THURSDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER 2001 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:05.

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.

                  TOURISM IN KOUGA AND EASTERN CAPE

                         (Draft Resolution)

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

That the Council -

(1) notes that - (a) this 27th day of September is World Tourism Day;

   (b)  in the Eastern Cape, the Kouga region, which is the area between
       the Nelson Mandela Metro and the Blaauwkrans Bridge   and  which
       must not be confused with the Coega development,  east  of  Port
       Elizabeth, is where the highest number of tourists, both foreign
       and local, commute;


   (c)  at present, an estimated 800 000 tourists commute  through  this
       region on their travels between Port Elizabeth and Cape Town;


   (d)  very few of these tourists explore the rest of the Eastern  Cape
       for a variety of reasons, inter alia the safety risk; and


   (e)  funding is required to develop the potential of tourism  in  the
       Eastern Cape; and   (2) calls on the Minister of Environmental Affairs and  Tourism  to  look
   into this important matter.

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

VIOLENT ACTION THREATENED BY USA, PLEA FOR RECONCILIATION AND CONDEMNATION OF TERRORISM

                         (Draft Resolution)

Rev M CHABAKU: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) gravely observes the growing intimidation of God’s people throughout the world by threats of the USA through the same terrorism that killed thousands in North America on 11 September 2001;

(2) notes that the world continues to be involved in ardent navel-gazing and twiddling of thumbs while God’s people get killed in the Middle East;

(3) urges the USA to desist from this callous action and to rather fight ideas of terrorism with alternative ideas that turn enemies into friends;

(4) notes that we are working together with our adversaries, who are not our enemies, and that we gave them leadership positions as we strive to be one family;

(5) notes that the whole world is tired of violence and wars; and

(6) commits itself to abhor and condemn terrorism everywhere no matter where it occurs or who does it.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Is there any objection to the motion? There is an objection. The motion will therefore become notice of a motion.

                   PROUDLY SOUTH AFRICAN CAMPAIGN

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M V MOOSA: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the Proudly South Africa campaign will officially be launched at
       a high-profile event on 3 October 2001; and


   (b)  this campaign is widely supported by all the  constituencies  in
       Nedlac and has been long in the pipeline;

(2) believes that -

   (a)  the Proudly South African campaign will enable all South African
       consumers and  consumers  all  over  the  world  to  confidently
       purchase quality South African goods;


   (b)  the Proudly South African label will be a guarantee of adherence
       to fair labour and environmental standards; and


   (c)  by exercising the choice to purchase goods bearing  the  Proudly
       South African mark, members of  the  public  can  contribute  to
       promoting economic growth, job creation and poverty  alleviation
       in the country;

(3) wishes the Proudly South African campaign well;

(4) calls on all members of Parliament to actively support the campaign and do whatever they can to publicise it; and

(5) calls on the Government and parliamentary structures to do all that they can to ensure that procurement decisions take due cognisance of this campaign.

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

                     DEPUTY PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Chairperson, hon premiers, hon members of the House, in late 1948, as a little boy of less than 10 years, I used to hear a song which was popular at the time, with lyrics that went: ``Imithetho kaMalan, isiphethe nzima, asazi la sofela khona.’’ [Malan’s laws are tough on us; we do not know where we will die.]

One day I asked my maternal grandmother who this Malan was, and she said:

uMalan uhulumeni, indoda enkulu emhlophe, efaka amaklesibhande, ehlala le ePitoli. [Malan is the government, a big white man who wears braces and who lives in Pretoria.]

My grandmother’s response was no different from that of millions of other black South Africans who were excluded from the political system by the apartheid government. Those who lived at the time would remember that often people viewed the government not as their own or their friend, but as somebody who came to cause problems for them, who oppressed them. They had never seen this person and therefore the imagination visualised a powerful person somewhere in Pretoria. Everybody would say that that was what the government in Pretoria had said.

Given this background, as the first democratic government of this country, we had a historic mandate and a duty to bring about dramatic and visible change to the concept of government and governance.

We had to establish a government of the people, one that all South Africans could relate to and understand. This government had to be brought closer to the people. We had to formulate and implement programmes that would ensure that government improved the quality of lives and reduced poverty, inequality and vulnerability.

We faced immense challenges, but, through co-operative governance, built the necessary institutional capacity, formulated and implemented a range of policies, and strengthened our financial management systems.

Section 41 of the Constitution spells out the notion of co-operative governance. The crux of this section states that all spheres of government and all organs of the state must assist and support each other.

We are proud of the fact that, in just a few years, we have succeeded in changing the face of our government and the manner in which government conducts its business. We have done this in ways that very few countries have achieved in decades of democratic rule.

We strongly believe in our mission of bringing government closer to all our people, in particular the poorest of the poor. In this regard, we abolished the four provinces which had been established in 1910, and replaced them with nine provinces and nine provincial governments.

This was aimed at ensuring wider participation of people in the governing of their lives, and to allow for greater access to government. This establishment of more than one sphere of government was to lay the basis of co-operative governance. I am pleased to address this House on this topic. As you are all aware, the NCOP forms the backbone of co-operative governance, as the only structure that brings together the national, provincial and local spheres of government in one chamber.

The direct involvement of organised local government and special delegates from the provincial legislatures in the affairs of this House means that this House has its ear to the ground.

I am also aware that this House recently held a workshop on improving co- operative governance, in which a number of questions were debated. I look forward to reading the final report of the workshop with interest.

It is our well-considered view that co-operative governance facilitates creative and crosscutting thinking on policy issues. It also makes government more effective and efficient, as it allows for integrated policy development, prioritisation, planning, execution and evaluation of Government programmes.

At the executive level, co-operative governance is no longer a theory but daily practice. Members are aware of the formation of the Cabinet cluster system, which effectively compressed 26 Ministries into six clusters. This system is replicated at the level of director-general, through the Forum of Directors-General, which is also attended by the nine provincial directors- general.

Co-operative governance between the national and provincial spheres is further facilitated through the President’s Co-ordinating Council, which brings together the President and premiers to discuss matters of mutual concern.

In addition, Ministers, whose area of responsibility includes matters of provincial competence, meet with members of provincial executive councils to ensure collective discussion on both the development and implementation of policy.

Our last leg in the democratisation process was the finalisation of the local government sphere in December 2000. This truly brought the big man'' sitting in Pretoria to people's back yards. This has indeed demystified thebig man’’ and made people realise that government is part of their daily lives and is made up of ordinary men and women coming from within their own communities.

As my compatriots in this Chamber know, the ability of Government to deliver depends on how it plans and manages its finances. To ensure a properly functioning intergovernmental system, the Government has passed enabling legislation and put in place the necessary financial management systems.

We have established the Budget Council, which comprises representatives of national and provincial government and which makes recommendations on provincial allocations. We have also established the Budget Forum, which includes representatives of all three spheres and considers budget allocations for local government.

Furthermore, there is a financial and fiscal commission tasked with the role of ensuring equity in the division of nationally raised revenue between the spheres and within each sphere.

It is pleasing to note that significant successes have been achieved in the area of financial management and budget reform. In 1998, the Budget Council oversaw the introduction of the three-year rolling budgets, the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework.

This, together with improved political oversight and the early publication of the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, has enhanced the transparency of the intergovernmental fiscal system and has facilitated better alignment between policy and budgets.

This is not to suggest that the process has been smooth. But, in instances where problems arose, we were quick in finding good and lasting solutions and were decisive in implementing them.

For example, in the 1997-98 financial year, provinces ran a combined deficit of R5,4 billion. Through co-operative governance we were able to turn the deficit into a surplus of R0,6 billion by the next financial year.

A further monitoring tool we have now put in place through the Public Finance Management Act is a statutory obligation on all departments and provinces to report on the state of their finances at least every quarter so that we can identify potential problems before they reach crisis proportions.

Details on improvements in financial management at provincial and local government levels are contained in the intergovernmental review of 1999 and

1. The year’s review, as hon members know, will be released in this House early next month.

I am informed that the NCOP is intending to conduct an intensive examination of the review involving representatives of all three spheres of government.

In bringing government to the people and ensuring co-ordination and co- operation among the three spheres, we are able to improve service delivery and ensure that delivery points are brought closer to the people.

We are proud that some residents of remote rural villages now receive basic services such as welfare grants and can apply for birth, death and identity documents in their own villages without having to travel long distances. This has been done through the Government’s multipurpose community centre, or MPCC, programme. The multipurpose community centre programmes are a collaboration between different government departments and have truly brought government to the people in a manner unthinkable before 1994.

There are already a number of multipurpose community centre success stories. As of this July, 10 000 birth certificates and 5 000 identity documents have been issued at the Tombo MPCC near Port St Johns, which was launched in December 1999. We are also informed that approximately 200 people visit the Namahadi MPCC in QwaQwa daily.

A real test of our intergovernmental system usually comes during times of disaster, as it did during the 1999-2000 financial year. All spheres of government came together and worked out a strategy to fund emergency reconstruction and implemented relief and rescue programmes. An additional amount of R895 million was allocated to provincial governments last year in support of their disaster relief programmes. Further amounts of R600 million in 2001-02, R400 million in 2002-03 and R200 million in 2003-04 have been set aside for provinces to complete the reconstruction process.

Another example of successful co-ordination was in the combating of the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease and the cholera outbreak in KwaZulu- Natal. The co-operation of the different spheres of government ensured success in containing these epidemics.

Members of the House would be aware of the Government’s Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme, which is also premised on the ongoing interaction of all three spheres of government. This is one programme that requires the full attention of this House, as it will bring about visible transformation in the countryside.

While we are pleased with our successes thus far, we are aware that there are challenges remaining.

The nine provinces created out of the ruins of the apartheid infrastructure no doubt had teething problems initially. These have been dealt with as shown in the financial turnaround mentioned earlier.

It is to be expected that there will be similar problems with the newly created democratic local government structures. However, we are confident that we will face these challenges head-on.

The successful delivery of services to the people also depends on the dedication of our public servants. I am saying this at the appropriate time as this week is Public Service Week. This week’s theme, ``I am proud to serve you’’, encapsulates our attitude as Government to the public that we serve. We need a Public Service that is responsive to the needs of the people in the spirit of Batho Pele, to ensure effective and efficient delivery of services. Public servants should be ready and prepared to serve with respect, humility and courtesy at all times.

Let me reiterate that we are determined as Government to improve the conditions of the poorest of the poor in our country and ensure a better life for all South Africans. Our commitment to achieving this goal is unwavering, and our track record speaks for itself. The Government cannot be accused that its policies are a deviation from serving the poorest of the poor. I am referring, in particular, to our economic policies and programmes.

Anyone who wishes to challenge the Government’s programmes must check his or her facts thoroughly. It is of even greater concern if the accusations are made by those who purport to speak on behalf of the poor.

Most of the accusations have come from people who have been reflecting the interests of their narrow sectors and ignoring the bigger picture. On the other hand, as Government, we have to ensure that we serve the interests of all sectors, and not one sector.

What we need from everyone, in the spirit of democracy, transparency and co- operation, are constructive suggestions that will enhance the delivery of Government’s programmes.

The establishment of representative institutions, such as the NCOP, was something that was well thought out. These institutions help extend the participation of the people in the exercise of power. We need to enhance and enrich them for the sake of our people. This House has a serious responsibility in the manner in which it works. It must continuously remind us about the correct decisions we took in the past in establishing these institutions.

Democracy may be expensive and time-consuming, but it helps to prevent autocratic and dictatorial tendencies. It stops a few people taking ill- considered decisions that adversely affect the lives of the majority. This House is well placed to ensure that power is exercised fairly and properly in all spheres of Government.

We have come a long way since 1994 and, together with all South Africans, we can ensure that South Africa ranks amongst the greatest nations of the world.

In closing, let me convey a message from the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, who said that I should remind this House that today is World Tourism Day. Fortunately, we have been out there in the lobby, and I am sure that the House is very conscious of it, and that we should reflect on how we can continue to promote our wonderful country. We must be part of changing the ``big white man’’ to an ordinary person. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Having welcomed the Deputy President, I should now proceed to welcome all the special delegates from the provinces who have joined us for this debate.

Mr T B TAABE: Chairperson, permanent and special delegates to the NCOP, it is my pleasure once again to warmly welcome the Deputy President, the hon Mr Jacob Zuma, to this House. I would also like to take this opportunity to extend our greetings to our premiers from the various provinces, and members of the Cabinet who may be with us this afternoon.

Tuesday, 9 October 2001, is cause for celebration for all NCOP activists. It is a cause for celebration precisely because to us it is seen as an occasion of importance for members of this House who, together with members of Cabinet, have actively engaged their energies in securing the right to table the 2001 Intergovernmental Fiscal Review in the House.

As members would know, the previous two Intergovernmental Fiscal Reviews were not tabled in the manner in which it is being done now, which is basically a major achievement for the NCOP.

As members of the NCOP, we are of the view that the NCOP, this House, is the correct place for tabling the Intergovernmental Fiscal Review. As members would know, Intergovernmental Fiscal Reviews outline the fiscal framework that informs the division of resources between the various spheres of government, of which in this case there are three. They lay out the division of resources between and within the spheres of government and summarise projected spending trends over the next three years.

The Intergovernmental Fiscal Review becomes the document that seeks to provide a snapshot of how intergovernmental fiscal relations are currently evolving, highlighting the successes and the shortcomings. It also indicates the variances that exist between provinces and municipalities.

An interesting feature, therefore, of the forthcoming review will be the simultaneous release of nonfinancial performance indicators of money spent on key sectors, such as welfare, education and health. This will also make key distinctions between output and outcomes of financial expenditure. The key emphasis, in terms of the forthcoming fiscal review, will be on the monitoring of performance of nonfinancial indicators. This distinction will be a key instrument in assessing the progress of our fight to reduce poverty in South Africa. It may be fine for us to say, for example, that hundreds of thousands will be spend by provinces on education in the next financial year, but the key question ought to be whether this additional spending will result in a higher number of learners obtaining matriculation certificates, whether more preschool children will have access to early childhood education or whether a larger population of learners become computer literate.

The 2001 Intergovernmental Fiscal Review will break new ground in the evolution of intergovernmental fiscal relations, and we are proud that this epoch-making document will be tabled in this House, as I have mentioned, on 9 October 2001.

In this light I would appeal to hon members of this House to participate in the public hearings on intergovernmental fiscal relations which will commence on 10 October 2001. A special request is therefore made for increased participation, particularly in the social sectors. The education component of the public hearings will be held on 12 October, the health component on 16 October and the social development component on 12 October.

May I also take this opportunity to mention a few successes which the NCOP has had in this area. Of particular relevance and importance is the initiative of the Select Committee on Finance, under the guidance of the chairperson - Chief Whip of the Council - and, indeed, the other presiding officers. This accorded us the opportunity to be able to conduct public hearings in the various provinces during August this year; to begin to interrogate together with provinces, and other stakeholders, the recommendations of the Financial and Fiscal Commission. These public hearings awarded the committee, together with the FFC, an opportunity for the FFC to be able to formally share its recommendation on the division of nationally raised revenue to the provincial legislatures and their counterparts in local government.

One would know that the FFC has in the past never made such recommendations directly to the provinces and local government. This exercise also assisted us in terms of ensuring that, indeed, there was greater public participation, which participation, basically, was taken to new heights. Only the NCOP with its unique institutional features has the ability to intensify and accelerate such public participation.

More importantly, regarding the provincial equitable share, we also had the opportunity, together with the FFC, to be able to engage provinces further in the kind of work they have been doing and in beginning to explain the formula which the FFC is now using. The formula is based on the averages of the school-age population, the proportion of the population without access to medical aid funding, the elderly, the disabled, and the province’s share of the total population of the country. In the case of local government, the formula is also based on a number of households below the poverty level for each local authority.

In this light, I would like to appeal to all elected representatives to ensure that citizens residing in their constituencies are counted on census day. This would ensure that the kinds of approaches we have adopted, in terms of accelerating the pace of transformation in this country, are not hampered by lack of data, which, in many ways, will have precarious cost- raising implications. We may have the best policies and programmes to achieve our social and economic objectives, but if we do not have reliable data, the poor will not have access, basically, to much-needed resources. Such policies, whatever they may be, will then be meaningless to the majority of our people.

We therefore appeal to each and every citizen of this country to get counted on census day. Could I also take this opportunity to make quick references to the way forward, as we see it, basically at the level of the committee and, indeed, at the level of the NCOP. Continual discussions, as hon members would know, are ongoing in terms of how best we can expand our oversight role as the NCOP. I will therefore make some brief comments with reference to the kind of oversight role we should play as a committee in respect of finance.

Perhaps we in the NCOP should not duplicate the oversight function with our counterparts in the National Assembly. The NCOP should not exercise oversight over national institutions, as the point has been made from time to time. We ought to oversee the budget to ensure that provincial and municipal interests are properly accommodated and that the division, in respect of revenue, is shared equitably amongst provinces.

The separate tabling of the Division of Revenue Bill from the tabling of the national Budget could also expand the oversight role of the NCOP. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The PREMIER OF THE NORTHERN CAPE (Mr E M Dipico): Chairperson of the NCOP, Deputy Chairpersons, hon Deputy President, hon members and colleagues, it is indeed a great privilege and honour for me to be part of this important gathering, to focus on intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance in our country, flowing from the 1999 and 2000 national, provincial and local government election mandates to the elected officials in our respective provinces. We have committed the entire province of the Northern Cape, its organs of government and civil society, to striving to realise the goals and objectives of a better life for all our people.

The provincial government has, during the first quarter of 2001, engaged the entire district, local municipalities, mayors and chief executive officers and approved the revised integrated provincial strategy for 2001- 04, with the resolutions of the national lekgotla involving 11 themes.

As a result of this, the MEC mayoral forum meets monthly with the provincial MEC for housing and local government, who, in turn, reports to the clusters - the social cluster, the economic cluster and the joint cluster of the executive council respectively - on matters relating to local integrated growth and development, as well as on addressing the glaring inequalities in our society and taking the necessary steps to eradicate poverty and other social ills, in order to ensure that our people are afforded the dignity they deserve.

As reported at the last Presidential Co-ordinating Council, the transformation of local government in the province is on track, and the IDP processes are well advanced. A meeting between the Northern Cape and the North West will be held on the second of next month to discuss the future and how to manage the cross-border municipality of Kgalagadi, noting the complexities we are going through.

Indeed, the launching of the Kgalagadi nodal rural area is a challenge to us to ensure that all the departments, national, provincial and local government, including the district councils, can throw their budgets together to ensure that we create success in that area. We hope that we will be able to make a difference in the lives of those people who are the poorest of the poor in our country.

One of the very good exercises that we have been going through and which has worked for our province has been ``The cabinet meets the people’’, which continues every second week. On Wednesdays the cabinet moves around the province, going to rural areas and faraway places. A fortnight ago all MECs and heads of the departments were in Leliefontein. We call upon regional office heads, from minerals and energy, water, etc, to join us and sit with municipalities, district councils and the people in those areas to address the issues affecting those people for the whole day and find resolutions to the problems and look into implementation. We have seen it working. It has produced major results in areas that we visited, like Riemvasmaak, Schmidtsrift and a number of other rural areas. We have seen immense potential from the resources from all other departments.

I would like to tell the Deputy President that we did not choose Leliefontein in the Richtersveld as a coincidence. We chose it because this period is the tourism month and flower season. When one goes to the exhibition one will see the Northern Cape, with the flowers blossoming. [Laughter.] We are attracting everybody to come and look at a carpet of flowers of different colours stretching more than 500 km - a beautiful area! If hon members have not been there, I wish that they would go to the Richtersveld in order to know their country. Leliefontein is not in Zimbabwe but it is in the Northern Cape, in South Africa. [Laughter.] I hope that hon members will be able to join us when we go out to those areas.

Another area which has worked, particularly regarding co-ordination, is the one that we have mentioned: one-stop services which started in the Northern Cape three years ago. We have launched these one-stop service centres in Augrabies, Pescodia and Galeshewe, and the services rendered in a package under one roof are immense. They cater for all the departments, from people who want to apply for death and birth certificates, and licences, to people who want to pay for their services like electricity. There is a one-stop service next to the Deputy President’s constituency office in Galeshewe, in the Northern Cape, which also caters for those who want to get married. It creates a beehive of activity, because people do not go to town to Home Affairs’ magistrates, but use the one-stop services and marry very nicely without any problems. [Laughter.] That is what we want to see. Everybody who goes there gets a service from the Department of Labour, municipality service, Home Affairs and all other services. We do get information for the people who use those centres in the rural areas.

Indeed, we believe that proper co-ordination is working to roll out these one-stop services throughout, and others will be launched by the President in two months in Colesberg and we hope that other areas will be able to benefit from this integrated approach.

In order to enhance the ongoing streamlining of interaction between the three spheres of government, it is thus both a constitutional and a practical necessity to restructure the flow of information between the various national, legislative and executive structures. There is a need to ensure that co-ordination is well structured, particularly with the new local government structures which need to be assisted by the provinces where messages go straight to them, and at times provinces cannot assist and give the necessary support if they are not notified by the various departments from the national Government.

Another area which we have seen working is with regard to crime prevention. We have launched the crime prevention committee, which is led by the judge president in the province, where broader correctional services, defence, safety and security, the judiciary, welfare, education, health and economics departments are working together. We also brought in municipalities and the private sector, particularly insurance companies. That has brought the situation under control in Galeshewe. The President highlighted the crime rate in Galeshewe and the okapi knives that are also used in the USA. We understand them much better in the Northern Cape because they have a history in the province.

We are dealing with that matter and making a difference in that area, because it is not only a matter of crime, but also one of looking into underlying problems. We have seen the private sector contributing to the installation of cameras throughout the CBD, buying new bakkies for the police and paying for the call centres throughout Pescodia and Galeshewe where people press for emergency services rather than running for telephones. It has worked because we can respond very fast to those matters.

Our provincial government is currently well advanced with the implementation of its integrated and coherent approach of service delivery to the people. It has been organised in a manner that focuses on the strengths of Government in a more collective way. The executive council and the heads of departments have realigned their activities to clusters to ensure that priorities are implemented in such a manner so as to achieve national and provincial benchmarks.

The clusters which have been operating from 1999 are the social cluster, which involves education, health, social welfare, safety, liaison, housing, arts, sports and culture; the economic cluster, comprising economic affairs, tourism, transport, public works, agriculture, nature conservation and environmental affairs, and finance; and the joint cluster, which deals with all the matters which cut across, and is chaired by the premier in the cabinet.

The policy and planning unit, which is located in the premier’s office and includes intergovernmental relations, has been mandated to optimise alignment among the various strategic planning, budgeting and decision- making processes that take place in Government.

Effective co-ordination of the activities between national, provincial and local governments is directed via the cabinet office. The premier together with the director-general ensure that reporting is done through the technical committee for the President’s co-ordinating council on achieving Government’s strategic objectives. Such interactive forms of decision- making and service delivery will undoubtedly continue to promote co- operative governance and intergovernmental relations between the spheres of government.

I believe that as we seek to achieve the reconstruction and development of our society we must foster a spirit of mutual co-operation, co-ordination, impact assessment and evaluation, not only among spheres of government, but also among our people. I agree with the Deputy President that when the people talk about this big person, we should demystify this big baba and show them that we, as Government, belong to them. I hope that as we continue doing that we are in a position to get the stories which were heard many years ago, and are seen to be able to deal with our problems without failing our people.

In conclusion, allow me also to extend my heartfelt appreciation for the support which the Northern Cape government has been receiving, including co- operation from the various national departments and the Presidency. With the limited resources we have, we have been able to make headway.

We have made progress as far as improving service delivery, growth and development is concerned, and have ensured that all agencies are able to optimise what they do in their respective areas of work, as well as in the province and their local areas. [Applause.]

The PREMIER OF THE FREE STATE (Ms I W Direko): Chairperson, hon Deputy President, hon Premiers, hon members of the NCOP and colleagues, it always takes me down memory lane when I visit this House, having been a member of this respectable, august House. No premier understands better … [Laughter.][Applause.] … what a dynamic House this is. We are second to none in the NCOP.

The Constitution establishes norms of co-operative governance in which the various spheres of governance are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated. The Constitution spells out clearly that no man is an island in governance. In pursuit of this distinctiveness, interdependence and interrelatedness, I wish to focus on our contribution as a province in building a more co-operative and prosperous South Africa.

The co-operation between the various spheres of government is central to the realisation of the agenda of reconstruction and development of the country, as well as the achievement of a nonracial, nonsexist and democratic society. I am pleased, therefore, to indicate that our province participates with great interest and commitment in the key national Intergovernmental Relations Forum established by the national Government. We think this is necessary if we are to realise the founding provisions and principles of the Constitution.

The relationship between the provincial executive council and the provincial legislature is very sound, and our challenge remains the co- ordination of activities between our NCOP representatives, the legislature and local government to ensure effective co-ordination for the province. There is no way the right can go on doing a, b, c and d when the left does not know what the right is doing.

It is also important to continue to strive for the better co-ordination of activities and decisions made by the three spheres of governance. This is particularly important where decisions made at one sphere of governance have financial and administrative implications for another sphere of governance. It is desirable that when this happens the necessary consultation must take place.

It was a robust step on the part of the Government to reorganise local government. It is therefore important that making this third sphere of government work is approached in a robust manner. That is why working together becomes so critically important.

In order to improve co-ordination and to ensure that the necessary consultation takes place between the provincial and local governments, we have established a provincial and local government forum, which we refer to as Provloc. Provloc simply means monthly meetings between the local government and the provincial government so that we move forward together. While this forum is still at its initial stages, it has a good potential to improve relations between the provincial and local governments.

If people on the ground must benefit from us in the province and those at local government, we must of necessity work together. We are not representing ourselves there, but the people. The people are the beneficiaries of both spheres of government, and if we have to deliver what the people expect from us, then it is critically important that we work together as a team.

In addition, we meet regularly with executive mayors to discuss issues of mutual interest and the need for an integrated approach to development in the province. The mayors - I did see one or two mayors around here - are critical to the success of local government. It is important that we in the province move along with them, and that we come together monthly to identify problems. No two areas are the same. Fundamentally the differences are the same, but there are particular problems that exist in various municipalities that are not the same. When we get together we can solve each other’s problems. That is why we also have this mayoral platform.

The above-mentioned co-operation assisted the province to develop and finalise its integrated development plan. The province now has a draft of this plan. It contains not only provincial input, but also input from municipalities, so that when we go to the people and say that this is the integrated development plan of the Free State, it is, indeed, a Free State development plan, which is informed by the interim integrated development plans of municipalities.

Our measurement of the success of co-operative governance has to be the substance of our integrated development plans, which will be finalised by March 2002. The challenge is for national departments to join provincial and local governments in making those plans effective. The process of implementing the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy is also a practical way to move intergovernmental relations from rhetoric to real co-operation. People are tired of talk. They need delivery. It is important that we as leaders, in whatever sphere of government, recognise that need. Our people down there need hope. They need to be given hope. It is only by working together that we can give them hope.

This process has forced us to look at how we work and seek to change the fragmented ways that bedevil our ability to implement Government programmes. There are good Government programmes; it is our strategies that we need to spruce up to be able to deliver to the masses.

Good governance in our province has provided us with an opportunity to establish strategic partnerships with, amongst other things, the house of traditional leaders. We get on very well with our traditional leaders.

Ek weet nie of die Khoikhoi saamwerk nie, maar in die Vrystaat werk ons saam. [Gelag.] [I do not know if the KhoiKhoi are co-operating, but in the Free State we are working together. [Laughter.]]

They are after all, the people’s leaders. They must be given the recognition they deserve, and one gives them recognition by working with them. [Interjections.]

Regarding religious leaders, we had a very good seminar of 1 300 religious leaders who came together at a conference organised by themselves. From that conference has emerged a permanent structure, which includes business, religious leaders and agricultural unions across the board. That religious body has produced an integrated forum of everybody who is interested in seeing the Free State make progress.

By the way, we are working on a new Free State. We are producing new Free Staters to be able to produce a Free State which becomes a force to be reckoned with. [Interjections.] Ons sal nie terugstaan vir die groot plekke nie. [Gelag.] [Applous.] [We will not stand back for the bigger places. [Laughter.] [Applause.]]

We also have regular meetings with the farming communities. Through these partnerships we have recorded successes with regard to HIV/Aids. The farmers, the religious leaders, communities in the rural areas come together because, I would like to say to Comrade Deputy President, we now have our district Aids councils that include everybody, particularly those in the rural areas.

We have achieved all the above, because of our commitment to solving problems and challenges through co-operative and peaceful means provided by our country’s Constitution. Next year, at this time, I would like to say to Comrade Deputy President, we will be able to report more progress. But, for the moment, we are strong enough to challenge anybody, including the diamond province. [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, I did not note the strong presence of representatives of organised local government in the House today, so we welcome Salga representatives to the House. [Applause.]

The PREMIER OF GAUTENG (Mr M S Shilowa): Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, Deputy President of the Republic, hon members, the teacher, principal and recently professor, I understand, is a hard act to follow. [Laughter.]

From the input of the Deputy President, it is clear that we are discussing our system of governance not because we doubt its correctness and appropriateness. The purpose of the debate is to find ways and means to co- operation and co-ordination among the three spheres of government to ensure that they function effectively for the benefit of the people of South Africa.

Since the Constitution came into force both the national and provincial spheres of government have had time to grow, clarify their roles and create the necessary capacity to fulfil their obligations and functions. We now have new municipal structures, some of which are still going through the similar growing process that the other spheres had to go through.

A challenge for all of us, as we look at how we can enhance co-operation among the three spheres, is to assist this newly established sphere of government in its growing phase and ensure that it has the necessary capacity to fulfil its obligations and functions.

In Gauteng we have already started a process of working together with all municipalities to ensure that they go through the growing phase much quicker and create the necessary capacity to serve their communities. Of the six metropolitan areas in the country, three are located in Gauteng. The viability of the country’s economy …

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Premier, I wonder if I could ask you to move to the microphone directly behind you. It seems we have a problem with the microphones owing to our ceiling being over 100 years old and very leaky.

The PREMIER OF GAUTENG (Mr M S Shilowa): Thank you very much, Chairperson. In my previous job, if such things happened, I would simply have organised a walkout. [Laughter.]

I was saying, hon Chairperson, that of the six metropolitan areas in the country, three are located in Gauteng. The viability of the country’s economy is linked to the success of these municipalities. As the provincial government, we therefore have a duty, working together with the municipalities, to ensure that the economic growth potential in these areas is fully exploited.

We also have three district councils that bring together key towns and cities in the province. Over the past year we appointed transformation managers to help transform these municipalities into centres of excellence in service delivery. Together with the national Government, we have also assisted in building the capacity of councillors and officials. We have set aside resources to enhance the viability and sustainability of these new municipalities. We are currently finalising the establishment of the municipal institutional support centre to assist with change management, development of new financial systems, debt control and revenue generation, building treasury capacity in municipalities, and creating effective municipalities.

The last Gauteng intergovernmental forum meeting also agreed on a range of measures aimed at strengthening the capacity of local government and on working together to ensure the effective delivery of services, including the provision of minimum amounts of free water and electricity, and on improving the billing system.

As part of our efforts to align policies of all spheres of government for effective economic growth, development and service delivery, we have examined integrated development plans of various municipalities and suggested ways and means in which they can be linked to provincial strategies and plans.

One of the challenges we face in the province is that of cross-border municipalities. This challenge is how to provide uniform quality services across provincial boundaries. Together with the provincial governments of Mpumalanga and the North West, we will continue to look at effective ways to manage cross-border municipalities in ways that are beneficial to the citizens of the respective provinces.

We would want to suggest that the NCOP visit some of our cross-border municipalities to see how they are functioning to ensure that no province, ourselves included, abdicates its responsibility or dumps it on the other province, particularly in areas that are not shared responsibilities, such as health, education, housing and roads.

Together with national and local government, we need to find a response, in a multidisciplinary way, to the fact that an estimated 25% of Gauteng households do not yet have access to waterborne sewerage, clean running water and electricity. We are currently working on a plan to ensure the provision of these basic services to all Gauteng residents within the next three years. However, its success will rely on the extent of the close working relationship and joint planning by all three spheres of government.

There is also a need to discuss the sometimes controversial issue of the powers and functions of all spheres of government. There may indeed be powers and functions that currently reside at national and provincial government levels, which may be better performed by local government. This is in addition to powers and functions that may currently reside with the national Government but require to be devolved to provincial governments. This, in my view, will in turn reduce the number of conditional grants usually made available to provinces and municipalities.

The argument is sometimes raised that we should scrap provinces because most of them are not able to rise to the challenge of service delivery. We disagree with this position. We need to recognise first and foremost that South Africa has emerged from the transition with one of the best constitutions and a system of government unprecedented anywhere in the world, albeit a hybrid of many systems of Western democracies. We must work hard to ensure that it works. We must not allow the little haggles and teething problems to detract us from this resolve.

The problems of capacity to deliver services effectively and efficiently are problems we must acknowledge, and we do acknowledge them as the Gauteng province. What most provinces are experiencing are indeed problems also faced by a number of national departments. It would be wrong to suggest that national departments struggling to find their footing must be dissolved, and if it is wrong to say so, it is also wrong to say so in respect of provinces.

I think what is required is for the system of South Africa’s governance to be consolidated. We must be proud of the nature of our democracy, including how it was attained and how it is evolving day by day. A South African brand of democracy is being born here and many nations are watching to see how it prospers so that they, too, can learn from it.

The South African Constitution is stronger in many areas. An attempt to dislodge one of its fundamental aspects, namely the structure of government, will not only send the wrong signals to our citizens and the world, but does indeed shake our commitment to seeing our democracy mature.

Provinces serve not just the practical functions of service delivery, as has been the focus of some critics, but also serve political imperatives such as the political representation of a spectrum of people. What is required is to confront the real issues of the weaknesses of provinces and to continue to seek ways of addressing them.

National Government has an obligation to play a role in this work too. Local government, on the other hand, plays an important role in our system of governance, conceived largely as a delivery and developmental organ. Section 153 of the Constitution requires that local government, and I quote:

… structure and manage its administration and budgeting, and planning processes to give priority to the basic needs of the community, and to promote the social and economic development of the community …

Seen as a developmental and delivery sphere of government, local government is accorded by the Constitution what can be referred to as administrative functions, as opposed to policy and legislative functions, which are explicitly accorded to national and provincial spheres of government. Although municipalities have powers to make by-laws, this is limited to making their administrative functions possible to carry out, thus limited to their delivery and developmental functions, evident in the kinds of issues both Parts B of Schedules 4 and 5 stipulate.

Together with municipalities in Gauteng, we are aware of the fact that our people cannot be spectators in policy formulation and service delivery. That is why we continue to give expression to our commitment to people- centred governance through a sustained programme of direct interaction and engagement with the people of our province, where they live.

This year alone, we have visited Randfontein, Zenzele and Bekkersdal on the West Rand; Vanderbijlpark, Everton and Rotunda in Sedibeng; Bronkhorstspruit, Zithobe and Rethabiseng in the Metsweding district; Daveyton in Ekurhuleni; Atteridgeville in Tswane; and Ivory Park in Johannesburg. This programme is a living expression of direct government accountability to the people. It gives effect to peoples’ right to know what Government is doing and plans to do. It enables citizens to make their voices heard and impact directly on service delivery in their areas.

I would like to respond to a few points of what the Deputy President said. Firstly, I am happy to announce that Gauteng’s audited financial statement for the 2000-01 financial year has been done and it will be debated from the middle of October in the legislature. This is going to be done at the same time as we debate the annual reports, which means we are not going to debate the annual reports and only next year look at the resources. We are going to be looking at the annual reports, looking at the resources that have been spent, and then we are able to justify why we were not able to implement programmes that we have said we would be able to implement. I think this will make the Deputy President’s job easier in terms of the review.

Secondly, we have requested all MECs to brief all committees on priorities for the next three years, to get input prior to finalisation in November. We have also taken a view, based on the report we received yesterday during the extended Cabinet meeting, that we will participate in the integrated fiscal review debate. We think in that way we will also be able to indicate what it is that we are doing, what the challenges and problems are and what we can do. In conclusion, there are a number of areas around which we are working together with local government. If one takes Pretoria, there is work that we are doing with them in terms of the IT hub and the auto cluster. If one takes Ekurhuleni - his Excellency Mayor Bavumile is here - we are working with them as well in terms of revamping the manufacturing areas of Alrode, Germiston and Wadeville. We are also working on a similar approach with the mayors of Sedibeng in the Vaal, as well as those of the West Rand.

A similar approach is taking place with Johannesburg and the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development. We are working on a constitutional Bill in which we seek to preserve the women’s section of the Old Fort and turn that into a proper museum, hopefully to house the Gender Commission. The Old Fort is the only prison in the world in which two legends of our time, Mandela and Gandhi, both spent time. We think it is important that we preserve that. There are therefore a number of areas around which we are working and we believe we can succeed. The co-operative nature of the South African system of governance requires that each sphere of government does not act in isolation, and that the country’s resources are used in a way that balances the different interests of each sphere of government, as well as geographical areas, by emphasising issues of shared interest to ensure maximum efficiency. [Applause.]

Mr C B HERANDIEN (Western Cape): Madam Chair, hon Deputy President, members of the NCOP, it is indeed a privilege for me to address the Council today on behalf of our premier, Mr Gerald Morkel. Please allow me at the outset to tender an apology on behalf of my premier. Due to unforeseen circumstances, he will not be able to be with us here today.

Vergun my om ten aanvang dan ook ‘n lansie te breek vir mnr Morkel. Ek is seker dat alle politici wat vertroud is met die gebeurlikhede in die provinsiale regeringsfeer sal saamstem dat mnr Morkel, sedert hy die premierskap oorgeneem het, homself as ‘n leier van formaat onderskei het. Hy het veral daarin geslaag om klein politieke asook kleinlike politieke slaggate te vermy, en toe te sien dat die politieke besluitneming in die Wes-Kaap in belang van al die inwoners van die Wes-Kaap is. Ons, as Wes- Kaap loof hom daarvoor. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Allow me at the outset also to put in a good word for Mr Morkel. I am sure that all politicians familiar with events in the provincial sphere of government will agree that since Mr Morkel took over the premiership he has distinguished himself as a formidable leader. He especially succeeded in avoiding petty and small-minded political pitfalls, and in ensuring that the political decision-making in the Western Cape is in the interest of all the inhabitants of the Western Cape. We, the Western Cape, applaud him for this.]

Before I comment on the performance of the Western Cape government, I would like to share with the House the principles on which the Western Cape policy framework is based. The overall objective of the Western Cape fiscal policy framework is to direct departmental budget allocations and planning towards attaining the provincial strategic outcomes. These desired outcomes were formulated by the Western Cape during 1999, with a 10th being added towards the end of 2000. These outcomes serve as the ultimate goals for which all departments should strive.

They entail the following: to contribute to the creation of a safer environment for the people; to create an enabling environment for economic growth; to prepare the people of the Western Cape for the knowledge economy of the 21st century; to contain the spread of HIV/Aids and tuberculosis; to empower the poor people of the province through the provision of basic services; to improve the quality and the accessibility of services offered by the provincial government; to protect, enhance and promote the total environment for the optimal development of the people; to maintain and improve the physical infrastructure required for the development of the province; to bind the province as the gateway to Africa; and, lastly, to improve on rural development. The Western Cape government has, since the last general election, succeeded in maintaining a proud record of clean government. The watchdog bodies such as the Public Protector’s office have investigated no major cases of corruption in this province. This is the result of a quite unique style of financial discipline and precision management that earmarks the managerial style of the provincial officials of the Western Cape. A specialist forensic audit component with legal capabilities, consisting of 14 investigators, has contributed greatly to the prevention of irregularities.

A very important flagship project in the field of human resources was also completed during the previous financial year. The primary objective of the project, aptly named Transformation 2000, was to inject greater representivity into the top provincial management echelons. The Western Cape realised that the demographics reflected in the 1996 census figures were not mirrored in the senior management profile of this province.

I must immediately point out that our objective was not to enforce transformation at all cost. There are already several reported case studies that proved that such an approach can lead to detrimental results. Therefore, our aim was rather to promote the principles of Batho Pele by creating a management team that represented a balanced range of community interests.

I am proud to announce today that our approach did render excellent results. More than 3 000 applications were received for the 60 positions that became available. We were not only able to bring our senior management profile in line with the demographic profile of the province, but we were also fortunate enough to secure the services of some of the best qualified and most capable candidates from the previously disadvantaged communities.

I supervised the whole process and participated in most of the interviews as a panel member. I can assure the House that it is a total myth that the top talent amongst the previously disadvantaged communities does not want to work in the Western Cape. The applications and appointments resulting out of the Transformation 2000 process proved that the Western Cape government and provincial administration are much sought-after employers amongst all population groups. [Interjections.]

The Western Cape has in the past been accused of seeing itself as a little political island. [Interjections.] I can assure members of this House that nothing is further from the truth. Since the adoption of the new constitution the Western Cape has gone out of its way to position itself as a fully fledged supportive partner in the provincial sphere. Since the recognition of three independent spheres of government forms the basis of our Constitution, it is of paramount importance that all nine provinces wholeheartedly participate in the intergovernmental structures that act as the roots of the system.

I want to assure members today that the Western Cape has taken these structures very seriously. Our politicians and officials are diligently attending the meetings of the various intergovernmental relations structures and our commitment and contributions are well documented. [Interjections.]

I am not going to embark upon a long list of comparisons in order to prove that the Western Cape is the leading province in that sphere of government. [Interjections.] On the other hand, I would be forsaking my duty if I did not share a few relevant socioeconomic facts with the House. [Interjections.] Not all the premiers are here today. [Interjections.]

With regard to health services, it is an accepted fact that life expectancy is a reliable measure of access to health services, as well as other socioeconomic variables such as housing conditions and social order. The average life expectancy in the Western Cape is 68, whereas in the rest of the country, according to Statistics SA, it is only 63,2. The infant mortality rate of 26 deaths per 1 000 live births is also way beyond the national average of 41 deaths per 1 000.

In the field of education, the Western Cape government has been actively promoting the establishment of a knowledge economy as one of the cabinet’s primary objectives. The adult literacy rate of 95% places the Western Cape more than 10 percentage points higher than the national average. Historic data corroborated by Statistics SA confirm that 95% of all children between the ages of 6 and 17 are enrolled in educational institutions.

The Western Cape government and administration put in a concerted effort to enhance their capacity in the field of information technology. The computer network was increased from 5 800 to 7 100 end users. The network now provides services to 84 sites throughout the province. This includes a comprehensive electronic mail service and a hi-tech data warehouse.

Gender issues also received ample attention with the establishment of departmental gender structures. The formulation of guidelines and policy and the development and implementation of training and educational programmes paved the way for the promotion of gender issues in the provincial arena.

Urbanisation and migration have also left their mark on the economy of the Western Cape. The province has experienced a high degree of functional urbanisation, mainly as a result of the hardships suffered by the agricultural sector. Unfavourable weather patterns earmarked by lengthy droughts have caused job losses in the rural areas. The migration of farmworkers to the metropolitan areas has further been augmented by the influx of migrants from other provinces. The labour market could not cope with this rapid expansion of the urban labour forces, resulting in an increase in small-time crime and squatting.

Looking at the very important field of housing, 1994 saw the launch of a new housing subsidy scheme. This scheme was aimed at providing 1 million houses within five years. The Western Cape was allocated 114 000 units as its portion of the national target. Although the national target was only met recently, the Western Cape managed to complete its quota within the five-year timeframe.

It has continued this excellent performance by providing shelter to as many families as its budget allows. I am proud to announce that, by the end of the 2000-01 financial year, we had created no less than 148 000 new housing opportunities in the Western Cape. We have also spent every single cent allocated to us by the national Department of Housing.

This is a major achievement compared to some of the other provinces that regularly end up with large amounts of unspent housing money. I want to place on record that the Western Cape provincial department of housing has to date allocated more than R1,8 billion to housing projects within the provincial boundaries.

It is, however, necessary to place these figures into perspective. The housing backlog in the Western Cape is currently estimated at 310 000 units. It is projected that this number will grow to a staggering 410 000 units by the year 2006. If the government can secure the building of 42 000 units per annum, a potential beneficiary will be on the waiting list for ten years and the backlog will be eliminated in 24 years from now.

The delivery of 40 000 units per year will see a beneficiary on the waiting list for eight years and the backlog wiped out within 15 years. The problem, however, is that a budget allocation of R736 million per annum will be needed to fund the building of 40 000 units per year.

The cold reality is that the Western Cape only received R322 million for the current financial year and can look forward to an allocation of R343 million for the next financial year. In practical terms, this means that we will be playing catch-up forever, trying to eliminate an unmanageable backlog.

To add insult to injury, the subsidy amount is shrinking in real terms. This makes it increasingly difficult to provide the acceptable and sustainable family units that are needed for the creation of more stable families and communities.

Daar is politici wat openlik verkondig dat hulle vertroue in die provinsiale regeringsfeer verloor het. Daar is diegene wat van mening is dat die skrywers van die Grondwet gefouteer het deur vir drie regeringsfere voorsiening te maak.

Ek verskil van hulle. Agb lede moet onthou dat ons Grondwet nog ‘n baie jong een is. Grondwette neem dekades, dikwels eeue om gevestig te raak en ek meen dit is voortydig om nou reeds ‘n oordeel oor ons nuwe Grondwet te vel.

Ek glo die provinsiale regeringsfeer vervul ‘n belangrike rigtinggewende rol in die grondwetlike omgewing. Dit was veral duidelik tydens die onlangse drastiese herstruktureringsproses wat die plaaslike owerheidsektor ondergaan het. Dit is juis in tye soos dié wat die provinsiale regering sy staal toon om die belangebalans tussen ‘n makro-ingestelde nasionale regering en ‘n gefokusde plaaslike owerheidsektor te handhaaf. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[There are politicians who state openly that they have lost faith in the provincial sphere of government. There are those who are of the opinion that the drafters of the Constitution erred in providing for three spheres of government.

I do not agree with them. Hon members must remember that our Constitution is still very young. It takes decades, often centuries, for constitutions to become established, and I think it is premature to pass judgment on our new Constitution at this stage.

I believe the provincial sphere of government fulfills an important key role in the constitutional environment. This was especially clear during the recent drastic restructuring process that the local government sector has undergone. It is precisely in times like these that the provincial government shows its strength in maintaining the balance of interest between a macro-attuned national government and a focused local government sector.]

The emergence of provincial leadership of this sort is a natural result of a balanced three-tiered government system. The challenges that await resolution, namely the redistribution of wealth, opportunity and resources, can best be dealt with at provincial level. [Applause.]

Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, in his keynote address at the national conference on the imperative of co-operative governance on 8 May 1998, Deputy President Mbeki, as he then was, inter alia said that the real value the NCOP could add to the costly exercise of governance was evident in the manner in which the NCOP dealt with the Eastern Cape intervention concerning the affairs of the Butterworth municipality. This also brought to the fore the important oversight role the NCOP had to play in future.

The two constitutional amending Bills of this year potentially have profound implications for the NCOP’s supervisory role over interventions in provincial and local government. I want to thank Prof Nico Steytler of the University of the Western Cape for his excellent exposition of these implications.

Sections 100 and 139 of our Constitution contain specific checks and balances for when a provincial government intervenes in a municipality. This House, as indicated by the President, plays an extremely important reviewing role where a provincial government assumes the executive obligation of a municipality.

The proposed new section 155(8) provides that either the national or a provincial government may exercise executive and legislative authority on behalf of a municipality either when the municipal council cannot function or when there is a serious and persistent financial emergency.

This proposed new section is not directly linked to the present sections 100 or 139. If these sections are not applicable, then none of the safeguards apply, even though the scope of the intervention can be very intrusive, including the assumption of legislative authority.

Not bound by any constitutionally prescribed safeguards, the national legislation enabling an intervention as envisaged by the proposed section need not include the supervisory role of the NCOP. By allowing for a less cumbersome procedure, the proposed section may render the supervisory role of the NCOP in this regard a dead letter.

The proposed creation of new grounds and procedures for very intrusive interventions, if allowed at all, should make the supervisory role of the NCOP more important, not less.

In terms of the present sections 100 and 139, this Council is given a special task to ensure that each and every intervention is not only lawful, but also compatible with the spirit of co-operative governance.

This House ensures that the proper balance between the three spheres of government is maintained, but the proposed amendments turn this process around and shift the onus from the intervening national or provincial government that must convince the Council, this House, that the intervention is justified, to the province or municipality subject to an intervention.

The reason for these proposed changes is unclear at this stage. The absence of a mandatory review of interventions will be compounded by the absence of a strict timeframe within which it must be done.

A sense of urgency is needed because an intervention by one sphere in another conflicts directly with co-operative governance, which is based on the principle that no sphere encroaches on the geographical, functional or institutional integrity of government in another sphere.

One cannot help being astounded at these proposed measures, which would very seriously undermine the supervisory role of this Council and its capacity to also look after the interests of both provincial and local government.

The delicately balanced structures agreed to by all the parties at the constitutional negotiations would be undermined by these amendments, which would weaken the control over local government by provincial government and would seriously water down the supervisory role of the Council.

It seems that there are widespread objections to these proposed constitutional amendments. I noted the serious objections of Salga, the governments of the Western Cape and North West provinces, Dr Sutcliffe and even Cosatu. It is of great concern that the ANC government agreed to such far-reaching constitutional amendments with, it seems, little attempt to achieve a wide consensus, even within its own ranks.

I think I speak for most members of all parties in this House, in the provincial legislatures and councils … [Interjections.] … when I seriously ask the Deputy President, as Leader of Government Business in this Parliament, to request Cabinet to reconsider these proposed constitutional amendments.

I would like to tell the Deputy President that I have little doubt that most members would openly agree with my argument were it not for the fact that the undemocratic antidefection clause is unfortunately still part of our law.

I am sure that other members would appreciate it if the Deputy President could indicate to us what the Government’s thinking is in this regard, because this Parliament and, indeed, our democracy, cannot afford to lose another Andrew Feinstein. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Hon member, I allowed you to proceed and debate a Bill which is not even before Parliament, and is also not the subject matter of our debate today. It is not a matter before the House.

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chairperson, hon Deputy President, premiers, members and mayors present here today, allow me this opportunity to first of all make a very important announcement.

I want to congratulate my premier on his first-born girl. He is a daddy now. I wish him well with baby-sitting, and I will teach him how to change nappies. [Laughter.]

This debate is a crucial one for us. Over the years we decided that we wanted to build a particular kind of democracy in our country. This is now happening and the vital role of the NCOP is part of that process. Therefore this debate will inform us much more about the key issues around the role of the NCOP.

When South Africans adopted the interim Constitution prior to the 1994 elections, little was known about the difficulties that lay ahead. Quite clearly, the Senate was becoming another House of Parliament, replicating the National Assembly’s activities and debates, rather than dealing with provincial matters.

It needed to be restructured to ensure a link between senators and the provinces which they come from. Thus the NCOP was formed to ensure that those interests were taken into account.

Our mandate is to ensure that provincial interests are taken into account in the national sphere of government. This is done primarily by providing for provincial participation in the national legislative process and through public participation in the national forum on issues affecting the provinces. In this way, it provides for a dynamic and much closer relationship between the province and its NCOP representatives.

In a nutshell, our role is shaped by our constitutional mandate, the provincial interests arising from national policy action and provincial experience, and the functioning and planning of our committees.

Most importantly, it strengthens the representation of poorer and less populous regions so as to promote development and growth in the less developed provinces without inhibiting development in those with historically greater resources at their disposal.

This mandate goes beyond being a national forum. It provides that we should facilitate public participation. It links the NCOP to the local government sphere and provides important oversight powers with respect to the provincial and national officials. In that way it is the heart of co- operative governance.

Despite the challenges we have been facing as the NCOP, we have managed to prioritise our work in a very meaningful way. We hold the view that our committees are the most challenged of all in the South African legislative environment. They are few, with hard-pressed members who face a wide agenda. Despite being a team of 54 permanent members, we are expected to do work that is shared among 400 members in the NA. Time management has been our watchword.

In this short period of time, we are proud to say that amongst other accomplishments, we have improved our liaison with the provinces through NCOP Online, which has become a source of information for the provinces. Through what I can call our crossing of the technology Rubicon, provincial issues have become easier and better, and legislative processes are more organised.

The strategies currently employed by our permanent delegates include working closely with our NA counterparts during the consideration of Bills and ensuring that proposed amendments are taken on board in the NA. It is also important to know that quite a number of Bills scrutinised by the NCOP are amended and then adopted by the NA.

The NCOP plays a vital role in intergovernmental relations and the promotion of horizontal relations between local governments. Some of our achievements include the implementation of municipal legislation initiatives aimed at building the capacity of municipalities, the review of delegated legislation; the review of national and provincial government interventions and resolving disputes about the administrative capacity of provincial governments.

The constitutional basis of the power of the province to monitor local government is set out in section 155(6) of our Constitution, where it provides that each provincial government must establish municipalities in its province, in a manner consistent with legislation enacted in terms of subsections (2) and (3) and by legislative or other measures.

I have noticed that all the speakers before me touched on local government. One is quite impressed to see that we have such a large delegation of Salga members here today. I think that they can play a more active role in interacting with us in the legislative process. We regard local government as a very important sphere of government, because that is the level of government that is closest to our people.

Section 139 of the Constitution authorises the provincial executive to intervene in a municipality when it does not fulfil an executive obligation in terms of legislation. This section covers more than just a provincial executive taking remedial action. It also includes a process whereby a province reviews and monitors the actions of the municipalities falling within its jurisdiction.

This section has, however, two components, the first being the process of provincial review of the actions of local government in order to measure the fulfilment by local government of its executive obligations. The second is a process of correction, should local government fall short of its obligations.

With regard to interventions, we have taken the view that they were regressive and they had to be prevented by setting out an early warning system, as well as healthier monitoring on the part of the provinces. This would mean a more consistent interaction and sharing of ideas between provincial government and the NCOP about those municipalities which are affected and experience difficulties.

Provinces like the North West and the Northern Cape, which had a number of municipalities that were bailed out by means of provincial interventions, already had such systems in place before the end of last year. Right from the very first intervention in Butterworth, the NCOP adopted a problem- solving approach to its role in interventions. It examined each and every case on the ground, not just on the merits or the papers submitted. It interviewed the communities, provinces, and councillors concerned, engaged with them and mediated any conflicts that may have existed between parties.

One of the most critical areas, the role of Salga within the NCOP, which is a direct link between the local government and national Government, highlights the special role of co-operative governance played by the NCOP. The NCOP’s role is unique in as far as it is compared to the NA’s position regarding the provincial legislature’s role. Neither the provincial legislature nor the NA is in a position to identify and act upon problems with those national policies that are implemented by provincial executives.

The NCOP, therefore, provides a forum for the articulation of local and provincial government concerns at national level. It plays a central role between the spheres of government. It is in that link between the national Parliament and the provincial legislatures that the NCOP is uniquely situated.

The South African Constitution obliges Government to involve public participation. It therefore stands to reason that the NCOP would not regard public participation as just an ordinary exercise, but rather as obligatory. This entails that, in collaboration with the provincial legislatures, the NCOP has a duty to ensure that decisions taken on the national level have involved the public. In conjunction with the above, one of our areas of success has been the achievements of the review debates. These debates are organised by provinces together with the NCOP, to deal with certain issues of policy.

These debates provide an opportunity for provinces to look at their objectives, what they have achieved, and whether their programmes were in tandem with those of other provinces or the national Government.

They bring to life issues that affect provinces. In that way, they reflect different voices from different provinces. The aim of fostering this constitutional obligation of public participation is to encourage public participation at the provincial legislature level, which must be informed by the desire to target certain priority issues in which the NCOP can exercise more influence in terms of decision-making. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr D E AFRICA (North West): Chairperson of the NCOP, Mr Deputy President, premiers, representatives of Salga, and special and permanent delegates, I stand here today to represent the Premier of the North West province, Mr Popo Molefe, who is recuperating after major surgery. He, however, sent his warm greetings and support from the North West provincial government. May I, in the same breath, thank the NCOP for arranging this important session and the Deputy President for his illuminating speech on this ever- challenging notion of co-operative and cogovernance, which must, following the new system of local government, be ever present on the agenda.

This debate could not have come at a better time. The future powers and roles of provinces and local government have, of late, become subjects of intense media speculation. It has been widely suggested that, with the new local government dispensation which provides more power to municipalities, the role of provincial government is becoming minimal.

We are further told that the inclination on the part of central Government is to deal directly with municipalities. This development, it has been emphasised, will result in municipalities becoming more and more powerful, with a smaller role for provincial government in relation to issues relating to local government.

The Deputy President’s speech to this august House this afternoon has confounded supporters of the above theory. It has confirmed our long- standing belief and practice that the relationship between all spheres of government is grounded on the firm principle of sound intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance. The three spheres of government are integral parts of our body politic.

They are part of a bigger whole, hence, they are distinctively autonomous but interrelated. One cannot function efficiently and effectively without the support and participation of the others. This House further confirms in this sitting the need to give effect to the provisions of Chapter 3 fully. We are satisfied that today’s debate has reconfirmed the sanctity of this principle, as clearly stipulated in Chapter 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.

We are certain that a more programmatic framework shall be developed to practicalise Chapter 3 of the Constitution, with the specific focus on ensuring that both the provincial and national spheres play a critical role in strengthening local government.

The North West provincial government has and will continue to nurture the relationship with other spheres of government. We are an active member of the President’s Co-ordinating Council. Through this forum, the President has created a platform on which provinces are afforded an opportunity to discuss directly with the President issues of common interest. We wish to reiterate the views expressed by the Premier of Gauteng that in this Forum we should begin to give more attention to the issue of cross-boundary municipalities to ensure that this system, as envisaged, works cohesively countrywide.

Indeed, the PCC has the potential to be at the apex of intergovernmental relations and can continually refine our approach to give real meaning to the principle of cogovernance, with the NCOP playing a major role in ensuring that no sphere of government deviates from this approach.

We have also established similar structures at provincial level. We have, accordingly, established the provincial intergovernmental forum that brings together the premier, supported by all members of the executive council, representatives of organised local government, and the house of traditional leaders. This forum is guided by the need for effective co-operation and co- ordination between provincial and local government, whilst respecting the autonomy of the various spheres. It is sufficiently flexible to respond to potential synergies, whilst retaining the strategic vision which guides this forum.

The PIGF has as one of its important members the house of traditional leaders. We are pleased to inform this House that the relationship with traditional leaders in our province has been a cordial and constructive one. We can confidently report that the Bafokeng royal administration is now participating in the new system of local government, after having agreed on an agency agreement with the municipality of Rustenburg. It is envisaged that the provincial government, through the PIGF, will foster a partnership with traditional leaders in order to implement the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy that was announced earlier this year.

Since its formation in 1997, the provincial intergovernmental forum has occupied centre stage in provincial government relations with local government. It is heartening to report that through the PIGF we were able to successfully drive the process of ensuring that local government played a critical role in provincial planning processes.

It is also through this forum that a successful conference was held to look at how we can begin to deal with the issue of the provision of free basic services to our communities. Indeed, the PIGF has proved to be an important consultative forum, where all relevant stakeholders rally around a common developmental vision.

The newly established local government structures have presented new challenges to the intergovernmental systems and structures. The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act imposes a duty on municipalities to facilitate compliance with the principle of co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations. To this end, the provincial government has established the Premier’s Mayoral Forum through which the premier seeks to forge consensus with mayors on key developmental challenges.

The new approach of the integrated development planning process has revolutionalised the way local governments, and, indeed, provincial governments, conduct their business. We view the role of the premier’s forum as being one of co-ordinating and facilitating a common framework on integrated development and planning.

We have to ensure that all plans of provincial and local governments are synergised, and have created a provincial IDP review committee where all spheres of government and departments come together to ensure that all our plans are integrated and reflected in the IDPs.

However, there are some hurdles that we need to overcome if we are to live true to the principle of sound and co-operative governance. It seems to us that the major battle is ignorance about the discipline itself. It seems we need to do more to expand our knowledge and understanding, and also the understanding of the broader community on this wonderful system of intergovernmental relations, for we cannot prescribe proper remedies without a good diagnosis of the system. We therefore need rigorous education and an information-sharing programme in order to promote the principle and practice of intergovernmental relations, for, as we are sitting here today, we are intergovernmental practitioners, indeed.

It is the wish of the North West provincial government that the process of fostering strong partnerships between all spheres of government continues. This will ensure that every sphere, while autonomous, interacts and consults with one another in the spirit of co-operative governance and the achievement of common goals in all matters of mutual interest.

The real test of our approach to intergovernmental relations and co- operative governance is how we empower local government to propel our people into an environment in which they will be the real architects of microtransformation; integrated development and change. They should also play a critical role in changing the microcharacter of our cities, towns and villages.

We will all benefit greatly if this House can, within the first year of the existence of the new system of local government, develop a framework which will comprehensively engage all three spheres to take forward and practicalise the notion of co-operative governance and cogovernance in order to ensure that we deliver and provide services in a cohesive, integrated, systematic and programmatic approach. [Applause.]

Mr L RAMATLAKANE (Western Cape): Chairperson, hon Deputy President, premiers and members, I would like to thank the hon the Deputy President and the NCOP for this important debate on the subject that is particularly and uniquely relevant to the Western Cape.

In order to understand intergovernmental relations we, firstly, need to understand the role of the three spheres of government and the constitutional imperative of Chapter 3 on co-operative governance. In the Western Cape, we see this understanding seriously affected by the ruling political party objective on the part of the DA - this prejudiced constructive intergovernmental relations. I was provoked to speak the truth and I think that they must listen to it. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Hon member, can you please take your seat. I would like to ask hon members not to howl at each other. I will immediately name somebody because you are, now, getting out of order.

Mr L RAMATLAKANE (Western Cape): Chairperson, only yesterday, in the provincial legislature, we witnessed an example of how intergovernmental relations should not be conducted. The MEC for agriculture in the Western Cape, with the full backing of the provincial cabinet, tabled a Bill which seeks to privatise the provincial department of agriculture, thus converting it into a statutory body. Our concern is that this new privatised board would put agricultural services beyond the reach of emerging African and coloured farmers.

A further concern is that the department itself is totally unrepresentative of the people in this province, contrary to Transformation 2000, as was mentioned earlier on. The transformation of this sector will be almost impossible if this Bill becomes law.

The Western Cape MEC has never formally raised this Bill at the Minec level. To make matters worse, the department has not received official National Treasury approval for a Western Cape Bill. The national Minister has also cautioned the MEC that she would have to oppose this Bill if it went forward.

It is this tendency called ``go it alone’’ which goes against the transformation agenda and which often characterises the DA government in the Western Cape. The DA continues to exploit the votes of the coloured and poor to promote and retain white privilege. [Interjections.]

We remember very well how the DA-controlled Western Cape government took the national Government to court in an attempt to keep the Khayelitsha community out of the Tygerberg municipality. This was an example of the taxpayers’ money being used to gerrymander boundaries to promote racist apartheid divisions. The Western Cape lost this case and Khayelitsha was indeed included within the Tygerberg municipality. Not only did this impact negatively on intergovernmental relations, but it also cost the taxpayer R5 million.

The recent flood disaster on the Cape Flats left poor African and coloured families homeless and destitute. The DA-controlled spheres of government consistently failed to act on this crisis. A full two months lapsed while provincial and local government failed to intervene. It was only when the national Government intervened and declared it a disaster area that things were put in place. This is simply unacceptable. This neglects the poor and not only exposes the DA’s race priorities, but also highlights the failure to co-operate constructively with the other ANC-controlled levels of government.

Another example was the refusal by the provincial government to throw their weight fully behind the national Government’s court case against pharmaceutical companies. Instead, the MEC for health, the hon Koornhof, accompanied the leader of the DA, Tony Leon, on a trip to Europe to negotiate separately with the very same companies. Clearly, such conduct undermines intergovernmental relations or even co-operative governance as directed by Chapter 3 of the Constitution. It also sends mixed messages to the international communities. The continuing attitude of the DA can only be summarised as a revolt against the Constitution.

Only yesterday the MPL Patrick McKenzie again moved a motion asking the premier to investigate the abuse of power by the MEC for local government in Theewaterskloof local government and other municipalities. Here the DA disregards the principles of intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance, and court action, without pursuance of co-operative governance and the principle of intergovernmental relations, is the order of the day.

Currently, in the Western Cape provincial and local government we see the following problems: The first is the abuse of provincial and local government budgets to fight interparty political battles, such as the street-naming fiasco. Over R1 million was spent to help the DP in its fight against the New NP to get rid of Peter Marais, while other allegations of corruption by DA councillors are simply ignored. For example, the allegation of corruption in housing that have been reported in Westbank have not been mentioned or dealt with yet.

The second problem is the abuse of the provincial government budget in the form of a survey by the DA on its support, and running a public relations campaign to improve its image. The survey shows that the DA is perceived as, and I quote, ``uncaring, out of touch, insensitive towards the African and Coloured people.’’

The province now wants to spend R12 million to manipulate the public perception by misleading the public into believing that the DA, in fact, cares.

Thirdly, the NCOP also has certain powers to intervene in local government on request by provinces. What concerns us is the selective manner in which the MECs choose to intervene. Despite being requested by the national Minister to appoint a committee to investigate the DA-controlled Langeberg municipality, the MEC concerned has refused to do so. Maybe the NCOP has to intervene and deal with this problem without undermining the independent role of this sphere of government.

The NCOP must be aware of the international relations which provinces build independently. We are concerned that our provincial government has, for instance, entered into a relationship with what we call a right-wing dominated local government in Upper Austria, led by Jörg Haider. My question is: How can such an agreement be reconciled with the country’s overall foreign policy objectives? [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Order! Order! Hon members Ackermann, Dlulane and Majodina, you are causing disorder in the House.

Dr Z L MKHIZE (KwaZulu-Natal): Mr Chairperson, hon Deputy President, premiers, hon members, I want to start by extending an apology from my premier, Mr Mtshali, who was unable to attend because he was in the National Assembly yesterday and has to be in the provincial legislature today.

I also want to take the opportunity to thank the Deputy President for an enlightening and analytical address. I want to say to this House that our province always considers the NCOP to be very important. But we also believe that our province is one specimen of how South African democracy works [Applause.] … having moved from very severe violence to complete peace. With the largest population in the country, it is the one province that has got seven political parties and a coalition government. We believe, therefore, that the voice of the provinces is important to hear.

We also believe that the NCOP has made a significant contribution by creating an avenue for the provinces to express their views and influence national decisions. The fact that several provinces had to be to placed under section 100(1)(a) as a result of financial difficulties sounded alarm bells for all of us. However, the support and co-operation between provinces and national Government, has ensured that, to date, no province has had to be placed under section 100 (1)(b), where the national Government has to take over its obligations.

There has also not yet been a need to invoke this section, as a result of either lack of ability or the lack of will to co-operate by any province. We believe that our constitutional democracy is maturing and co-operative governance is well understood and practised.

The existence of the Presidential Co-ordinating Committee has played a pivotal role in addressing the problems experienced by provinces. Attempts to solve problems in close co-operation with Treasury, combined with stringent financial controls, removed KwaZulu-Natal from section 100 (1)(a), giving KwaZulu-Natal a positive and healthy financial status.

In addition to our fight against corruption, we are quite confident that we are able to direct our funds to our people. The cluster system that has also been adopted by the executive council has facilitated interaction and promoted interdepartmental co-operation. We are now planning a forum that will include provincial government, local government and the House of Traditional Leaders in order to strengthen our co-operative governance.

I also think that it is notable that there has not been a serious conflict either between the national Government and provinces or between provinces, resulting in the need for a wide use of section 125 (4) which provides for the NCOP to intervene in disputes. While the use of these provisions is an acceptable and a normal sign of democracy at work, it is significant that the spirit of understanding between provinces and our national Government has not made the use of these provisions necessary.

Considering the deep conflict from which South African democracy has emerged, and the political differences and diverse interests of our different communities, this is an outstanding achievement. It is also a compliment to the South African people and the leaders they elected.

The agenda of this House, the NCOP, and the spirit of debate on issues involved will always remain a barometer of the political mood and impending or existing political turmoil and constitutional crisis in this country.

We also believe that political stability in our province and the co- operation of the parties involved in the coalition government in our province have contributed to the stability of South Africa as a country.

Allow me, therefore to raise a few topical issues of concern that affect our province, which the support of national Government will remain paramount in ensuring that our province is able to cope with. Firstly, we want to welcome the prioritisation of four district councils, Umkhanyakude, uMzinyathi, Zululand and Ugu, for the implementation of the Sustainable Integrated Rural Development Programme. Few other programmes are able to demonstrate an integrated approach and co-operative governance amongst the three spheres of government as this particular programme is doing.

We also look forward to the extension of this programme to the remaining district councils, because they are no richer.

We continue to appreciate the support the national Government is offering to our province in terms of projects that are geared towards stimulating economic growth, such as the international airport and other related projects.

The issue of the five basic services is also an issue that we would just want to comment on. While these policies offer welcome relief to the very poor who are faced with the burden of making ends meet, it has also become clear that the best-developed cities with larger financial resources are best placed to take advantage of the policy. The smaller municipalities in rural areas with poor infrastructure face a steeper challenge in the implementation of this particular policy. There was also an earlier confusion about the allocation of equitable share to the B municipalities, while the C municipalities bear the responsibility of the function. This also added to the challenge. We, however, welcome the news that additional resources have been made available to address this issue. We also welcome the work that is being done to concretise this policy in so far as the electricity supply is concerned.

The poor supply of safe and clean water in our province dramatised complications during the outbreak of cholera, when more than 105 000 people were affected and 228 deaths noted. However, we also note that this number of deaths is less than 1% of deaths, which is the best ever figure, resulting in the WHO sending its expects to record this experience to develop guidelines for other countries to follow.

But I think we must admit that the cholera problem is endemic on the eastern side of our country. Therefore, it will continue to be with us and will always show up where the water supply is not at its best. At a cost of more than R150 million, this is also the best reflection of interdepartmental co-operation and national support.

I want, therefore, to take this opportunity at this stage to pay tribute to the volunteers from all the provinces who have been to KwaZulu-Natal to assist us in fighting this problem. Their gesture was a gesture of friendship. It was a mark of friendship, solidarity and, indeed, patriotism.

I therefore want members here to convey to their different provinces our sincere gratitude for the support that we obtained from the different provinces.

I realise that the Deputy President has already stated that the foot-and- mouth disease has been another example. Again, the co-operation between national Government and our province during the outbreak of foot-and mouth- disease was also a hallmark of the best of intergovernmental relations that we could hope for.

We are now proudly able to announce that our province is free of foot-and- mouth disease, thanks to co-operative governance and the support from national Government. We are also in a position to give some news to the United Kingdom which seems to be suffering from the problem that we have already solved. [Applause.]

There is no other way to demonstrate co-operative governance than in ensuring that our people will always emerge victorious and united in the face of extreme challenges. These challenges that one has spoken about have brought our people together and made sure that we could survive despite those difficulties.

Another tragedy struck just when the farming community was settling down to count the cost of the foot-and-mouth outbreak which destroyed their valuable property. I think a lot of us would be aware that for the African community the value of cattle is economic, cultural and spiritual, and that they are the embodiment of their very life and very existence. In early September a raging veld fire in the northern part of our province destroyed a lot of livestock and caused more to die of starvation, causing extreme anguish and severe financial losses. As though this was not enough, a spell of cold weather with rains and snow devastated the same area, causing untold damage and losses.

The fire caused over R250 million’s worth of damage on timber plantations, as more than 50 000 hectares of grazing land were destroyed, while the cold weather caused damage of more than R43 million in livestock, that is sheep, cattle, goats and others. There was more than R1,5 million damage in infrastructure, involving five district councils and 17 municipalities, which is the basis on which our province requested the President to declare the area a disaster area.

Another issue is the scourge of HIV/Aids, which is taking its toll on the province, straining all the departments and drowning our meagre resources. Again, a joint approach between the Government and civil society and clear political leadership, from national, provincial and local provincial governments, has strengthened our effort to mobilise our people to face the problem.

The Provincial Aids Council, headed by our premier, has encouraged stakeholders to embark on programmes to reduce its spread. A successful and unique programme which focused on men resulted in a march by thousands of men pledging to play a role in the fight against Aids. Those marching were political leaders, traditional and elected leaders, religious leaders and ordinary members of the community, who marched under the slogan: ``Men make a difference. Give her love and not Aids.’’

This event was held on National Women’s Day on 9 August and it was addressed by the chairperson of Sanac, the Deputy President and the Premier of KwaZulu-Natal. The programme focused attention and also sent a strong message on the problem of domestic violence, for the reduction of which more resources are necessary.

We are therefore also pleased to note that the FFC is now considering that HIV/Aids should be a factor in the process of budget allocation. Our province fully supports the national Government’s focus on poverty eradication, which will go a long way towards dealing with the problem of HIV/Aids and improving the lives of our people, because one of our biggest problems has been that poor infrastructure and poverty have made the impact of any disease much worse. This has been the reason why we have had such a high number of people with cholera. I think we face the same problem with HIV/Aids, because with poverty it gets worse.

The other challenge we have had to face is that of malaria. The KwaZulu- Natal province carries more than 50% of the malaria load of this country. But, again, the co-operation of local government and the national Government and our local communities resulted in such a drastic reduction of this problem following the 1999 floods, that KwaZulu-Natal has now earned South Africa an SADC award for the best programme on the control of malaria. [Applause.] The issue that, I think, has been raised here, which continues to dominate part of our political debate, is that of traditional leadership. All we can say right now is that this issue remains an area of concern and tension in the province. Needless to say, there are also divergent views amongst political parties in the province and within the coalition government. We, however, remain confident that the pragmatic approach of our national Government will ensure an amicable and lasting solution to this matter, which has seen very vigorous debates and public displays of disagreement.

Whilst I do not wish to underplay the significance of the focus day on tourism, I will not dwell on the well-known virtues of the KwaZulu-Natal tourism industry, as there are very few members in this House who do not have their own personal experience of these virtues. Those members who have not been to KwaZulu-Natal will eternally regret what they are missing. [Laughter.]

Lastly, we as the people of KwaZulu-Natal and of Durban, in particular, were greatly honoured to host the third World Conference against Racism. We believe the significance of the conference lay in it being an acknowledgement by the world of the role that South Africans have played in fighting for nonracialism. There remains a lot of work for us to do in stamping out all forms of discrimination, especially in ensuring that young people, particularly children at school and at home, grow up without any form of racial prejudice.

The conference proceeded to its conclusion without any disruption or breakdown in law and order, and the security of the delegates was never threatened. Almost all of the 16 000 participants left with a very positive feeling about South Africa. The declarations and resolutions adopted will forever be associated with our democratic new South Africa.

South Africa was shown to the whole world as a haven of political tolerance, peace and nonracialism. That was the best show of co-operative governance, as all the different spheres of government were involved. Our province is still prepared to accept the honour of hosting any other international conference and of hosting heads of state on behalf of South Africa in the future. [Laughter.] [Applause.]

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, comrade Deputy President, hon premiers and MECs, special delegates, representatives from Salga and colleagues, the hon the Deputy President may recollect that in his debate in this House a year ago, I had to mention to a member of the opposition that he appeared to be like a cowboy riding a tired donkey into the sunset firing blanks. The person that I was referring to at the time was Mr Peter Marais. In fact, it appears as if it was very prophetic and true. He no longer is the mayor of the Cape Town unicity.

The difficulty that we faced that time, in terms of the content of his contribution to the debate, was that he was not concerned about the nature of the debate. The Deputy President had spoken about urban renewal and integrated rural development, but Mr Marais was more concerned about scoring political points in a very vociferous way to create a divide between the Western Cape on the one hand and the other provinces on the other.

It does appear as if we now have a similar situation with Mr C B Herandien, the hon MEC for housing. He seems to have used his speech to showcase the Western Cape. Quite clearly, the intention of the Constitution was that provinces would be established and created not as competing fiefdoms, the one against the other, but as efficient instruments of government to make government accessible to our people so that we could enhance participatory democracy.

The reality that was accepted by all provinces alike was that development in the provinces was asymmetrical. Certain areas had historical advantages. Certain areas had used influx control to ensure that privileges were extended to people of a particular racial group.

To showcase a province now, on the basis of advantages that it has incurred, is quite wrong. I respectfully feel that one should not, like the proverbial ostrich, bury one’s head in the sand and forget that one is living in one united South Africa.

The mere response of Mr Ackermann when Mr Ramatlakane spoke, the hostile, aggressive approach towards him, is an indication of the fact that there is a denial and unwillingness to accept the truth. In fact, the DA does care. I do not think that Mr Ramatlakane has worry about money being spent from the budget. It cares about those who are privileged and those who are white. It should care more about those that are disadvantaged, those that come from the coloured areas and those Africans who are suffering in informal settlements.

I think the central key to our democracy is caring and responsiveness. Once we achieve that, we will fundamentally understand the purpose of the NCOP, because this institution has to prove to be somewhat different from the National Assembly or any other institution. In this institution when matters, however contentious they are, are debated - this has happened over the past two years - the debate has concluded with a resolution that has been adopted by all provinces and all political parties affirming a common, united position. We say that this is the House of Ubuntu. This is the House where divergent views are expressed and articulated, but where consensus can be found.

If this is the defining character of the NCOP, it must, in fact, be the defining character of intergovernmental relationships among provinces and among the different spheres of government. When we talk about our commitment to housing, that commitment must prevail not only in the Northern Province but also in the Western Cape, Gauteng and elsewhere. We cannot talk about advancements of technology in a particular area and say we are doing better than the other provinces. We should rather laud the achievement of Gauteng, which, notwithstanding its historical disadvantages, it is able to provide more than 90% of its schools - public schools, not private Model C schools - with computers and IT. That, in fact, is an achievement that says: Here is a redress of the disadvantages and inequalities of the past. This is a province that is moving forward because of its commitment to transformation and development.

In the nature of this House, I think that there is an open and candid, frank way to deal with matters. I think a concern has been quite legitimately raised by Mr Matthee. The concern was in terms of the Bill that has been introduced, but Mr Matthee seems to be missing the point, which is that we take pride in our democracy, a democracy which makes the articulation of that particular view that he is expressing in this House possible because of public hearings.

It makes it possible for Mr Darkie Africa to come to a public hearing of Parliament and speak as an MEC concerned about a particular issue, not because he is a member of ANC, but because he is concerned about the different spheres of government and inter-governmental relationships. He may be right, he may be wrong, but he is not denied the right to articulate and express a particular point of view. Here we see provinces able to come to the national forum to express that.

What Mr Matthee should understand is that one cannot look at legislation from a particular perspective. One should ask, for example, when we talk about interventions in terms of section 139: Is the amendment going to have the effect of limiting the role of the NCOP or, honestly, is it going to have the effect of expanding the role? Have we debated that particular issue? What the amendment does, is to say that we can intervene at any time, and it gives us that latitude, but there may be a counterargument which says that section 139, as it exists within the framework, is quite in order and quite adequate, and there may be alternative mechanisms that one has to look at.

I think what this kind of debate has done, in terms of the discussions and engagements at the public hearings where both the Houses participated, is that it has brought to our attention the fact that we are dealing with very complex and difficult constitutional issues. Before we even consider adopting the legislation, we should consider whether various other options could be canvassed in order to find the best possible solutions so that, wherever possible, we do not tinker with the Constitution. If Mr Matthee did, in fact, have an opportunity - and I think this House will have an opportunity - to debate this matter at length, I believe that the Deputy President would take into account the concerns that have been raised in this regard. The final word has not been spoken.

I would like to take this opportunity to raise certain things. I do not want to sound like a praise singer, but we must thank the Deputy President, in his capacity as Leader of Government Business, for assisting and supporting the initiative to introduce section 76 legislation in this House.

It has brought a tremendous amount of enthusiasm amongst communities. It has affected provincial legislatures in a very pronounced way in that they look at legislation with much greater interest and passion, because they know they are able to shape the legislation.

What seems to be the case now is that most of the amendments are, in fact, being initiated by the NCOP as a representative of the provinces. Very little of that is happening in the National Assembly once it receives the legislation, which means that the provinces have really shaped and changed the legislation in terms of their experience. It also enables provinces then to have public hearings, so when public hearings are held in the National Assembly, the views of provinces have already been taken into account.

I also believe that one area that perhaps should be looked at in terms of intergovernmental relations is the area of co-ordination, which Mr Darkie Africa raised. I think it is a very important area. But certainly, the two central issues regarding intergovernmental relations, particularly with respect to the new municipal structures and new dispensation, are the following: Firstly, the provincial governments would now have to redefine their roles, and have to play a much more integrated role in terms of how they deal with the budget. It also means that local governments and district councils would provide provincial governments with their integrated development plans and their proposed budgets. Those budgets would, in fact, determine the priorities of the province. The province would look at the programmes, the needs and the requirements of local governments and then, on that basis, would be able to determine these.

In order to monitor and ensure that this occurs in an integrated way, it is important that we have linkages with local government. Here I think that IT, which we had to grapple with in the NCOP in the past and which has been so beneficial to us in engaging very meaningfully and actively with our provinces, would be a very key and central instrument in terms of monitoring, in terms of oversight.

It has been a very long debate but I have to say that this House has responded to the call of the Deputy President. To give a few examples: We have tried to establish a provincial focus. We also have tried to establish that we are responsive. The Deputy President has raised the issue of disasters, which was a classical phenomenon or expression of intergovernmental relationships. This House went to the disaster areas, exercised oversight there, invited the different spheres, including Salga, to participate in debates, compiled a report and submitted the report to the executive, which I believe had some kind of impact in terms of the process of intergovernmental relations, horizontally and vertically in terms of disaster management.

In terms of the matters that were raised by the hon the Deputy President, regarding urban renewal and integrated rural development, this House intends setting aside dedicated time for provincial legislatures, local government and the NCOP. We will also extend an invitation to our counterparts in the NA to visit those areas and to see what are the successes, challenges and difficulties that are encountered. We, as a legislature, would be able to respond to government action in the three spheres with regard to priorities that we have all accepted and that have been set by our President. This is amongst the other issues that we are going to raise.

The previous speaker raised the importance of the Intergovernmental Fiscal Review. I think one of the important features of that particular area - and premiers, MECs and members of the legislatures who are here should take note of this - is that for the first time, there is going to be an analysis of key social areas such as education, local government and health. That analysis has never been done before in the manner in which it will appear in the report. It means that it will reflect the determination of provinces in terms of programmes and priorities that provinces have to accept. The report will therefore be one which all provinces should engage with, and could then be developed by the NCOP as representative of the various provinces and representing also the local sphere and be debated meaningfully here.

With these few words, I would like to thank the premiers, the chief Whips, the MECs and the members of the legislatures for the support and also acknowledge Salga for their participation. We do believe that in the near future, given the fact that it has had teething problems with its new structure, Salga will be able to participate much more meaningfully and effectively in the work of this council.

Mr B H VILAKAZI (Salga): Deputy President, Chairperson, hon delegates to the NCOP, premiers, MECs, executive mayors and representatives of local government who are part of this debate and discussion this afternoon, it is indeed an honour for me to deliver what could be called a maiden speech on behalf of Salga in this important debate, as introduced by the Deputy President of the country. May I start by tendering the apology of the chairperson of Salga, the executive mayor of Pretoria-Tshwane, Father Mkhatshwa, who could not be with us this afternoon.

South Africa’s municipal elections, held on 5 December 2000, closed the chapter of transitional local government and therefore marked the dawn of a new era for municipalities in this country. Until 1994 the vast majority of our people had been denied the right to elect the representatives of their choice.

Local government in South Africa is a very critical sphere of government. It is tasked with the responsibility to serve the people and to provide essential social and economic services to the communities. Section 40(1) of the Constitution captures this new constitutional status of the various spheres of government as follows:

In the Republic, government is constituted as national, provincial and local spheres of government which are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated.

The Constitution spells out the developmental role and the mandate of local government in terms of its objects, which are, according to section 152(1): (a) to provide democratic and accountable government to local communities;

(b) to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner;

(c) to promote social and economic development;

(d) to promote a safe and healthy environment; and

(e) encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in the matters of local government.

We should also add to this the ward committees structure. This mandate places local government at the centre of service delivery. Local government can only rise to this challenge if municipalities are financially and institutionally empowered. Local government cannot fulfil its developmental mandate without being part of the national and provincial development agenda. All spheres of government must, in line with the spirit of co- operative governance, co-operate with one another by fostering relations with one another and enriching and fostering successful budget processes and management through the now established national budget forum and the Financial and Fiscal Commission.

One of the critical requirements of all municipalities in the country is to produce IDPs and the value of IDPs, for the municipalities is embedded in the formulation of focused plans that are based on developmental priorities. This approach will endorse a system that entails the directing of resources to areas where they are needed most, maximising our capacities in improved service delivery in all our communities to remove the inequalities and imbalances of the past.

Municipalities are also required to align their plans with the provincial and national spheres of government in the delivery of national and provincial development plans at local level. Municipalities also have to incorporate a wide range of sectoral programmes like water, health and small business development into their own municipal development programmes and also comply with the requirements of a range of national legislation aimed at facilitating development.

For this to succeed, co-operative governance and a proper system of intergovernmental relations are very critical. Without all spheres of government adhering to the principles of Chapter 3 of the Constitution, we cannot succeed alone in local government. We need to promote and develop a close working relation between the spheres of government and bring governance close to the people.

Salga is a statutory body broadly mandated to represent local government at national level. This mandate stems from section 163 of the Constitution, which recognises an important role of organised local government in the South African sociopolitical landscape. In line with this constitutional provision, the Organised Local Government Act was passed by Parliament in November 1997.

The NCOP, by virtue of its status, plays an important role as an instrument of intergovernmental relations. Salga, as a representative of organised local government and the third sphere of government recognised by the South African Constitution, takes part in all NCOP activities affecting local government.

Salga’s role in the NCOP, therefore, is to represent the interests of local government at national level, and specifically the national legislative process, and to advise other spheres of government on the implications of various pieces of legislations and policies that affect local government.

Organised local government’s role is to be the direct link between the NCOP and municipalities. However, Salga faces a number of challenges in its role of representing local government in the legislative branch of intergovernmental relations.

The intergovernmental relations audit report commissioned by the Department of Provincial and Local Government identified some key issues hampering Salga’s participation in the NCOP. Amongst these were the NCOP’s legislative cycle, the lack of resources and infrastructure, the absence of permanent delegates and the lack of participation in provincial legislatures.

With local government covering the whole country, it is therefore imperative that we find ways and means and processes to make it possible for local government to meet the deadlines as dictated by the NCOP’s session cycles in terms of obtaining the required mandates, even from the most remote parts of this country.

Through joint workshops we need to be able to identify and put in place mechanisms to provide for enough time for consultation with member municipalities once legislation has entered the cycle and amendments have been effected to the Bill.

Salga, as a national structure, represents and acts as a voice for local government. Therefore, if Salga is to speak for local government, proper consultation with even the smallest of the municipalities should take place before the local government’s position can be tabled as input to Parliament.

We welcome the comments of the hon Sulliman and agree that there is indeed a more meaningful role that needs to be played by Salga in this legislative process. However, I again want to note that the absence of permanent delegates and the lack of resources should inform us on the urgent need to address this matter mutually in order to capacitate and enhance organised local government’s participation in the NCOP.

Unlike provinces, Salga does not have members permanently at Parliament. This problem reduces our ability to critically analyse the implications of each piece of legislation with implications for local government. It tends to be too costly for Salga to ferry delegates to and from provinces to Parliament each time such legislation finds its way into the cycle. Due to the lack of local government participation in provincial legislatures and the absence of voting rights in the NCOP for local government, Salga has not been able to submit a negotiating and final mandate as provincial legislatures do.

In conclusion I want to say that we appreciate and accept the invitation to continue our participation in the doings of the NCOP. Today’s participation in this debate should facilitate Salga’s continued participation in the NCOP. This will enable municipalities to make inputs into various policies and pieces of legislation that impact on local government to ensure that local government is able to fulfil its developmental role.

Proper intergovernmental relations structures and mechanisms should be established at both a legislative and executive level within provinces to ensure that co-operative governance starts at provincial level. Salga welcomes the establishment of different forums in different provinces, bringing together premiers, mayors, MECs and organised local government to enhance governance and co-operative governance. Intergovernmental relations are therefore critical for the proper implementation of government policies. All of us must adhere to these principles for such implementation to succeed.

Lastly, Salga would like to congratulate the Deputy President on this long- awaited debate and its success through his participation this afternoon.

We want to join those who have extended goodwill wishes to Premier Popo Molefe for a speedy recovery from what seems to have been a major operation. We also want to join everyone in the House in congratulating Premier Manne Dipico on the evident sudden growth in the size of the population of his province and his contribution through the birth of his daughter.

With that we want to thank you for the opportunity and for welcoming Salga back into the NCOP. [Applause.]

The PREMIER OF THE NORTHERN PROVINCE (Adv N A Ramatlhodi): Chairperson, Deputy President and colleagues, I wish to use this occasion to join those who have acknowledged the presentation by the Deputy President of the Republic of South Africa.

The initiated would know that our Constitution is a product of sufficient consensus. In that sense it represents the minimum commonly agreed upon positions by various units, class forces, groups and others. It is therefore based on the mutual accommodation of all these interests.

Given that it is an embodiment of the collective will of our people, it has been successful in producing the stability that our country enjoys. We are therefore enjoined not only to promote the letter and spirit of the Constitution to the best of our abilities, but indeed to be seen to be doing so.

At the heart of our dispensation is the notion of the communal management of various institutions catered for under the Constitution. That notion derives from the saying which was formulated by our ancestors 46 years ago when they said that the people shall govern. We have thus created these institutions to enable our people to govern themselves. Co-operative governance therefore is not an options, it is indeed an imperative.

If we look at co-operative governance in a vertical sense, that is between and amongst the three spheres of government, there are given instruments which allow for the seniors amongst equals to exercise an overall oversight. That notion is normally referred to as national norms and standards, meaning that all of us should conform to uniform and single norms and standards.

Normally these norms and standards would then belong to the province of a particular Minister who would therefore have the responsibility of determining what constitutes common norms and standards - not only determining, but applying those common norms and standards or alternatively ensuring that they are being adhered to.

That is the role of the national Ministers of the Republic.

In playing this role, the national Ministers might, at times, be tempted to cross the sacred line and find themselves compromising the principle which goes together with that of interrelatedness, which is distinctiveness. As we implement co-operative governance, we should therefore guard against that possibility.

Similarly, local and provincial governments have a duty and an obligation to co-operate with the norms and standards of a country. As I said, it is not an option. In co-operating, they also have a duty to make sure that they remain distinct within the confines of the Constitution.

Sometimes provinces and local governments might want to hide behind the notion of autonomy in order to avoid adherence to the norms and standards. What we need to look at is that those of us who are at different levels have equal responsibilities in the communal management of our country. I will come to horizontal co-operative governance. Let us take the national sphere, for example, between the departments which are within the provincial sphere. The tendency is for the departments to seek to be sailors on their own, and for the Ministers or MECs to compete and outshine one another. That undermines co-operative governance.

What is required is what we have tried to do, namely make sure that the cluster system is perfected to its highest efficiency, at least at the provincial and national levels. I am sure that local government will find that it will not necessarily need to reinvent the wheel, but rather to enrich what we are in the process of creating.

Regarding co-operative governance between provinces, earlier on I was listening to some the debates here and I was reminded of a peacock performing a mating dance before a peahen. [Laughter.]

We have a common responsibility to manage these provinces communally and collaboratively. We should not take pride in the fact that some are ahead and others are behind. [Interjections.]

Mrs A M VERSFELD: Why not?

The PREMIER OF THE NORTHERN PROVINCE (Adv N A Ramatlhodi): We should worry about what we all do communally to bring along those who are backward. [Applause.] That is at the heart of co-operative governance.

We know that different parts of our country are at different levels of development, and that has been authored by our own history. Either we had something to do with it or we did not, but that is the objective reality. If we want to build a stable, sustainable and prosperous nation, we should stop laughing at ourselves, because when one laughs at one’s brothers, one is laughing at oneself.

Those of us who are behind have a responsibility not to pull back those who are in front. As they give a helping hand, we must follow and make their task easier by doing our bit and not blaming history.

I thought that I should address the broad principles, rather than go into the details of what we do in the Northern Province. There are things which are very similar to most of what has been said here.

Ms C-S BOTHA: Madam Chair, hon Deputy President, special delegates, premiers and hon members … [Interjections.] I always do, madam. You must listen. [Interjections.]

The NCOP is seldom privileged to have the Deputy President in our Chamber. Therefore, I would have thought that we could use this opportunity to discuss matters of more immediate relevance so as to share his views.

Luister! [Listen!] Instead, we are debating a subject that was already exhaustively studied by the Ministry and the Department of Provincial and Local Government in 1999. At that time, its report concluded that a clear conception of the NCOP’s mandate and greater focus on its potential to enhance the quality of intergovernmental relations were needed. But since we are now deliberating on intergovernmental relations, it would help if we had clarity on the future of both the NCOP and provinces. [Interjections.]

Uncertainty is fuelled by remarks such as those of Premier Stofile that the current governmental structures are going to cause a lot of problems … [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! What is out of order, Madam?

Rev M CHABAKU: Chairperson, what is out of order is codes of conduct. It is unbecoming for this prestigious place to have an hon member saying, ``I always do, you must listen.’’ It sounds arrogant and not courteous. I therefore ask that we respect this place and discontinue messages like that.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! The point is taken. The member may continue. I have noted the point.

Ms C-S BOTHA: Uncertainty is fuelled by remarks such as those of Premier Stofile that the current governmental structures are going to cause a lot of problems, as well as similar sentiments by another premier quoted in the report as having said:

I am doubtful of the Government’s commitment to the NCOP or the provincial system of Government.

If these doubts are laid to rest, it will result in greater legitimacy for these new democratic structures, and greater respect for the Constitution, as well as the rights and obligations of citizens. But if the future of the main actors is not secured … [Interjections.] I care about democracy and hope that the member does too. But, if the future of the main actors is not secured, intergovernmental relations will remain fluid.

Currently there is a big debate around the proposed constitutional amendments before this Parliament. I am glad that the hon Surty supported the hon Matthee in raising these issues. I certainly intend doing so myself, and I disagree with the previous Chair, who thought that they were not relevant.

These amendments will allow the national Government the right to intervene in the executive and legislative functions of local authorities, as well as downgrading the role of the FFC. Throughout the hearings of the … [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, there is a point of order.

Mr M I MAKOELA: Chairperson, it has already been ruled in this House that the speakers are pre-empting a matter that is about to come before this House, and this is against the Rules. It is not up to a member to decide. The Chair has already made a ruling. The previous speaker was out of order, and this speaker is continuing to be out of order. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! At the moment the member is right. The matter is still to be tabled in the House. [Interjections.] Can you carry on, hon member, but noting that the matter is still to be debated? [Interjections.]

Ms C-S BOTHA: [Inaudible.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I am saying so. Dorothy, please! Oh no, and I have the right to ask the ushers to take you out. [Laughter.] Member, continue. The member may continue, but not on a matter that is still expected to be tabled. That is my ruling.

Ms C-S BOTHA: Madam Chair, I accept your ruling but I find it very difficult to ignore what is currently going on in this Parliament, as if it were not relevant to this debate. I therefore suggest that Mr Surty’s support of Mr Matthee was proper and that I should be allowed to continue. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, this is defiance of a ruling of the Chair. [Interjections.]

Mr M I MAKOELA: Chairperson, I asked the Chair to make a ruling that this was contempt of the House, and the member is defying a decision of the Chair. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I have said that I have made a ruling. Hon member, you only have a half a minute. Carry on. You have 30 seconds. [Laughter.]

Ms C-S BOTHA: Madam Chair, I object. I actually object to having 30 seconds left. I had six minutes to speak, of which most was taken up by positions that are really not supposed to have been held in this House. Therefore, 30 seconds does not …

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, I asked you to continue to debate. Ms C-S BOTHA: Good, Chair, I will proceed then with why I think we should consider both the position for interventions at the moment and those being tabled in the House. I will proceed with an example. I submit that there is something of a provincial paralysis resulting from the lack of political will to expose existing shortcomings, both at provincial and local level. These may be personal or institutional, but their net effect is a profligate waste of money, and likely to lead to a constitutional breach in the delivery of services at the end of the road. I have cut out a large slice of my speech.

I want to give hon members the example of Ngwathe municipality in the Free State this past fortnight. It has run up debts of which those that have reached crisis proportions amount to over R16 million. This does not include their rescheduled debt to the DBSA, on which it has already defaulted. To prevent seizure of their assets by the Free State Municipal Pension Fund, they had to obtain an interdict, which is concomitant with cost implications. This situation tends to shed a sympathetic light on Treasury’s requested amendments.

Madam Chair, I am not sure about my time now. Is it 30 seconds or not? [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, I have the duty to say whether your time is over or not.

Ms C-S BOTHA: However, to give substance … Pardon?

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, Sandra, I have the duty to tell you when your time is up. I have not told you so. [Interjections.]

Ms C-S BOTHA: Thank you, Madam Chair. However, to give substance and shape to the provisions of co-operative governance, lack of capacity, at which door too many failures of political will are laid, should be addressed with concrete plans.

The DBSA is one entity that may well be able to make a significant impact. Until such time, much of the discussions around principles …

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, your time is over. [Applause.]

Ms C-S BOTHA: I find that extraordinary.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, your time is over.

Ms N C KONDLO (Eastern Cape): Chairperson, hon Deputy President, the premiers present if there are any at this stage, hon members, the delegation or representatives from Salga …

… ndifuna ukuqala ngokuthi ndicelele iNkulumbuso yephondo leMpuma Koloni, uMfu Stofile, uxolo kule Ndlu nakuSekela Mongameli ngokuba engekho nathi apha kule Ndlu. [… I would like to begin by apologizing for the Premier of the Eastern Cape, Rev Stofile, to this House and to the Deputy President for his absence in this House today.] It is almost five years since the new Constitution was adopted and great strides have been taken in our new democracy. Co-operative governance and positive intergovernmental relations are the cornerstones of the Constitution and our maturing democracy.

To ensure that the current momentum in promoting democracy and co-operation is maintained, it is imperative that we reinforce the structures that promote intergovernmental relations and co-operation. To ensure that we succeed in building a better life for all the people of this country, co- operation among the three spheres of government should be greatly enhanced. This will contribute immensely to good governance and improved service delivery. All three spheres of government should continue to nurture co- operative governance. This route will definitely ensure the vision of the ANC-led Government.

As a province, we have taken a resolution to continually lay the foundations for us to succeed in promoting these relations. To that end, we, as a province, have already established the forum that will improve what we are here to debate.

In terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the mandate given to the ANC-led Government by the electorate, the core objective of the Government is to deliver services to our people. The province of the Eastern Cape resolved, after identifying that service delivery is unco-ordinated and haphazard, to establish a structure to address this anomaly. National departments in the province and local government have been engaged in service delivery activities that were never known to be possible in the province of the Eastern Cape.

The executive council has mandated the director-general to co-ordinate the establishment of an intergovernmental forum, and this structure has been in existence since September 1999. This forum brings together provincial departments, national departments in the province, local government and parastatals both provincially and nationally. Its purpose is to facilitate the co-ordination of plans and programmes of the different spheres of government within the province.

The key objective of the forum is integrated service delivery that is co- ordinated at the centre. The IDPs are the critical parts that inform this process. We are of the view that this approach will have a positive impact in terms of which resources are pulled together for one good cause.

Furthermore, this forum facilitates the economic growth and social development in the province and ensures that the current initiatives, such as the integrated sustainable rural development strategy, the urban renewal strategy and poverty alleviation, will be effectively delivered.

The work done to date on the four nodal points that were identified through the national President’s speech, O R Tambo, Chris Hani, Khahlamba and Alfred Nzo, are a clear example of co-operative governance in motion.

The intergovernmental forum has both the technical and the political branches. The technical branch is the part that drives the integrated service delivery programme of the province. The secretariat of this forum is there for the purposes of implementation of the day-to-day activities of the structure. The IGF will ensure co-operation instead of competition amongst the spheres of government and therefore ensures prompt, efficient, effective and optimal service delivery.

We acknowledge that, as different spheres of government and parastatals, we serve the same communities, and the best way to do this is to enhance co- ordination and integration of planning, as well as implementation, to secure maximum service delivery.

The collective approach to governance will add value to the establishment of the developmental local government as envisaged and having been implemented since the December 5 elections. The outcome of these efforts should be a win-win situation for both communities and Government. The integrated service delivery approach is currently being implemented as a pilot in the rural municipalities of Emalahleni in the Chris Hani municipality. This initiative involves institution-building, the provision of economic and social infrastructure, and various economic development projects for sustainable development. The outcome of these initiatives will expand the tax base of the areas and ensure that developmental local government is a reality.

The IGF political structure is to convene towards the end of the year. Its goal will be to ensure political leadership for the IGF technical forum. This includes the identification of common priorities and the joint allocation of financial resources, especially in respect of capital projects. The Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy and the executive council outreach programme have managed to bring both the provincial and local government political leadership closer to each other towards resolving some of the problems.

As the province, we appreciate the commitment and continuous support that we receive from the national Government departments, and this approach should be sustained. All these positive developments are informed by our provincial growth and development strategy and all key stakeholders have been mobilised behind our initiatives. I am referring here to the business sector and communities at large, as well as nongovernmental organisations.

The projects that we are currently pursuing have the potential to unlock the untapped economic opportunities in the province as demonstrated by the example of Koega, the Wild Coast SDI and the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy that I referred to earlier. We are all united in our resolve to fight poverty and unemployment and to defeat crime and corruption. [Interjections.]

We are determined to improve service delivery and mechanisms are in place to ensure that we succeed. We cannot fail as our people look to us to achieve the noble goals of a better life for all. Our Government will continue to support other structures that promote co- operative governance. The Minmec structure, for example, is one of the key noble ideas and should be seen as a consultative and interactive structure rather than a structure that gives directives to provinces, and it should be seen as a structure for interaction in order to meet our challenges.

Xa sisongeza apho, nala masebe akhoyo kuNdlunkulu, angabikho kumaphondo, ii … [In addition to that, even the departments that are represented in Parliament and not in the provinces …]

… intergovernmental forums as well as co-operative governance should be able to see how best we ensure service delivery, as provinces and local government, in terms of engaging these departments whether they be Home Affairs, Justice or Labour, so that as governments that are run and managed nationally we are able, like the other spheres of government, to have an impact on how resources are allocated and what it is that these resources are for, ie for a better service to our people. The presidential consultative council plays a useful role to bring the provinces together with the Presidency to ensure that there is co- ordination and integration of all our efforts. The challenges facing our legislatures and this House lie more in ensuring that the pieces of legislation that need our feedback as provinces are timeously communicated so that, as provinces, we can give well-thought-out feedback. At times we gloss over very important policies for our democracy and at the end of the day suffer reversals.

It is, however, an inspiring development that, with a young democracy like ours, we have been able to strike a balance between focusing on our spheres of Government and promoting intergovernmental relations in the manner that we have so far.

In conclusion, adherence to Chapter 3 of the Constitution, in as far as the Eastern Cape is concerned, is key to the success of co-operative governance. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Thank you, hon member. I would just like to remind hon members that we do have a practice in terms of the Rules, that members do not obscure the Chair when a member is speaking. I notice that members have now begun to walk in the House in front of members who are actually addressing the Chair. This is unacceptable. It seems quite clear to me that if we are indeed members of this House it is important that we know the Rules, firstly, and that we observe them. So I would like to ask members to please ensure that they do observe the Rules.

The PREMIER OF MPUMALANGA (Mr N J Mahlangu): Chairperson, Deputy President and hon members, I would just like to share some ideas regarding our experiences in Mpumalanga. I would start by saying that it was José Rizal who said, and I quote:

A stone is worthless if it is not part of an edifice.

Today we gather here in these hallowed portals as leaders and representatives of our respective provinces - stones in the edifice that is our beautiful country, South Africa. I believe that we are all in agreement that public attitudes towards Government and its role have changed a lot over the past couple of years. Not only in Mpumalanga, but also throughout the country the public is now more demand like to service and explanations if we cannot deliver on time.

Now, some people may want to know what brought about this change in attitude. The answer lies in our commitment to being in daily contact with the people, listening and learning from them, and a commitment to hold report-back meetings so that the community can give us report cards.

In the past years we have been hard at work in Mpumalanga, fostering friendly relations with the communities and other stakeholders. That is why we were able to deal in a co-ordinated manner with the floods, the cholera epidemic and the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. We would not have been able to do that without a strategic plan devised by all of us as a collective. But where did it start, one may ask.

In October 1999 the Mpumalanga provincial executive council took a decision to embark on a programme of reaching out to people of the province. One of our aims was to reach out to and engage communities and stakeholders in discussions around development, and also, for us as the executive and bureaucrats, local authorities and national government departments based in the province, to understand the dynamics and problems in the areas and to reach consensus on a broader programme of action for service delivery.

In short, we are taking government to the people. We believe that communities have become more informed about what Government does and about plans put in place for future development in the province. Communities have come forward to appreciate efforts by government to speak to them face to face.

How do we deal with the integrated development plan in the province? Firstly, through the outreach programme of the Mpumalanga executive council outlined above, we fortnightly, as a collective, meet a particular municipal council and police station commanders in a particular area visited. In the afternoon, each MEC addresses and interacts with communities in a preplanned meeting. A full record of this interaction is kept, co-ordinated and followed up by the premier’s office through all affected provincial and national departments as well as relevant local government structures. Feedback from government on concerns raised by communities and councils is given by the affected departments in all instances.

The records of this feedback are also kept in the premier’s office so that when outreach programmes go back to the same places, answers are ready and communities are reminded of the government’s response.

Secondly, we have interaction through cluster committees. In this way departments are able to consult and plan together so that a deliverable Government programme, based on a totally integrated approach, is adopted.

As premier, I chair the governance and administration cluster which is attended by the executive mayors of the province. The cluster focuses on the element of monitoring the implementation of provincial priorities by both spheres of government.

We also have the economy, investment and employment cluster and the social services cluster. Our cluster committees are supported by technical cluster committees, comprising the respective heads of departments. The three district council municipalities and other executive mayors also send representatives to both the cabinet cluster committee and the technical cluster committee.

Structures have been set up at provincial level to deal with co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations. The functions and activities of the Mpumalanga intergovernmental relations forum are co-ordinated by the department of local government. This forum meets quarterly and the purpose is to invite politicians and senior managers in municipalities to meetings. Matters of mutual interest affecting municipalities, in a provincial context, are discussed at these meetings.

If matters that are not necessarily vested within the department of local government are to be discussed, role-players from other departments within the province, and even from national level, are also regularly invited to address these meetings. These meetings are especially aimed at discussing policy-related matters that have an impact on service delivery and the co- ordination of activities, and at reporting on issues of common interest and soliciting consensus in this regard.

The MEC for local government has established three different mayors’ forums within the province. Municipalities of similar size and with similar capacity are grouped together in the three forums. The aim of the mayors’ forum is to create a structure within which the MEC and mayors within the province can meet in order to discuss matters of mutual political interest. This also serves to update the MEC and the mayors on progress made with regard to matters affecting municipalities, and also to discuss measures to improve their performance.

Cross-boundary district and local municipalities were established between the province of Mpumalanga, the Northern Province and Gauteng. Although there are challenges facing these municipalities, such as having two authorities in one and the same municipality, our structures are co- operating very well on the ground and it seems these problems are being overcome.

Again, the MEC for local government regularly meets with traditional leaders, leaders of the local government association of Mpumalanga and the Masakhane co-ordinating committee. Several municipalities have already established ward committees and a number of municipalities are in the process of establishing such committees. Our local economic development programme strives for the eradication of poverty and unemployment through the implementation of local economic development programmes. As a province, we are bold in our ambitions that within this decade we will have the capacity to fight poverty.

There are serious challenges still facing us. The first one has to do with the autonomy of municipalities. There is always the danger that intervention will sometimes be construed as interference or intrusion in the sphere of municipalities.

The other challenge is really being able to manage the cross-border municipalities. We are all new in this sphere and this is a new phenomenon in the country.

In the instances of the Marble Hall and Groblersdal cross-border boundaries, it is really cumbersome that people living across the border with Mpumalanga should travel hundreds of kilometres to Potgietersrus in the Northern Province to register their vehicles when there is a registration office a few kilometres away in Mpumalanga. This challenge is being looked at, but it is a challenge.

Regarding national departments in provinces, one would like to see the greater involvement of provinces, which is sometimes not the case. To quote an example, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry normally deals with municipalities directly regarding bulk water supply. But provinces are automatically drawn in by complaining residents once there are problems regarding water shortages. I believe that if these interactions could start at the planning stage, such problems could be avoided. Even the involvement of the province would be very meaningful because the community does not know about the division of national, provincial and municipal powers. That co-operation between the three spheres of government is very important.

The land affairs Bill will have an impact on municipalities and will most certainly have an impact on the land facilitation Act. Our department of local government is not directly involved with the Bill and it is doubtful whether municipalities are indeed fully involved.

Finally, maybe on this, the first day of Public Service Week, it is important to note that the provincial Public Service has, like the rest of the South African society, changed a lot over the seven years. I have noticed the difference between the Public Service that I now work with and the Public Service that I worked with before 1994. I am happy to say that most of the changes that have occurred over that period of time have been beneficial.

I think there is great allegiance and commitment by the Public Service to upholding the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the Batho Pele principles.

One would say that co-ordination between national departments and the province is crucial, for one cannot, when someone raises a complaint in an outreach programme, say to the person that the matter is a national department affair and so one cannot handle it. Co-operation is there, but I think much can be done to improve it. [Applause.]

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, His Excellency the Deputy President, premiers and hon members, it is generally contended that there is no single best model for co-operative governance and intergovermental relations anywhere in the world. The way in which intergovernmental relations are practised is an exercise unique to each country, which is rooted in the social and economic context of that particular country.

In South Africa we have developed a new model for co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations, which is most appropriate to our own social, economic and political history. It is a history of governance that was characterised in the past by a lack of effectiveness and transparency, and an absence of accountability and coherence. It is a history characterised by huge disparities in social, economic and political development between the different sectors of our population.

Our particular system of intergovernmental relations aims to address these imbalances. This is the broad historical context within which we must locate any discussion around intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance.

Co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations denote a complex work of relationships between the different spheres of government, on both a vertical and a horizontal level.

On a vertical level, intergovernmental relations refer to those relationships between the national Government and provinces, provinces and local government and national Government and local government.

On a horizontal level, intergovernmental relations refer to the relationships between one municipal council and another, between a district council and another, or between one province and another.

Although the intergovernmental relationship between different spheres of government is a complex issue, our Constitution has made it easy for us to define this relationship. Chapter 3 of our Constitution outlines a number of principles which serve as a guide for the implementation of our own system of relations.

In terms of these, all spheres of government must co-operate and respect the constitutional status, institutions, powers and functions of government in the other spheres. All spheres of Government are obliged to exercise their powers and perform their functions in such a manner that does not encroach on the geographical, functional or even the institutional integrity of another sphere.

In addition, these spheres should also co-operate with each other in mutual trust and good faith by assisting and supporting each other, consulting one another on matters of common interest and by co-ordinating their actions and legislation. The success of our hybrid system of government is based on efficient and effective intergovernmental relations. Without these, the system of relations may struggle even to eliminate the unnecessary duplication that might still be there, or to make services more responsive to local needs. Further on, it may also not be able to empower our people to participate more in decision-making processes.

This honourable House, the NCOP, we believe, plays a critical role in ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of intergovernmental relationships. This is because the NCOP has created a particular niche in its oversight and monitoring function in that it has become the formalised structure in terms of which all nine provinces can bring to the table both their traits and traps.

The way in which the NCOP fulfils its monitoring and oversight responsibility has been primarily through its constitutional obligations, particularly those contained in sections 154, 139 and 100. Here we note that these references are being made in reverse. That is my interpretation of their importance.

The need for this kind of intervention and support arises when municipalities, and/or provinces, do not exercise their executive obligations in terms of the Constitution. The interventions in Ogies and Butterworth municipalities are practical examples of the oversight role that the NCOP played in restoring their respective capacities for service delivery.

I must immediately contend that it is difficult to take this form of drastic action. But, ultimately, when a province or municipality cannot or even does not or is unwilling to, as we have heard in this House this afternoon, fulfil any executive obligation in terms of legislation or the Constitution, the NCOP has no other option but to intervene by taking any appropriate steps to ensure fulfilment of that obligation.

This intervention must be handled sensitively and cautiously and should not cause any breakdown in the co-operative governance. This, necessarily, imparts on the autonomy of provinces and local government and has the potential of detrimentally affecting their relationships. The NCOP’s role with regard to local government extends beyond interventions, as our interpretations might see interventions as a negative exercise. We are also looking at other legislative paradigms such as the guidelines offered by the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act and other relevant pieces of legislation.

In terms of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, councils and even district councils are obliged to develop integrated development plans, in short, the IDPs. These IDPs are a framework for local development that involves various provincial departments, such as health, housing, transport and many others.

Currently, the MEC for local government has the responsibility of monitoring and overseeing these IDPs to ensure that they correlate with provincial priorities, whereas the municipal councils are responsible for their implementation. It makes, thus, more sense to create a broader structure to oversee the implementation of the IDPs.

Given the fact that the NCOP is ideally placed to provide the national platform for these three spheres to come together, we could play a pivotal role in merging and integrating these different development plans and priorities into a cohesive whole. Best practice modules, which emerge at the NCOP platform, could serve as a conceptual framework through which norms and standards could be duplicated in all provinces. I am referring here to the conferences and summits that we usually hold with our counterparts in the province.

In conclusion, I understand the role of the NCOP as being, to those who know, like the mechanics of a vehicle, what is called a thrust bearing. The function of a thrust bearing is that it stabilises the vehicle during the changing of gears. In the absence of this thrust bearing, the car will not move steadily forward. If one ignores this thrust bearing, one may even damage one’s car or it will not move an inch. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Chairperson, I must thank you and also thank the hon members who have debated the whole afternoon this important principle of co-operative governance. It is clear from the inputs that we have come to appreciate this principle and that we want to ensure that, indeed, it happens for the good of our government at all levels.

The various inputs have been made on a number of issues, some demanding this House to consider and others demanding other levels of government to consider. I believe, after having listened to the contributions, that one feels very comfortable and confident that this House does appreciate its role and that it would want to ensure that this role is effectively played in the process of the governance of our country.

I have always felt that this House needs quality time to consider issues, precisely because of the strategic nature of the House and where it is placed in our constitutional arrangement.

I know that we all get under pressure because of time. At times there are Bills that are coming, and we have to rush. We have to receive mandates from the provinces, and we have to rush. The executive is keen to pass legislation very quickly, and we have to rush. But I believe this House, perhaps more than the other House, needs quality time to consider matters that are of great concern to our people. This House is placed in a position where it can be almost 100% objective on matters, given the fact that it is not like the provincial side of government or the national Government, which might from time to time, as Premier Ramatlhodi was saying, tend to overlap in a particular way.

It sits in a place where it could help to stabilise whatever is happening within the system. It therefore needs that quality time to ensure that indeed people exercise power, participate and have access. I do not see that any other House could do that without some prejudice of one kind or another. Here, one sits with members of Parliament from the National Assembly who participate, as well as provincial members and local government members. It is a unique position that history, in terms of our Constitution, has allocated this House. It is therefore an important House and I think we need to emphasise this, and therefore say, whether people are rushing, on whatever side of the House, we should be a stabilising factor so that we do not commit mistakes, but do things properly and satisfy everyone.

I think it is here, under one roof in one joint meeting, that when people look at the debate, they see all levels of government debating a single issue. It is therefore very important indeed. I believe that the discussions that have taken place probably give the answer to a question that was raised by one speaker: What is the future of the NCOP, the provincial governments or provinces? I did not detect in the discussion that there was any doubt on the part of members here about the importance of this House. What I detected was a lot of input and motivation concerning how one would ensure that this House does its work to strengthen democracy and communication in the country.

I doubt the question warrants to be answered or even to be asked, because I believe that the contributions from the different parties to debates indicate the importance of this House. Who, then, would come and say this House is not important? Where shall that person come from? I take it that people who have been making inputs here come from all parties. If there are people who have any doubt, I think it is important that they listen to the debates, because I am sure they will then be in a position to realise what happens. After all, it is an important element, if not ingredient, of a democratic system that ensures broader participation by the people.

Within our system, the Council is also the place that ensures interaction and interconnection between the different levels, so that they gel, they dovetail, and we are able to govern this country as one people. I think the principles that Premier Ramatlhodi raised in relation to how much each level should respect the other and help the other is an important principle, given our history, where we come from, and how much we need to be engaged in the transformation and reconstruction of our country rather than to move in a different direction. This House helps to cement that. That is why I believe it needs to have more time and not to be rushed by us, because at times we rush because we think that we need to do things immediately.

I am very thankful for the inputs that were made on different aspects. Members have raised a number of important issues. I was happy to hear those inputs that say that specific attention will be given to the Urban Renewal Strategy and the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme. That pleases me indeed, because it is this House that must ensure that decisions and programmes of the Government are indeed implemented and that there is co-ordination and integration, as the programmes suggest.

I am very happy that members have indeed considered it important to allocate specific time and pay specific attention to these areas. It is my considered view that if we succeed with these two programmes, we will certainly, within a short space of time, see a difference and change in the quality of life of our people. I am also pleased to hear that the members are going to undertake a fiscal review of the intergovernmental situation. That is very important because Government on its own, without finances, is not a government. The Government is judged by whether it is succeeding or not in the manner in which it handles its fiscal systems.

If members review this particular aspect, they are in fact checking whether the Government is operating properly. Are we able to deliver? Do we have any shortcomings? It is only then that we can realise whether departments are spending or not, or delivering or not. It is, again, an important factor and I hope it will inform us, particularly at executive level. Once we do the review, which I believe will be objective, we will know where there have been shortcomings.

Some issues have been raised which, as I say, are important, but one cannot respond to all of them. One of the issues that has been raised, I think by two speakers, is the issue that relates to traditional leaders. I think one speaker talked about the relationship between traditional leadership and Government. I would again say this House should concern itself with that issue and try to help, if anything, by discussing it and making some inputs.

I think it is an issue that really affects all of us, probably more Salga at the level of the districts. It is an issue on which we cannot stand by and watch and not participate. They might have a solution or contribute towards a solution. I thought it was important that we underline the issue, but something needs to be done about it.

Actions are being considered and I have had a meeting with the subcommittee of the Cabinet that is handling this matter. The Cabinet has given it the responsibility, and very soon I will be participating in organising a meeting between the traditional leaders’ representatives and that committee to look into the issues again. This is done in conjunction with the committee. It will also be important for this House to concern itself and discuss the matter, because it relates again to the manner in which we govern this country, in particular at the level of local government.

With regard to the relationship between the Government and traditional leaders, I am sure that at the right time we might come back when we have got some distance on the issue. It is important not to look at that issue as one that relates to the national government or a specific department. We should all embrace it and try to find a solution. I doubt that as a country, having gone through such difficult issues, we could fail on this one. We cannot fail. We will find a solution. This House can also appeal to all of those who participate not to become too emotional and angry, as it happens at times. They might listen better if one puts across wise words to them.

Having said all of that, all that really remains is to express appreciation and also to indicate that I listened very attentively to what the members of this Council were saying as a contribution to the debate. The issue of co-operative governance is a dynamic issue, a living issue that we should talk about, not only today, but from time to time. We need to put together our views and dovetail our understanding and have a common view of what needs to be done by different layers of government as well as ourselves.

The participation of Salga is very important. When I came here as an MEC I used to listen again and again to Salga saying that they did not have resources and did not know how to achieve. I think something ought to be done to consider this. Perhaps Salga itself could try to budget for this particular activity. Salga is no longer just a small thing. It has unicities. Some of them very rich. It is a question of budgeting for it rather than saying, ``Please help us.’’ I think it is important that we note that. Their participation here, almost on a permanent kind of basis in the form in which they are, again enhances the interaction and the democratic practice and culture in which we talk and get to know what has happened.

I would be very keen, for example, on this House in future being able to get a kind of report or a briefing on what is happening nationally in so far as different sectors are concerned where they operate. In this way we may get a fair idea, given in a composite kind of a report as a briefing to this House. I take it as an important kind of an element and I am therefore saying to the mayor that he should go back to the other mayors, since some of them run very huge budgets, and find out if they can work out something among themselves.

I was also pleased to see the number of premiers here today, but not yet fully satisfied, because they were not all here. If there is any occasion at national level that really belongs to the premiers, to me it is this occasion. Their having other arrangements on this day is not, I think, very welcome. [Applause.] They ought to prioritise this. It is important that they be able to come here and share views with us and also hear what we say. I know that they have a possibility and opportunity to meet when they meet with the President, but, given the nature of the House, I think they should prioritise this. I would be very happy if they were able to come, all of them, when we have such debates.

As hon members know, the President also comes here, and I am sure they ought to be here when the President is here. At times even when the President is here they are not all here. I am hoping that the colleagues from the provinces will certainly raise this point, because I think that although we have not raised it very strongly, it is important.

In a sense, it indicates and demonstrates their respect for their own constitutions that they have taken an oath to, as well as respect for the government system, as it were, and for Parliament. From their level I think it is important that they take this very seriously, so that they give it the dignity and respect it needs, and are able to participate and listen.

I would say that if they come here, they should actually spend the night in Cape Town. One of the issues is that they speak, other premiers listen to them, and then they go without listening to other premiers. I do not think it is fair. [Applause.] We know of the date some time ahead, so I think they could adjust their diaries.

I am merely making an appeal because I think this is important. If they do not come here, if the very people who ought to be taking it most seriously are not here - and this is called the National Council of Provinces'' - other people will begin to wonder:Is this thing important?’’ This is just an appeal. I am asking my colleagues, the premiers who are still here and those who represent the others, to tell them. I think it is important that they give the necessary respect to this occasion.

Without taking too much of your time, Madam Chair, thank you very much for the debate. I hope next time we will be able to say that we have moved on. We have moved a little further than last time. The grandmothers of today should not have the need to say to their children: ``Le indoda sePetoli efaka amaklesibhande.’’ [The Government’s men in Pretoria wear braces.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! We thank the Deputy President for having initiated this important debate. I think it is the first time that we have had such a review in this context of Parliament.

Debate concluded.

The Council adjourned at 18:21. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                    WEDNESDAY, 26 SEPTEMBER 2001

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 26 September 2001 in  terms
     of Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill  as  a  section
     75 Bill:


     (i)     Basic Conditions of  Employment  Amendment  Bill  [B  70  -
          2001] (National Assembly - sec 75).


 (2)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 26 September 2001 in  terms
     of Joint Rule 160(4), classified the following Bill  as  a  section
     76 Bill:


     (i)     Mental Health Care Bill [B 69 - 2001] (National Assembly  -
          sec 76).


 (3)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 26 September 2001 in  terms
     of Joint Rule 161(1), classified the following Bill as follows:


     (i)     Immigration Bill [B 46 - 2001]


      The Bill was introduced as a section 75 Bill.  Clause  12  of  the
      Bill contains a money Bill provision within the meaning of section
      77(1) of the Constitution, while the rest of the Bill  deals  with
      matters  that  are  not  subordinate   and   incidental   to   the
      appropriation of money or  the  imposition  of  taxes,  levies  or
      duties. Therefore, the Bill cannot be classified as a  section  75
      Bill.


      Accordingly the JTM finds that the Bill is constitutionally out of
      order in terms of Joint Rule 161(1)(e).


 (4)     The  following  Bill  was  introduced  by  the   Minister   for
     Agriculture and  Land  Affairs  in  the  National  Assembly  on  26
     September 2001 and referred to the Joint  Tagging  Mechanism  (JTM)
     for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160:


     (i)     Planning Profession Bill [B 76 - 2001]  (National  Assembly
          - sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its
          introduction published in Government Gazette No  22639  of  31
          August 2001.]


     The Bill has also been  referred  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Agriculture and Land Affairs of the National Assembly.


     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the  classification  of
     the Bill may be submitted to  the  Joint  Tagging  Mechanism  (JTM)
     within three parliamentary working days.


 (5)     The  Minister  for  Justice  and   Constitutional   Development
     submitted  the  Wysigingswetsontwerp  op  die  Grondwet   van   die
     Republiek van Suid-Afrika [W 68 - 2001] (National  Assembly  -  sec
     74) to the Speaker and the Chairperson on 26 September  2001.  This
     is the official translation of the Constitution of the Republic  of
     South Africa Amendment Bill [B 68 - 2001] (National Assembly -  sec
     74), which was introduced in the National Assembly by the  Minister
     for Justice and Constitutional Development on 12 September 2001.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Minister of Finance:

 Report and Financial Statements of the National Treasury for 2000-2001,
 including  the  Reports  of  the  Auditor-General  on   the   Financial
 Statements of Vote 12 - Finance for 1999-2000, the Financial Statements
 of Vote  32  -  State  Expenditure  for  1999-2000  and  the  Financial
 Statements of the National Treasury for 2000-2001 [RP 101-2001].

1. The Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:

 (1)    Government Notice No 219 published in the Government Gazette  No
     22106 dated 9 March 2001, Application for registration of  heraldic
     representations and objections, made in terms  of  sections  7,  7A
     and 7B of the Heraldry Act, 1962 (Act No 18 of 1962).


 (2)    Government Notice No 399 published in the Government Gazette  No
     22281 dated 18 May 2001, Application for registration  of  heraldic
     representations and objections, made in terms  of  sections  7,  7A
     and 7B of the Heraldry Act, 1962 (Act No 18 of 1962).


 (3)    Government Notice No 400 published in the Government Gazette  No
     22281 dated  18  May  2001,  Notice  of  registration  of  heraldic
     representations, made in terms of section 10 of the  Heraldry  Act,
     1962 (Act No 18 of 1962).


 (4)    Government Notice No 563 published in the Government Gazette  No
     21242 dated 9  June  2001,  Provisional  declaration  of  types  of
     objects, made in terms  of  section  32(5)(b)(i)  of  the  National
     Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No 25 of 1999).


 (5)    Government Notice No 580 published in the Government Gazette  No
     22410 dated 25 June  2001,  Notification  that  the  President  has
     signed the National Council for  Library  and  Information  Service
     Act, 2001 (Act No 6 of 2001).


 (6)    Government Notice No 112 published in the Government Gazette  No
     22451 dated 13 July 2001, Substitution of Notice  No  120  of  1997
     concerning Norms and  Rules  for  Provincial  Language  Committees,
     made in terms of section 8(11) of the Pan  South  African  Language
     Board Act, 1995 (Act No 59 of 1995).

1. The Minister of Public Enterprises:

 Financial Statements of Alexkor Limited for 1999-2000. 4.    The Minister of Safety and Security:


 Report and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of  Safety  and
 Security for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on
 the Financial Statements of Vote 28 - South African Police Service  and
 the Secretariat for Safety and Security for 2000-2001 [RP 129-2001].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs on Deciduous Fruit Industry, dated 25 September 2001:

   The Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs, having considered the application by the National Agricultural Marketing Council for the implementation of proposed statutory measures in the deciduous fruit industry, reports, in terms of section 15 of the Marketing of Agricultural Products Act, 1996, that it has approved the recommendation of the Council.

   The Committee recommends that surplus funds be utilised at the Minister’s discretion within the same industry.

                  THURSDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER 2001
   

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 26 September 2001 in  terms
     of Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill  as  a  section
     75 Bill:


     (i)      Land  Affairs  General  Amendment  Bill  [B  71  -   2001]
          (National Assembly - sec 75).


 (2)    The following Bill was introduced by the Minister of  Labour  in
     the National Assembly on 27 September  2001  and  referred  to  the
     Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of  Joint
     Rule 160:


     (i)     Labour Relations Amendment Bill [B  77  -  2001]  (National
          Assembly - sec 75) [Explanatory  summary  of  Bill  and  prior
          notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette  No
          22642 of 31 August 2001.]


     The Bill has also been  referred  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour of the National Assembly.


     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the  classification  of
     the Bill may be submitted to  the  Joint  Tagging  Mechanism  (JTM)
     within three parliamentary working days.




 (3)    The following Bill was introduced by the  Minister  for  Justice
     and Constitutional Development  in  the  National  Assembly  on  27
     September 2001 and referred to the Joint  Tagging  Mechanism  (JTM)
     for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160:


     (i)      Constitution  of  the  Republic  of  South  Africa  Second
          Amendment Bill [B 78 - 2001]  (National  Assembly  -  sec  74)
          [Bill and  prior  notice  of  its  introduction  published  in
          Government Gazette No 22460 of 13 July 2001.]


     The Bill has also been  referred  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development of the National Assembly.


     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the  classification  of
     the Bill may be submitted to  the  Joint  Tagging  Mechanism  (JTM)
     within three parliamentary working days.


 (4)     The  Minister  for  Justice  and   Constitutional   Development
     submitted the Wetsontwerp op Onderskepping en Meeluistering  [W  50
     - 2001] (National Assembly  -  sec  75)  to  the  Speaker  and  the
     Chairperson on 27 September 2001. This is the official  translation
     of the Interception and Monitoring Bill [B  50  -  2001]  (National
     Assembly - sec 75), which was introduced in the  National  Assembly
     by the Minister for Justice and Constitutional  Development  on  28
     August 2001. National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson:

 Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces:


 Bill passed by National Assembly on 26 September 2001  and  transmitted
 for concurrence:


 (i)    Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 63B - 2001] (National Assembly
     - sec 75).


     The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee  on  Labour  and
     Public Enterprises of the National Council of Provinces.


 Bills passed by National Assembly on 27 September 2001 and  transmitted
 for concurrence:


 (i)    Alexkor Limited Amendment Bill [B 29 - 2001] (National  Assembly
       - sec 75).


       The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Labour and
       Public Enterprises of the National Council of Provinces.


 (ii)   Gas Bill [B 18B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75).


       The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee  on  Economic
       Affairs of the National Council of Provinces.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers:

1. The Minister of Trade and Industry:

 Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Council  for  Scientific  and
 Industrial Research for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-
 General on the Financial Statements for 2000-2001 [RP 147-2001].

1. The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:

 Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of  Justice  and
 Constitutional Development for 2000-2001, including the Report  of  the
 Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote 18  -  Justice  and
 Constitutional Development for 2000-2001 [RP 158-2001].

1. The Minister of Sport and Recreation:

 Report and Financial Statements of Sport and  Recreation  South  Africa
 for 2000-2001, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the
 Financial Statements of Vote 29 - Sport and Recreation South Africa for
 2000-2001.

National Council of Provinces:

1. The Chairperson:

 Written comments received from the public and  provincial  legislatures
 on the Constitution of the Republic of South  Africa  Second  Amendment
 Bill [B  78  -  2001],  submitted  by  the  Minister  for  Justice  and
 Constitutional  Development  in  terms  of  section  74(6)(b)  of   the
 Constitution, 1996.


 Referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Security  and  Constitutional
 Affairs.

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Education and Recreation on the Cultural Laws Amendment Bill [B 45B - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 26 September 2001:

 The Select Committee on Education and Recreation, having considered the
 subject of the Cultural Laws Amendment Bill [B 45B  -  2000]  (National
 Assembly - sec 75), referred to it,  reports  the  Bill  with  proposed
 amendments, as follows:


 CLAUSE 3


     1. On page 3, in line 49, after "Technology" to insert:


          and the Select Committee on Education and Recreation


          CLAUSE 4
     1.  On  page  4,  in  line  21,  after  "lexicography,"  to  insert
          "language and".


     2. On page 4, in line 22, to omit "financial and".


     3. On page 4, after line 23, to insert:


          (c) by the substitution for subsection (3)  of  the  following
              subsection:
                "(3) A person's appointment as member of the  Board  in
              terms of subsection (1)(a), shall be  made  in  accordance
              with the following procedure:
              (a)   The  Minister  [,  after   consultation   with   the
                   Portfolio  Committee,]  shall  [appoint  an  ad   hoc
                   committee consisting of not fewer than nine  persons,
                   to] invite the general public to nominate persons for
                   appointment as members of the Board.
              (b)   [The  Portfolio  Committee]   A   Joint   Committee,
                   consisting of members of the Portfolio  Committee  on
                   Arts, Culture, Science and Technology and the  Select
                   Committee on Education and  Recreation,  shall  in  a
                   consensus-seeking manner -
                   (i)   from the nominations forwarded to it [by the ad
                         hoc  committee],  compile  a   short-list   of
                         candidates with due regard to  the  provisions
                         of subsections (1)(a) and (2):  Provided  that
                         no short-list with  more  than  25  candidates
                         shall be compiled;
                   (ii)  interview, in a public and transparent  manner,
                         each of the candidates whose names  appear  on
                         the short-list; and
                   (iii) compile and forward to  the  Minister  a  final
                         short-list with due regard to  the  provisions
                         of subsections (1)(a) and (2):  Provided  that
                         no final short-list of more than 20 candidates
                         shall be compiled.
              (c)    the   Minister,   after   consultation   with   the
                   [Portfolio]  Joint  Committee,  shall   appoint   the
                   members of the Board from the number of  the  persons
                   whose names appear on  the  short-list  mentioned  in
                   paragraph (b)(iii).";


              CLAUSE 5


     1. On page 4, in line 38, after "Committee" to insert:


          on Arts,  Culture,  Science  and  Technology  and  the  Select
          Committee on Education and Recreation


          CLAUSE 14


     1. On page 7, in line 30, after "Technology" to insert:


          and the Select Committee on Education and Recreation


          CLAUSE 26


          1.  On page 9, in line 27, after "Technology" to insert:
          and the Select Committee on Education and Recreation


          CLAUSE 31


     1. On page 10, in line 25, after "Technology" to insert:


          and the Select Committee on Education and Recreation


          CLAUSE 35


          1.  On page 11, in line 9, after "Technology" to insert:
          and the Select Committee on Education and Recreation
 The Committee further reports that the DP and the New  NP  opposed  the
 Bill on the following grounds:


 (a)    The Committee failed to include a principle that a  member  must
     vacate office if that member fails to fulfil his or her  duties  in
     terms of the functions of the councils.


 (b)    The Committee failed to accept the  principle  that  councillors
     should not be paid allowances  or  receive  honoraria,  but  should
     only be reimbursed for direct costs.


 (c)    The Committee refused to accept that the National  Arts  Council
     should appoint the chairperson.

1. Report of the Select Committee on Education and Recreation on the Cultural Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 46B - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 26 September 2001:

   The Select Committee on Education and Recreation, having considered the subject of the Cultural Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 46B - 2000] (National Assembly - sec 76), referred to it, reports the Bill with amendments [B 46C - 2000].

   The Committee further reports that the Western Cape opposed the Bill on the grounds that the provisions contained in Clause 1 would interfere with the powers of provincial and local government.

2. Report of the Select Committee on Education and Recreation on the Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 55 - 2001] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76), dated 26 September 2001:

   The Select Committee on Education and Recreation, having considered the subject of the Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 55

   • 2001] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76), referred to it, reports the Bill with amendments [B 55A - 2001].

   The Committee further reports that the Western Cape opposed the Bill on the grounds that the provisions contained in Clause 1 would interfere with the powers of provincial and local government, and that, in Clause 6, the proposed new subsection (7)(b) and (c) of section 37 of the South African Schools Act would render a trust, which was established lawfully, unlawful.

3. Report of the Select Committee on Education and Recreation on the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill [B 57 - 2001] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76), dated 26 September 2001:

   The Select Committee on Education and Recreation, having considered the subject of the General and Further Education and Training Quality Assurance Bill [B 57 - 2001] (National Council of Provinces - sec 76), referred to it, reports the Bill with amendments [B 57A - 2001].