          Affairs make the following section 42D award for the claimants
          of Lady Selbourne:


          (1) All claimant units should receive as their restitution
              award an amount of R40 000 in respect of each erf/lot.


          (2) Retention by the State of the amount of R16 000 per
              erf/lot claimed for the payment of serviced sites to the
              Pretoria city council, for those claimants opting for
              sites in the development being undertaken by them, which
              payment is to be made on transfer to the council on
              completion of the servicing of the sites.


          (3) Approval of the agreement to be entered into by Lady
              Selbourne claimants and the Department of Land Affairs,
              as referred to the State Attorney's Office for approval
              in terms of Treasury instructions.


          (4) Approval of the agreement with the Pretoria city council,
              to the effect that the council will reserve the sites it
              is servicing in the development of Lady Selbourne for
              claimants, and that the servicing of the sites will be
              paid from the amount awarded to the claimants who want
              the site at the rate of R16 000 per erf/lot.


          (5) Mandating the RLCC for Gauteng and North West or its
              nominee to sign the above-mentioned agreement and deed of
              sale, where applicable, on behalf of the Department as a
              representative of the State in this matter.


          During the meeting with the Committee, the representatives of
          Lady Selbourne's claimants voiced the following:


          (a) The delivery of the land to the claimants seems to take
              too long.


          (b) The lack of resources in the Office of the RLCC is the
              contributing factor.


          (c) A lot of money is wasted on consortiums.


          (d) Delivery in urban areas is slow because the Minister
              focuses on rural claims.


          (e) People are concerned about the blanket size allocation of
              plots.


          (f) Name of Lady Selbourne must be restored.


 D.     Ellison and Steynberg


     1. Background


          The land consisted of the following farms in the district of
          Bronkhorstspruit (formerly district of Pretoria), Province of
          Gauteng:


          Doornkraal 425 JR and Onverwacht 424 JR


          Doornkraal 424 JR (Portion 1 known as Ellison Agricultural
          Holdings)


          Ellision Agricultural Holdings, comprising 86 holdings were
          laid out on a certain Portion 1, in extent 400,5265 morgen
          (343,5253 ha) of the farm Doornkraal 425 JR. The farm was
          originally registered in the name of Thomas Elision Lowe under
          Certificate of Registered Title - T3422/1933 dated 24 June
          1933.


          Onverwacht 425 JR (Portion 58, known as Steynberg Small
          Holdings) (This portion on which the Steynberg Small Holdings
          were laid out, was only a portion of the farm Onverwacht 424
          JR).


          Steynberg Small Holdings were laid out on portion 58 (a
          portion of Portion 55) of Onverwacht 424 JR, in extent 102
          morgen (87,7561 ha). These properties were originally
          registered in the name of Coenraad Steynberg under Certificate
          of Registered Title - T3763/1932.


          Steynberg sold some of these Holdings to the State. Steynberg
          sold the remaining Holdings (described as the remaining
          extent), in extent 99 morgen, to Ellision Lowe. The property
          was transferred in his name on 13 May 1933 in terms of Deed of
          Transfer T3322/1933.


          This farm, in extent 1576 and 271 square metres (1350,2813
          hectares) was originally registered in 1860 in the name of
          Daniel Jacobus Erasmus. Daniel donated the farm to his son.
          The farm was subsequently subdivided into 65 subdivisions and
          a remaining extent.
     2. History of dispossession


          The land, regarded as a so-called portion, was expropriated in
          terms of section 13(2) of the Development Trust and Land Act,
          1936 (Act No. 18 of 1936). The Department of Bantu
          Administration and Development dealt with the dispossession.
          The removals took place between 1965 and 1972. The community
          received one-month-notice letters, informing them of their
          removal. Prior to the removal, a letter was sent by the
          Department of Bantu Administration to every land-owner,
          stipulating, inter alia, the following:


              The owners who owned less than 20 morgen of land were not
              entitled to compensatory land but would be given sites at
              Leboneng, and would have to pay an annual fee for the
              occupation of the site. All the people whether owners or
              squatters would have to build their own houses.


              After payment of compensation for their houses, the
              people would be allowed to demolish their houses and to
              recover such material in cases of estates or where the
              owner refused to sell his property.


     3. Claim


          The Ellision and Steynberg co-ordinating forum had lodged a
          claim on the said agricultural holdings through the now
          defunct Commission on Land Allocation as far back as 1994.
          Later in the same year, when the forum was making a follow-up
          on the progress of their claim, they were informed that their
          claim would be dealt with by the new Commission on Restitution
          of Land Rights. The major obstacle in respect of the claim was
          that there was no indication of whether the community was
          claiming individually or collectively. The community had
          lodged only four claims. After further investigation, it was
          realised that the two agricultural holdings involve a number
          of people. As a result, each individual claimant had to claim
          a particular stand or plot, according to their deed of
          transfer, separately and not jointly, as it was done
          initially.


          The RLCC therefore acted in accordance with the provisions of
          section 12(4) of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, the aim
          being to invite all potential claimants. The notice stated,
          inter alia, that anyone who lived or owned property in those
          areas (or their descendants) and who had been forcible removed
          in terms of racially-based measures, could lodge a claim for
          the restitution of land rights. Potential claimants were
          requested to submit claims within a period of 90 days, from 7
          June 1996 to 5 September 1996. At the time of writing, 69
          claims (total of 75 properties) had been lodged and 54 claims
          have been gazetted.


     4. Current status of land


          The land is vacant. After the land was expropriated or
          acquired, it was transferred to the State and placed under the
          jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works. The properties
          are still registered in the name of the Republic of South
          Africa. The claimants indicated that Onverwacht portions have
          been developed mainly for residential purposes.


     5. Conclusion


          During the meeting with the representatives of Ellision and
          Steynberg, the following concerns were raised:


          (1) Courts claim that whatever compensation was paid during
              the expropriation was equitable.


          (2) The community feels that they were not equitably
              compensated.


          (3) A business plan for the area still awaits approval from
              the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs.


          (4) This approval is holding up development of the area.


 E.     Highlands


     1. Background


          According to Muriel Horrel, the distribution of the population
          "groupings" in 1955 within central Pretoria was racially
          mixed. However, to the north west of the city were the Cape
          Location, the Asiatic Bazaar and the Bantule African Location,
          designated for the respective "race groups". The obvious
          objective of the group areas removals was to drive out those
          members of society classified as non-white from the centre to
          the periphery of the city. So it was with Highlands.


          Highlands, as formerly known, was situated in an area
          presently known as Newlands Extension 2. It consisted of 99
          plots. It was a freehold area administered by the Peri-Urban
          Health Board. In terms of infrastructure, streets were well
          developed, but they lacked running water and electricity. 47
          claims have been lodged with the RLCC for Gauteng and North
          West, and 34 have been gazetted. Historical valuations have
          been conducted on 43 claims. Others were left due to late
          lodging or unavailability of information from claimants.


          A committee was elected by the community, with no negotiation
          powers but to facilitate the process. Four members were given
          power of attorney to negotiate and settle on behalf of
          claimants, namely Fr David Marupen (Chairperson), George
          Seckle Jr (Secretary), Ivan Seckle and David Veldman.


     2. History of dispossession


          Notice No. 1744, under section 13 of the Group Areas
          Development Act, Act 69 of 1955, was published in the Gazette
          on 21 November 1958. It was followed by Proclamation No 150,
          published the Gazette on 6 June 1958. A third Notice, No. 754,
          was published on 19 May 1961, declaring Highlands, and other
          areas in the magisterial district of Pretoria, areas for
          occupation by the "White Group", or for any other matter
          related to group areas practices.


          Rumours began in 1950 that Highlands residents would be
          removed under the group areas policy to relocate in
          Eersterust. The official notices that came later did not give
          the expropriated the option of "selling their properties by a
          given date or face expropriation". It only notified them of an
          Act of Parliament stating that they were dispossessed of their
          properties. The Highlands township committee, chaired by
          George Seckle Sr, with Fr David Marupen serving as Secretary,
          took the Peri-Urban Board to court in opposition to the
          removals. The committee lost the case in court, which did not
          come as a surprise.


          A few people took the route of selling their properties before
          they were expropriated. This created tension within the
          community. They were seen in the eyes of those who resisted to
          the end as betrayers of the cause. This perception persisted
          for a while after resettlement in Eersterust.


          However, with time relations were restored. There were those
          who moved when the date set for moving arrived. There were
          also those who were physically uprooted by government
          officials. When people were at work, in this case
          predominantly men, government officials came and loaded their
          goods on trucks to be dumped in Eersterust. Those at home were
          predominantly women and children. Property was not cared for,
          and furniture was damaged. People were dumped in houses and
          told that those were their properties from that moment
          onwards. People returned from work to The Highlands, only to
          find that their family was gone. They had to go and search for
          those who were unceremoniously dumped in Eersterust.


          A few refused to leave, even after this exercise of forcibly
          removing people in government trucks. An example was the
          Seckle family. Ivan Seckle was given seven days' notice. He
          was confronted at work, being a teacher at Ferguson High
          School. He was told to leave within that period, otherwise his
          house would be pulled down.


          Those who had poultry, pigs or other animals, had to slaughter
          them because there would not be space to keep them in
          Eersterust. The means to obtain a livelihood through domestic
          farming and small business, was lost. Those who augmented
          their income by letting their properties for accommodation
          purposes, also lost that benefit.


          The elderly, who put their lives into developing their
          properties in Highlands, could not start from scratch in
          Eersterust. Many of them did not survive that long in
          Eersterust. Their enthusiasm for things simply withered away.
          They died of heartbreak.


          There were those who contracted diseases such as tuberculosis,
          as a result of the unhealthy living conditions in Eersterust,
          which was near a dumping site. There was one small primary
          school, no high school, no college and no clinic. People had
          to travel to the H F Verwoerd Hospital (now the Pretoria
          Academic Hospital) for medical assistance.


          There was no public transport to work. People were further
          away from their workplaces and town in general, compared to
          the situation in Highlands. The infrastructure in Eersterust
          was still being put in place when people had to relocate
          there.


          Highlands was prioritised for investigation in June 1997, when
          a researcher and a fieldworker were hired to investigate the
          claims. One of the difficulties in investigating claims was
          that the then Department of Community Development (?) files
          were not available. The Commission's investigation proceeded
          in the following manner: An initial meeting/workshop was held
          to explain the process, followed by an in loco inspection of
          Newlands Extension 2. Thereafter, commission workers contacted
          claimants by telephone, letter and personal visits in order to
          obtain relevant documents.


          This was sometimes done with the assistance of the committee.
          After most of the claims had been gazetted, responses were
          received from the current landowners, and a meeting was held
          to explain the status of the claims.


          The Commission decided to commission valuers to undertake
          historic valuations of all the properties claimed. The
          decision to contract out the valuation and pay for it from the
          Commission's budget was made after the consultation with the
          Director-General of the Department of Land Affairs. The reason
          given, was that the Department, being a party to the claim,
          could not be a party to the valuations. A brief was then
          prepared and three firms of valuers were interviewed. Jimmy
          and Choeu was selected to undertake the valuation, and a
          contract with terms of reference was drawn up. The valuation
          study commenced on 19 January 1998 and was completed by the
          end of February that year (?). Two meetings were held with the
          claimants: The first to explain the purpose of the valuation,
          and the second to hand over the reports, upon completion.


          The investigation deemed to be substantially completed, the
          commission decided to initiate the process of negotiating
          settlements of these claims.


     3. Conclusion


          The representatives of Highlands community raised the
          following concerns:


          (1) The compensation for the loss of land, lives and property
              was never enough.


          (2) The affected people of Highlands came out of the deal as
              losers.


          (3) The rule of law was not applied when the community was
              being compensated.
          (4) The court did not consider the plea of the attorney on
              behalf of the community who argued for fair and equitable
              settlement.


          (5) The community felt that they were discriminated against
              because the formula used to calculate the settlement
              figure was only applicable to Highlands, not to the other
              areas.


          (6) Some of the claims which were proved valid, were dismissed
              by the court.


          (7) There is a misguided belief that the community was
              properly compensated during the then expropriation.


          (8) The court did not address the hardship felt by the
              community of Highlands.


          (9) The community felt that their dignity had to be restored.


 F.     Visit to Payneville
     The Committee met with the following members of the community: Mr
     A Hofmeyer and Mr P Hofmeyer (Developers); Mr K Madalene
     (Chairperson of Community).


     1. Historical background


          The original township of Springs was eMagogoweni. In 1923 the
          authorities at the time deemed that it was too close to
          Springs, and the Town Superintendent, a Mr Payne, arranged for
          settlement in the area which became known as Payneville.
          Between 1959 and 1976, the people of Payneville were removed
          to Kwa Thema. Their houses were demolished, and the land has
          remained substantially vacant. Today the Springs town council
          owns about 25% of the land. The rest is owned by a private
          developer, International Manufacturing Engineering Company,
          who bought it and who has been developing it for low/medium
          cost housing. After the gazetting of restitution claims in
          1998, this development has been put on hold, pending a
          resolution on the claims.
          The land was originally owned by the Grootvlei Mine, which
          gave use rights to the Springs town council to subdivide the
          land for residential purposes. The township was named after Mr
          Payne, who had negotiated the transfer and was responsible for
          its establishment. The Springs town council built council
          housing on a portion, and surveyed and divided the rest into
          plots, although the mine retained the mineral rights on the
          land. Some of the residents resided in council-built housing
          as tenants, and they paid rent. The rest obtained plots, for
          which they paid a rental and on which they were allowed to
          build their own houses. A town council report of 27 May 1958
          indicated that Payneville had 690 municipal dwellings, 879
          owner-built dwellings and 153 other stands used for churches,
          traders, gardening and municipal services. 42 stands were
          vacant.


     2. History of dispossession


          In 1954 the Mentz Commission recommended that townships with
          black residents be grouped together. The Minister of Bantu
          Administration and Development consequently decided that the
          residents of Payneville be removed to Kwa Thema. The actual
          removal took place between 1959 and 1976. The residents were
          paid compensation for their structures, which were demolished.
          Because of the racial laws in effect at the time, the only
          option for most of them was to take up the rental
          accommodation provided for them in Kwa Thema.


          Council records indicate that, with the consent of the
          Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, a valuation
          of the improvements on the properties was undertaken by two
          valuers: A Mr L Taurog, nominated by the Council, and a Mr L
          Nestadt, nominated by the Payneville Native Advisory Board.
          The valuation of the house, less the valuation of the
          materials retained by the house owner, constituted the base
          compensation paid to the house owner. In addition, a
          consolation amount of 15% of the base valuation was added on
          in consideration of the inconvenience and expense incidental
          to removal. A further amount of R6,10 was paid to each
          resident in respect of their rental for the first month in
          their new houses in Kwa Thema. The records of the amount paid
          to each erf occupier is available, but not the original files
          or report detailing how this was arrived at.


     3. Claimants


          The claims were individually lodged. There is a committee to
          facilitate activities within the claimant community. Between
          350 and 400 claims for restitution have been lodged with the
          office of the RLCC.


          The community raised the following concerns:


          (1) The Minister is delaying the signing of agreement of
              purchase.


          (2) The delay in signing of the agreement is delaying the
              development in the area.


          (3) The government must allow more people to lodge the claims.


          (4) Some claims are registered, but there are outstanding
              documents.

                        MONDAY, 18 JUNE 2001

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Bills:

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 (1)    Wysigingswetsontwerp op Uitvoerkrediet- en Buitelandse
     Beleggingsherversekering [W 19 - 2001].


     The Export Credit and Foreign Investments Re-insurance Amendment
     Bill [B 19 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) was introduced in
     the National Assembly on 26 April 2001 and referred to the
     Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry. Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote 25 -
 Public Service and Administration for 1999-2000 [RP 134-2000].

                        TUESDAY, 19 JUNE 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The following Bill was introduced by the Minister of Trade and
     Industry in the National Assembly on 19 June 2001 and referred to
     the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of
     Joint Rule 160:


     (i)     Companies Amendment Bill [B 35 - 2001] (National Assembly
          - sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its
          introduction published in Government Gazette No 22249 of 24
          April 2001.]


     The Bill has also been referred to the Portfolio Committee on
     Trade and Industry of the National Assembly.

National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson:

 The following paper was tabled and it is now referred to the Select
 Committee on Finance:


 Report of the Office of the Auditor-General on the Budget of Income and
 Expenditure for 2001-2002 [RP 60-2001].

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (a)    General Report of the Auditor-General for 1999-2000 [RP 75-
     2001].


 (b)    Status Report of the Auditor-General on the submission of
     financial statements of National and Provincial Government in
     terms of the Public Finance Management Act for 2000-2001 [RP 79-
     2001].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. Interim Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests with regard to the complaint against Mr T S Yengeni MP

 1.     BACKGROUND


 1.1    On the basis of a report in the Sunday Times, 25 March 2001, Mr
     D Gibson, MP lodged a complaint with the Chairperson of the Joint
     Committee on Ethics and Members' Interests in respect of alleged
     non-disclosure by Mr T S Yengeni, MP.


 1.2    At its meeting on 28 March 2001, the Committee instructed the
     Registrar to request a response from Mr Yengeni to Mr Gibson's
     letter of complaint.


 2.     COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MR YENGENI AND THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR
     OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS WITH REGARD TO THE COMPLAINT


 2.1    The Registrar, as instructed by the Committee, sent a letter to
     Mr Yengeni on 30 March 2001.


 2.2    Mr Yengeni responded on 6 April 2001. In his response to the
     Registrar, Mr Yengeni questioned whether the relevant rules and
     procedures had been followed.


 2.3    In consultation with the Chairperson and on the basis of legal
     opinion obtained from the Chief Parliamentary Law Adviser, a
     second letter, dated 10 April 2001, was sent to Mr Yengeni
     informing him that the letter of the 30 March 2001 was sent on the
     instruction of the Committee and that he is required to respond.


 2.4    On 10 April 2001 the Registrar received a letter from Mr
     Yengeni's personal assistant indicating that Mr Yengeni would only
     be in a position to respond after 2 May 2001 as Parliament was in
     recess.


 2.5    The Registrar subsequently received a response from Mr Yengeni
     on 18 April 2001. Mr. Yengeni responded to the questions on the
     allegation of non-disclosure of a benefit that he received in
     respect of his motor vehicle and secondly the non-disclosure of
     his home in Tigerhof.


 2.6    Mr Yengeni indicated that he had disclosed his home in 1996 and
     that his understanding of the rules was that a once off disclosure
     was sufficient. With regard to the motor vehicle Mr Yengeni stated
     that the vehicle was legitimately purchased and that its
     acquisition did not in any way amount to a gift or donation and
     therefore there was no need for disclosure.
 3.     CONTENT OF THE COMPLAINT


     The complaint submitted by Mr Gibson raised the following matters:


 3.1    That Mr Yengeni did not disclose erf 18250 Cape Town.


 3.2    With regard to motor vehicle CA 80233, that the licensing
     application indicates that Stannic was the financier and that Mr
     Yengeni appears to have received free use of a motor vehicle for a
     period of seven months and that the benefit was not disclosed.


 3.3    That the Committee should consider whether it is appropriate for
     the Chairperson of the Defence Committee to enter into an
     agreement with a company that either itself or whose affiliates
     are or were involved in tendering for arms or sub-contracts.


 4.     FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


 4.1    In respect of the alleged non-disclosure of erf 18250 Cape Town.


 4.2    Five members of the Committee were of the view that -


     (a)     Mr Yengeni's explanation was not sufficient for them to
          determine the facts; and


     (b)     Mr Yengeni therefore should be required to appear at this
          point before the Committee to give an explanation of the
          alleged non-disclosure concerning the acquisition of the motor
          vehicle.


 4.3    The majority view was -


     (a)     Mr Yengeni did not comply with the Code;


     (b)     Mr Yengeni's non-compliance was not mala fide.


 4.4    Accordingly the Committee recommends that Mr Yengeni must submit
     the details of erf 18250 to the Registrar by 31 May 2001.
     The Committee voted 24 in favour of the majority decision with 5
     against.


 4.5    In respect of the alleged non-disclosure of the benefit of motor
     vehicle CA 80233 as well as the appropriateness of the Chairperson
     of the Defence Committee entering into an agreement with a company
     that either itself or whose affiliates are or were involved in
     tendering for arms or sub-contracts. The Committee deliberated at
     length on these matters.


 4.6    The view of seven members of the Committee was that -


     (a)     the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members' Interests
          should proceed directly with its own investigation of these
          matters;


     (b)     Mr Yengeni is refusing to cooperate with the Committee,
          and this constitutes contempt of the Committee;


     (c)     Mr Yengeni should be required to appear at this point
          before the Committee to give an explanation of the facts
          concerning the acquisition of the motor vehicle.


 4.7    A majority view -


     (a)     noted that the allegations contained in the Sunday Times,
          25 March 2001, were made in the context of the Strategic
          Defence Procurement Process;


     (b)     further noted that on 2 November 2000 the National
          Assembly accepted the recommendation of the Standing Committee
          on Public Accounts that a forensic investigation be conducted
          into allegations of impropriety in relation to this process;


     (c)     further noted the report of the Standing Committee on
          Public Accounts, tabled in and adopted by the National
          Assembly on 4 April 2001, that such an investigation is being
          co-ordinated by the Office of the Auditor-General and
          comprises the Office of the Public Protector and the
          Investigating Directorate for Serious Economic Offences in the
          Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions;


     (d)     believes that the subject matter of the complaint falls
          within the scope and ambit of the above investigation and that
          a separate investigation by the Committee would traverse the
          same issues. Therefore a parallel investigation, at this
          point, into these matters is not desirable.


          Accordingly, the Committee in respect of the above two
          matters, recommends that Parliament should await the report of
          the joint investigating team, the Committee should consider
          the report in order to proceed with the complaint.


          The Committee voted twenty-two in favour of the majority view
          with seven against.


 The report is tabled for consideration by the National Assembly.

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Public Services on the Airports Company Amendment Bill [B 20 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 19 June 2001:

   The Select Committee on Public Services, having considered the subject of the Airports Company Amendment Bill [B 20 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

2. Report of the Select Committee on Public Services on the Road Accident Fund Amendment Bill [B 21 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 19 June 2001:

   The Select Committee on Public Services, having considered the subject of the Road Accident Fund Amendment Bill [B 21 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

3. Report of the Select Committee on Economic Affairs on the Privileges and Immunities of International Atomic Energy Agency Agreement, dated 19 June 2001:

   The Select Committee on Economic Affairs, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International Atomic Energy Agency, referred to it, recommends that the Council, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve accession to the said Agreement, with the following reservations:

   (a) The Government of the Republic of South Africa does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 6 of Article III, as certain limitations exist in the Republic regarding the holding of and trading in gold.

       Explanatory note: The buying, selling and holding of gold in
       the Republic is regulated. In terms of Exchange Control
       Regulation 2, no person other than an Authorised Dealer may
       buy or borrow any gold from or sell to any person who is not
       an Authorised Dealer, unless exemption from Exchange Control
       Regulation 5 has been authorised (Mining Houses and Mining
       Producers may elect to sell their total gold holdings to the
       approved counter parties, including foreign counter parties,
       provided that the Exchange Control Department of the South
       African Reserve Bank has given the necessary exemption from
       the aforementioned regulation).
   

   (b) The Government of the Republic does not undertake to apply the exemption from taxation in respect of salaries and emoluments, referred to in section 18(a)(ii) of Article VI of the Agreement, in respect of any South African citizen who is ordinarily resident in South Africa.

   (c) Pending a decision by the Government of the Republic on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of Section 34 of the Convention, which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in differences arising from the interpretation or application of the Convention.

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Select Committee on Economic Affairs on the UN Privileges and Immunities Convention , dated 19 June 2001:

   The Select Committee on Economic Affairs, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 13 February 1946, referred to it, recommends that the Council, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve accession to the said Convention, with the following reservations:

   (a) The Government of the Republic of South Africa does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 5 of Article II, as certain limitations exist in the Republic regarding the holding of and trading in gold.

       Explanatory note: The buying, selling and holding of gold in
       the Republic is regulated. In terms of Exchange Control
       Regulation 2, no person other than an Authorised Dealer may
       buy or borrow any gold from, or sell to, any person who is not
       an Authorised Dealer, unless exemption from Exchange Control
       Regulation 5 has been authorised (Mining Houses and Mining
       Producers may elect to sell their total gold holdings to the
       approved counter-parties, including foreign counter-parties,
       provided that the Exchange Control Department of the South
       African Reserve Bank has given the necessary exemption from
       the aforementioned regulation).
   

   (b) Pending a decision by the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of Section 30 of the Convention, which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in differences arising from the interpretation or application of the Convention.

 Report to be considered.

1. Report of the Select Committee on Economic Affairs on the Specialised Agencies’ Privileges and Immunities Convention, dated 19 June 2001:

   The Select Committee on Economic Affairs, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialised Agencies, approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 November 1947, referred to it, recommends that the Council, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve accession to the said Convention, with the following reservations:

   (a) The Government of the Republic of South Africa, in accordance with the provisions of Section 43 of Article XI, indicates the following specialised agencies in respect of which it undertakes to apply the provisions of the Convention:

       1.  The International Labour Organisation (ILO).
   
   
       2.  The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United
           Nations (FAO).
   
   
       3.  The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
   
   
       4.  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
           Organization (UNESCO).
   
   
       5.  International Monetary Fund (IMF).
   
   
       6.  International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
           (IBRD).
   
   
       7.  World Health Organization (WHO).
   
   
       8.  Universal Postal Union (UPU).
       9.  International Telecommunications Union (ITU).
   
   
       10. World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
   
   
       11. International Maritime Organization (IMO).
   
   
       12. International Finance Corporation (IFC).
   
   
       13. International Development Association (IDA).
   
   
       14. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
   
   
       15. International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
   
   
       16. United Nations Industrial Development Organization
           (UNIDO).
   

   (b) The Government of the Republic of South Africa does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 7 of Article III, as certain limitations exist in the Republic regarding the holding of and trading in gold.

       Explanatory note: The buying, selling and holding of gold in
       the Republic is regulated. In terms of Exchange Control
       Regulation 2, no person other than an Authorised Dealer may
       buy or borrow any gold from or sell to any person who is not
       an Authorised Dealer, unless exemption from Exchange Control
       Regulation 5 has been authorised (Mining Houses and Mining
       Producers may elect to sell their total gold holdings to the
       approved counter parties, including foreign counter parties,
       provided that the Exchange Control Department of the South
       African Reserve Bank has given the necessary exemption from
       the aforementioned regulation).
   

   (c) Pending a decision by the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of Section 32 of the Convention, which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in differences arising from the interpretation or application of the Convention.

 Report to be considered.