TUESDAY, 17 SEPTEMBER 2002 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:03.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

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

That the House -

(1) notes with shock reports that 166 children have died of starvation in 11 hospitals in the northern areas of the Eastern Cape;

(2) further notes with concern that most of the children who died of starvation in the rural parts of the Eastern Cape were under the age of seven years and, therefore, were eligible for child support grants;

(3) believes that the cornerstone of Government’s overall programme of transformation is the eradication of poverty and racial inequalities caused by the apartheid system, and that Government has introduced the child support grant to protect children from the vicious circle of poverty; and

(4) calls on all stakeholders responsible for the facilitation of the child support grant to ensure that deserving children receive the child support grant.

[Applause.] Mrs G M BORMAN: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DP:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  the Auditor-General found that the ANC's rule of Cape  Town  was
       marked by chaotic financial management; and

[Interjections.]

   (b)  the  ANC-run  town  of  Saron  in  the  Western  Cape  is  being
       investigated for poor financial record-keeping, unauthorised  or
       irregular payments and the unauthorised deposit of council money
       into a personal account;

[Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mrs G M BORMAN:

(2) notes with astonishment that the ANC has announced that Ms Nomaindia Mfeketo, under whose previous Cape Town mayoralty the financial mess took place, would be their mayoral candidate for Cape Town; and

[Interjections.]

(3) expresses the hope that the ratepayers of Cape Town will not have to suffer under a resumption of power by the financially incompetent ANC and Ms Mfeketo.

[Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Order, order! Hon members, these are supposed to be notices of motion. That means you should be listening.

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

(1) notes with concern that according to the Pharmaceutical Society of South Africa counterfeit drugs from other countries’ illegitimate pharmaceutical industries, which costs the country up to R2 billion a year, could be dangerous for people who take them;

(2) urges all stakeholders concerned to recognise, and not turn a blind eye, and take action against this illegal industry; and

(3) hopes that the relevant authorities will do their utmost to stop these counterfeit drugs from entering and being distributed in South Africa.

Miss P S SEGOBELA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes with shock reports that 166 children have died of starvation in 11 hospitals in the northern areas of the Eastern Cape;

(2) further notes with concern that most of the children who died of starvation in the rural parts of the Eastern Cape were under the age of seven years and therefore were eligible for child support grants;

(3) believes that the cornerstone of Government’s overall programme of transformation is the eradication of poverty and racial inequalities caused by the apartheid system and that Government has introduced the child support grant to protect children from the vicious circle of poverty; and

(4) calls on all stakeholders responsible for the facilitation of the child support grant to ensure that deserving children receive the child support grant.

Mnr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Mevrou die Speaker, hiermee gee ek kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting van die Huis namens die Nuwe NP sal voorstel:

Dat die Huis kennis neem dat -

(1) die Nuwe NP besorg is oor die proses van keuring en aanstelling van senior bestuurders in die Staatsdiens en dit ongehoord is dat elf persone op bestuursvlak na twee jaar gedagvaar moet word om hulle oorspronklike sertifikate ter stawing van hul kwalifikasies in te lewer; en

(2) die Nuwe NP die Minister en die Staatsdienskommissie versoek om -

   (a)  streng teen genoemde persone op te tree; en


   (b)  geen persone in  die  toekoms  aan  te  stel,  of  te  bevorder,
       alvorens  die   geldigheid   van   opvoedkundige   kwalifikasies
       behoorlik nagegaan en bevestig is nie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

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

That the House notes that -

(1) the New National Party is concerned about the process of selection and appointment of senior managers in the Public Service, and finds it shocking that eleven people at managerial level had to be summonsed after two years to submit their original certificates as proof of their qualifications; and

(2) the New National Party requests the Minister and the Public Service Commission to -

   (a)  take firm action against the persons in question; and


   (b)  in future not  to  appoint  or  promote  any  persons  prior  to
       thoroughly  checking  and  confirming  the  validity  of   their
       educational qualifications.] Prof L M MBADI: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the  next  sitting  day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) expresses its unreserved horror and disgust with revelations that more than 160 children have died of starvation this year in the Eastern Cape alone;

(2) notes that these revelations are made at a time when the Minister of Social Development has expressed reservations about the funds disbursed to charities from the National Lottery;

(3) further notes that problems in applying for identity documents are preventing desperately poor beneficiaries from claiming the social grants that stand between them and poverty; and

(4) calls for immediate joint action between the Departments of Home Affairs and of Social Development, as well as the provincial and local government spheres to address this unacceptable state of affairs, where a country with a surplus of food can allow the starvation of children.

Mr R J B MOHALALA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that Telkom has developed a ``unique’’ model for creating and retaining jobs;

(2) further notes that this plan involves ensuring that potentially redundant employees are absorbed into business units which are growing within Telkom, and this plan has received support from the Communication Workers Union and the Alliance of Telkom Unions;

(3) believes that the initiative by Telkom contributes positively to fighting unemployment and poverty;

(4) commends Telkom for embarking on this initiative; and (5) calls on other companies to emulate this important example.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes with sadness that the rape of innocent children in this country has dramatically increased over the past few years;

(2) believes that the easy availability of pornography has played a major role in inflaming the passions of rapists, who are now targeting defenceless children;

(3) endorses the calls by the majority of South Africans that capital punishment be reinstated and imposed on dangerous rapists who are not even moved to sympathy by the cries and screams of small children;

(4) believes that the man who brutally raped six-year-old Lerato from Alexandra Township and left her to die with her intestines hanging between her legs, about a week ago, does not deserve any jail term, but the death penalty;

(5) expresses concern that a country that can protect overseas delegates who are attending international conferences and summits, is dismally failing to protect its citizens, particularly innocent children who are continually abducted and raped by people who do not care about the ineffective criminal laws of our country; and

(6) calls on the Government to -

   (a)  prioritise the eradication of child rape from our society; and


   (b)  heed the calls from our peace-loving people  and  reinstate  the
       death penalty as a matter of urgency.

[Applause.]

Mr J P I BLANCHÉ: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the FA:

That the House -

(1) notes allegations that President Mbeki’s wife bought a state property without the proper tender process being followed and put that property on the market a few months later for over R400 000 more than she paid for it;

(2) expresses its concern that members of the ANC elite are enriching themselves at State expense; and

(3) calls on the Government to -

   (a)  investigate the sale of the Port Elizabeth property to Mrs Mbeki
       and report to Parliament as a matter of urgency; and


   (b)  come clean on which other State assets have  been  sold  without
       following the tender procedures required by law.

[Applause.]

Miss T E LISHIVHA: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:

That the House -

(1) notes that -

   (a)  preliminary results of  research  conducted  by  the  Bureau  of
       Market  Research,  Iklwa  Structured  Financial   Products   and
       economists from Urban Econ revealed that  the  World  Summit  of
       Sustainable Development injected R8 billion into South  Africa's
       economy; and
   (b)  the report also revealed that the summit  created  approximately
       18 000 local jobs;

(2) believes that South Africa’s Government’s decision to host this important summit has firmly established our country as an important tourist destination; and

(3) commends the decision of the Government to host this historic summit.

[Applause.]

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

That the House -

(1) notes -

   (a)  the arrest in Zimbabwe last week  of  a  retired  Judge,  Fergus
       Blackie, on trumped up charges laid by the Mugabe regime;
   (b)  proposals by President Mugabe to amend the Land Acquisition  Act
       in order to facilitate his regime's illegal  seizure  of  white-
       owned farm land; and


   (c)  South Africa's confirmation that it endorsed Libya, one  of  the
       world's most notorious abusers of human rights, as chair of  the
       UN Commission on Human Rights; and

(2) concludes that it was a bad week for Nepad and for those who hope to convince the world that human rights and good governance enjoy a high priority in Africa.

[Applause.]

Mr N S MIDDLETON: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the House -

(1) notes that according to the Child Poverty Monitor, released by the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA), about 75% of children younger than 17 lived below the poverty line of R400 per month in 1999;

(2) further notes that the poverty levels were highest in the Eastern Cape (88%), Northern Province (84%) and KwaZulu-Natal (80%); and

(3) urges all concerned to do their utmost to reduce the number of children living below the poverty line.

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

That the House -

(1) notes that Agri-South Africa announced that commercial farmers would work with the Government to ensure that agricultural land was transferred to black farmers as long as this is sustainable; (2) believes that the implementation of a comprehensive land redistribution programme which addresses the racially skewed land ownership patterns is an important component of undoing the effects of apartheid and building national unity;

(3) welcomes the statement by Agri-South Africa that they would support the land reform programme; and

(4) calls on white commercial farmers to work with the beneficiaries of the land reform programmes, and to assist them in making their farms productive and viable.

Dr P J RABIE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the New NP:

That the House -

(1) notes that the Rand declined after Mr Gilingwe Mayende, the Director- General of Land Affairs, stated that the Government will invoke the right to expropriate agricultural land in the public interest, if the principle of willing buyer/seller fails to meet land reform goals;

(2) urgently requests the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs to reconfirm that secure property rights constitute a prerequisite for investor confidence and sustained healthy economic growth; and

(3) appeals to the Government to take precautionary measures to prevent similar future statements, which can be detrimental to the South African economy.

Mr M N RAMODIKE: Madam Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:

That the House -

(1) is alarmed with shock and trepidation at the unilateral decision taken by the mayor of Tzaneen Municipality and the MEC for Local Government in the Limpopo province to change the name of the town Tzaneen to ``Mark Shope’’ without consultation with the local people or the inhabitants of the area;

(2) notes with disgust that the name change was made and announced without approval from the South African Geographical Names Commission and the Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, as required by law;

(3) is convinced that the vast majority of the inhabitants of Tzaneen, political parties, traditional leaders and other stakeholders in the area are diametrically opposed to the name change, and contend strongly that the name should not be changed;

(4) is convinced that the name Tzaneen or Tsaneng does not have any offensive political, ethnic or racial connotations, and that it has a balancing historical, linguistic and indigenous meaning which communicates and reflects the spirit of the communities and the African Renaissance; and

(5) calls upon the South African Geographical Names Commission and the Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology to heed the call and the will of the people in and around Tzaneen.

CELEBRATING HERITAGE DAY TOGETHER AS SOUTH AFRICANS TO ACHIEVE UNITY IN DIVERSITY

                      (Subject for Discussion)

Ms M A A NJOBE: Madam Speaker and hon members, I feel honoured to participate in this very important debate commemorating and remembering Heritage Day.

In its 1997 Mafikeng Conference, the ANC recognised that owing to a host of historical reasons the identities accepted by the people of South Africa are rooted in ethnic, racial, cultural, linguistic and regional factors. It then resolved that it is important that we come to terms with the significance of all these identities, both in our movement and in our country. These identities are not necessarily divisive. They have progressive aspects that can be harnessed as part of our nation-building project. The main aim of celebrating Heritage Day as a national day is to bring us together as one nation, a South African nation. As we draw closer to Heritage Day on 24 September 2002, we must make a firm resolution to celebrate our heritage as South Africans together to achieve unity in diversity. This country has spent a lot of time and resources and has sacrificed the lives of people struggling to achieve unity of the diverse peoples that live in it. Obviously the struggle for unity still continues.

As South Africans, on 24 September 2002 we will be contributing in the process of welding a sense of nationhood among ourselves. We will be collectively celebrating our common values as espoused in the Constitution and these are, among other things, equality of race, equality of gender, equality of religion, equality of language and equality of culture in its totality. All these, among many, constitute heritage. I believe there should be equality in all respects and respect for that equality, for unity to be achieved.

The theme for this year’s Heritage Day as pronounced by the lead department, the Department of Arts and Culture, is that we celebrate our national symbols, namely the national flag, the national anthem, the coat of arms, the national bird, the fish, the tree and the national orders. I assume all the members of Parliament know these national symbols and orders. The key values underpinning the key national symbols, the flag, the anthem and the coat of arms, are reconciliation, unity in diversity and nation-building.

The significance of these national symbols is to bind us together into a nation and make us proudly South African. In reality, the fact is that every day is a heritage day and there are more national symbols that we should promote. These are heritage symbols that constitute our value systems and practices. Our national flag symbolises a country and its people. It represents a rich heritage of our history and binds us to one another. Our flag has no doubt caused a great enthusiasm among us South Africans. This has been witnessed in sporting activities, in the commemoration of special days and so on. It is the emblem of our very existence. There is widespread acceptance of our flag across the political and the cultural spectrum.

The central design of the flag, beginning with a vee at the hoist and coming together in the centre of the flag, extending as a single horizontal bond to the outer edge of the fly, can be seen as representing the convergence of the diverse elements in South African society, which then together, take the road ahead in unison. This idea of unity and convergence links up with the motto of the national coat of arms, which means unity in strength. Our flag has, without a shadow of doubt, found its way into the hearts and minds of the population at large and has become the unifying symbol which South Africa as a nation needs. We see it, naturally, everywhere. We see it on people’s faces. We see it on cultural artefacts. We literally see it everywhere and our flag seems to be adaptable to all kinds of situations as people express themselves in unity. Its acceptance by the nation at large is one of the success stories of the new South Africa. It has, indeed united the nation.

Heritage is a system of symbols, tangible and intangible, that shape our culture. Heritage is a source that shapes our moral and economic lives. It is highly valuable and fragile. It is hard to renew. Heritage resources are reservoirs of memories of people, libraries and museums. As we approach this Heritage Day, let us resolve to enjoy our heritage, let us resolve to visit our reservoirs to determine whether they tell our story. Do they tell us where we come from, who we are and what we want our children and future generations to learn and to be?

A week ago I spoke to a friend of mine and expressed my resolution to visit a local library and a museum at least once a week. Her response was not encouraging. She remarked that our libraries, museums and heritage sites are not yet a mirror of our nation. I take her remark seriously and it serves as a motivation to go on a tour of all heritage centres. I invite members, therefore, to resolve to address the concerns of South Africans who want to develop their heritage. I think we need to assess the effectiveness of various institutions we have established to develop national heritage. We must lead their transformation. We must assess whether the books that we buy provide for the development of our communities and for the education of the South African nation. Is there an adequate stock of resources to facilitate the transformation of the South African culture, the languages, the natural sciences and technology?

Madam Speaker, a programme contributing to greater awareness of our unity in diversity and the need for common South African patriotism has to be introduced, but of course, with sensitivity in schools in particular, after consultation with the stakeholders. Over the years we have established museums to serve as centres of heritage conservation and development. These museums are meant also to serve as recreation centres for local and foreign tourists. The question remains, however, whether they serve the needs and the interests of all the people.

Some people may be wondering what relevance the name Iziko has to museums. This is the name given to the Cape Town museums collectively, but, as we know Iziko is a fireplace for cooking; for providing light, warmth and for the family to gather around and tell stories. This is what people expect when they visit Iziko museums and it must provide for all these expectations. In fact, these are legitimate development needs of the people. Today I invite members to create amaziko for storytelling, transfer of knowledge for sustainable social and economic development. We must never underestimate the power of storytelling and oral history as an African system of development.

Our communities accommodate a rich heritage. This heritage is presented in different forms, tangible and intangible forms. There are places and features that carry memories of individuals, groups of people and the entire nation. Recently, we brought back home from France the remains of a national symbol, Sarah Baartman, to lay her to rest in South Africa. I need not go deep into the story of Sarah’s painful experiences in life and in death, but I want to submit the legacy of Sarah Baartman as an opportunity to engage in extensive research and rewrite our history. Her burial site offers a pilgrimage for South Africans and the peoples of the world to go on a journey towards genuine respect for humanity and for dignity. It is no wonder that the President of the Republic of South Africa pronounced the site a national heritage site, and that its protection shall breed a new world order and moral order through which the world shall prosper.

There are many heritage sites of national, provincial and local significance. Some are associated with wars that were fought in South Africa, some relate to churches, some have been identified and they are protected. For example, we have Robben Island, Makapan Valley in Limpopo and the site of the Sharpeville massacre in Gauteng, which are all protected under the National Heritage Resources Act. There are many others. The list is quite long, including among other areas the Freedom Square in Kliptown, Chief Albert Luthuli in KwaDukuza, Samora Machel in Mbuzini, Mpumalanga, the Blood River in Ncome, the Steve Biko Memorial, the Sol Plaatjie Memorial and so on and so forth, and that also includes the recently created one, the Freedom Park. By the way, there is a display in the foyer about the Freedom Park. Members are also invited to visit there.

The majority of protected sites are structures and buildings that have reached pension age, that is 60 years of age. However, a large number of heritage resources are threatened as they have not been identified, graded and protected. On this Heritage Day we must return to our communities and facilitate the identification of heritage resources that must be protected and conserved for this and future generations.

Madam Speaker, it is clear that there are many ways in which we can celebrate Heritage Day, but what is important is the nature of our celebration. It should be proudly South African. A history or heritage conference, a community heritage tour or a tour of a museum, time spent in the company of a knowledgeable person or an elder is worth a heritage day celebration. A sport and recreation activity is a heritage celebration. The critical challenge facing the strengthening of our nationhood is that we tend to make Heritage Day a private affair. There are planned celebrations in all the provinces and the Department of Arts and Culture will host an open national celebration on 24 September. In addition, one may visit heritage centres and celebrate with family members, friends or a group of community members.

My call, therefore, is that this year we pledge to celebrate our heritage as proud South Africans, flying our national flag, singing our national anthem and aiming to enjoy our rich heritage together. I do wish everybody a fruitful Heritage Day. [Applause.]

Mr S E OPPERMAN: ``Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu’’. ‘n Mens is ‘n mens deur ander mense. [No man is an island.] Lesi sisho simqoka kubantu abampisholo ngoba lesi sisho shichaza inkambo yobuntu botho. [This proverb is very important to black people, because it describes the culture of humanity].

Awukho umthetho ongaba nomphumela obonakalayo ukwakha ukubambisana njengesizwe esisodwa ngaphandle kokuzimisela ngezinhliziyo zethu. [No law can produce visible success in building co-operation among people of one nation without our being serious within our heart.]

Eenheid is ‘n hart-ding, nie ‘n kop-ding nie. Dit kan nie met reëls, wette of regulasies afgedwing word nie. [Unity comes from the heart, not from the mind. It cannot be enforced by way of rules, laws or regulations.]

A few days ago, when the hon the Minister of Education responded in Afrikaans to a question by the hon Pieter Mulder, I said to myself: ``In a small way he is reaching out, and if he is reaching out to the Afrikaans- speaking community, I am not going to refuse his hand’’. Of course, Madiba set us the example of reaching out on the day he travelled to Orania to have tea with Mrs Betsie Verwoerd. These little drops of goodwill are precious and we all need to cherish them and follow the example.

At one of her functions during the weekend, the hon Thoko Didiza said: ``As we are busy building, there is no need to create new tensions’’.

!Ke e:/xarra//ke [eenheid in diversiteit] is die nuwe leuse vir ons land en in die gees van ons Grondwet wil ek hoop dat elkeen oor diversiteit sal skrywe: ``Hanteer uiters versigtig’’.

Die baie omstrede kwessie van naamsverandering is deesdae besig om orals onnodig temperature op te jaag. Dit is ‘n jammerte dat die uiters belangrike Kommissie vir die Bevordering en Beskerming van die Regte van Kulturele, Godsdienstige en Taalgemeenskappe nog nie aangestel is nie. Die Minister van Kuns, Kultuur, Wetenskap en Tegnologie behoort as ‘n saak van dringendheid toe te sien dat dit aangestel word.

Die primêre funksies van hierdie te stigte kommissie - te wete, eerstens die bevordering van respek vir kulturele, godsdienstige en taalregte, en tweedens die bevordering van vrede, vriendskap, menswaardigheid, verdraagsaamheid en nasionale eenheid tussen verskillende gemeenskappe op die basis van gelykheid, geen diskriminasie en vrye assosiasie - behoort intussen die gees te wees van besluite rakende naamveranderings.

Name wat krenk en aanstootlik is, moet natuurlik nie behoue bly nie. Wanbalanse moet natuurlik reggestel word om ons kulturele diversiteit te weerspieël. In hierdie opsig wil ek een van my mentors, my agb kollega Anna van Wyk, bedank vir die beleidsrigting wat sy aangedui het. Om egter aan name te peuter wat ‘n ``skoon’’ geskiedenis het, is uiters onverantwoordelik, soos ook vandag in een van die mosies te kenne gegee is.

Volgens die voorskrifte van die Nasionale Pleknamekomitee, behoort name wat diskriminerend is ten opsigte van ras, kleur, geloof, geslag en politieke affiliasie vermy te word.

Name wat sonder politieke kontaminasie is, behoort behoue te bly om absurditeite te voorkom, soos in die Suid-Kaap waar die naam van ‘n spesifieke strand sonder rede of behoorlike bestudering van die historiese oorsprong daarvan verander is om sodoende by ‘n bepaalde politieke agenda te pas. Met die verandering van die politieke toneel is die naam van die strand toe weer verander, terug na die oorspronklike naam. Sal hierdie speletjie voortduur soos die politieke toneel verder verander?

Dit word waardeer dat die voorgestelde naamsverandering van ‘n dorp soos Tzaneen weer terugverwys is. Ons hoop gesonde verstand sal seëvier. Aspekte van administratiewe geregtigheid, soos in die Grondwet gewaarborg en gebaseer op wetlikheid, redelikheid en behoorlike prosedure, is in hierdie geval totaal geïgnoreer. Die vraag is, waarom? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[!Ke e:/xarra//ke [unity in diversity] is the new motto for our country and in the spirit of our Constitution I would like to hope that everyone will write that diversity should be handled with the utmost care.

This very controversial matter of name changes has lately been causing a lot of unnecessary flaring of tempers everywhere. It is unfortunate that the very important Commission for Promotion and Protection of Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities has not been appointed. The Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology should as a matter of urgency see to it that it is appointed.

The primary function of this organisation to be formed - firstly the promotion of respect for cultural, religious and linguistic rights, and secondly, the promotion of peace, friendship, humanity, tolerance and national unity among different communities on the basis of equality, no discrimination and free association - should in the meantime be the spirit of decisions regarding name changes.

Names that are offensive or abhorrent should of course not be retained. Imbalances should, of course, be rectified in order to reflect our cultural diversity. In this regard I would like to thank one of my mentors, my hon colleague Anna van Wyk, for the policies that she has indicated. However, to tamper with names that have a ``clean’’ history is very irresponsible, as was noted today in one of the motions.

According to the instructions of the National Place Name Committee, names that are discriminatory with regard to race, colour, religion, gender and political affiliation, should be avoided. Names that are without political contamination, should be retained in order to avoid absurdities, such as in the Southern Cape where the name of a specific beach was changed without reason or proper research into its historical origin in order to suit a specific political agenda. With the change in the political scene the name of the beach was once again changed back to the original name. Will this game continue as the political scene further changes?

It is appreciated that the proposed name change of a town such as Tzaneen has been remitted. We hope that sound common sense will prevail. Aspects of administrative justice, as guaranteed by the Constitution and based on legality, fairness and proper procedure, was totally ignored in this instance. The question is, why?]

I believe that there is enough goodwill among our diverse communities to handle these sensitive issues in a way that will encourage all communities to join in celebrations and to move forward in establishing our country as a beacon of stability and hope. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Before I call on the next speaker, I would like, on behalf of all hon members, to welcome in our midst a group of physically challenged pupils from the Helen Franz school in Limpopo Province. [Applause.] You are most welcome to be with us today and we thank you for coming. I will now call upon the hon Cassim.

Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, a few weeks ago, when I noticed on the programme of Parliament that this debate was scheduled to take place after Heritage Day, I requested that we should actually bring the debate forward to before Heritage Day. The reason for that was very simple.

Over the past eight years we have noticed, on a number of occasions, Ministers complaining about the fact that when it comes to the celebration of Heritage Day generally black members of our communities and this nation are coming forward to participate, but that members of other ethnic and race groups are visible by their absence.

Therefore, it became important and necessary for us to raise this question here in Parliament to find out what could be done to address that. If the purpose of Heritage Day is actually to show our unity in diversity, then it has to be demonstrable and visible. But if, once again, after so many years

• and now would be the eighth year of celebration - the same tendency as in the past manifests itself, then it basically means that something is happening so that people who should be drawing closer to one another are not in fact doing that. Therefore, we need to address this.

Now in trying to ask why we are having this problem, I have tried to ascertain what is being done via the department to make sure that all communities from all races and ethnic groups are actually visible and participating together. Now, the department has, indeed, put out many advertisements and it has used the radio extensively to make certain that targeted groups are being reached. But, I am of the view that in spite of that we will, once again, have a situation in which all of the communities of South Africa will not be seen to be participating and celebrating together.

The question that needs to be asked is: What steps can we take so that the day of unity does not become the day of disunity? I believe that we need to start with education, and it is just as well that the hon Minister of Education is in House. Though it is not directly his line function, with the influence that he has in the educational sphere, I think we need to get the children of this country to start playing and celebrating together in order that we can build and cement the kind of unity that, indeed, we should not only be striving for now, but which we should be demonstrating is happening. We should also be asking those who are within the Public Service, policemen and women, nurses of all races and colours to come forward. There should be some way in which the department, in future years, can make certain well before the coming of Heritage Day that communities, even at the local government level, are given the opportunity to plan for Heritage Day, so that when it comes we do not have to rely so much on advertising to get the people there. If people have produced the programmes themselves in whatever shape they want them, then I am very certain that there will be a greater willingness to participate, because it is a programme of their own making. Then it will not become a programme where the political element outweighs the social, cultural or whatever element.

Up to now, for the past eight years, if we cast our minds back, we will find that most of these celebrations have tended to give the political content greater weight than the cultural and the social. The appeal is: Let us try and get this correct, because Heritage Day is not just a holiday. It is, in fact, one of the most significant days to show the change between the old and the new regimes, where in the past there was a cultural and racial hegemony. We now need to demonstrate that the opposite of that has actually rooted itself in South African soil and that as a people we are willing and able to enjoy the satisfaction of the progress we have made together, collectively. We can share what we are culturally and build together the kind of unity that will, indeed, start making a nation out of us. Although we have come very far in the past eight years, I believe that in terms of the main question - if we are still one united nation manifesting that unity - we have to say that in respect of that we have not yet reached our destination.

So, let us hope that this Heritage Day will be much better. Let those who are listening to us in Parliament, out there in the broader community, whether they are white, Indian, coloured, brown or whatever colour, let them all join together and make this Heritage Day a landmark in our cultural and political history. [Applause.]

An HON MEMBER: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, is it in order for a member of Parliament to sleep and snore in this House? I have been observing with interest the hon member Nigel Bruce, fast asleep. [Laughter.]

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I think there is sleeping with your eyes wide open and sleeping with your eyes shut. Neither is in order, but I will leave it to the members to discipline themselves. [Laughter.]

The MINISTER OF WATER AFFAIRS AND FORESTRY: Madam Speaker, time permitting, I will attempt to show the connection among ditlhare - the trees - Langa Township’s 75th anniversary, tourism, Paul Coleman, the earth walker, the threat of war with Iraq and our heritage. We, humans - the hon member snoring over there included - are all similar to trees. [Laughter.] We have roots which explain where we come from. We reach out our hands in friendship to others like the branches of a tree reaching out to the sun and, in fact, like the figures on our Coat of Arms which are so expressive of ubuntu. If one cuts a tree or a human being, a scar remains forever, reminding one of that blow. Trees are symbols of life and hope.

In this country, as part of our heritage, we devised the most wonderful way of remembering those who gave their lives in the struggle for freedom by planting trees in their memory so that they should never be forgotten. We plant such trees to green our land and to heal the nation. We encourage all our people to plant trees for the birth of a child or in memory of a loved one.

We planted trees yesterday with the community, during the 75th anniversary celebrations of Langa Township. That was organised by the hon member Zo Kota. We remembered those who had fallen in the struggle during 1960 and, again, those who had fallen in the 1976 uprising. We remembered the man after whom Langa Township was originally named, King Langalibalele of AmaHlubi, who was captured by the British in 1873 and incarcerated on Robben Island because of his rebellion against colonial rule.

We have planted trees to those warriors who have fallen in defence of our country in the many wars of our history; those who fell during the colonial wars of dispossession; and, in fact, those gallant Boers who fought against the selfsame aggression of British imperialism. Perhaps, it is only today that many can see more clearly that the Anglo-Boer War or the South African War, as it is more correctly termed, is part of the British imperial power’s overall wars of conquest in which all our people were victims.

Planting the trees with us at Langa, yesterday, was Paul Coleman from England who, a few months ago, arrived in our country and walked from Pietermaritzburg to the Johannesburg World Summit planting trees en route. Paul is not called the earth walker for nothing. He walked in North and South America, from Canada to Brazil, in 1992, to the Rio summit. He has walked in Europe and the Middle East and has covered 35 000 km in 30 countries. This morning he planted a tree here, in Parliament, with the Speaker. He will plant a tree on Robben Island and will soon start out from Cape Town on a four-year ramble that will take him through our continent, from Cape to Cairo and onto China - literally from Robben Island’s prison walls to the Great Wall of China.

Paul aims to draw attention to the impact of war on humanity and the natural environment. He has an ambition to persuade people all over the world to plant a tree for a every person who died in armed conflict during the twentieth century - that is about a 100 million people. I think that we can justifiably refer to him as iqabane lendlela nemithi - a comrade of the road and trees. [Applause.] I would like to ask Paul Coleman to rise and acknowledge the House. [Applause.] I would like to thank Paul very much for that.

Paul has merged with us and our heritage. I would like to say, in the fine words of our national motto: !ke e: /xarra //ke - diverse people unite - because of his love and respect for mother earth and for freedom, equality and fraternity. Paul expresses himself by walking the world, reaching out to people and planting trees. Our country expressed that ideal at the world summit whose programme we are already implementing in many ways, even in the simple act of planting trees; ensuring the provision of water and food, better health and education; eradication of poverty; and care and protection of our environment so that it can be green, healthy and can be passed on to future generations as the heritage of our country.

The heritage handed to us from our past is not simply the symbols of our Coat of Arms, or the legacy of rock paintings, songs, music, dance, cultural and environmental treasures. It is all that, but it is also our finest aspirations of freedom, democracy and equality, which is what all that reflects and inspires. So, it is the wisdom of centuries of struggle for justice that saw our President emphasising this week in New York, as the planet is poised for an unnecessary war against Iraq, the role of the UN as the vehicle for ensuring peace. At this hour of impending war, the US and Britain rattling their sabres, our President has declared that the Non- Aligned Movement is committed to the peaceful resolution of all conflicts, including those pertaining to Palestine and Israel as well as Iraq, in keeping with UN resolutions.

In the same vein, our former President, Nelson Mandela, has warned the President of the world’s mightiest country to refrain from war and seek other means. These two famous South Africans express, at this moment of danger to world peace, the essence of our heritage and wisdom of our history: talk, negotiate, seek peaceful resolution to conflict and only resort to force where freedom and justice are in peril and there is no other choice.

As we celebrate our heritage - an inclusive, democratic nonracist and nonsexist South Africa - other dark forces plot and conspire to drag us back into the abyss. The ultraright conspirators in our country, who have recently been uncovered by superb police work, are isolated, bankrupt and without significant support. It is highly appreciated and it is in the best spirit of our heritage that leaders of Afrikaner parties in this House have rejected conspiracies to overthrow the Government by violence.

Whilst we will not overreact to such plots, the plotters and any elements who seek to defy our Constitution and rights through violence can be sure that we will defend to the last drop of blood our people’s achievements. The assegai and iwisa - the knobkerrie in our Coat of Arms - are dual symbols of defence and authority and symbolise the wisdom and courage with which we fought for our freedom and with which we will defend this democracy. These weapons are as much as part of our heritage as our valuable cultural treasures. Those conspirators who wish to plunge our country into blood are living in the past. Those like them who remain befuddled by racial poison need to join us in the new South Africa. If they were at Langa, yesterday, they would have seen a community with its dignity and voluntarily involved in greening and cleaning the township. As we planted the trees with Paul Coleman, an all-women band played music and sang, and a coach-load of German tourists stopped to join in the carnival and danced with the community. The tour guide told me that, in the past, they would bypass the townships too afraid to enter. They were now en route to a township restaurant and the tourists were flocking into South Africa. It is ubuntu, a white lady told me.What?'' I asked, as I thought she had said it is theBantu’’. It is the spirit of ubuntu'', she explained, that is drawing the tourists and making them want to come back’’.

Paul Coleman has experienced that ubuntu. He talked about how friendly people are and is optimistic about South Africa and the world. Paul will walk along the Garden Route and enjoy, amongst other things of beauty, the mountains and fynbos. He will walk through the Knysna and Tsitsikamma forests. He will see the Amatola mountains from where our people fiercely resisted colonial conquests in frontier wars that could be more accurately referred to as a 100 years war - so determined was the resistance of the spear against gun on the Eastern Cape frontier.

When Paul reaches the northern parts of our country, at the end of the year, he will be able to admire the baobab tree of the savanna and obtain vitamin C from the marula fruit and maybe protein from the mopane worm to give him added strength for his trek up Africa to Cairo and on to China. May Paul’s spirit be continually uplifted by this beautiful country and wonderful people as he experiences our heritage. We call on our people, our mayors, councillors, communities, and learners in our schools, to give him friendship, protection and hospitality on the road. We thank him for visiting us. Hamba kahle Paul, earth walker, qabane lendlela nemithi. You are an example of unity in diversity and in practice.

I have no doubt that all members of this House will be unanimous in support of this debate and will join in the national celebrations for Heritage Day. May I endorse the statements made by the hon member Cassim, that Heritage Day is for all South Africans: swart, bruin en wit [black, brown and white]. It is for all of us and we call on all our people to participate. Siyabonga, kakhulu. [We thank you very much.] [Applause.]

Mrs ANNA VAN WYK: Mevrou die Speaker, dit was goed om die Minister van Waterwese te hoor, want bome is ‘n belangrike erfenis. Dit was ook mooi om te hoor dat hy uiteindelik een sin in Afrikaans gepraat het. Baie dankie daarvoor.

Ek is baie jammer dat ons Minister van Kuns en Kultuur nie vandag hier is nie. Ek is baie bly dat die agb Brigitte Mabandla vroeër hier was, maar ek sien dat sy nou voet in die wind geslaan het. Ek wil ook graag die afvaardiging van SAHRA verwelkom wat gekom het om hierdie debat aan te hoor.

Te dikwels word erfenis eng beskou as ‘n luukse, iets waaroor mense sterk emosies het, maar waarvan die betekenis nie maklik deur die publiek of regering in terme van geldwaarde uitgedruk kan word nie. Die ongelukkige waarheid is dat indien erfenis bewaar en volhoubaar benut moet word, en dit geld uiteraard die natuurerfenis ook, dit wel in geldterme uitgedruk moet kan word. Ek wil vandag konsentreer op ons konkrete kultuurerfenis en spesifiek op die geboue van ons land.

Geboue het in die eerste plek ‘n vanselfsprekende, implisiete waarde, maar ook ander belangrike waardes wat insluit argitektoniese, kulturele, assosiatiewe en historiese waardes, asook opvoedkundige, estetiese en omgewingswaardes. Dus het eiendom ‘n veelheid van waardes. Oor die afgelope dekades is daar studies gedoen wat afdoende bepaal dat hierdie waardes hulself manifesteer in ekonomiese waarde waar eiendoms- en erfenisbestuur reg toegepas word. In New Jersey, Texas, Colorado, Maryland, Noord- en Suid- Carolina, Kentucky en Virginia is byvoorbeeld bevind dat eiendomswaardes van verklaarde historiese geboue en distrikte konsekwent beduidend vinniger toeneem in die oorgrote meerderheid gevalle in die mark geheel, en in die swakste gevalle teen normale markwaarde.

Die Kaapstadse Vennootskap is ‘n goeie plaaslike voorbeeld van hoe om binne ‘n kort tydperk duisende rande se beleggings te lok en werkgeleenthede te skep deur stedelike vernuwing, waarvan die restourasie van geboue ‘n belangrike komponent is. Nog ‘n voorbeeld is die Kaapstadse Waterkant wat die restourasie en volhoubare benutting van ou store, dokke, werkswinkels en kantoorgeboue behels. Vandag is die Waterfront as enkele besoekerslokpunt een van die grootste geldmakers in die land. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs ANNA VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, it was good to listen to the Minister of Water Affairs, because trees are an important heritage. It was also very nice to hear that he eventually spoke one sentence in Afrikaans. Thank you very much for that.

It is a pity that our Minister of Arts and Culture is not here today. I am very glad that the hon Brigitte Mabandla was here earlier, but I now see that she has taken to her heels. I would also like to welcome the SAHRA delegation who came to listen to this debate.

Too often heritage is narrowly regarded as a luxury, something about which people have strong emotions, but of which the meaning cannot easily be expressed in terms of monetary value by the public or the Government. The unfortunate truth is that if heritage must be conserved and used sustainably, and this includes natural heritage as well, it should then be expressed in monetary terms. Today I would like to concentrate on our concrete cultural heritage and specifically on the buildings of our country.

Buildings, in the first instance, have an obviously implicit value, but also other important values which include architectural, cultural, associative and historical values, as well as educational, aesthetic and environmental values. Property, therefore, has a multitude of values. Over the past few decades studies were done which conclusively determined that these values manifest themselves in economic value where property management and heritage management are applied properly. In New Jersey, Texas, Colorado, Maryland, North and South Carolina, Kentucky and Virginia, for example, it was found that the property values of historically declared buildings and districts consequently considerably increased faster in the vast majority of cases in the market as a whole, and in the poorest instances, at normal market value.

The Cape Town Partnership is a good local example of how thousands of rands in investments can be attracted within a short space of time and job opportunities can be created through urban renewal, of which the restoration of buildings is an important component. Another example is the Cape Town Waterfront which comprises the restoration and sustainable use of old stores, docks, workshops and office buildings. Today the Waterfront, as a single visitors’ attraction, is one of the biggest money makers in the country.]

Old hotels, such as the Polana in Maputo, Raffles in Singapore and the Mount Nelson in Cape Town, represent another case in point. Today the urban renewal of entire mothballed dockyard precincts in England and other parts generates more income in real terms than the erstwhile shipping and local manufacturing industries.

Referring to New Jersey as a case study, it was found that a million dollars of historic preservation created five more jobs than manufacturing a million dollars’ worth of electronic equipment, 19 more jobs in producing a million dollars’ worth of metals, and 18 more jobs than refining a million dollars’ worth of chemicals. Think also of what this means in direct and downstream savings on dealing with the environmental consequences of dirty industries. The choice for South Africa should be clear: Concentrate on heritage as one of the major drivers of our economy.

Cultural tourism is the fastest growing component of the tourist industry worldwide. Beautiful scenery exists everywhere but the uniqueness inherent in the built heritage of a country is what draws visitors to specific places. Places are identified by their distinct appearance and atmosphere and therefore retaining a sense of place is crucial to sustainable cultural tourism. A recent study in the state of Virginia found that historic preservation tourists spent an average of $423 in comparison to the $180 per ordinary tourist. Three times as many tourists visit historic buildings as visit beaches; four times as many as visit theme parks - think of the hideously appellated Ratanga Junction; and 15 times as many as visit golf courses. Historic preservation visitors stay longer, visit twice as many places and spend two and a half times more than other visitors. In Virginia cultural tourism is an integral component of that state’s economy and not merely an alternative to what is falsely perceived as economic growth manifesting itself in increases in dirty industry.

Dit is die geval wêreldwyd en behoort ook hier so te wees. Maar daar is problematiese aspekte. In die eerste plek weet die staat nie regtig wat hy besit en waarvan hy die bewaarder is nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[That is the scenario worldwide and ought also to be the case here. But there are problematic aspects. In the first place, the state does not know what it really owns and of what it is the custodian.]

The state is the biggest property owner in South Africa. All three spheres of government own vast building assets. Lists are incomplete. The Department of Public Works has a woefully underresourced heritage assets subdirectorate whose hard-pressed members are doing sterling work to identify and list the properties owned by national government. The listing of heritage assets by provincial governments, as well as local governments, is patchy at best and mostly completely absent. In short, we have to find out what we have and start restoring and redeploying our built heritage sustainably.

The SA Heritage Resources Agency is pathetically underfunded and underresourced. Legislation and finances are stumbling blocks as well. In terms of the Heritage Resources Act, provincial governments are responsible for the management of all national monuments in that province through provincial heritage resource agencies. These agencies, with the exception of KwaZulu-Natal, do not exist. In the Western Cape a law giving effect to such an agency is in the drafting stage, but the terms of the Financial Management Act have to be met before public entities may be declared. At present provincial heritage management functions constitute an unfunded mandate. The SAHRA was able to extend permits for development in terms of ministerial regulations which expired in April this year. At present legal development of property has frozen and it is costing the country millions. There are also all kinds of other developments. It is probably also only a matter of time before someone who has invested in a property subject to receiving a permit for development within a reasonable period sues a provincial government for damages. The Kroon judgment in the Eastern Cape has made it clear that existing protection stands but that the previous regulations were ultra vires. These financial and legal problems need to be resolved forthwith. Furthermore, the national White Paper on Heritage needs to be amended to bring it in line with the Constitution. Until such time there is really no heritage management in this country.

Plaaslike regering is egter die enkele kardinale sondaar wat onberekenbare skade veroorsaak en toelaat aan die land se gebouerfenis. Onbegrip, visieloosheid en korttermyngewin is die grondliggende oorsake van die vernietiging en verontmensliking van historiese stede en dorpe. Die regte soort beleid en wetgewing ten opsigte van beplanning en ontwikkeling kom kort. Voor daar niks oor is van ons ouer dorpe en stede nie, moet daar dringend werk gemaak word van die onvermoë en onwilligheid van plaaslike regerings. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.) [Local government, however, is the single cardinal sinner which causes and allows incalculable damage to the country’s built heritage. A lack of understanding, a lack of vision and short-term gain are the fundamental causes for the destruction and dehumanising of historical cities and towns. The right type of policy and legislation with regard to planning and development is lacking. Before there is nothing left of our old towns and cities, we should urgently make work of the inability and unwillingness of our local governments.]

The built heritage of the country is further threatened by the unintended consequences of some housing legislation and particularly the Security of Tenure Act. Its latest interpretation by Judge Harmse will doubtless cause further slumlordism and urban decay. South Africa is a fascinating country from every perspective. Let us use all of our assets to develop our country, our economy and empower our people. [Applause.]

Ms ANNELIZÉ VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, in celebrating Heritage Day an opportunity is provided to South Africans to celebrate that which distinguishes us from other nations. It is also a celebration of what binds us together as South Africans.

Fittingly, the Department of Arts and Culture declared Heritage Month, the month in which we celebrate our national symbols and institutions. It is these very symbols that define us as a nation. It is these symbols that we should jealously guard over and treasure.

Ours is a rich culture, a culture with different religions, languages, food that we eat and historical inheritance. It is this rich diversity that lies at the foundation of our strength and potential as a nation.

The SA Constitution, the basis of our newly found freedom, protects our diversity. It has established bodies guarding over the right of all to be that different being. The very values that South Africa as a sovereign democratic state was founded on, acknowledge, protect and provide space for that diversity to be practised.

The National Assembly is one of the institutions identified by the Department of Arts and Culture to be celebrated during the month of September. We, representing the diverse people of this country, make up the NA. We are as diverse as the people that we represent. That is the way that it should be. The question, however, is whether we as members of the NA in our workings portray tolerance to that diversity.

Do we create enough room for different opinions, different perspectives and different arguments so as to inform those decisions that we take in the interest of the country as a whole and the people as a nation? Are we tolerant towards an opinion, an approach or a point of view different from the one we subscribe to? Do we realise that a different opinion can inform our decisions better or do we feel threatened by it? The challenge to us as members is how to acknowledge that diversity and use it as an important building block to achieve unity.

As South Africans we should guard and protect our rights to diversity. However, we cannot allow that very right to be abused by small groups within society who threaten our democracy. The revelations of the past weeks of a right-wing plot to overthrow Government is an example of such a small section of society intolerant of our diversity. Such people pose a threat to our unity. They abuse the room created for diversity and still believe that through violence they can force the majority of South Africans, black and white, to succumb to their obsolete ideas. As South Africans we should unite against those dark forces and give them no room to hide from the law.

I am a white Afrikaans-speaking South African. That violent minority group, claiming to represent Afrikaans-speaking whites, does not represent me and millions of others like me. [Applause.] No one political grouping can or should claim to represent exclusively any part of our nation. The majority of white South Africans are proudly part of the New South Africa. Our loyalty lies with our country and all our people. We participate fully and positively as true South Africans. Nobody, through whatever actions, is going to detract us from doing exactly that.

In celebrating Heritage Day South Africans should consciously seek to find out more about each other’s culture. Heritage Day provides an opportunity for South Africans to enrich their own lives, their understanding of one another, by creating a day dedicated to our heritage. Let us on Heritage Day not only celebrate our own, but let us also learn from one another and celebrate that together with the many things, both tangible and not, that unify us as a nation.

Heritage Day celebrations lie close to the heart of the UDM. They take place days before the UDM celebrates its fifth year of founding on 27 September 1997. The UDM’s founding principles, as embodied in our constitution, are based on unity within our rich diversity. The UDM believes that we can address poverty and imbalances in our society, inspired by our unifying love of our country and its people. We believe that we should set free the creative power inherent in our diversity to ensure quality of life and individual freedom for every citizen towards our transformation into a winning nation.

To the UDM, its president and all its members, a happy fifth anniversary. May we grow from strength to strength. [Applause.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker, I welcome pastor Woodrow Walker and his delegation from Atlanta. God bless them in their work in South Africa. [Applause.] I celebrate Heritage Day grateful for the privilege of being a South African and grateful for my Christian heritage. I also celebrate Heritage Day grateful for the privilege and honour of being a mother of four wonderful children. The heritage we are passing on to future generations, however, is to me a very real concern, even though it appears there may be no future generations to receive it.

Fertility rates in the entire developed world are now well below replacement levels, and if current declines in fertility rates in the developing world continue, the entire world will soon be below replacement fertility level. Contrary to widespread perceptions of overpopulation, the world needs babies and needs them now!

Until relatively recently the concepts of marriage, family and even children’s rights were not commonly linked with international law. However, human rights issues have taken centre stage at international conferences and international law has become hostile to long-standing notions of marriage, the natural family and the rearing of children, presenting marriage, motherhood, fatherhood and childhood as cultural and economic problems that demand immediate solutions.

The impact on South African law is evident as these new norms are used to destroy innocent life and deconstruct marriage and family in spite of recent studies, which emphasise the critical role of dual parenting as -

… by far, the most emotionally stable and economically secure arrangement for child-rearing and recognise that nothing compares to a solid, stable marriage between their biological parents.

Scientific surveys have found that cohabiting, unmarried women are more likely than married women to suffer physical and sexual abuse and the consequences are even more serious for children as -

… the most unsafe of all family environments for children is that in which the mother is living with someone other than the child’s biological father. Prior to the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, no legal system in the world granted autonomy rights to children. In fact, the world limited children’s autonomy in the short run in order to maximise their development of actual autonomy in the long run. If we want our children and our children’s children to celebrate Heritage Day in the years to come, we must refute and resist the lies that undermine family, marriage, motherhood, fatherhood and childhood. We must give birth to our babies, love them, enjoy them and protect them. They are a gift from God.

Where are we going, Mommy? People dressed in green, If they hurt you, Mommy, just scream. What’s happening, Mommy, I’m starting to cry, Mommy come quickly, they’re making me die, Killing me quickly, pulling me apart, Everything in me, even my heart, Bye, Mommy, goodbye I love you, I do Why, Mommy, why … can’t you love me too?

Termination of pregnancy is abortion and it kills babies! [Interjections.]

Yes, God have mercy on us. Hon Minister, do we desecrate forests to commemorate the over 230 000 babies legally terminated in the last five years? It is interesting that we have sustainable development summits, but the only real action to come out of these summits is termination of pregnancy, condoms and the promotion of homosexual lifestyles. Why do we pretend to concern ourselves about sustainable development when we have partnered with those who are ensuring that there will be no one to benefit

• or at least not our children or their children’s children?

… Do hon members know, for example, how many people will be in Japan in the year … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr D A A OLIFANT: Madam Speaker. The Freedom Charter says South Africa belongs to all who live in it and by this is meant that South Africa is, in essence, a common heritage to all its people.

Ever since the ANC-led government took power in 1994, it has embarked on the road to transform our South African society. The ANC, as outlined in the Freedom Charter, has sought to transform our society from a racist South Africa to a nonracial democracy.

Die vraag is: Het ons geslaag? In ‘n baie groot mate het ons. ‘n Hele klomp wetgewing is ingestem in hierdie Raad om ons land na ‘n nie-rassige bestel te lei, soos byvoorbeeld die Grondwet, wat een van die omvangrykste grondwette ter wêreld is; ons vlag met sy ryk Suid-Afrikaanse kleure, wat eenheid simboliseer; en die land se nuwe landswapen, wat eenheid in diversiteit aanspreek. Vergelyk dit met die landswapen van die ou Suid- Afrika, wat juis vandag 92 jaar gelede onthul is, en toe juis vir apartheid in sy volle glorie gestaan het.

Ons volkslied beeld ‘n blik uit ons verlede en gee ook ‘n groot sprong na ons toekoms en so konsentreer die volkslied ook op eenheid en nasiebou. As ons na bogenoemde feite kyk, en ons fokus op vanjaar se tema, dan kan ons met trots herdenk dat ons erfenis ‘n ware en waardige rol kan speel in ons doel om eenheid te bereik binne die raamwerk van ons verskillende agtergronde. Ons grootste erfenis is natuurlik die mense van Suid-Afrika. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The question is: Have we succeeded? To a very large degree we have. A large body of legislation has been adopted in this Chamber to lead our country to a nonracial dispensation, such as, for example, the Constitution, which is one of the most comprehensive constitutions in the world; our flag with its rich South African colours, which symbolises unity; and the country’s new coat of arms, which addresses unity and diversity. Compare that with the coat of arms of the old South Africa, which was unveiled today precisely 92 years ago, and then in fact stood for apartheid in all its glory.

Our national anthem reflects a glimpse from our past and also takes a large leap into our future and in this way the national anthem also concentrates on unity and nation-building. If we look at the aforementioned facts, and we focus on this year’s theme, then we can commemorate with pride that our heritage can play a true and valuable role in our aim to achieve unity within the framework of our different backgrounds. Naturally, our greatest heritage is the people of South Africa.]

Through all these dark and often brutal periods that we have gone through, some of us knew that nonracialism was the key and that that was the objective that we all had to strive for. When the time came, our country’s great leaders led by the ANC’s Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Govan Mbeki, Walter Sisulu, as well as FW de Klerk, Constand Viljoen …

… en andere het Suid-Afrika van ‘n gewisse, afgryslike ramp gered. En toe kom haar mense, Suid-Afrikaners, ons mense, uit alle hoeke van ons land en met ‘n volle Suid-Afrikaanse trotsheid het ons ‘n erfenis geskep wat vandag bekend staan as die Afrika wonderwerk, waarvan die wêreld nog lank sal praat. Dit was die vryste en regverdigste verkiesing wat nog in Afrika gesien en beleef is. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[… and others saved South Africa from a certain, horrific disaster. And then her people came, South Africans, our people, from all the corners of our country and with full South African pride we created a heritage which is today known as the African miracle, which the world will be talking about for a long time to come. It was the most free and fair election yet seen and experienced in Africa.]

Today this Government has achieved all its Chapter 9 objectives, particularly officially recognising the communities and their languages in the Khoisan Council. Extracts from the President’s ``I am an African’’ speech, relate to this. In his quotes the President reflects on the notion that we know where we are coming from and that we know where we are going.

It was re-emphasised at the recent World Summit on Sustainable Development that our country is the cradle of the human race. It is also here that birth was given to some of civilisation’s most profound foundations. From the days of the Khoisan civilisation and the tribal authorities, South Africa is continuing on its path of ubuntu: I am, because you are. Also the Gandhian choice of satyagraha, the force of truth, which was born here in our country and is cherished by the entire world. I must thank comrade Ramgobin for this background. These cultural experiences and expressions, born in the crucible of our country’s consciousness, are today not only our heritage but the heritage of the human family. Let us be proud of the different cultures and languages of our country.

Today our former President, Nelson Mandela, son of this African soil, is part of that world heritage that makes up the human race. Let us celebrate our freedom through our national symbols. Let us all proudly sing the national anthem when we are watching our sporting heroes in the stadiums of our country and the world; when we come together and welcome the heads of state of other countries. Let us not sing only the part that we are comfortable with, but let us all sing the entire national anthem, because this anthem makes us proud of who we are. Let us stand tall when we salute our flag, because our flag has become a symbol of strength and unity, not just in our country but in Africa and the rest of the world. Let us be proud of our coat of arms, because this reflects our real identity as South Africans.

!ke e:/xarra//ke - [We stand proud through our unity in diversity.] [Applause.] Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Mevrou die Speaker, as ons praat van ons erfenis, dan praat ons ook onder andere van ons geskiedenis. Daar is ‘n aanhaling wat sê: Die geskiedenis is die bewaarder van die herinneringe van groot dade en die getuie van die verlede, die voorbeeld en die leermeester van die hede, die waarskuwing vir die toekoms.

As ons Erfenisdag saam as Suid-Afrikaners wil vier, om eenheid in verskeidenheid te bewerkstellig, moet ons ag slaan op hierdie aanhaling. Dan moet daar erkenning wees vir elkeen se herinneringe van groot dade van die verlede. Dan moet ek as Afrikaner toegelaat word om myself te wees en tuis te wees in my land waarin ek leef. Dan moet my taal erken word en nie onderdruk word deur Engels nie.

Die verlede is getuie van die stryd van Afrikaans, waarna daar in ‘n stadium neerhalend as ‘n kombuistaal verwys is, maar wat opgestaan het en wat met trots gepraat kan word. Laat die geskiedenis die leermeester wees vir die hede. Laat ons nie dieselfde foute van die verlede herhaal nie. As ons sê ons is ernstig met eenheid in verskeidenheid, moet ons dade ook daarvan getuig.

Die implementering van die artikel 185-kommissie, die Kommissie vir die Bevordering en Beskerming van die Regte van Kultuur-, Godsdiens- en Taalgemeenskappe, het nou nog nie plaasgevind nie. As ons ernstig is met wat ons sê, moet ons onsself afvra: Hoekom nie? Daar is nog nie eens advertensies in die media geplaas sodat hierdie kommissie saamgestel kan word nie.

Die geskiedenis is die waarskuwing, ook vir die toekoms. Ons moet ag slaan op die waarskuwingstekens, anders gaan die spreekwoord geld: Hy wat sy verlede vergeet, sal gedwing word om dit te herleef. Elkeen van ons moet toegelaat word om te kan sê: Laat die erwe van my vaders vir my kinders erwe bly. Dan sal daar eenheid in verskeidenheid in ons land wees. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Speaker, when we talk about heritage, we are also talking, inter alia, about our history. There is a quotation which says: History is the guardian of the memories of great deeds and the witness of the past, the example and the teacher of the present, the warning for the future.

If we want to celebrate Heritage Day together as South Africans, to achieve unity in diversity, we must pay attention to this quotation. There then has to be recognition for each person’s memories of great deeds of the past. I as an Afrikaner must then be permitted to be myself and to be at home in the country in which I live. My language must then be recognised and not oppressed by English.

The past is a witness to the struggle of Afrikaans, which was at one stage disparagingly referred to as a kitchen language, but which rose up and which can be spoken with pride. Let history be the teacher for the present. Let us not repeat the same mistakes of the past. If we say we are serious about unity in diversity, our deeds must also testify to this.

The implementation of the section 185 commission, the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, has not yet taken place. If we are serious about what we are saying we must ask ourselves why not? Advertisements have not yet even been placed in the media so that this commission can be constituted.

History is the warning, also for the future. We must pay attention to the warning signs, otherwise the idiom will apply: Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. Each one of us must be permitted to be able to say: May the heritage they gave us for our children yet be. Then there will be unity in diversity in our country.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Madam Speaker, hon members, there is one thing most people agree on, and that is that nation-building has not been achieved yet. To achieve this we have to tread with great circumspection in celebrating occasions like Heritage Day. Nation-building is not an event, it is a process that has to evolve and be nurtured to unfold into what is envisaged in our interim Constitution of 1993, namely:

… a need to create a new order in which all South Africans will be entitled to a common South African citizenship in a sovereign and democratic constitutional state in which there is equality between men and women and people of all races so that all citizens shall be able to enjoy and exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms.

It cannot happen overnight and laggards to change should not be rebuked, because this may scare and alienate them for much longer. Occasions such as Heritage Day call for what the interim Constitution calls a ``need for understanding, not vengeance and a need for ubuntu, but not for victimisation’’. The other stakeholders should be invited to the planning, then the preparations and should eventually participate in the programmes of Heritage Day itself.

This bottom-up approach is consultative and involves other people, whereas the current practice of celebrating the day is top-down: Hence very few people buy into it. For as long as the ruling party treats the celebrations of national public days as their preserve, apathy among other people will manifest itself. There has to be sensitivity in celebrating occasions like this, as we are in a process of making a legacy for posterity. Our children should not find that we have left them a heritage of domination over others, or being dominated by others. They should not find that have we left them a heritage of delighting in excluding and marginalising others and, conversely, we should leave our children a heritage of mutual respect, mutual understanding, tolerance and the undying desire to serve humanity.

Heritage Day celebrations should serve as a bond among our people. Imagine if we are to celebrate the heritage of our forebears with the programme of the day making provision for addresses in snippets of all eleven official languages. Imagine if we were to attend occasions and listen to boeremusiek, the Sesotho moqoqopelo, the Venda ndomba and all other cultural dances. The occasion can be colourful and all could look forward to the day the following year. On Heritage Day we should follow the great law of culture, which is to let each one become all that he was created to be.

During Heritage Day celebrations people should entertain themselves, entertain guests and entertain ideas. Finally, may we on Heritage Day, wherever we shall be gathered, chant our heritage of unity, the national anthem, with proper decorum and without any aid from some choir. [Applause.]

Dr M S MOGOBA: Madam Speaker, the subject of our debate today needs to be affirmed by all who call themselves Africans - that is, those who believe that Africa is their home, those who have no other place they call home, those who have an unshaken sense of belonging and those who just cannot resist the sweet smell of the soil of their country.

This definition does not refer to the colour of a person, which is a great irrelevance and an accident of one’s birth. Thanks go to God, who has given us this great heritage of a beautiful country with clear blue skies by day and a symphony of stars by night, a country that has no volcanoes and very few earth tremors, a country that is multicultural and multilingual, with human gifts of all varieties.

And yet, this is the country that was nearly reduced to rubble or a bloodbath through human bigotry and possibly a sense of greed. The ideal of freedom nearly eluded us. Many sacrificed and some resisted, while others even remained indifferent. However, we are all here, together under the canopy of our magnificent sky. God has given us another opportunity to celebrate our common nationhood, our common creatureliness.

The freedom we now enjoy belongs to us all. No single group or party can rightly claim this Parliament or Robben Island, Soweto ‘76 or Sharpeville ‘60, or the Majuba Hills of the Anglo-Boer War of the 1880s and 1890s to be their own. These were our individual, group or collective mistakes or sins.

God forbid that we should want to live in the past or want to build our future and that of our children on the dustheap of our past, reminiscent of the dusty valleys of Afghanistan. At best, we should learn from the past and bravely face the challenges that lie ahead of us.

This nation has made mistakes and blunders, but it has also seen some wonderful achievements such as, for example, the historic Rustenburg Church Conference; the Codesa negotiations at Kempton Park; the Peace Conference, of which I hope we can make a film; the Peace Accord; the Prayer Rally at Kings Park, Durban; the joint monitoring of the KwaZulu-Natal election; the IFP-ANC Peace Initiative at Kempton Park; the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; the South African Constitution; the Human Rights Commission; our first democratic election; that historic induction of our first democratic President, with the whole world in attendance; and, lately, the World Summit on Racism, the WSSD and the Non-Aligned Movement Conference.

The only critical rejoinder is that we must not allow these national historic landmarks to degenerate into the colonial trophies of one group or party. We must grow. We are now a nation. Under God, we will face challenges like the African Union and world peace. We will play our unique part in building a country and a world of peace, under God, as we repeat the inspired words of our national anthem:

Morena boloka setjaba sa heso [God bless our nation] Woza Moya, woza Moya [Come Spirit, come Spirit] Usisikelele. [And bless us.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Madam Speaker, we live on the planet Earth, which is under tremendous pressure. What we know of this planet of ours is that it has changed over the past millennia and that each time everybody had to adapt to the new changes. Now it is the same, in that we have to learn from our experience. This is what we have inherited from the past. At the moment our planet is under tremendous pressure and if we want to continue with our other activities, we should take note of how our decisions will influence future life on this planet.

As ek na Suid-Afrika kyk, wonder ek soms wat het ons van die verlede geërf. Dan kom ‘n magdom gedagtes by my op. Elke individu kan seker sy eie lys opstel oor die ekonomie, oor sy taal en kultuur, oor voorregte, benadeling, oor die politiek en oor sport, wat ook al. Elkeen se herinnering en ervaring is dus sy erfdeel en dit maak hom wat hy is. Juis in hierdie verskeidenheid van erfenisse en die diversiteit van ondervinding en ervaring in een land se mense lê die wonder en ook die uitdaging vir Suid- Afrika.

As ons dié verskille negatief ervaar, gaan ons hierdie wonder nie verder uitbou nie. Ons sal ook nie samewerking skep nie. Dit sal ons nie help om nie weer die foute van die verlede te herhaal nie. As ons afwyk van die begrip van om vir mekaar ruimte te skep, sal ons terugval in die moeras van gister, waar elke kind van Suid-Afrika sy erfdeel opeis. Dan sal dié erfdeel, soos die een van die verlore seun in die Bybelse geskiedenis, gou in korttermyn klatergoud verval en tot Suid-Afrika se nadeel wees.

Elkeen van ons is die produk van gister se omstandighede. Gaan ons voort om elkeen vir sy eie eensydige oortuigings te baklei, soos in die verlede, of gaan ons met nuwe moed die toekoms in Suid-Afrika tegemoet wat ons aan die einde van die vorige eeu vir onsself geskep het? Dit was op daardie oomblik in Suid-Afrika se geskiedenis toe die mense van ons land, oor hul verskille heen, ‘n geleentheid tot samewerking geskep en benut het.

In die eerste paar jare het ons goed gebou op die eenheid van diversiteit, maar in die laaste paar jaar sien ek hoe ons al hoe meer wegbeweeg en mekaar minder verstaan, en dat daar minder verdraagsaamheid is. Ek sien in die laaste tyd helaas dat die ou gewoontes terugkeer en so die nuutgevonde erfenis van vryheid en demokrasie toenemend bedreig. Ons het weer begin val in die slaggate van gister se diskriminasie en vooroordele. Ons loop gereeld vas in die landmyne van wraak, vergelding en onverdraagsaamheid wat mense in groepe se belange negeer.

Dit is baie jammer, want dit kan so anders wees. Mag die gesprek wat ons vandag hier voer, bydra om die positiewe nasiebou waarna ons strewe weer op die spoor te plaas. Gister is verby - dit is geskiedenis. Ons moet die toekoms skrywe en dit reg skrywe. Dit is wat die toekoms van ons verwag. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[When I look at South Africa, I sometimes wonder what we have inherited from the past. Then a multitude of thoughts come to me. Every individual could probably compile his own list on the economy, on his language and culture, on privileges, prejudice, on politics and sport, whatever. Everyone’s memory and experience are therefore his heritage, and that determines who he is. It is precisely in this diversity of heritage and the diversity of experience in one country’s people that the wonder of and also the challenge for South Africa lie.

If we experience these differences negatively, we shall not be able to build upon this wonder any further, nor will we be able to create co- operation. It will not help us to repeat the mistakes of the past. If we deviate from the principle of making room for one another, we will fall back into the quagmire of yesterday, with every child of South Africa claiming his heritage. Then this heritage will, as in the case of the prodigal son in biblical history, soon be reduced to tinsel in the short term and be to South Africa’s detriment.

Every one of us is the product of yesterday’s circumstances. Are all of us going to continue to fight for our own unilateral convictions, as in the past, or are we going to face the future in South Africa, the South Africa that we created for ourselves at the end of the last century, with new courage. It was at that point in the history of South Africa that the people of our country, regardless of their differences, created and utilised an opportunity for co-operation.

During the first few years we built soundly upon the unity of diversity, but over the past few years I have seen us moving increasingly further apart and understanding one another less, and that there is less tolerance. Unfortunately I have seen recently that the old habits are returning, thus posing an increasing threat to the new-found heritage of freedom and democracy. We have started falling into the pot-holes of yesterday’s discrimination and prejudices again. We frequently encounter the landmines of vengeance, retribution and intolerance, which negate the interests of groups of people.

This is a pity, because it could be so different. May our discussion here today contribute toward getting back on track the positive nation-building to which we aspire. Yesterday is past - it is history. We must write the future, and write it correctly. That is what the future expects of us.]

Mrs M L NGWENYA: Madam Speaker and hon members, it is right that we are celebrating a day that recognises what we South Africans share. We are truly a diverse nation and we are building a democratic society day by day, which has as its foundation tolerance and respect for diversity. Let us look at all of our traditions and customs with eyes and senses that are open to learning the best way we can.

Le ke letšatši la go ipshina le go keteka go gopola setšo sa rena gore bana le ditlogolo tša rena di tsebe bohlokwa bja dijo le dino tšeo lehono rena batswadi re paletšwego ke go ruta t šona ka lebaka la kgatelelo yeo re tšwago go yona.

A le a tseba gore rena ge re gola re be re eja re lahla? A le a tseba gore re gotš e re tseba gore tlhago e a ilelwa, e bile e a hlomphiwa? Ke ra gore selo se sengwe le se sengwe se be se na le nako ya sona. Go fa mohlala, go be go na le nako ya go sega bjang bja go rulela mengwako ya rena, go be go na le nako ya go sega legogwa, lefsielo, le tše dingwe.

Kgoši ya rena e be e ntšha lentšu ka matona a gagwe go botša setšhaba gore bjale ke nako ya go sega bjang, gomme batho ba tla phalala ba ya nageng, e le setšhaba sa kgoši yeo fela. Ge e le ba ka ntle bona ba tla ya go kgopela mošate gore ba hwetše tumelelo ya go sega bjang. Ke ka moo le bonago kua dinagamagaeng go na le mengwako e mebotse ya go rulelwa ka bjang. Ge go fihla nako ya dienywa tša tlhago, go swana le marula, basadi ba tsoga ka matšeke go ya go topa marula, ba a kgobela felo go tee go ya ka dikgoro tša bona, gomme ba phulele banna ba bona morula. Ge morula ola o bidile, bakgalabje ba tla kgobokana kgorong ya gabo bona le bahumagadi ba bona gomme ba hlwa ba enwa ba eja dijo tša setšo sa gabo bona. Bakgalabje ba rata bogobe ka nama ya kgogo ya segae yeo e nago le pherefere e tala.

Bommago rena ba apeela bana ba bona bogobe bja morula ge o sa le o mobose, ba re ke kgobolane. Gape ba o nwa bjalo ka senwamaphodi, o tle o ba hlatswe teng gore ba phele gabotse. Morula ke sehlare sa go lokiša thari ka lapeng. Gore go be le khutšo, thari ke e bohlokwa.

Ka nako ya mabilo, mahlatswa, mmupudu, ditoro, ditšhidi, dithetlwa, dikwele, go bala ke go hlaola, rena banenyane re be re sa hlwe re apea. Re be re apeela batswadi ba rena fela. Re be re phela ka dienywa tša tlhago. Re be re phadima o ka re re išwa fantising.

Leuba la re tsenela ka motse ka seo se bego se bitšwa betterment scheme ya

1. Nna ke be ke e bitša ``Worsement scheme’’, ka gore dijo tša rena di napile tša tšhaba, ra ganetšwa go namela dithaba tša gabo rena tša tlhago. Dithaba tšeo di ile tša kampelwa tša ba tša mmušo ola wa apartheid. Kgoši ge e be e bolela e be e swarwa, batho ba gagwe ba homotšwa ba re tuu! Bodidi bja tsena. Tlala ya tsena, gomme ra fetoga makgoba nageng ya gabo rena ya tswalo.

Re na le dijo tša rena tša setšo tša go swana le mafodi, marotse, maraka, ditloo, dinyebu, lewa, ditlhodi, lekokoro, mokhuša, go bala ke go lebala. [Legofsi.] Tša rena dijo di be di na le phepo e kgolo. Go be go apeiwa magobe ka marotse re re ke kgodu goba thophi. Ka dithotse tša arotse le magapu re be re di setla gomme re dire bogobe bjoo ba rego ke morobolo, ka se gaSekhukhune ba re ke sempheriane, African pudding ka Sejahlapi. Dithotse tša mafodi re be re šeba ka tšona ge re lapišitšwe ke nama le maswi. Maswi e be e le sentletšentletše. Re be re sa a bee ka setšidifatšing. Re be re efa dikolobe ge a kgahlile. [Legofsi.]

Go be go se na sešuana goba mohlologadi, ka gore botatago rena ba be ba re laela gore re ye go lema gabo semangmang gosasa ge re tsoga. Gomme re tla tšea dipeu ra leba gona. Bommago rena ba be ba sa re selo. Seo e be e le gore go se be le motho yo a tlago a robala ka tlala. Seo ke seo se bego se le bohlokwa setšhabeng, gomme re sa se hloka le bjale.

Go be go ba le letšatši le legolo leo ba rego ke ``re buile mašemong’’ ge go se na go bunwa. Ka leo letšatši bommago rena ba be ba apea dijo ka mehutahuta, ba ntšha bokgoni bja bona bja go apea dijo tša setšo. Re be re eya kgorong go ya go bona, go ja, le go thaba mmogo. Botatago rena ba be ba enwa morula, e sego wo wa go rekišwa wa lehono.

Makgarebjana re be re apara setšo sa gabo rena gomme re yo binela batswadi ba rena. Ke ka moo le bonago go be go se na mafetwa. [Legofsi.] Banenyana ba be ba nyalwa ka gore ke moo ba bonagalago gona, gomme batswadi ba be ba ba kganyoga fao. [Legofsi.].

Ge re etla go tlhompho ya mehlare, re gola re tseba gore re eya dikgonyeng, go robiwa mehlare ya go oma fela, e sego e meetsi. Ke ka fao re bego re sa ye kgonyeng re rwele dilepe. Re be re dira dikobi tša go oba mehlare ya go oma fela. Re be re hlompha mehlare bjalo ka ge re be re itlhompha. Dihlare tše dingwe tšeo batswadi ba ilego ba re botša gore re se ke ra di roba, re be re sa di robe, go etša mmilo, motšhidi le tše dingwe. Le ge re be re sa tsebe gore ke ka go reng, ka gore tlhompho e be e le gona, re be re hlompha batswadi ba rena. Le yona mehlare ya dikenywa re be re sa kgone le go oba, re tšhoga gore mohlomongwe re tla roba dikala tša dikenywa, ka gona re tle re di hloke ka ngwaga wo o latelago.

Ke fetša ka gore re ke re fiwe sebaka sa go boela setšong sa rena gore bana ba rena ba tle ba ipshine ka bophelo bjo bobose bja go hloka malwetši ao re a bonago gonabjale. A re rateng segagabo rena. Ga se nnete gore segagabo rena ke sa maemo a fase. Rena re swanetše gore re tšee segagabo rena re se emiše, re ikgantšhe ka sona, gobane se re dirile seo re lego sona lehono. Re bo Mme Lydia ba ponto le šeleng. Ga re tšhošwe ke selo. Re a leboga. [Legofsi.] (Translation of Pedi paragraphs follows)

[This is the day to rejoice and celebrate the remembrance of our heritage whereby our children and grandchildren will know the importance of the food and drinks that we as parents were previously disadvantaged to learn about. Are you aware that when we grew up we never went hungry? We ate and threw away. Are you aware that we grew up honouring and respecting nature? I mean, everything had its own time. For example, there were times for the cultivation of grass, for the roofing of our homes, for cultivating cane, for sweeping grass, etc.

The Chief ordered the indunas to give orders of the cultivation of the grass, and then people were granted permission to go and cultivate grass.

This is the reason why the huts in the rural areas look so beautiful with grass roofing. When harvest time arrives, for instance for fruit such as marula fruit, women will wake up early in the morning to go and pick marula fruit and gather it into their homes, and then brew wine for their husbands. Once the wine is ready, all the old men will come with their wives and gather to drink the marula wine. The old men would then prefer to eat porridge and chicken with green chillies.

Our mothers prepared porridge for their children made out of marula while it was still fine. This is called kgabolane. They also had marula as a drink in order to detox for good health. Marula is a medicine to generate birth. In oder to have peace at home child bearing is important.

During the period when all natural fruit were ripe, fruit such as mabilo, mahlatswa, mmupudu, ditoro, ditshidi, dithetlwa and dikwele, to mention but a few, we girls never cooked during that period; we only cooked for our parents. We survived on natural fruit. We were as healthy as well cared-for animals that usually go for cleansing.

Things took a turn for the worse when the betterment scheme of 1949 was introduced. I used to call it the ``worsement scheme’’ because we were deprived of our food; all of a sudden we were not allowed to climb our own natural mountains. All the mountains were delimitated by the apartheid government. When the Chief said something he was arrested and his tribe were threatened to keep quiet. Poverty gripped us, hunger came in, and we were enslaved in our own land of origin.

We have traditional food which we call marotse, maraka, ditloo, dinyebu, lewa, ditlhodi, lekokoro and mokhusa, to mention but a few. [Applause.] Our food was very nutritious. We used to cook porridge with pumpkin and call it kgodu or thopi. We used to crush pumpkin and watermelon seeds and cook porridge which is called morobolo, in the Sekhukhuni language it is called semphoriane, which is African pudding in English. We used to eat pumpkin seeds with porridge when we were tired of milk and meat. There used to be a lot of milk, we did not put it in the fridge but used to give it to pigs when it turned bad. [Applause.]

There were no orphans or widowers because our fathers used to tell us to go to plough in so-and-so’s field in the mornings. And we would take seeds and go there. Our mothers had no say in that. That was to prevent anyone from going hungry, which was the main thing in the community, and we still need that even today.

There used to be a big day which was called re buile masemong [we are back form the fields] after reaping. On that day our mothers would cook different kinds of food, show their ability to cook traditional food, and we would go to the kraal to watch, to eat and to rejoice. Our fathers used to drink marula beer - not the kind that is sold these days.

We girls used to wear our traditional clothes and go to sing for our parents; that is why there were no spinsters. [Applause.] Girls would get married, because that is where they were seen and their parents would take pride in them. [Applause.]

When it comes to valuing trees, we grew up knowing that they are used for firewood. Only dry trees were cut, and not soft trees. That is why we did not carry axes to go and fetch wood. We used to make tools for cutting trees only. We used to respect trees as much as we respected ourselves. We did not cut the other trees which our parents told us not to cut, for example mmilo, moshidi and others. Even though we did not know the reason for it, because we had respect we used to respect our parents. We could not cut fruit trees for fear of cutting fruit-bearing branches, which would have meant that we could not have the fruit the following year.

In conclusion, we should be given an opportunity to go back to our traditional ways so that our children can enjoy a life free of diseases that we see today. Let us love our traditions. It is not true that our traditional lives are of a lower class. We must uplift our tradition and be proud of it because it has made us what we are today. We are the Lydias of high class. We are not afraid of anything. Thank you.]

S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I at this point take the opportunity to thank all the hon MPs that phoned me and sent me SMS messages and flowers, fruit and sweets during my illness. I had a major operation of a total knee replacement and my heritage was a plastic and metal heritage of the knee. Thank you very much all of you for your kind thoughts and prayers. I am back now and I am on the route of exposing my loud voice again.

As I did last year, I shall reiterate the rich heritage that we South Africans encapsulate. Its content marks the beginning of our people, our nation, all around us. Everything we see, all that exists has a story of its origin, beginning and inheritance - a heritage that the MF celebrates with all South Africa.

Last year we took to commemorating our national emblems and this year the theme is to celebrate our national symbols and institutions. Our flag, national bird, national fish, national flower, anthem, national animal, coat of arms and national tree all symbolise our heritage. It is the duty of all South Africans to preserve these national symbols in respect of our heritage.

The struggle of our people forms a part of this heritage too, as blood that seeped into our soil for hundreds of years. Today stand erected museums that tell the story of our people. This allows our people to be reminded of their heritage. We have fought together and we have entered a new generation that sees us as one people, not divided by race, culture or creed. We are one.

The MF expresses the need to maintain this unity, the need to instil this unity from the callow ages of our youth to the reformation in thought of our elderly. The MF calls upon all not to look back and attempt the tactics of the past regime to divide our society. Look forward to a better tomorrow as one. Let us celebrate our heritage that, though diverse in content, together formulates a masterpiece. Our main heritage is our beloved, beautiful South Africa.

Mr C AUCAMP: Hon Deputy Speaker, with the slogan ``Unity in Diversity’’ we are touching the key to success or failure in South Africa. It is this concept that will determine in the long run whether South Africa is and will really be the miracle so often spoken about. But there is one condition; unity in diversity is only the one side of the coin. South Africans, despite their different cultures, languages and beliefs must act together and stand together as a country. They must address together in unity the enormous problems and challenges facing all of us together. To that goal the AEB is fully committed.

But, the flip side of the coin is diversity in unity; fully recognising and fully accommodating our rich diversity and celebrating this diversity not as a threat, but as an asset, as the oxygen for security, as the gift of belonging. Therefore, I am going to switch to overdrive, meaning I will address you further in my mother tongue.

Die sleutel tot sukses van die geheel is afhanklik van die respek vir die dele. Die eenheid in die leuse op die landswapen is afhanklik van die respek vir die verskeidenheid, wat ook daarin vervat is. Die boustene vir ‘n Suid-Afrika waarin al sy kinders veilig en geborge kan wees, lê in die eerbied vir dít wat vir elke gemeenskap kosbaar is as die erwe van ons vaad’re.

In dié opsig is ek bevrees dat ons dikwels lippediens bewys aan die ryke kaleidoskoop van die erfenis van al ons mense. Hier is net enkele voorbeelde. Die lank beloofde artikel 185-wet het uiteindelik ná ses jaar die lig gesien. Gaan ons nog ses jaar wag vir die implementering daarvan? Die gedagte was dan juis dat die kommissie vir die regte van gemeenskappe op Erfenisdag 2002 die lig sou sien. Die voortdurende afkraak van taal as synde ‘n struikelblok vir toelating tot ons tersiêre inrigtings voorspel niks goeds vir die respek vir die tale van ons land nie. Nog ‘n voorbeeld is die samesmelting van universiteite van bo af, rondgeskuif soos pionne op ‘n skaakbord, sonder inagneming van die taal, etos en karakter van elke inrigting. Vat maar net ‘n raai wie is die skaakmeester.

Daar was ‘n blitzkrieg van ondeurdagte naamsveranderinge in die Limpopoprovinsie. Dit is asof die totale geskiedenis van die deel van die bevolking waaraan ek behoort met ‘n enkele pennestreep uitgewis moet word. Dit is ironies dat net die dorp wat na die duiwel vernoem is sy naam kon behou. Daar is skoolleerplanne waarin die geskiedenis herskryf word volgens een resep, waarin elke unieke waardesisteem op die altaar van die nuwe orde geoffer word. Dit is alles dinge wat my as lojale, toegewyde, patriotiese Suid-Afrikaner dikwels tog laat vra: Hoort ek regtig nog hier?

Die beskerming van die ryke verskeidenheid van ons veelgefasetteerfenis mag nie in museums opgesluit lê om nou en dan bekyk te word nie. Dit moet leef in ons harte, in ons strate, elke dag. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The key to the success of the whole is dependent on the respect for its parts. The unity referred to in the slogan of our coat of arms depends on the respect for the diversity, which is also contained in it. The building blocks for a South Africa in which all its children can be safe and secure lie in respect for what is valuable in each community as the legacy from their forefathers.

In this respect, I fear that we often pay lip service to the rich kaleidoscope of the heritage of all our people. Here are just a few examples. The long promised section 185 legislation has eventually seen the light after six years. Will we have to wait another six years for its implementation? The idea was precisely for the Commission for the Rights of Communities to be established on Heritage Day 2002. The continual discrediting of language as an obstacle to admission to tertiary institutions does not bode well for respect for the languages of our country. Another example is the top-down merging of universities, moved around like pawns on a chessboard, without consideration for the language, ethos and character of each institution. Just take a guess at who the chessmaster is.

There was a blitzkrieg of ill-considered name changes in the Limpopo province. It is as though the entire history of that part of the population that I belong to has to completely be wiped out by the single stroke of a pen. It is ironic that only the town that was named after the devil could retain its name. There are school syllabi in which the history is rewritten according to one recipe, in which each unique value system is sacrificed on the altar of the new order. These are all things that often make me ask as a loyal, committed, patriotic South African: Do I really still belong here?

The protection of the rich diversity of our multifaceted heritage cannot be locked away in a museum to be viewed occasionally. It must live in our hearts, in our streets, every day.]

Let us not celebrate our diversity once a year on Heritage Day, but throughout the year in our daily conduct, in our legislation, in our respect for what is precious to every community, and maybe the miracle of South Africa will become a sustainable reality for all its peoples.

Mr C M LOWE: Madam Speaker, shortly before he died, French President Francois Mitterand was asked how he thought history would judge him. ``It all depends on who is writing it’’, he replied. And a few years earlier, when he stood at this very podium as the first foreign head of state to address our democratic Parliament, he spoke passionately of the need to speak the truth.

As we celebrate our South African heritage and acknowledge the past, let us reflect on Mitterand’s wise observations and ensure that our history is written in the name of all South Africans and that our past, however terrible and traumatic, human and heroic, is an inclusive account of our story as a nation and our place in the world.

So what is our story? Well it is certainly not the skewed history I was taught up to matric - where die donderse Engelse'' and the Zulu heathens’’ were the perennial baddies - any more than the sanitised records of life in the ANC camps, devoid of accounts of human rights abuse and of torture.

And while it is true that there was a liberal slide away in the late seventies and the eighties, as so vividly portrayed by Jill Wentzel in her book, it is just as true that for every slide away, other liberals remained committed to the cause and continued the struggle for democracy and freedom. While it is a fact that the TRC process uncovered countless chilling incidents of gross human rights abuses committed by the apartheid state, it is just as true that more than just a few atrocities were carried out by those on the side of the liberation struggle.

In his book Last Days in Cloud Cuckooland, a fascinating account of the final gasps of white power on the continent, from the flight of the Belgian refugees from the Congo in 1960 to the first years of Nelson Mandela’s presidency, Graham Boyton shows the complexity and ambiguity of the role of the whites in Africa, observing that they were never a unified gang of cold- hearted supremacists any more than the blacks in Africa have been a saintly group of idealists and altruists.

Such is the reality of our heritage, far more complex and many shades of grey rather than the starkness and simplicity of black and white. But it is a reality that we must accept and a challenge we must grasp if we are to become a winning nation. For how can we ever have a future if we fail to honestly acknowledge our collective past?

Just as the rock art on our new coat of arms fosters a sense of dignity and nationhood which, in the words of President Mbeki, evokes our distant past, our living present and our future, so our heritage as a people must tell the entire story and include all the players.

The point is this, when the tributes and edifices of Freedom Park are unveiled in 2004 will they reflect all of our struggles, all of our histories and all of our heritages, or will they simply portray one struggle and acknowledge individuals therein based on the political cause that they supported?

Steve Biko is rightly praised for the inclusiveness of his struggle for black consciousness and ultimately South African consciousness. We too must become more inclusive in our consciousness as a nation. We cannot live in a country of two peoples, divided forever by where our forefathers came from, what languages we speak, what religions we practise and what ideology we support.

Why does the Apartheid Museum in Johannesburg pay lip service to the monumental work of Helen Suzman? Why is the courageous role of the late Molly Blackburn not fully told and when will we read of the heroic legal defence work of the late Harry Pitman? We are all one, and I, along with every one of the hon members, choose to be here, in the country that gave us birth and which we all love, as much of an African as the President. That story needs to be told as well. [Applause.]

Mr B W DHLAMINI: Madam Speaker, South Africa’s Heritage Day, 24 September, falls within the heritage month, where the emphasis is on our national flag, coat of arms, national anthem, national orders and National Assembly, as part of the theme of celebrating our national symbols and institutions. It is my understanding that this theme was chosen to popularise our national symbols and to inform the public of their significant meaning. Chief amongst these meanings would have to be national unity and reconciliation.

The IFP believes that our national symbols must build bridges between the past and the future of this great country. South Africa consist of many rich diverse cultures and traditions. In the past this diversity was used to divide us and to keep us apart, but the new South Africa demands that we embrace our diversity in order to unite us, not to unite in the sense that we must forgo our individuality or individual cultures and traditions in the interest of one national identity, but unite in the sense that we must accept and respect one another and show proper respect for different cultures.

On 24 September various activities will take place around South Africa to celebrate Heritage Day. It is my sincere hope that these activities will be used as an opportunity for South Africans to come together and to celebrate our diversity by uniting across boundaries and to embrace our new nation. The IFP believes that while all people of South Africa must play a role on Heritage Day to celebrate our unity in diversity, the contributions of the youth of our country should be singled out. It is the youth that will provide the leadership of tomorrow and it is the youth that must take forward the great strides we have made in uniting and reconciling past differences and divisions. This process of fostering unity and respect across cultural lines is by no means at an end and should, in fact, be deepened and strengthened by the actions of the youth.

The leader of the IFP, Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi MP, highlighted the role of youth at a recent IFP Youth Brigade conference, when he warned against the potential development of totalitarianism in South Africa and where he stated:

It will be the task of a new generation to strengthen civil society and to ensure that enough power is spread to the building blocks of our society, its business, its universities and its nongovernmental institutions, to ensure that no single source of power may ever control our country, its free thinking and its plural expression of its will.

To this I will respectfully add that the youth has a major role to play in our continuing development as a country of many riches and diverse cultures and traditions; a country in which diversity is respected and honoured to such an extent that unity is created and maintained across what may have seemed insurmountable barriers just a few years ago. I also call upon all young people in South Africa, black, white, Indian and coloured, to be part of these celebrations, because they are not meant for one cultural or race group. It is meant for all South Africans, so that we bridge the gaps that were created by apartheid. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF ARTS, CULTURE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: Madam Speaker, the hon members who have spoken here today all urge us to celebrate our heritage together as South Africans and achieve unity in diversity.

I want to share with this House an extract of our acclaimed poet, a former member of this House, Dr Mongane Wally Serote’s poem Come and Hope With Me and this is what it says:

The seed of hope is buried deep it lies in the eye and ear in the sullen and silent face it lies deep in time it awaits you with large and fat and tall stories it awaits you to climb the steep and slope this hope awaits you to hope come and hope with me. I believe that this poem speaks of the wonderful future we want to carve for our children despite the arduous journey. We speak with a clear voice about our painful past and we say, never again.

Today we stand together as brothers and sisters having woven together a colourful tapestry of our strengths; for example, our resilience, tenacity, resoluteness, forgiveness and care for each other and our determination to build a democratic, nonracial and nonsexist society. The whole world has seen it and this tapestry has become the tallest symbol of hope for countries at war with each other and with themselves. Our stories and our songs are known the world over.

We need to celebrate not only what we have gone through since 1994 and that we emerged victorious today. We have a responsibility to reclaim the tangible and intangible threads of our shared colourful past and together constantly to weave the future we dream of.

This month all Government departments, civil society, business parastatals, schools and colleges are making plans for celebrating heritage day and raising awareness about its importance. Let us make this a successful affirmation of our South Africanness. The national event of Heritage Day is taking place at Mary Fitzgerald Square in Johannesburg, on 24 September. All provinces will also be holding celebrations within this year’s theme of national symbols on our Heritage Day. There will be a lot of activities for young and old.

This year’s theme for Heritage Day has been chosen to celebrate the symbols that define us, the symbols which tell the world who we are and where we come from - our flag, our national anthem, our coat of arms and our national institutions. We have united under popular events through our symbols. We have volunteered to have our flag painted even on our faces. These symbols have become us. One is confident that our coat of arms is indeed going to enjoy the same affection as the flag does. Heritage Day is also an important day to educate the people about our value system emanating from our Constitution.

At the very core of our being as South Africans reverberates an amazing sense of responsibility for this beautiful country and all it embodies. Our heritage cannot be simply defined as cultural or natural, because our biophysical environment shapes us and we shape it. We have shaped our history and it has also shaped us. Through this close knit web of interaction has emerged what the global world can affectionately call South African.

Our future is intact in our heritage. St Lucia stands as an important heritage site not only because of its biodiversity, but also because of the indigenous knowledge associated with the site symbolised by the fishing kraals of Sodwana. The coelacanth, termed ``extinct’’, resurfaced telling the world that our heritage is, indeed, intact. The great invincible uKhahlamba, the Drakensberg mountains, have from times afar sheltered our priceless artistic masterpieces - our rock paintings. Our cradle of humankind at Sterkfontein has told the world time and again that the first human umbilical cord was buried in our part of the world.

Our artistic prowess and finesse cannot be disputed when one sees the Mapungubwe rhino. When the world approved some of these sites as world class, it was indeed an affirmation of the exceptional wealth that these majestic landscapes hold. We all have a challenge to make these treasures enrich our people.

One of the milestones we reached in reclaiming our dignity was indeed the burial of Sarah Bartman. Once more I thank everyone, including the people of Khoi-San descent who collectively made this event a successful one.

We saw through the World Summit how we can achieve the best if we push ourselves to the extreme of our capabilities. We opened the doors of creativity to the world by showcasing beautiful things. Our artwork, which ultimately displayed the extravagance and daring nature of our spirit, creativity and daringness to do something different, amazed our visitors and ourselves.

We are constantly discovering who we are. We splashed our colour through our beadwork and cloths, our carvings, grasses, song and dance. We showed our visitors that our local resources made music. It is not only the artists and students who put up the exhibition together who benefited. Ubuntu Village massaged our souls. In money terms - of course, the crafters made a coin. I can say here today that crafters themselves made close to R2 million in those ten days.

This, gives us confidence that we are on the right path to sustainable development. We were able to usher our crafts, which have been downgraded and given peripheral status, into the centre of the stage.

We made a case for our heritage of indigenous knowledge at the World Summit. Discussions on indigenous knowledge systems were very vibrant; and I agree with MmaLydia that, in fact, we have reached indigenous knowledge in this country.

What stood out in the debates was that we need to acknowledge the positive role that our heritage can play in sustainable development. The debates on indigenous knowledge systems touched on the issues of poverty, in the face of loads of wisdom packaged away having been termed inferior and backward, as MmaLydia was saying.

Our indigenous technologies, knowledge of plants, the significance of our crafts and the complex mathematical understandings in them give us more energy to explore ways of utilising them in modern times. And I do agree with hon Anna Van Wyk when she says that it is time that we became aware of the importance of heritage even in monetary terms.

The challenge to make tangible that of our heritage which is intangible such as our freedom, will be met by Freedom Park. The present progress made on this project gives us hope that our cries and joys for freedom will be seen and heard. I want to assure all members that Freedom Park will reflect the true history of this country.

Freedom Park will acknowledge South Africa’s true history and contribution to humanity. Freedom Park will affirm our national identities and values which are embedded in the advent of democracy. It will try to tell a more accurate and inclusive story of our past. The story will also remind us of the pain and sorrow that marked our past. It will remind us that freedom was not an easy path to walk towards. Through this Freedom Park will be a constant reminder for us to jealously guard our freedom.

On its completion Freedom Park will encompass a museum, a monument and a garden of remembrance. It will also be accessible to all South Africans. Great South Africans whose selfless contributions have enabled us to achieve freedom and dignity for all will be celebrated and their honour made immortal - a prize reserved for our greatest. Ordinary men and women whose contributions in diverse fields have contributed to South Africa’s progress will also be honoured.

When President Mbeki officially launched Freedom Park this year, he said that healing and genuine reconciliation will only come about when the entire story of South Africa is told. That story belongs to all of us. It is a story which ends well with freedom. We have the freedom to tell this story now. It is a story which will help heal the divisions of the past and work towards reconciliation and nation-building.

Freedom Park’s conceptual framework states that Freedom Park has the potential to interpret and present a powerful portrait of a nation in the making. Our future leaders are still in the making and Freedom Park intends playing an important role in educating our youth. This Freedom Park will do, by forging strong partnerships with education departments and supportive institutions to instill and enhance positive attitudes and morality through its celebration of great South Africans.

Finally, I want to acknowledge the meaningful and fruitful partnerships that have been formed at governmental level with trade unions, industry, education, environment and tourism, foreign affairs and the Presidency, of course, in making Freedom Day the success that it will be.

Let me say to all of us that hope awaits us, as Mongane Wally Serote has said. Let us all work hard to build a just and caring society. Let us enjoy our heritage and let it help us define nationhood and a South African aesthetic. And to the hon Mr Aucamp, keep hoping, let us work together, and do not feel threatened. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

             CONSTITUTIONALITY OF BILLS PASSED IN HOUSE.

                              (Ruling) The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, during the  debate on the presidential pardons on 14 August, the hon Ms  Smuts  in  her  speech with reference to reparations said, and I quote:

It is the Government that is in dereliction of its duty to put a proposal before us, but it is we who drafted and passed the law in a time when MPs across party lines legislated strictly under the Constitution.

I understood the quoted remark to contain the inference that since that time members have made laws that do not strictly observe the Constitution. This, despite the fact that members have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution.

After the hon member, at my request, clarified her remark I indicated that I would look at the Hansard and consider the matter further. I have given the matter careful consideration, and regard this matter as touching upon important issues of which the House should take note. We must accept that the constitutionality of provisions in a Bill introduced in Parliament may be in doubt and that members may hold different views on whether particular provisions are strictly constitutional. It is, indeed, their duty to subject the Bills that come before them to that kind of scrutiny.

There have been instances where the constitutionality of a Bill was the subject of intense debate in this House. Ultimately, in such cases it comes down to a matter of interpretation of the Constitution and it is only the courts that can make a finding on the matter. To the extent that the hon Ms Smuts was referring to such instances, her remark can be accepted.

I would, however, caution members against questioning the integrity of the law-making process in Parliament on the basis of strongly held convictions in a particular case. Members should reflect on the fact that we all have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution, and have taken an oath that we will do so. [Interjections.] There is no need for any of those comments.

As members, we should indeed be foremost champions of the Constitution. It must, therefore, be accepted that in carrying out their law-making functions members will and must be actively committed to ensuring that, to the best of their knowledge, Bills passed comply fully and strictly with the Constitution. That is the responsibility of each member at all times. As long as they scrupulously carry out that responsibility, their good faith should not be questioned in cases where differences of opinion arise.

                  INTERCEPTION AND MONITORING BILL

                  (Consideration of Report thereon)

There was no debate. Report adopted.

REGULATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS AND PROVISION OF COMMUNICATION- RELATED INFORMATION BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Deputy Chair, colleagues, comrades and friends, as a starting point to this debate I would like briefly to refer to the circumstances that led to the need for the promotion of the Bill that lies before the House today.

The Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act, 1992, regulates the interception and monitoring of certain communications and conversations. In exceptional circumstances it provides for the interception of postal articles and communications and for the monitoring of conversations or communications.

However, since that Act came into operation on 1 February 1993, there have been substantial technological advances in respect of telecommunications, such as cellular, satellite and computer communications. This has also taken place alongside considerable legal developments throughout the world regarding the interception and monitoring of communications. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that sophisticated telecommunications mechanisms are increasingly being utilised in the commission of organised crime in this country and countries abroad.

The SA Law Commission, as part of its review of security legislation, investigated the Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act of 1992 some time ago. The Interception and Monitoring Bill, 2001, as originally introduced into Parliament, emanated from this SA Law Commission report on that investigation. The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered that Bill and the submissions that it received in respect of that Bill, presented the version that lies before the House today, namely the Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-related Information Bill.

The principal object of this Bill is to regulate the interception of communications, the monitoring of signals and radio frequency spectrums and the provision of communication-related information. Although I do not intend to discuss or give a detailed explanation of all the provisions of the Bill, I think that it is important to highlight some of the more important clauses.

Chapter 2 contains two general prohibitions. Firstly, no person may intentionally intercept or attempt to intercept, at any place in the Republic, any communication in the course of its occurrence or its transmission. Secondly, no telecommunications service provider may intentionally provide or attempt to provide any communication-related information to any person other than the customer of the telecommunications service provider. Communication-related information is information that, inter alia, identifies the origin, destination, termination and duration of an indirect communication generated or received by a customer of a telecommunications service provider. An example of communication-related information would be if it is revealed that I have, on my cellphone, dialled Miss X from Cape Town International Airport and spoken to her for 13 minutes.

It is important to point out that certain exceptions to those two general prohibitions are created. These exceptions include the interception of communications authorised by an interception direction issued under the Bill, the interception of communications by a party to a communication or with the consent of a party to a communication, and the interception of communications to prevent serious bodily harm.

Chapter 3 deals with bringing applications for and issuing of directions in terms of the Bill. Four kinds of directions may be issued in terms of the Bill, namely, the directions authorising the interception of communications; directions authorising the provision of communication- related information as soon as it becomes available - the Bill defines this kind of information as real-time communication-related information''; directions authorising the provision of communication-related information stored by a service provider, that is the so-called archived communication-related information’’; and lastly, directions directing decryption key holders to disclose decryption keys or to provide decryption assistance in respect of encrypted information.

Chapter 3 also makes provision for issuing of entry warrants, authorising entry upon premises for purposes of intercepting postal articles or communications, installing and maintaining interception devices and removing interception devices. In this regard it must be noted that only senior members of the law-enforcement agencies may apply for directions or warrants. Only a judge designated by the Minister may issue directions and warrants under this legislation, but directions for archived communication- related information may also be issued by any judge or magistrate.

The reason for this exception is that archived communication-related information can already be obtained in terms of other existing laws, for example, section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977.

Strict criteria must be complied with before any direction or entry warrant may be issued under this Bill. For example, directions authorising the interception of communications or the provision of real-time communication- related information may only be issued if the judge is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that, firstly, the matter involves the commission of a serious offence or, secondly, the information relates to a threat to the public health or safety, national security or compelling national economic interests of the Republic or, thirdly, the information relates to property that is or could probably be an instrumentality of a serious offence, or is or could probably be the proceeds of unlawful activities.

Although the general rule is that all applications, directions and entry warrants must be in writing, provision is made for making oral applications and issuing oral directions and entry warrants if it is not reasonably practicable, having regard to the urgency of the case or the existence of exceptional circumstances, to make written application and to issue a written direction or entry warrant.

Chapter 5 makes it compulsory that all telecommunications services must have an interception capability. Storage of communication-related information by telecommunications service providers is also made compulsory. Telecommunications service providers must, at their own cost, acquire the necessary facilities and devices to enable the interception of indirect communications, ie communications transmitted over a telecommunications system, and the storage of communication-related information.

Certain other costs that telecommunications service providers may incur under the provisions of the Bill must be borne by them. However, compensation is payable to postal service providers, telecommunications service providers and decryption key holders for certain forms of assistance given by them to the law-enforcement officers executing directions.

In terms of Chapter 6, the Minister of Intelligence must, at state expense, establish one or more centres, to be known as interception centres, for the interception of communications in terms of this Act and also equip, operate and maintain such interception centres and acquire, install and maintain connections between telecommunications systems and interception centres.

Provision is also made for the establishment of an Office for Interception Centres. The director of this office will, amongst other things, manage and exercise administrative control over these centres. Provision is further made for the establishment of an Internet Service Providers Assistance Fund. The purpose of this fund is to assist small Internet service providers who are not financially in a position to comply with the requirement that certain facilities and devices must, at own cost, be acquired by telecommunication service providers. In terms of Chapter 7, telecommunications service providers are required to obtain and keep certain information in respect of their customers, cellular phones and SIM cards. It also contains a general obligation to report the loss, theft or destruction of cellular phones or SIM cards. Chapter 8 contains general prohibitions and exceptions to this. Provision is, for example, made for the declaration of certain instruments, devices or equipment, the design of which renders them primarily useful for the purpose of the interception of communications, to be listed equipment. The manufacturing, possession and advertising of such equipment is specifically prohibited. However, certain exemptions in respect of those prohibitions are created. In Chapter 9 offences are created and penalties for such offences are prescribed. As pointed out in the Memorandum on the Objects of the Bill, some of those provisions relate to the following: the unlawful interception of communications; the unlawful provision of communication-related information; failure to give a satisfactory account of provision of a cellular phone or a SIM card; the absence of reasonable cause for believing that a cellular phone or SIM card is properly acquired; the unlawful acts in respect of telecommunication and other equipment, and the failure to report the loss, theft or destruction of a cellular phone or SIM card.

Provision is made for revoking a licence to provide a telecommunications service in the case of a second or subsequent conviction of a service provider of certain offences created in this Bill.

The Bill has been widely criticised in the media and in some submissions made to the portfolio committee. The main grounds of the criticism are, firstly, that this legislation will infringe on the individual’s right to privacy as contained in the Bill of Rights and, secondly, that the division of costs between the state and telecommunications service providers is unfair.

I am convinced that sufficient safeguards have been built into the Bill to ensure that we fulfil the duty incumbent on the state to combat crime. We at the same time will avoid unjustifiable intrusion into any person’s right to privacy. As far as the cost issue is concerned, I know that the portfolio committee has conducted thorough research in this regard and I understand that in this issue the matter was carefully dealt with and scrutinised. The modern trend is similar to the path we have chosen in many foreign jurisdictions. I also believe - and this is very important - that the Bill will provide an important mechanism in Government’s fight against crime, especially organised crime.

Finally, I would like to make use of this opportunity to thank the chairperson of the portfolio committee, the hon Johnny de Lange, and the members of that committee, for their hard work and the consideration that they have put into this legislation. I am of the opinion that the high standard that this committee has set for itself in its approach to and processing of legislation in general is once again reflected in the manner in which they dealt with this Bill. I would also like to thank the officials from our department who have assisted me with this legislation and in following the course of this legislation through the committee process, and for their guidance and briefings that they have given as the Bill has progressed.

Dr J T DELPORT: Mnr die Voorsitter, die DP en daarmee ook die DA ondersteun hierdie wetgewing. Aanvanklik het daar sekere probleme in die wetgewing bestaan wat gelei het tot ernstige twyfel oor die toepaslikheid en die noodsaaklikheid om dit te aanvaar. Die meeste van dié besware is mettertyd uit die weg geruim en ek wil die voorsitter, adv De Lange, bedank. Ek mis sy teenwoordigheid hier. Daar is seker ‘n rede daarvoor. Ek hoop nie dit is omdat hy nou bedenkinge oor dié wetsontwerp het nie. Hy is natuurlik iemand wat ‘n goeie debat verwelkom en ons werk lekker saam totdat hy op sekere punte steekser as die steekste muil raak en dan kan ons maar net sê: Ons verskil. Ons gaan dan nêrens kom nie.

Ek wil ‘n paar algemene opmerkings maak en daarom gaan ek met ‘n baie algemene storietjie begin. Ek het grootgeword in die dae van die plaastelefone en plaaslyne. Destyds het die tantes, in plaas van Loerbroer te kyk, ingeluister op die plaaslyne. Ons het uitgevind dat die enigste manier om ou tant Anna te kry om nie in te luister nie, was om iets te sê soos: Hoor hier, het jy gehoor tant Anna vry nou so na ou Vuiljannie. [Gelag.] Dan het sy die foon neergesit of gesê: Jy lieg dit! [Gelag.]

Die eerste algemene beginsel uit hierdie storietjie is die reg op privaatheid. In hierdie wetgewing word dit besonder beskerm. Alle afluistery is uit. Alle meeluistering, posonderskepping en opvang word verbied. Dit is ‘n misdaad om dit te doen. Tant Anna mag nie meer op die plaaslyn inluister nie. Die reg op privaatheid staan dus baie sterk voorop in dié wetgewing. Daar is uitsonderings. Die drie basiese uitsonderings is: As ek self ‘n party is, of met my toestemming, kan iemand opvang wat my telefoongesprek is. Dit is ‘n innoverende stap. Tweedens is daar sekere noodsituasies en derdens is daar die gemagtigde meeluistering deur die agentskappe wat wet en orde moet handhaaf.

Ons is tevrede dat ons baie streng beheer hieroor kry. Die wetstoepassingsagentskappe moet skriftelik aansoek doen en hulle moet ‘n volledige uiteensetting gee van die redes. Hulle doen aansoek by ‘n aangewese regter wat vir dié doel afgesonder word. Hulle moet aantoon dat effektiewe stappe nie andersins moontlik is nie, want alle ander maatreëls is al gevolg en het gefaal. Dit is beperk tot ernstige misdade, veral georganiseerde misdaad.

Verder is daar voorgeskrewe rapportering en toesighouding deur die parlementêre komitee vir intelligensie. Daar is goeie beheer. Nou wil ek net kom by die algemene effek en sekere dinge waaroor ons steeds verskil.

Die belangrikste innovering is ten opsigte van selfone, e-pos en die moderne manier van kommunikasie. Dit is ‘n gesofistikeerde stelsel wat baie gesofistikeerde onderskeppingsinstrumente benodig. Dit is baie duur apparate. Die DA se uitgangspunt is: Die staat kry uit sekere bronne geld. Daarmee moet die staat die land regeer en bestuur. Dit is die staat se verantwoordelikheid om hierdie instrumente aan te stel, om dít wat nodig is om misdaad te bekamp, beskikbaar te stel.

Dié wetgewing maak egter voorsiening daarvoor dat dit die diensverskaffers is wat die nodige apparatuur moet beskikbaar stel. Die lyn na die onderskeppingsentrum word op staatsonkoste geïnstalleer. Ons meen dat die staat ook vir die eerste stap moet betaal, naamlik die herleiding van die boodskap.

Ons vereis ook dat die inligting ook gestoor moet word vir drie jaar. Dit is baie goed om dit te hê. Die vraag is egter of die koste wat dit vir die land inhou, so iets werklik regverdig. Dit is ‘n vraag waaroor ons ernstig twyfel.

Derdens meen ons daar is onnodige papierwerk en daar moet selfs rekords by voorafbetaalde selfone gehou word. Dit is goed dat dit gehou word ter wille van toegang tot die rekords. Die vraag is egter of die koste werklik die voordeel uitbalanseer. Ons het ‘n probleem met die terugwerkendheid op bestaande lisensies. ‘n Saak wat lisensiehouers maar self moet uitklaar, is tot watter mate hulle as bestaande lisensiehouers deur wetgewing verplig kan word om hierdie instrumente aan te bring.

Ek wil nou in die algemeen maan tot omsigtigheid. ‘n Onlangse ervaring - en ek is jammer om dit te moet ophaal - toe ‘n Minister met groot stelligheid aangekondig het dat prominente persone besig is met ‘n sameswering teen die President, laat ‘n mens met ‘n gevoel van sinisme. Dit het kort daarna geblyk dat dit onjuis was. As so ‘n belangrike saak met soveel stelligheid aangekondig kon word, wat van die arme gewone burger wat blootgestel word aan daardie tipe agterdog? Ons gee van die gesofistikeerdste apparatuur aan ons polisie en ons wetstoepassers. Dit moet gebruik word om misdadigers aan die kaak te stel en ons versoek is: Gebruik dit om misdadigers aan die man te bring en nie vir politieke doeleindes nie.

Ek kon nooit presies die bedrag bepaal nie, maar dit is seker by ‘n miljard rand wat uit die ekonomie gesuig gaan word om hierdie vermoë te skep, enersyds aan die kant van die staat en andersyds aan die kant van die verbruikers. Niks hiervan gaan die veiligheid van die gewone ou op straat werklik raak nie. Dit gaan nie ons arme dogtertjies wat gruwelik vermink word, beskerm nie. Dit gaan nie ons plaasmoorde verminder nie. Dit gaan nie die verkragtingslagoffers, die arme vrouens wat willoos verkrag word, help nie. Ek sê nie hierdie wetgewing is onnodig nie.

Ons moet egter nie die een ding doen en die ander nalaat nie. Ons publiek roep uit daar buite: Vang die misdadigers!'' Met net so 'n luide stem word gevra:Gee ook vir ons veiligheid in ons daaglikse bestaan, waar dit nie meer veilig is om in my motor te ry nie, want ek kan beroof word of my motor kan gekaap word’’. Ons moet die een doen en dan kos dit ‘n miljard rand om dit wel te doen. Ons moet ook nie huiwer om ‘n miljard rand te bestee aan die veiligheid van ons mense op straat, die veiligheid van ons mense in hulle huise, en ons vroue en kinders nie. Suid-Afrika vra dit van ons. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr J T DELPORT: Mr Chairperson, the DP as well as the DA support this legislation. At the outset there were certain problems in the legislation that led to serious doubt regarding the enforceability and the necessity of adopting it. Most of these objections were resolved over time and I would like to thank the Chairperson, Adv De Lange. I miss his presence here. There is probably a reason for that. I hope it is not because he now has qualms regarding this legislation. He is someone, of course who welcomes a good debate and we work well together, that is until he becomes more stubborn than the most stubborn mule on certain points and then we can only say: We disagree. Then we are not going to get anywhere.

I would like to make a few general comments and for that reason I am going to start with a very general little story. I grew up in the days of farm telephones and farm lines. In those days, instead of watching Big Brother, the old ladies listened in on the farm lines. We figured out that the only way to get old Aunt Anna not to listen in was to say something like: Listen here, have you heard that Aunt Anna is now making eyes at old Dirty Jannie. [Laughter.] Then she would put the phone down or say: You are lying! [Laughter.]

The first general principle of this little story is the right to privacy. In this legislation it is especially protected. All eavesdropping is out. All bugging, interception of post and recording is prohibited. It is a crime to do so. Aunt Anna is no longer allowed to listen in on the farm line. The right to privacy is therefore very strongly supported in this legislation. There are exceptions. The three basic exceptions are: If I myself am a party, or with my permission, then someone may record my telephone conversation - this is an innovative step; secondly there are certain emergency situations; and thirdly, there is the authorised bugging by agencies that have to maintain law and order.

We are satisfied that we are getting very strict control over this. The law enforcement agencies have to put requests to do this in writing and they have to present a complete exposition of the reasons. They apply for this from an appointed judge who has been appointed for this purpose. They have to prove that effective steps are not possible otherwise, because all other measures had been taken and failed. It is limited to serious crimes, especially organised crime.

Furthermore there is prescribed reporting and supervision by the Parliamentary Committee for Intelligence. There is good control. Now I only want to get to the general effect and certain things about which we still disagree.

The most important innovation concerns cellphones, e-mail and the modern way of communicating. It is a sophisticated system that needs many sophisticated interception equipment. This is very expensive apparatus. The DA’s point of departure is: The state receives money from certain sources. With that the state must govern and manage the country. It is the state’s responsibility to acquire these instruments, to make available what is necessary in order to curb crime.

This legislation, however, provides that it is the service providers that have to make the necessary apparatus available. The line to the interception centre is installed at state expense. We think that the state should also pay for the first step, namely the redirecting of the message.

We also require that the information must be stored for three years. It is very good to have it. The question, however, is whether the costs this means for the country really justify something like this. It is a question about which we have serious doubts.

Thirdly we believe that there is unnecessary paperwork, and records even have to be kept for pre-paid cellphones. It is good that this is being kept for the sake of access to the records. The question is, however, whether the cost is truly even with the advantage. We have a problem with the retrospective effect on existing licenses. A matter that licence holders have to clear up for themselves, is to what extent they, as existing licence holders, can be forced by legislation to install these instruments.

I would now like to, in general, urge for caution. A recent experience - and I regret having to mention it when a Minister announced very assertively that prominent persons were involved in a conspiracy against the President, - leaves one with a feeling of cynicism. Shortly thereafter this proved to be untrue. If such an important matter could be announced with so much assertiveness, what about the poor everyday citizen who comes under that kind of suspicion? We supply our police and law enforcers with the most sophisticated apparatus. It has to be used to expose criminals and not for political objectives.

I could never quite determine the amount, but it is probably close to a billion rand that is going to be sucked out of the economy to create this capacity, on the part of the state on the one hand and on the part of the consumers on the other. None of this will affect the safety of the ordinary man in the street. It will not protect our poor little girls who are being horribly disfigured. It will not decrease our farm killings. It will not help the rape victims, the poor women being defencelessly raped. I am not saying that this legislation is unnecessary.

We should not, however, do one thing and neglect to do the other. Our public is crying out out there: Arrest the criminals!'' With an equally loud voice the following is being asked:Grant us safety in our daily existence too, where it is no longer safe for me to drive my vehicle, because I could be robbed or my vehicle could be hijacked.’’ We must do one thing and then it would cost a billion rand to actually do it. We should not hesitate either to spend a billion rand on the safety of our people in the street, the safety of our people in their homes, and our women and children. South Africa asks this of us. [Applause.]]

Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, the Bill before us today will go down in history as one that many people initially received with mixed feelings. That was no surprise as it will affect the private lives and communication of our citizens. In the main, those citizens are law-abiding members of the community. But, it would be foolhardy to argue that crime does not exist and even more foolhardy to argue that communication does not play a vital role in the planning and execution of crime.

Parliament, therefore, had the unenviable task of finding a balance between the rights of people to privacy and the needs of the state to fight crime with all the means at its disposal. The IFP believes that a balance has been achieved and that sufficient checks and balances have been built into the Bill to protect the fundamental rights of our citizens.

The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development dealt with the Bill in a comprehensive and thorough manner in order to get to the bottom of all of its complicated provisions and implications. We received thousands of submissions from various quarters. The IFP believes that the final Bill is a much better product due to the extensive public consultations that took place.

The IFP will support the Bill. In supporting the Bill, I would like to concentrate on just a few issues. Chapter 2 of the Bill states very clearly that no person may intentionally intercept or attempt to intercept, or authorise any other person to intercept or attempt to intercept, at any place in the Republic, any communication in the course of its occurrence or transmission. But that provision is limited by the provision that there will be a designated judge who will give authority for interception and monitoring, and for authorising warrants for that interception. This is typical of the checks and balances that I referred to earlier.

In essence, it means that interception and monitoring can only be done in terms of the rule of law. Before authorising an interception, the judge must be satisfied that the following criteria have been met: a serious offence has been, or is being, or will probably be committed; an actual threat to public health or safety, or national security of the Republic is evident; and if there is a potential threat to public health and safety or the national security of the Republic. Those are just a few of the criteria that must be met before interception is authorised. Again, it should be stressed that those are adequate checks and balances to protect our citizens from the power of the state.

Clauses 24 and 25 of the Bill deal with progress reports and interception and monitoring that must be furnished to the authorised judge, and the cancellation of interception and entry warrants where no progress reports were made. The IFP believes that this provision is an important way of protecting citizens. The IFP is, however, concerned about the fact that an oral application for interception and monitoring of communication may be requested by an officer and granted by a judge even though a written application need only reach the judge or magistrate after a further 24 hours.

It is understandable that it may be necessary in extreme cases, where an eminent danger can be shown, for such a short cut to be made possible. But, our concern is that the short cut may be abused for purposes other than legitimate law enforcement reasons. For instance, it is no secret that fraud and corruption do occur in our law enforcement agencies. Let us hope that these provisions will not aid and abet fraud and corruption, and detract from other checks and balances in the Bill that were inserted to protect our law-abiding citizens.

Uma sengisika elijikayo, ngifuna ukwexwayisa labo okuyothi uma belahlekelwa ngamaselifoni bangawabiki ngoba becabanga ukuthi sebezothenga amanye ngoba lokho kungase kumdonsele ophathe lowo owenze njalo ngoba isigebengu singase siyicoshe leyo selifoni siyisebenzise ezintweni eziwubudlova. Uma-ke umuntu engayibikanga emaphoyiseni, isikhuni sesiyobuya nomkhwezeli, icala lembule ingubo lingene kulowo muntu. Useyophendula amacala angawazi.

Ngakho-ke ngithi kubafowethu nodadewethu mabazame ukuthi uma belahlekelwe amaselifoni, noma uma elimele, bahambe baye kowabika emaphoyiseni bafikwe banikezwe izigqebhezana eziyinkomba yokuthi iselifoni ayisekho kumnikazi wayo ngoba ilahlekile, kuthi-ke uma ngabe icoshwa yisigebengu bakwazi ukuthi bavikeleke. Yiso-ke leso sixwayiso engingase ngibanike sona esingenza ukuthi siphumelele ngoba phela lo mthetho ubucayi, ukhuluma ngezinto ezibucayi esingazixoxanga saziqeda lapha. Ngakho-ke yisexwayiso esihle leso. Ngithi mabakhumbule-ke ukuwabika amaselifoni uma elahlekile. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)

[In my opinion, I would like to warn those who lose their cellular phones and do not report them as lost because they are thinking of buying others. A person who does this is in danger because a criminal can take that cellular phone and use it for criminal purposes. If one does not report it to the police, the case can be directed to him or her. One could find oneself having to face criminal charges that one is not responsible for.

Therefore, I ask my brothers and sisters to report their lost or damaged cellular phones to the police stations so that they will be given stickers, which show that they have lost their phones. This will help them in case their cellular phones fall into the hands of criminals. That is the warning I can give to them and which can make us succeed because this Bill is delicate. It deals with delicate issues, which we did not dispose of, when we discussed them here. Therefore, this is a very good warning. I am saying that they should remember to report their lost cellular phones.]

Mna M T MASUTHA: Magagešo. Lehono ke letšatši le legolo gagolo ka ge ba boletše baswana ba re le ge o ka e buela leopeng magokobu a a go bona, bo nta selomela kobong le bona bo phepheng maloma a fodiša ba mathateng lehono''. Molao-kakanyo wo o lego mo pele ga rena lehono o tlile go kgontšha Mmušo gore o kgone go ba lebelela ka mahlo a phaaga, gomme ka ge baswana ba bolela bare sekhukhuni se bonwa ke sebataladi’‘re tla ba bontšha gore aowa, ge ba ntše ba le gare be tšwela pele ka go senya tokologo ya rena, le rena re tla ba otla ka thupa e bogale. (Translation of Sepedi paragraph follows.)

[Mr M T MASUTHA: Comrades, today is an important day, in so far as the Africans have said that even if you hide matters, there are those who will uncover you or expose you''. Those criminals are now in trouble. The Bill before us will enable the Government to deal with them accordingly. As Africans would say, sekhukhuni se bonwa ke sebataladi.’’ [It is impossible to keep a secret because eventually it will come out.] We will show them that if they continue to destabilise our freedom we will hit back severely.]

The Bill before us represents yet another milestone in the ANC-led government’s onslaught against crime. It provides a comprehensive regulatory framework for the interception and monitoring of certain communications, whilst at the same time protecting the right to privacy guaranteed under the Constitution by prohibiting unauthorised interception of communications. Amongst the concerns raised by service providers in the telecommunications industry is the assertion that the implementation of this Bill will occasion untold and undue financial hardships for the private sector by imposing costs on them, which to their mind should be borne by the state. They insist, by implication, that it is the state’s sole responsibility to create the necessary capacity and introduce measures to effectively deal with crime, an assertion with which the ANC, with respect, cannot agree.

Chapter 5 of the Bill, which deals with this matter, requires a telecommunication service provider to provide a telecommunication service which has the capability to be intercepted and to store communication- related information. It further empowers the Minister of Communications, in consultation with the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and other relevant Ministers, after consultation with all concerned, to issue a directive on how this legal obligation is to be complied with.

The aforesaid chapter further requires that a telecommunication service provider incur the cost of purchasing or leasing the necessary facilities that will enable the service provider to comply with this law. Having imposed this obligation on service providers on the one hand, the Bill proceeds to provide for reasonable compensation according to prescribed tariffs to postal and telecommunication service providers for providing assistance to law enforcement authorities in effecting interception directives under this law.

The Bill does seek to strike a balance between the responsibilities of the state to combat crime at its own cost on the one hand, and the responsibilities of the rest of society to play their role in assisting and making it possible for the state to do so on the other. The devastating effect that serious and organised crime can have on a country’s security, health, environment and economy is all too familiar to all of us with the 9- 11 aftermath and other acts of terror still fresh in our minds. In as much as the democracy and freedom that we are all currently enjoying did not come cheaply, it is equally so that to sustain it will come at a cost in one way or another which all of us as compatriots will have to be prepared to bear.

The Bill nevertheless recognises the reality that smaller service providers, particularly in the internet environment, may not have the capacity individually to sustain the costs of providing interception capability as required by this Bill. It therefore provides for the establishment of an internet service provider assistance fund. The fund is to be created with the contributions levied on such service providers in exchange for being granted exemption from acquiring the necessary facilities required for purposes of interceptability under the Bill.

For one or more interception centres, and for the creation of one or more interception centres to enable the state to effectively effect interceptions within the framework of this Bill, the cost of establishing, maintaining and resourcing such centres is to borne entirely by the state. It is important to bear in mind, as other hon members before me have already indicated, that the Bill is not opening up the public to a wholesale interception of their private communications by law enforcement authorities. On the contrary, it restricts the interception of private communications only to circumstances where such interception is sanctioned through an interception direction by a judge for purposes of the Act and under very stringent conditions specifically prescribed therein.

There are exemptions to these rules specified in the Act under which prior authorisation by a judge will not be required. Such exemptions include situations wherein the interception is performed by or with the consent of the person party to the communication in connection with the carrying on of a business or to prevent serious bodily harm.

In conclusion, I wish to congratulate the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and all those who have supported him in introducing this Bill, for the bold step he took in introducing this very complex yet very vital instrument at a time in the history of the world when such an instrument is most needed, given the circumstances I have already alluded to. The chair of the justice committee together with the legal drafters must be commended for spending many sleepless nights in ensuring the perfection of this Bill, a task which the rest of us did our best to help fulfil by providing them with our support.

The ANC therefore supports this Bill with all the enthusiasm it deserves. [Applause.]

Mrs S M CAMERER: Mr Chairperson, everyone has the right to privacy, which includes the right not to have the privacy of their communications infringed. Or do they? In spite of this guarantee in the Constitution the answer provided by this Bill is probably no, or maybe yes and no. Under certain circumstances, which are spelt out in this Bill, private communications are not and should not be immune from scrutiny by the authorities. The challenge to us in the portfolio committee was threefold: Firstly, to ensure that bugging, tapping and other forms of interception of communications are not legal unless done in terms of this law; secondly, that legalised bugging is not excessively intrusive and is curtailed in terms of the purposes of achieving certain legitimate goals; thirdly, that the limitations on the right to privacy, included in this legislation, pass the test for the limitations of rights as set out in the Constitution, namely, that it is reasonable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.

We, in the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, ably assisted by the department, have toiled mightily to achieve these goals. The Bill has been before the committee for more than a year and has been extensively panel-beaten. In fact, it is presented to the House by the committee rather than the department. It has gone through seven drafts. Days of hearings took place.

This Bill prohibits the provision of telecommunication services which do not have the capacity to be intercepted. One can safely say that many communications and service providers are still unhappy about the onerous and expensive obligations placed on them by this legislation. The expense for service providers inevitably means that users - the ordinary consumers of telephone, cellphone and internet services - are ultimately going to pay more for the service.

During the hearings doubt was also cast on whether technically or technologically bugging of certain services can be successfully implemented. I am certainly no judge of that, but I believe it is an aspect of the Bill that needs careful ongoing monitoring.

Not only did this Bill have a difficult birth, but it is a long, complicated and wordy piece of legislation, as other speakers have pointed out. Was it necessary to spell out in such minute detail the circumstances under which legalised bugging may take place and also to extend the reach of legalised bugging to cellphone and internet services? With some hesitation about certain aspects of the legislation, the New NP agrees that it is necessary and we will be supporting the Bill. [Applause.]

The New NP has always supported controlled interception of communication, whether written or telephonic, for the purposes of fighting crime. This was the purpose of the original Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act in 1992 and the principle has been extended in the Bill before us.

Since George Orwell published Animal Farm, most people believe the state, alias Big Brother, can and possibly is prying and tapping their phones, etc.

This Bill says that they cannot, except under controlled conditions. ``Controlled’’ means that, as a rule, applications for interception must be made to a former or retired judge designated especially for the purpose of hearing and disposing of applications for interception. Applicants are restricted to officers in the police, the Independent Complaints Directorate, the Scorpions and the Intelligence Services and they must be authorised by a senior officer in such a service.

The grounds on which an interception direction may be granted by the designated judge are at the heart of the Bill and are restricted firstly to a situation where the judge has reasonable grounds for believing a serious offence has been, is being or will be committed - and the definition of ``serious offence’’ includes Schedule 1 offences, like murder and rape, and organised crime - or that there is an actual or potential threat to public safety, national security or compelling national economic interest. The New NP supports bugging, tapping and prying to achieve these ends.

The most controversial aspect of the Bill is that the cost of intercepting a communication or storing information and maintaining archives of material must be born by the service provider. In the case of cellphones, particularly short-term prepaid contracts, and the internet, this can be technically burdensome and even difficult and very expensive.

While our legislation follows similar laws passed in Australia and Canada, the New NP believes that the implementation of this aspect of the Bill should also be carefully monitored to ensure that it is financially and practicably feasible throughout the industry, as we are truly in unchartered waters here.

There are a number of other controversial aspects of the Bill, like what seem to be potentially heavy penalties for rather minor misdemeanours such as a failure to report a lost or stolen cellphone. This is a new offence almost adding insult to injury. South Africans, are so used to having their cellphones snatched at stop streets, often through a smashed car window, or lifted from their desks, that they are automatically insured.

The only reason in the past for them to report the loss to the police was for insurance purposes, and manifestly not to have the thief apprehended, the crime solved or the phone recovered. Be that as it may, we believe the courts can be trusted to use their discretion in these matters and we support the Bill.

Mr J T MASEKA: Chairperson, many countries across the world do allow interception and monitoring of certain communications to prevent serious crimes and in the security of national interest, and such crimes are committed by individuals and/or group of persons using the modern sophisticated means of communications. It is therefore important to have certain communications intercepted and monitored to avoid serious crimes being committed. Crimes involving pure economical and bodily harm are committed by criminals using certain means of communications. Interception of communications is also important for the purpose of determining location in the event of emergency, for example, in the case of kidnapping.

It is imperative to have these communications controlled by means of interception and monitoring of certain communications through properly regulated rules to avoid the abuse of interception and monitoring by certain officials and/or individuals. This Bill intends to curb and control criminal activities, and it also makes provision for the prohibition of certain telecommunication services that do not have the capacity to be intercepted.

This Bill also makes provision for the regulation of the making of applications for, and the issuing of directions authorising the interception and monitoring of certain communications used by criminals to commit crimes. Crimes have a negative impact on the economy of our country and also on international relations, and they result in substantial financial gain for the individuals, groups of persons or syndicates committing the offence. But the Asset Forfeiture Unit takes care of it.

Interception and monitoring of communications can be done by authorised persons and/or any person other than a law enforcement officer who is a party to the communications, unless such communication is intercepted by such person for the purposes of committing an offence. The UDM supports the Bill. [Applause.]

Mr S N SWART: Chairman, in view of the technological advances in respect of telecommunications such as cellular, satellite and computer communications, there was a need to revisit the existing legislation. Telecommunications are also increasingly being used in the commission of especially organised crime, heists and other serious violent crimes. The result is the new legislation, which will totally replace the existing Interception and Monitoring Prohibition Act of 1992.

The ACDP’s initial concerns regarding the Bill have largely been accommodated, in that the right to privacy is protected by making interception of communications subject to judicial scrutiny. Communications can only be legally intercepted when law enforcement officers have obtained a court order from a designated judge subject to certain exceptions. The law enforcement officers will have to persuade the judge, inter alia, that a serious offence has been or will be committed, or that there is an actual or potential threat to public health, safety or national security.

The critical aspect of this piece of legislation will be judicial scrutiny, to ensure that the interception and monitoring is done only to pursue the aims of law enforcement, and not for some nefarious or corrupt purpose. During hearings, we were told of incidents where section 205 orders in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act had been altered after the judge granted them.

This illustrates how abuse can take place and must be guarded against. There is no doubt that the Bill will also have a significant effect on the communications industry. Other speakers have referred to the cost aspect of rendering telecommunications services interceptable and providing for the storage of call-related information.

We trust that the Government will monitor the effect of these costs on the industry, and consider introducing subsidies should the costs prove exorbitant and negatively affect the industry. Undoubtedly these costs will be passed on to the consumer.

In conclusion, the ACDP will support the Bill, as it will provide an important weapon in the fight against organised crime and terrorism. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I wish to call hon members to order. I think you are being disruptive. Please come to order.

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Mnr die Voorsitter, ek wil darem net vir die agb Dr Delport iets sê. Toe ek klein was, onthou ek nog die telefoon wat so afgeluister is. Dit was nie eintlik afluistering nie. Dit was maar net ‘n telefoonkonferensie wat die mense van daardie tyd gehad het.

Hierdie Wet is ‘n tipiese ja-nee-wet, ‘n wet wat, sou ‘n mens daarteen stem, kan daar geargumenteer word dat niemand misdaad in Suid-Afrika wil bekamp nie. Dit is so dat die beginsel van die wet aanvaarbaar is, dit was deel van die vorige bedeling. Inteendeel, die beginsel van meeluistering word wêreldwyd erken. Daarom sal die VF hierdie wetsontwerp steun.

Ek wil egter meld dat daar ‘n aantal aspekte is waaroor geargumenteer kan word: Is dit werklik die moeite werd aan die einde van die dag? Ek wil vandag vir dié Huis sê dat die gesofistikeerde misdadiger alreeds planne het om dit te omseil. Dit is net eenvoudig so dat aan die einde van die dag sal dit die gewone verbruiker wees wat sal moet opdok vir die kostes wat met dié wetsontwerp gepaard gaan.

Dit laat my dink aan die wapenwet. Die wetsgehoorsame landsburger word ‘n sekere las toegedien om die misdadiger by te kom, maar in werklikheid kom die misdadiger steeds weg. Ons sal dit nie kan voorkom met wetgewing nie. Ons sal hulle nie heeltemal kan vasvat nie. Die VF aanvaar dat hierdie ‘n poging is. Dit is moderne tegnologie en ons moet daarby aanpas, maar hoe dit in die werklikheid effektief toegepas gaan word, sal ons by ‘n latere geleentheid moet evalueer; hetsy by ‘n intelligensiekomitee of by die parlementêre verslag wat ingedien sal word. Ons sal dan kyk of die verbruiker waarde vir sy geld kry. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, I just want to say something to the hon Delport. I remember how, when I was a child, people used to listen in on the telephone. Actually it was not eavesdropping. It was merely a telephone conference that the people of that time held.

This is a typical yes-no Act, an Act which, if one were to vote against it, would result in the argument being raised that no one wants to combat crime in the country. It is a fact that the principle of the Act is acceptable; it was part of the former dispensation. On the contrary, the principle of interception is acknowledged internationally. Therefore the FF will support this Bill.

I do, however, wish to mention that there a few aspects which could be argued about: Is it really worthwhile at the end of the day? I want to say to the House today that the sophisticated criminal already has plans to evade it. It is just so that at the end of the day the consumer will have to pay for the expenses associated with the implementation of this Bill.

That brings me to the arms Act. The law-abiding citizen is given an additional burden in order to get to the criminal, but in reality the criminal still manages to get away. We will not be able to prevent that through legislation. We will not clamp down on them completely. The FF accepts that this is an effort. It is modern technology and we must adapt to it, but how it will be effectively applied in reality we will have to determine at a later stage; be it at a meeting of the intelligence committee or through the parliamentary report to be submitted. We will then see whether the consumer gets value for his or her money. [Applause.]]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Chairperson, a law on interception and monitoring of communications is characteristic of fascist regimes. In this country, it reminds us of the regimes of J B Vorster and Hendrik F Verwoerd. The major purpose of this Bill is to regulate the interception and monitoring of certain communications, including intercepting postal articles.

Communication includes, and I quote:

A conversation or a message, and any part of conversation or message, whether in the form of speech, music or other sounds, data, text, visual images or signals.

Those behind this Bill must take this nation into their confidence. What is the cause of the panic and fear on their part? In that way, we can understand the reason behind this legislation which seems to violate the Constitution. There is talk of democracy, rule of law and this country boasts of having the best Constitution. But is a fascist Bill such as the Interception and Monitoring Bill in concord with this claim?

From our past experience, such laws are capable of being abused, and they have always resulted in draconian legislation, which resulted in, for example, the Unlawful Organisations Act through which the PAC and other political organisations were banned. On 22 August of this year a constituency office of the PAC was raided by police, who said that they were looking for weapons. They found no weapons. On 28 August SAPS commissioner Moranodi Gaopebe said that an internal investigation would be carried out. To this date, there has been no explanation as to why the PAC office was raided by police and searched for weapons.

How frequent will such things happen when the Government is armed with interception and monitoring legislation? This law does not belong to a democratic country. It is a relic of fascist regimes. [Time expired.] [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! The hon S Rajbally has just come out of hospital. We wish her well. [Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, I am happy to be back and thank you for welcoming me.

Communication, key factor to the convening of all activities, has received continuous upgrade technologically. All Government departments are acknowledgeably working hard at attaining sustainable development, equality and correcting injustices of the past. Contributing to this metamorphosis is upgrading South African methods, trends and performance to the rest of the world of which in this case, would be the communication industry.

This advancement is felt to be to the betterment of South Africans who have gained respect through our experience, but we need to gain respect as a valid competitor in other faculties too. And this would require bringing policy in line with competition. In view of the Bill under debate, it is evident that this Bill would certainly not be a conclusion on the matter it serves to address, but rather a stepping stone towards bringing South Africa in line with other technologically advanced countries such as the USA and the UK.

In view of this, it is evident that the Bill contains a number of loopholes, as strongly expressed by holdings such as Vodacom, MTN and Cell C. The MF feels that this Bill is needed to bring us in line with global advancement. However, the necessity is to maintain confidentiality and the need to safeguard privacy is essential.

The MF is pleased to note that many concerned parties and role-players in the formulation of this Bill have provided valid criticism and necessary input and it is hoped that the same parties concerned remain involved in this process. The MF supports this Bill.

Mr L T LANDERS: Mr Chairperson, shortly after the 11 September bombing of the World Trade Centre in New York, it was reported in the media that the perpetrators had used computer technology including e-mail, websites and the internet to communicate with one another. It was also reported that the perpetrators had made use of the mobile phone pay-as-you-go technology to communicate with one another.

South Africa’s legal developments have not kept pace with the gigantic technological advances in respect of cellullar, satellites and computer communications through the use of e-mail and the electronic transfer of information. It is universally acknowledged that such technology is being widely used by organised criminal syndicates.

The Bill before this house seeks to address the fact that South Africa’s legal development has lagged behind the technological advances I have referred to. What we are doing, in the words of the journalist Paul Stobe, is simply upgrading systems for security agencies who are lagging behind crime syndicates in the use of information and communication technology.

One of the reasons that criminal and, in particular, organised crime syndicates have managed to remain a step ahead of our law enforcement agencies is their prolific use of information and communication technology. If we do not allow our law enforcement agencies to tap into such communications within a strict legal framework, criminals will remain elusive and they will continue to thrive.

The significance of 11 September in relation to this Bill cannot be overemphasised. It was also reported in the media soon after that event that one of the perpetrators had made a telephone call to someone in Canada. Using the technology and relevant laws at their disposal, the respective law enforcement agencies in America and in Canada were able to trace the origins of this call as well as the person to whom it was made in Canada.

What is frightening to me, however, is the fact that the Canadian law enforcement agencies were able to obtain a list of all the calls made by this person in Canada, including and in particular, one that was made to a person here in South Africa.

In and of itself, this telephone call from someone in Canada to someone in South Africa may not constitute an act of terror, nor was it necessarily a part of 11 September conspiracy. However, we cannot ignore the links to such calls. It is for this reason, amongst others, that we have created an obligation on persons who sell cellphones or simcards to retain certain critical information. We refer to this as the paper trail and it can be found in Chapter 7 of the Bill.

Internationally, the advent of modern technology has resulted in similar crime-fighting challenges in other countries. One particular challenge to which the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development has paid particular attention, relates to the prepaid system or pay-as-you-go. Currently, Brazil is seriously considering banning or outlawing this prepaid system altogether because, according to President Cardoso, its disposable nature and a lack of a paper trail in the Brazilian system facilitates and even spawns and promotes criminal activities. Countries like New Zealand, Britain and Canada are all revising and reassessing the looseness of the prepaid system.

We have gone the less extreme route of requiring prepaid cellphone users to be identified and verified by the suppliers of this system, and by no stretch of the imagination of the hon Dr Pheko can countries like Canada and New Zealand be regarded as fascist dictatorships.

Another requirement of this Bill is that lost or stolen cellphones must be reported. Failure to do so is an offence. If we think this is onerous, we should be reminded of the recent experiences of this city of Cape Town when cellphones were used to detonate bombs that killed and maimed innocent people.

Two recent articles in the written media served to highlight and underline this point. I refer to the Daily News of 3 September 2002 in an article that reads as follows, and I quote:

A national cellphone theft syndicate was smashed when private investigators and police stormed a Durban cellphone shop, seizing nearly R500 000 in electronic equipment and arresting three Democratic Republic of Congo nationals. Police from the Durban crime intelligence unit, together with private investigators, cracked the syndicate after a month- long investigation which began in the Eastern Cape and ended in Durban.

Last month cellphones and cellphone starter packs valued at more than R100 000 were stolen from the store of a national retailer in Cradock. Private investigators, together with detectives from several police crime intelligence units, managed to track the cellphones to Durban. The cellphone were allegedly being sold to crime syndicates who were using them to commit crimes.

A further example of this can be found in the Sunday Times editorial of 1 September 2002, headed ``We must support the war on cell crime’’. I quote:

Government’s announcement that it intends to impose heavy penalties on people whose cellphones are stolen but do not report this promptly has met with some criticism. But it is a step that deserves our support. The use of cellphones offers huge communication advantages and greater efficiency. But these advantages have also been recognised by criminals.

Security agents in turn make use of cellphones to establish the whereabouts of criminals. But this only works if the identity of the person using the phone can be established at all times. Hence the suggestion that stolen phones be reported promptly. In addition, such phones should be blacklisted, making them inoperable by criminals.

The baffling decision by a major cell network to cease this practice represents a setback in the fight against crime. South Africans are notorious for lobbying for strongarm tactics to fight crime. But they are frequently unwilling to be inconvenienced by the actions that are required of them in this fight. This attitude must change if we are to roll back this scourge.

I want to take this opportunity to say a few words of thanks and appreciation, firstly, to Johan Labuschagne from the Department of Justice, who was responsible for drafting this Bill and for promoting it through the committee. The work done by Johan Labuschagne cannot be overemphasised. We also want to thank our law enforcement and intelligence agencies for their assistance in helping us to draft this Bill. We convey our thanks and appreciation also to the telecommunications service providers and, in particular, to the Ministry and the Director-General of Communications. Their input into what we have before us was invaluable and they all played a crucial role in crafting this Bill.

Finally, we are convinced of the constitutionality of this Bill. However, there remains a challenge for both the judiciary and, dare I say it, the bench. In this Bill we have new concepts like archived communication- related direction, decryption assistance, decryption key and real time communication-related direction. We look forward to the near and distant future to see how our bench deals with such concepts. We commend this Bill to the House. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Mr Chairperson, comrades, friends and colleagues, firstly, I would like to express a word of thanks for a really good debate.

People have, obviously, agonised over the balance that is required. Our Constitutional Court has already concluded that the effective prosecution of crime is a societal objective of great significance which could, where appropriate, justify the infringement of fundamental rights.

I would like to suggest that the Bill is an absolute reflection of the committee’s agonising over that balance. It has looked at the issues around privacy. It has made exceptions around all the issues that pertain to an infringement of that privacy, extremely difficult procedures to go through in order to obtain this so-called infringement of privacy. I think the Bill is a reflection of that very balance that is required. We all know that in an ideal world we would not need this Bill and we know that this is far from an ideal world.

So I would really like to congratulate the committee on achieving that balance which the hon Masutha referred to. I do think that it has been achieved, and I think it has been agonised over. It is quite clear.

The hon Landers also referred to the sophistication of modern syndicates and this is just absolutely true. This piece of legislation is enabling in the sense that it provides some kind of mechanism for the law enforcement agencies to respond to the very sophisticated mechanisms and ways in which organised crime operates. So in fact, beyond the issue of bugging, so- called, it is a highly enabling mechanism in an environment where organised crime is on the increase.

As this relates to organised crime, there is a global perspective. Our legal developments have not kept up with the issues of technological advances and other legal systems which have been provided on this issue in different countries. The global nature of organised crime would mean that South Africa would be the weak link in trying to pursue these criminals, and that we could not have.

So it is extremely important that we have responded with a piece of legislation which, I believe, meets the requirements of our Constitution. Somebody called for monitoring. I think this should be done. I think it is an excellent suggestion and I am sure the committee will be interested to know how its legislation is serving the requirement.

I would like to refer to, I think it was, the first speaker, hon Delport, who, if I understood him correctly, intimated that because this Bill was aimed primarily at organised crime, the impact would not be felt by the average person on the street. I would like to suggest that the impact of organised crime is so dramatic on average people on the street that, if we manage to use this as a mechanism for breaking the back of organised crime, the average person will feel the effect.

Finally, with regard to the cost of the application of this Bill, the cost of not providing this Bill has to be evaluated. If it is not provided, the fight against organised crime will be lost. I do not think we can afford that.

The service providers sell a product to the public. Although they are engaged in the delivery of a service, they are in the business to make a profit. The product, whether we like it or not, lends itself to be used and is in fact often used in the commission of serious offences. We hold manufacturers of firearms accountable for the distribution of their products. The principle is exactly the same in respect of communication service providers. If the state has to bear all the costs, taxpayers across the board, whether they are users or not, would have to share the burden. Here we manage, at least, to limit the burden because the burden will be, I am sure, passed on to the product user. It does, however, seem a little fairer than an across-the-board application.

I would like to thank the committee for a modern piece of legislation which does bring our law enforcement agency into the realms of modern global law enforcement. I would like to thank the committee for presenting us with a piece of legislation which, I think, meets the constitutional requirements and the safety and security requirements of our community. I also would like to agree with the hon Landers that the response of the bench to these modern concepts and to the application of this legislation will be an interesting process to watch. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time.

The House adjourned at 17:25 ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                      MONDAY, 16 SEPTEMBER 2002

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 16 September 2002 in  terms
     of Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bills as section  75
     Bills:


     (i)      Anti-Personnel  Mines  Prohibition  Bill  [B  44  -  2002]
              (National Assembly - sec 75).


     (ii)    Agricultural Debt Management Amendment Bill [B 45  -  2002]
              (National Assembly - sec 75).


     (iii)   Promotion of Administrative Justice Amendment Bill [B 46  -
              2002] (National Assembly - sec 75).
 (2)    The following money Bills which were introduced by the  Minister
     of Finance in the  National  Assembly  on  13  September  2002  and
     referred to the Portfolio Committee on Finance, were also  referred
     to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for  classification  in  terms
     of Joint Rule 160:


     (i)     Gas Regulator Levies Bill [B 47 - 2002] (National  Assembly
             - sec 77).


     (ii)    Finance Bill [B 48 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 77).


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

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

 The following papers have been tabled  and  now  are  referred  to  the
 relevant committees as mentioned below:


 (1)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Finance:


     (a)     Government Notice No R 58 published in  Government  Gazette
          No 23600 dated 5 July 2002: Amendment of Schedule 1,  made  in
          terms of section 33 of the South African Revenue Services Act,
          1997 (Act No 34 of 1997).


     (b)     Government Notice No R 987 published in Government  Gazette
          No 23651 dated 19 July 2002: Regulations in terms  of  section
          18 of the Unemployment Insurance Contributions Act, 2002  (Act
          No 4 of 2002).


     (c)     Government Notice No R 990 published in Government  Gazette
          No 23651 dated 19 July 2002: Determination of limit on  amount
          of remuneration for purposes of determination of  contribution
          in  terms  of  section  6  of   the   Unemployment   Insurance
          Contributions Act, 2002 (Act No 4 of 2002).


     (d)     The Annual Financial  Statements  of  the  Corporation  for
          Public Deposits for 2001-2002.


     (e)     Government Notice No 762 published  in  Government  Gazette
          No 23477 dated 30 May 2002, Statement of the National Revenue,
          Expenditure and Borrowing as at 30 April  2002,  in  terms  of
          section 32 of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act  No
          1 of 1999).


     (f)     Government Notice No 898 published  in  Government  Gazette
          No 23580  dated  28  June  2002,  Statement  of  the  National
          Revenue, Expenditure and Borrowing as at 31 May 2002, in terms
          of section 32 of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999  (Act
          No 1 of 1999).


     (g)     Report and Financial Statements of the Development Bank  of
          Southern Africa Limited for 2001-2002.


     (h)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  South  African
          Reserve Bank for 2001-2002.


     (i)     Annual Economic Report of the South  African  Reserve  Bank
          for 2002.


     (j)     The Address of the Governor of the  South  African  Reserve
          Bank on 27 August 2002.


 (2)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Finance. The  Reports  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following papers are referred to the Standing Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Financial
          Services Board for 2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (b)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Financial
          and Fiscal Commission for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of
          the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for  2001-2002
          [RP 132-2002].


 (3)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development:
     (a)     Proclamation No R 54 published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          23548 dated 21 June 2002, Commencement of section  35  of  the
          Judicial Matters Amendment Act, 2000 (Act No 62 of 2000).


     (b)     Proclamation No R 55 published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          23553 dated 24 June 2002:  Referral  of  matters  to  existing
          Special Investigating Unit and  Special  Tribunal,  tabled  in
          terms of the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals
          Act, 1996 (Act No 74 of 1996).


     (c)     Government Notice No R 894 published in Government  Gazette
          No 23564 dated 5 July 2002: Regulations made in terms  of  the
          Judges' Remuneration and Conditions of  Employment  Act,  2001
          (Act No 47 of 2001).


     (d)     Proclamation No R 66 published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          23730 dated 8 August 2002: Referrral of  matters  to  existing
          Special Investigating Unit and Special Tribunal Act, 1996 (Act
          No 74 of 1996) made in terms of the Act.


     (e)     Draft Regulations in terms of  the  Promotion  of  Equality
          and the Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, 2000 (Act  No
          4 of 2000) tabled in terms of section 30(4)(a) of the Act.


     (f)     The Strategic Plan of the Human Rights Commission for 2000-
          2005.


 (4)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour.  The  Reports  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following papers are referred to the Standing Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Banking
          Sector  Education  and  Training  Authority   for   2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 95-2002].
     (b)     Annual  Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Mining
          Qualifications Authority for 2001-2002, including  the  Report
          of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-
          2002.


     (c)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Financial
          and  Accounting  Services  Sector   Education   and   Training
          Authority for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  138-
          2002].


     (d)     Annual Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Department
          of Labour for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  116-
          2002].


     (e)     Annual Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Commission
          for Conciliation, Mediation  and  Arbitration  for  2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 82-2002].


     (f)     Annual Report of the Unemployment Insurance Fund for  2001,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for the year ended 31 December 2001 [RP 117-2002].


 (5)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Home Affairs:


     The  Employment  Equity  Report  of   the   Independent   Electoral
     Commission  for  2001,  tabled  in  terms  of  section  22  of  the
     Employment Equity Act, 1998 (Act No 55 of 1998).


 (6)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:


     (a)      Annual  Report  of  the  National  Advisory   Council   on
          Innovation for 2001.


     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of the Artscape  for  2001-
          2002.


 (7)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Public Works:


     Community  Based  Public  Works  Programme   -   With   our   Hands
     Alleviating Poverty in South Africa.


 (8)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. The Reports of the  Auditor-
     General contained in the  following  papers  are  referred  to  the
     Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for  consideration   and
     report:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Engelenburg  House
          Art Collection for 2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of the Freedom  Park  Trust
          for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on
          the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 141-2002].


     (c)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Natal  Museum  for
          2001-2002  and  the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the
          Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (d)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  South  African
          Heritage Resources Agency for 2001-2002, including the  Report
          of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-
          2002 [RP 125-2002].


     (e)     Report and Financial Statements of the War  Museum  of  the
          Boer Republic for  2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (f)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Iziko  Museums  of
          Cape Town for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.
     (g)     Report and Financial Statements of the National  Zoological
          Gardens of South Africa for 2001-2002, including the Report of
          the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for  2001-2002
          [RP 130-2002].


     (h)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  William  Humphreys
          Art Gallery for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (9)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Agriculture and Land Affairs. The Reports  of  the  Auditor-General
     contained in the following  paper  are  referred  to  the  Standing
     Committee on Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     Report and Financial Statements of the Department of Land  Affairs,
     including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the  Financial
     Statements of the Department of Land Affairs - Vote  28  for  2001-
     2002 and the Report of the Auditor-General on the  registration  of
     the Deeds Trading Account for 2001-2002 [RP 160-2002].


 (10)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour  and  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Water  Affairs  and
     Forestry. The Report of the  Auditor-General  is  referred  to  the
     Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for  consideration   and
     report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Forest  Industries
     Education and  Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,  including  the
     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-
     2002 [RP 100-2002].


 (11)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Finance.  The  Reports  of
     the Auditor-General contained in the following papers are  referred
     to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for consideration  and
     report:


     (a)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Insurance
          Sector  Education  and  Training  Authority   for   2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 103-2002].


     (b)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Financial
          and  Accounting  Services  Sector   Education   and   Training
          Authority for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  138-
          2002].


 (12)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour and to the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Agriculture  and  Land
     Affairs. The  Reports  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following papers are referred to the Standing Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Primary
          Agriculture Education and Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 109-2002].


     (b)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Secondary
          Agriculture Sector Education and Training Authority for  2001-
          2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the
          Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 111-2002].


 (13)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Trade  and  Industry.  The
     Reports of the Auditor-General contained in  the  following  papers
     are referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for
     consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Clothing,
          Textile, Footwear and Leather Sector  Education  and  Training
          Authority for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  112-
          2002].


     (b)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Food  and
          Beverages Sector Education and Training  Authority  for  2001-
          2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the
          Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 99-2002].


     (c)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Wholesale
          and Retail Services Sector Education  and  Training  Authority
          for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on
          the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 115-2002].


     (d)       Annual   Report   and   Financial   Statements   of   the
          Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services Education  and
          Training Authority for 2001-2002, including the Report of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (14)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and  Energy.  The
     Reports of the Auditor-General contained in  the  following  papers
     are referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for
     consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Chemical
          Industries Education and  Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 93-2002].
     (b)     Annual  Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Mining
          Qualifications Authority for 2001-2002, including  the  Report
          of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-
          2002.


 (15)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Labour and  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Communications.  The
     Reports of the Auditor-General contained in  the  following  papers
     are referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for
     consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual  Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Media,
          Advertising,  Publishing,  Printing   and   Packaging   Sector
          Education and Training Authority for 2001-2002, including  the
          Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for
          2001-2002 [RP 105-2002].


     (b)     Annual Report and Financial Statements of  the  Information
          Systems,  Electronics  and   Telecommunications   Technologies
          Sector  Education  and  Training  Authority   for   2001-2002,
          including the Report of the Auditor-General on  the  Financial
          Statements for 2001-2002.


 (16)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Transport. The  Report  of
     the Auditor-General contained in the following  paper  is  referred
     to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for consideration  and
     report:


     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  Transport  Sector
     Education and  Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,  including  the
     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-
     2002 [RP 114-2002].


 (17)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Education. The  Report  of
     the Auditor-General contained in the following  paper  is  referred
     to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for consideration  and
     report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the  Education,  Training
     and Development Practices Sector Education and  Training  Authority
     for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on  the
     Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 134-2002].


 (18)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Public Works.  The  Report
     of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the  following  paper   is
     referred  to  the  Standing  Committee  on  Public   Accounts   for
     consideration and report:


     Annual  Report  and  Financial  Statements  of   the   Construction
     Education and  Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,  including  the
     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-
     2002 [RP 136-2002].


 (19)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour and to the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs  and
     Tourism.  The  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following paper is referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the Tourism,  Hospitality
     and Sport Sector Education and Training  Authority  for  2001-2002,
     including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the  Financial
     Statements for 2001-2002.


 (20)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour, the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs,  the  Portfolio
     Committee on Defence and the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Safety  and
     Security. The  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following paper is referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     Annual  Report  and  Financial   Statements   of   the   Diplomacy,
     Intelligence, Defence  and  Trade  Sector  Education  and  Training
     Authority for 2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (21)   The following papers are referred to the Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report and Financial  Statements  of  Parliament  of
          the Republic of South  Africa  for  2001-2002,  including  the
          Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for
          2001-2002 [RP 163-2002].


     (b)     Resolutions of the Standing Committee  on  Public  Accounts
          for 2002 and replies thereto obtained by the National Treasury
          - Third Report, 2002.


 (22)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Transport. The Report  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following paper is referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the  South  African  Rail
     Commuter Corporation for 2001-2002, including  the  Report  of  the
     Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP  151-
     2002].


 (23)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Minerals and Energy. The Reports of the  Auditor-General  contained
     in the following papers are referred to the Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     (a)     Annual Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Department
          of Minerals and Energy for 2001-2002, including the Report  of
          the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for  2001-2002
          [RP 159-2002].


     (b)     Annual Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Central
          Energy Fund for 2000-2001, including the Report of the Auditor-
          General on the Financial  Statements  for  2000-2001  [RP  30-
          2002].


     (c)     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the  Council  for
          Mineral  Technology  (MINTEK)  for  2001-2002,  including  the
          Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements  for
          2001-2002 [RP 92-2002].
     (d)     Annual Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Central
          Energy Fund for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-
          General on the Financial  Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  98-
          2002].


     (e)     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the  Council  for
          Geoscience for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements  for  2001-2002  [RP  128-
          2002].


     (f)     Annual Report and  Financial  Statements  of  the  National
          Electricity Regulator for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of
          the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (g)     Annual Report and  Financial  Statements  of  the  National
          Nuclear Regulator for 2001-2002, including the Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (24)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Home Affairs. The Report of the Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following paper is referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the Electoral  Commission
     for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on  the
     Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 146-2002].


 (25)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development. The Reports of the Auditor-
     General contained in the  following  papers  are  referred  to  the
     Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for  consideration   and
     report:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Public  Protector
          for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on
          the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 89-2002].


     (b)     Report of the Independent  Electoral  Commission  regarding
          the Management and Administration of the Represented Political
          Parties' Fund for  2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the Represented
          Political Parties' Fund for 2001-2002 [RP 147-2002].


 (26)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Transport. The Report  of  the  Auditor-General  contained  in  the
     following paper is referred to the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration and report:


     Report and Financial  Statements  of  the  South  African  Maritime
     Safety  Authority  for  2000-2001,  including  the  Report  of  the
     Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2000-2001.


 (27)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Social Development. The Report of the Auditor-General contained  in
     the following paper  is  referred  to  the  Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of  Social
     Development for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements of  the  Department  of  Social
     Development - Vote 17 for 2001-2002 [RP 174-2002].


 (28)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Public Enterprises. The Report of the Auditor-General contained  in
     the following paper  is  referred  to  the  Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     Annual Report and Financial Statements of the Department of  Public
     Enterprises for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements of  the  Department  of  Public
     Enterprises - Vote 8 for 2001-2002 [RP 158-2002].


 (29)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Environmental Affairs and  Tourism.  The  Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General contained  in  the  following  paper  is  referred  to  the
     Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for  consideration   and
     report:


     Annual  Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of
     Environmental Affairs and  Tourism  for  2001-2002,  including  the
     Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-
     2002.


 (30)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Environmental Affairs and Tourism for consideration and report:


     Protocol on the Development of  Tourism  in  the  Southern  African
     Development Community, tabled in terms of  section  231(2)  of  the
     Constitution, 1996.


 (31)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Public Service and Administration:


     Report of the Public  Service  Commission  on  Risk  Management:  A
     Provincial Perspective.


 (32)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Trade and Industry. The Report of the Auditor-General contained  in
     the following paper  is  referred  to  the  Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and report:


     Report and Financial Statements of  the  South  African  Bureau  of
     Standards for 2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (33)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Communications:
     Report and Financial Statements of Sentech (Pty) Limited for  2001-
     2002.


 (34)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Finance  and  to   the   Portfolio   Committee   on   Justice   and
     Constitutional  Development  for  consideration.   The   committees
     should confer and the Portfolio Committee on Finance to report:


     (a)     Memorandum of Understanding  among  Member  Governments  of
          the Eastern and Southern African  Anti-Money  laudering  Group
          and the Republic of South Africa, to be  tabled  in  terms  of
          section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (b)     Explanatory Memorandum to the Memorandum of Understanding.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers

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

 Report and Financial Statements of the Pan South African Language Board
 for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the
 Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 166-2002].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly:

1. Thirteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 24 - Public Service and Administration for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 15-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  of
       the Department on matters which, according to  the  Committee,
       needed attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies  from  the  Department,  the
       Committee took note of steps taken by the  Accounting  Officer
       and staff to fulfil their obligations in terms of  the  Public
       Finance Management Act concerning financial management at  the
       Department. The Committee has resolved not to have  a  hearing
       on the report for the year under review, but  will  await  the
       Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           of the Department for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified
           audit  opinion  on  both  the  financial  and   compliance
           audits, and trusts that  future  audit  opinions  will  be
           equally unqualified.
   
   
       2.  Shares in State Information Technology Agency (SITA)
   
   
           It is with concern that the Committee took note  that  the
           transfer of assets and liabilities in exchange for  shares
           to the State, as contemplated  in  the  State  Information
           Technology Agency Act, 1998 (Act No. 88 of 1998), had  not
           yet been finalised and that no shares had been issued.
   
   
           The  Committee  recommends  that  the  Accounting  Officer
           report to Parliament by 31 October 2002 on  progress  made
           with transfer of the assets and liabilities.
       3.  Audit Committee
   
   
           The  Committee  expressed  its  concern  that   an   Audit
           Committee had not been established as at  31  March  2001,
           and  wishes   to   point   out   that   this   constitutes
           noncompliance with the Public Finance Management  Act  and
           could be grounds for financial misconduct.
   
   
           The  Committee  recommends  that   the   Department   take
           immediate steps  to  address  this  matter,  and  that  it
           report to Parliament by 31 October 2002 on  progress  made
           with  the  establishing  of  the   Audit   Committee,   as
           contemplated  in  section  77  of   the   Public   Finance
           Management Act.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Fourteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 13 - Health for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 123-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  of
       the Department on matters which, according to  the  Committee,
       needed attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies  from  the  Department,  the
       Committee took note of  the  steps  taken  by  the  Accounting
       Officer and staff to fulfil their obligations in terms of  the
       Public Finance Management Act concerning financial  management
       at the Department. The Committee has resolved not  to  have  a
       hearing on the report for the  year  under  review,  but  will
       await the Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           of the Department for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified
           audit  opinion  on  both  the  financial  and   compliance
           audits, and trusts that  future  audit  opinions  will  be
           equally unqualified.
   
   
       2.  Irregular expenditure, R1 893 823
           The Committee  is  concerned  that  irregular  expenditure
           amounting to R1 893 823 had  occurred  at  the  Department
           during  the  year  under  review.   The   Department   has
           developed and inserted  a  pamphlet  on  AIDS  in  various
           newspapers. Proper tender procedures were not followed.
   
   
           The Committee strongly emphasises the following:
   
   
           (a)  Procurement procedures are an essential element of  a
                proper and disciplined control environment and should
                never be bypassed.
   
   
           (b)  Disciplinary steps such as warnings  and  letters  of
                warning/reprimand are often insufficient  to  enforce
                compliance with procurement procedures.
   
   
           (c)   The  Public  Finance  Management  Act  obliges   the
                Accounting Officer to ensure pro-active  measures  to
                prevent irregular  expenditure.  Failing  to  do  so,
                could constitute financial misconduct.
   
   
           The Committee therefore recommends that,  in  addition  to
           further stepping up its efforts to ensure compliance  with
           procurement procedures, the Department take the  necessary
           and  appropriate  disciplinary  measures   against   those
           responsible.
   
   
           The Committee further recommends that the  Department,  in
           consultation  with  the  National  Treasury,   report   to
           Parliament on whether:
   
   
           (a)   The  Accounting  Officer,   upon   discovering   the
                irregular nature of the expenditure, reported  it  to
                the  National  Treasury,  as  required   by   section
                38(1)(g) of the Public Finance Management Act, and in
                the  monthly  report,   as   required   by   Treasury
                Regulation 9.1.2.
   
   
           (b)   The  National   Treasury   or   the   Tender   Board
                investigated the reported irregularity,  and  whether
                the Department took the necessary steps to ask for ex
                post facto approval.
       3.  Sarafina II
   
   
           As the Committee is awaiting further  information  on  the
           above, a separate resolution will be adopted  at  a  later
           stage.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Fifteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 1 - Presidency for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 168-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  of
       the Department on matters which, according to  the  Committee,
       needed attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies  from  the  Department,  the
       Committee took note of  the  steps  taken  by  the  Accounting
       Officer and staff to fulfil their obligations in terms of  the
       Public Finance Management Act concerning financial  management
       at the Department. The Committee has resolved not  to  have  a
       hearing on the report for the  year  under  review,  but  will
       await the Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           of the Department for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified
           audit  opinion  on  both  the  financial  and   compliance
           audits, and trusts that  future  audit  opinions  will  be
           equally unqualified.
       2.  Unauthorised expenditure, R982 000
   
   
           The Committee took note of  the  unauthorised  expenditure
           totalling R982 000 during  the  year,  and  expressed  its
           concern. As  the  expenditure  charged  against  the  Vote
           exceeded the total amount voted by R982 000,  this  amount
           is regarded as unauthorised in terms of section 1  of  the
           Public Finance Management Act. The Committee took note  of
           the explanation given by the Accounting Officer,  as  well
           as  of  the  corrective  measures   implemented   by   the
           Department, and recommends that the amount of R982 000  be
           authorised  by  Parliament,  in  view  of  the  fact  that
           corrective preventative measures have been taken.
   
   
       3.  Unauthorised expenditure previously reported
   
   
           Expenditure to the amount of R632 000  (1996-97  financial
           year) and further amounts totalling R1,561 million  (1999-
           2000 financial year) was reported as unauthorised  by  the
           Auditor-General. As  the  Committee  is  awaiting  further
           information from the  Auditor-General  on  these  reported
           amounts, a recommendation will be made at a later stage.
   
   
       4.  Donations
           The Committee  was  informed  that  an  investigation  was
           embarked on to trace  all  donor  expenses  incurred  from
           1998-99 in respect of source documents in order to  ensure
           that the  correct  surpluses  are  surrendered  to  donors
           after completion of the projects.
   
   
           The  Committee  recommends  that  the  Accounting  Officer
           report to Parliament by 31 October 2002 on  progress  with
           the investigation.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Sixteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 22 - Provincial and Local Government for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 132-01], reports as follows: The Committee studied the Report of the Auditor-General and put questions for clarification to the Accounting Officer of the Department on matters which, according to the Committee, needed attention.

       After considering written replies  from  the  Department,  the
       Committee took note of  the  steps  taken  by  the  Accounting
       Officer and staff to fulfil their obligations in terms of  the
       Public Finance Management Act concerning financial  management
       at the Department. The Committee has resolved not  to  have  a
       hearing on the report for the  year  under  review,  but  will
       await the Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Seventeenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 25 - Public Service Commission (PSC) for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 128-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  of
       the PSC on matters which, according to the  Committee,  needed
       attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies from the PSC, the  Committee
       took note of the steps taken by  the  Accounting  Officer  and
       staff to fulfil their  obligations  in  terms  of  the  Public
       Finance Management Act concerning  financial  management.  The
       Committee has resolved not to have a hearing on the report for
       the year under review, but will  await  the  Auditor-General's
       Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       Noncompliance with Treasury Regulations
   
   
       The Committee took note of and expressed its concern about the
       PSC having no approved write-off policy  and  about  the  fact
       that the use of  suspense  accounts  not  cleared  each  month
       resulted in noncompliance with Treasury Regulations.
   
   
       The Committee recommends that the Accounting Officer report to
       Parliament by 31 October 2002 on the necessary steps taken  to
       rectify this matter.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Eighteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 27 - South African Management Development Institute (SAMDI) for the year ended 31 March 2001 (as stated in the Annual Report of SAMDI), reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  on
       matters which, according to the Committee, needed attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies from  SAMDI,  the  Committee
       took note of the steps taken by  the  Accounting  Officer  and
       staff to fulfil their  obligations  in  terms  of  the  Public
       Finance Management Act concerning  financial  management.  The
       Committee has resolved not to have a hearing on the report for
       the year under review, but will  await  the  Auditor-General's
       Report on the next financial year.
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           for the Auditor-General's  unqualified  audit  opinion  on
           both the financial and compliance audits, and trusts  that
           future audit opinions will be equally unqualified.
   
   
       2.  European Union claims
   
   
           The Committee  expressed  its  concern  about  outstanding
           claims  against  the  European  Union  (EU)  for  services
           rendered by SAMDI, to the  amount  of  R2,2  million.  The
           Committee  further  took  note  of  steps  taken  by   the
           Accounting Officer to speed up the process. The  Committee
           is concerned that in the event of the EU not settling  the
           claims, the  expenditure  will  form  an  expense  against
           voted funds.
   
   
           The  Committee  recommends  that  the  Accounting  Officer
           immediately  take  the  necessary  steps  to  settle   the
           outstanding claims by the EU and report to  Parliament  by
           31 October 2002 on progress made to finalise this matter.
   
   
       3.  Audit Committee
   
   
           The  Committee  expressed  its  concern  that   an   Audit
           Committee had not been established as at  31  March  2001,
           and pointed out that this constituted non-compliance  with
           the Public Finance Management Act  and  could  be  grounds
           for financial misconduct.
   
   
           The Committee recommends that immediate steps be taken  to
           address this matter, and that SAMDI report  to  Parliament
           by 31 October 2002 on progress made with the  establishing
           of the Audit Committee contemplated in section 77  of  the
           Public Finance Management Act.
   
   
       4.  Asset management
   
   
           The Committee took note of the  shortcomings  reported  in
           the  management  of  assets  and  that  the  accuracy  and
           completeness  of  the  asset   register   could   not   be
           determined. The Committee brings to the attention  of  the
           Accounting Officer that, since the implementation  of  the
           Public  Finance  Management  Act,  should  there  be   any
           deficits or surplus stock, it would be the  responsibility
           of the Accounting Officer.
   
   
           The Committee therefore recommends that:
   
   
           (a)  The Accounting Officer adhere to section 38(1)(d)  of
                the Public Finance Management  Act  and  to  Treasury
                Regulation 10.1.
           (b)  A comprehensive report be submitted to  the  Auditor-
                General by 31 October  2002  on  progress  made  with
                regard to the safeguarding of all departmental assets
                and any remaining future important milestones in this
                regard.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Nineteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) for the financial year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 122-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  on
       matters which, according to the Committee, needed attention.
       After considering written replies, the Committee took note  of
       the steps taken by the Accounting Officer and staff to  fulfil
       their obligations in terms of the  Public  Finance  Management
       Act  concerning  financial  management  at  the   SAMRC.   The
       Committee has resolved not to have a hearing on the report for
       the year under review, but will put  additional  questions  to
       the  Accounting  Officer  on  matters  that   needed   further
       attention.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the SAMRC to the following:
       Audit opinion
   
   
       The Committee commends the Board and staff of  the  SAMRC  for
       the Auditor-General's unqualified audit opinion  on  both  the
       financial and compliance audits, and trusts that future  audit
       opinions will be equally unqualified.
    Report to be considered.
   

2. Twentieth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 30 - Sport and Recreation for the year ended 31 March 2000 [RP 139- 2000] and the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 29 - Sport and Recreation for the year ended 31 March 2001 (as stated in the Annual Report of the Department), reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Reports of the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Accounting  Officer  of
       the Department on matters which, according to  the  Committee,
       needed attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies  from  the  Department,  the
       Committee took note of steps taken by the  Accounting  Officer
       and staff to fulfil their obligations in terms of  the  Public
       Finance Management Act concerning financial management at  the
       Department. The Committee has resolved not to have  a  hearing
       on the reports for the years under review, but will await  the
       Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Accounting Officer to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           of the Department for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified
           audit  opinion  on  both  the  financial  and   compliance
           audits, and trusts that  future  audit  opinions  will  be
           equally unqualified.
   
   
       2.  Internal checking and control
   
   
           The  Committee  acknowledges  the  steps  taken   by   the
           Accounting Officer to improve the  internal  checking  and
           control in the Department. However, the Committee,  having
           noted the  circumstances  under  which  this  took  place,
           still wishes to emphasise that  the  depositing  of  money
           into private bank accounts, as was reported  the  previous
           year, is not allowed under any circumstances.
   
   
       3.  Unauthorised expenditure previously reported
           Expenditure  to  the  amount  of  R822  460,68  (1999-2000
           financial year) and a further amount of R10 288,69  (2000-
           01 financial year) was reported  as  unauthorised  by  the
           Auditor-General. As  the  Committee  is  awaiting  further
           information from the  Auditor-General  on  these  reported
           amounts, a recommendation will be made at a later stage.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Twenty-first Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of the Water Research Commission for the period ended 31 March 2001 (as stated in the Annual Report of the Water Research Commission), reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       put questions for clarification to the Chief Executive Officer
       on  matters  which,  according  to   the   Committee,   needed
       attention.
   
   
       After considering written replies, the Committee took note  of
       the steps taken by the Chief Executive Officer  and  staff  to
       fulfil their  obligations  in  terms  of  the  Public  Finance
       Management  Act  concerning  financial   management   at   the
       Commission. The Committee has resolved not to have  a  hearing
       on the report for the year under review, but  will  await  the
       Auditor-General's Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Having noted the  above,  however,  the  Committee  draws  the
       attention of the Commission to the following:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The  Committee  commends  the  Board  and  staff  of   the
           Commission for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified  audit
           opinion on both the financial and compliance  audits,  and
           trusts  that  future  audit  opinions  will   be   equally
           unqualified.
   
   
       2.  Evaluation of financial statements by Audit Committee
   
   
           The  Committee  acknowledges  that  the  Audit   Committee
           evaluated the financial  statements  for  the  year  under
           review. However, the  Audit  Committee's  report  was  not
           included in  the  Annual  Report  of  the  Commission,  as
           required  (Treasury  Regulation  3.1.13).  The   Committee
           recommends  that  the  Commission   adhere   to   Treasury
           Regulations in future.
   

 Report to be considered.

1. Twenty-Second Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of the Commission on Gender Equality for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 165-01], and having considered responses of the Acting Chief Executive Officer to the Committee’s queries, reports as follows:

   1. Audit opinion The Committee commends the Acting Chief Executive Officer and staff of the Commission on the Auditor-General’s unqualified audit opinion on both the financial and compliance audits, and trusts that future audit opinions will be equally unqualified.

   2. Forensic investigation

      The Committee further commends the Commission for having instituted a forensic investigation that resulted in a disciplinary hearing, the subsequent dismissal of the staff member concerned and the recovery of the amount of money involved.

      The Committee welcomes the decision to terminate the electronic transfer system of payments, and to revert to the issuing of cheques for all payments after the authorities have properly scrutinised and signed the necessary documents. The Committee therefore requests that the Commission furnishes it with a report by 31 October 2002, indicating the success or otherwise of the new method of payment.

   3. Donor funding

      The Committee noted with concern that compared with the previous financial year, the amount in respect of donor funding received by the Commission during the financial year under review decreased substantially, thereby negatively impacting on the Commission’s ability to deliver on budgeted projects.

      The Committee welcomes the Commission’s initiative to engage its traditional donors for continued funding, and requests the Commission to furnish it with a progress report by 31 October 2002.

   4. Asset control

      The Committee is concerned that control over assets at the Commission is unsatisfactory. It noted, however, that physical stock-taking of all assets took place, and that users had to sign for assets under their control.

      The Committee therefore recommends that the Commission submit a formal report to it by 31 October 2002, informing it of the successful implementation of the Commission’s policy regarding asset control.

   5. Personnel records

      The Committee noted with concern that certain pay-roll, personnel and leave records were either not updated or in certain instances did not even exist.

      The Committee noted, however, that all staff files have now been updated, and that the Commission is currently streamlining the files of all the Commissioners. The Committee therefore recommends that a formal report be submitted to it by 31 October 2002, showing the completion of updating and streamlining the process.

   6. Disaster Recovery Plan

      The Committee is concerned at the absence of a formal disaster recovery plan or a business continuity plan.

      The Committee noted the unsuccessful corrective steps and the temporary nature of the back-up measures instituted by the Commission.

      The Committee requests that the Commission urgently institutes a comprehensive disaster recovery plan and furnish it with a progress report thereon by 31 October 2002.

   7. Internal audit

      The Committee noted that the Commission had outsourced its internal audit function, but that internal auditors have now been appointed.

      Nevertheless, the Committee is concerned that no final reports were available for review and that, consequently, no reliance could be placed on the internal audit function.

      The Committee requests that the Commission furnish it with a progress report on this matter by 31 October 2002. Report to be considered.

2. Twenty-Third Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, dated 11 September 2002:

   The Standing Committee on Public Accounts, having considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the financial statements of Vote 27 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism for the year ended 31 March 2001 [RP 115-01], reports as follows:

       The Committee studied the Report of  the  Auditor-General  and
       forwarded preliminary questions for clarity to the  Accounting
       Officer of the Department on matters which, according  to  the
       Committee, needed attention.
   
   
       Having considered written replies, the Committee took note  of
       steps taken by the Accounting  Officer  and  staff  to  fulfil
       their obligations in terms of the  Public  Finance  Management
       Act concerning financial management  at  the  Department.  The
       Committee has resolved not to have a hearing on the report for
       the year under review, but will  await  the  Auditor-General's
       Report on the next financial year.
   
   
       Noting the above, however, the Committee wishes to  bring  the
       following matters to the attention of the Accounting Officer:
   
   
       1.  Audit opinion
   
   
           The Committee commends the Accounting  Officer  and  staff
           of the Department for  the  Auditor-General's  unqualified
           audit  opinion  on  both  the  financial  and   compliance
           audits, and trusts that  future  audit  opinions  will  be
           equally unqualified.
   
   
       2.  Unauthorised expenditure, R673 248 [par 3.4, p 18]
   
   
           The Committee is concerned that  unauthorised  expenditure
           amounting to R673  248  had  occurred  at  the  Department
           during  the  1999-2000  financial  year.  The   Department
           overspent this amount on a contract for the supply of  Y2K
           services during the said year. They applied  for  ex  post
           facto approval on 31 January  2000,  but  the  application
           was turned down by the State  Tender  Board  on  18  April
           2000.  This  amount  is  only  shown  as  a  note  in  the
           management report, and is not disclosed in  the  financial
           statements for the year ended 31 March 2001,  as  required
           by Treasury Regulation 9.1.5.
   
   
           The  Committee  noted  the  explanation  provided  in  the
           replies, dated 30 January 2002, and  wishes  to  emphasise
           the following:
   
   
           (a)  Given the  high  reliance  placed  by  Parliament  on
                information contained in the financial statements and
                the notes thereto, the Accounting Officer must at all
                times ensure that these are accurate and complete.
   
   
           (b)   Appropriate  corrective  steps,  which  may  include
                disciplinary  steps  and/or  enhancing   of   control
                measures,  should  be  taken  in  each  instance   of
                unauthorised or irregular expenditure,  in  order  to
                prevent a recurrence of similar incidents.
   
   
           However, given the context presented by the replies of  30
           January 2002 and the assurance by the  Accounting  Officer
           that value was received for the  money  spent,  and  given
           the fact that the State suffered no  loss,  the  Committee
           recommends  that  Parliament  approve   the   unauthorised
           expenditure.
   
   
       3.  Joint Paymaster-General Account
   
   
           In paragraph 3.1 on page 3 of the previous Report  of  the
           Auditor-General [RP 120-2000], it was  reported  that  the
           Department  still  shared  a  bank  account  and   warrant
           voucher series with  the  Marine  Living  Resources  Fund.
           This practice hampers control over and  administration  of
           the accounting system of the two entities.
   
   
           Furthermore, a tender was awarded to  ABSA  Bank  for  the
           provision  of  banking  services  for  the  Marine  Living
           Resources Fund. At the time of adoption  of  this  Report,
           the bank account was not yet operational due to  technical
           problems.
   
   
           The  Committee  recommends  that  the  Accounting  Officer
           report to Parliament by no later than 30 November 2002  on
           this matter.
   
   
       4.  Follow-up computer audits  of  general  controls  in  head
           office and weather bureau environments
   
   
           The computer audits revealed a number  of  weaknesses  and
           lack of control measures, as outlined on pages  15  to  18
           of   the   Auditor-General's   Report   [RP 115-01].   The
           Committee is satisfied with  the  replies  of  30  January
           2002, which refer to corrective steps taken or planned.
   
   
           The  Committee,  however,  notes  with  concern  that  the
           Fisheries Resource System has 350 users and  is  used  for
           the  issuing  of  valuable  boat  and  fishing   licences,
           permits and levies paid on fish caught.  The  total  value
           of these amounts to about R13,7 million per year.  In  the
           replies it was indicated  that  a  comprehensive  security
           policy was being developed in consultation with SITA.
   
   
           The Committee recommends that a copy of the  policy,  once
           finalised,  be  furnished  to  the   Auditor-General   for
           review, and that a brief report be  tabled  in  Parliament
           by the end of November 2002, providing assurance that  the
           necessary  corrective  steps  have  been  implemented   to
           address areas of risk, such as possible fraud or  loss  of
           confidential data.
   
   
       5.  Use of government credit card by former Deputy Minister
   
   
           The Committee noted with  concern  that  this  matter  has
           been outstanding for an unduly long period of time.
   
   
           The Committee recommends that an  indication  be  obtained
           from the Public Protector by the Accounting  Officer,  and
           provided to Parliament by 30  November  2002,  on  when  a
           final report  could  be  expected  or  on  any  subsequent
           developments that may have an impact on the matter.
   

 Report to be considered.

                     TUESDAY, 17 SEPTEMBER 2002

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson:

 (1)    The Minister of Intelligence on 9  September  2002  submitted  a
     draft of the Intelligence Services Control  Amendment  Bill,  2002,
     as well as the memorandum explaining the objects  of  the  proposed
     legislation, to the Speaker and the Chairperson in terms  of  Joint
     Rule 159.


 (2)     The  following  Bill  was  introduced  by   the   Minister   of
     Intelligence in the National Assembly  on  17  September  2002  and
     referred to the Joint Tagging Mechanism  (JTM)  for  classification
     in terms of Joint Rule 160:


     (i)     Intelligence Services Control Amendment Bill [B 50 -  2002]
          (National Assembly - sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill  and
          prior notice  of  its  introduction  published  in  Government
          Gazette No 23828 of 9 September 2002.]


     The Bill has been referred to the Ad Hoc Committee on  Intelligence
     Legislation 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.

National Assembly:

1. The Speaker:

 (1)    The Portfolio Committee on Finance has been  instructed  by  the
     Speaker,  in  accordance  with  Rule  249(3)(c),  to  consult   the
     Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy  on  the  Gas  Regulator
     Levies Bill [B 47 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 77),  which  was
     referred to the Portfolio Committee  on  Finance  on  13  September
     2002.

1. The Speaker:

 The following papers have been tabled  and  now  are  referred  to  the
 relevant committees as mentioned below:


 (1)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development. The Report of the  Auditor-
     General contained  in  the  following  paper  is  referred  to  the
     Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for  consideration   and
     report:


     Report and Financial Statements of the Legal Aid  Board  for  2001-
     2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the  Financial
     Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 161-2002].


 (2)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:


     Report and Financial Statements of Business Arts South  Africa  for
     2001-2002.

1. The Speaker:

 (1)    The following changes have been made to the membership of  Joint
     Committees, viz:


     Defence:


     Appointed: Booi, M S; Fazzie, H M; Fihla, N B; Kalako, M  U;  Kati,
     J Z; Magashule, E S; Mathebe, P M; Xingwana, L M T.


     Dicharged: Cindi, N V; Maserumule, F T; Mashimbye, J  N;  Zondo,  R
     P.


     Ethics and Members' Interests:


     Appointed: Chikane, M M; Mlangeni, A; Njobe, M A A;  Radebe,  B  A;
     Solomon, G.


     Discharged: Nhleko, N P; Ntuli, M B.


     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women:


     Appointed: Goosen, A D; Luthuli, A N (Alt); Maine, M S; Morutoa,  M
     R (Alt); Ngwenya, M L; Xingwana, L M T.


     Discharged: Benjamin, J; Goniwe, M T; Mathibela, N F;  Mutsila,  I;
     Nqodi, S B; Southgate, R M.


     Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of  Children,  Youth  and
     Disabled Persons:


     Appointed: Dithebe, S L (Alt); Luthuli, A  N;  Maine,  M  S  (Alt);
     Mbulawa-Hans, B G; Nzimande, L P M; Turok, B.


     Discharged: Benjamin, J; Ndzanga, R; Reid, L L R.


 (2)    The following changes  have  been  made  to  the  membership  of
     Portfolio Committees, viz:


     Agriculture and Land Affairs:


     Appointed: Gogotya, N J; Hanekom, D A (Alt); Holomisa, S  P  (Alt);
     Mathibela, N F (Alt); Ngwenya, M  L;  Ntuli,  J  T;  Radebe,  B  A;
     Schoeman, E A.


     Discharged: Arendse, J D; Bhengu, F;  Dlali,  D  M;  Gomomo,  P  J;
     Kati, J Z; Maunye, M M; Nobunga, B J; Ntuli, B M; Zita, L.


     Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:


     Appointed: Baloyi, S F (Alt); Dyani, M M Z; Fihla, N B; Luthuli,  A
     N (Alt); Martins, B A D (Alt); Makasi, X C (Alt); Ramgobin, M.


     Discharged: Ludwabe, C I.
     Communications:


     Appointed: Durand, J; Morutoa, M  S;  Phadagi,  M  G;  Van  Wyk,  A
     (Alt).


     Discharged: Magazi, M N; Maloney, L; Mongwaketse, S J; Mutsila,  I;
     Nel, A C.


     Correctional Services:


     Appointed: Da Camara, M L  (Alt);  Moeketse,  K  M;  Ncinane,  I  Z
     (Alt); Swart, P S; Zondo, R P.
     Discharged: Sosibo, J E.


     Defence:


     Appointed: Fihla, N B; Kalako, M U (Alt); Kati, J Z (Alt); Kota,  Z
     A (Alt); Magashule, E S (Alt); Mashimbye, J N (Alt); Mathebe, P  M;
     Mngomezulu, G P; Mohlala, R J B; Ngculu, L V (Alt);  Oosthuizen,  G
     C; Xingwana, L M T.


     Discharged: Bloem, D V; Diale, L N; Fazzie,  M  H;  Gogotya,  N  J;
     Ntuli, S B.
     Education:


     Appointed: Mabuza, D D.


     Discharged: Benjamin, J; Ripinga, S S.


     Environmental Affairs and Tourism:


     Appointed: Arendse, J D; Bhengu, F (Alt); Maimane,  D  S;  Van  der
     Merwe, S C.


     Discharged: Benjamin, J; Luthuli, A N; Phadagi, M G;  September,  R
     K.


     Finance:


     Appointed: Hanekom, D A; Kannemeyer, B W (Alt); Mabe, L  L;  Nqodi,
     S B.


     Discharged: Cachalia, I M; Nair, B; Ramgobin, M; Turok, B.


     Foreign Affairs:


     Appointed: Mudau, N W;  Cindi,  N  V  (Alt);  Mabuza,  D  D  (Alt);
     Yengeni, S T; Zita, L.


     Discharged: Hendrickse, P A C; Moloto, K A; Ramgobin, M.


     Health:


     Appointed: Mathibela, N F (Alt); Ngaleka, E (Alt); Twala, N M.


     Discharged: Mbulawa-Hans, B G; Njobe, M A A.


     Home Affairs:


     Appointed: Chauke, H P (Alt); Gxowa,  N  B;  Lekgoro,  M  K  (Alt);
     Mthembu, B; Skhosana, W M; Tolo, L J.


     Discharged: Chikane, M M; Cindi, N  V;  Lobe,  M  C;  Mlangeni,  A;
     Mokoena, A D; Nel, A C.


     Housing:


     Appointed: Coetzee-Kasper, M P (Alt); Mabena, D C.


     Discharged: Fihla, N B; Mudau, N W.


     Justice and Constitutional Development:


     Appointed: Mahlawe, N; Mutsila, I; Nel, A C (Alt).


     Discharged: Magazi, M N.
     Labour:


     Appointed: Olifant, D A A.


     Discharged: Mabuza, D D.


     Minerals and Energy:


     Appointed: Duma, N M; Kgarimetsa, J J; Mabuza, D D (Alt);  Ngaleka,
     E (Alt); Olifant, D A A (Alt).


     Discharged: Dlali, D M; George, M E; Gomomo, P J; Motubatse, S D.
     Provincial and Local Government:


     Appointed: Kgarimetsa, J J (Alt); Komphela, B M.


     Discharged: Lekgoro, M K; Olifant, D A A.


     Public Enterprises:


     Appointed: Benjamin, J; Komphela, B M; Masala, M M (Alt); Mpaka,  H
     M (Alt); Phohlela, S.
     Discharged: Mohlala, R J B; Smith, V G.


     Public Service and Administration:


     Appointed: Mbulawa-Hans, B G.


     Discharged: Nhleko, N P; September, C C.


     Public Works:


     Appointed: Mudau, N W (Alt).


     Discharged: Louw, S K.


     Safety and Security:


     Appointed: Duma, N M (Alt); Maserumule, F T (Alt); Ntuli, J T.


     Discharged: Goniwe, M T; Mashimbye, J N; Masithela, N H;  Scott,  M
     I.


     Social Development:


     Appointed: Dlamini, B O  (Alt);  Gandhi,  E;  Jassat,  E  E  (Alt);
     Lamani, N E (Alt); Solo, B M; Sotyu, M M (Alt).


     Discharged: Mabe, L L; Mabena, D C; Mbulawa-Hans, B G;  Ramotsamai,
     C M P.


     Sport and Recreation:


     Appointed: Moss, M I; Mzondeki, M J G.


     Discharged: Kota, Z A; Mbulawa-Hans, B G; Moonsamy, K.


     Trade and Industry:


     Appointed: Duma, N M; Lyle, A G (Alt);  Mokoena,  A  D;  Moloi,  J;
     Moloto, K A (Alt); Moropa, R M (Alt); Ripinga, S S; Turok, B.


     Discharged: Benjamin, J; Gomomo, P J; Hajaig, F; Ntuli, B M;  Zita,
     L.


     Transport:
     Appointed: Coetzee-Kasper, M P; Magubane, N E; Malebana, H F.


     Discharged: Louw, S K; Mudau, N W; Tinto, B.


     Water Affairs and Forestry:


     Appointed: Goosen, A D (Alt);  Kati,  J  Z  (Alt);  Magubane,  N  E
     (Alt); Maluleke, C J M (Alt); Ndzanga, R; Phohlela, S.


     Discharged: Arendse, J D; Kotwal, Z; Ncinane, I Z.


 (3)    The following changes  have  been  made  to  the  membership  of
     Standing Committees, viz:


     Private Members Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions:


     Appointed: Mshudulu, S A.


     Discharged: Maimane, D S.


     Public Accounts:


     Appointed: Fankomo, F C (Alt); Gerber,  P  A;  Hogan,  B  A  (Alt);
     Joemat R R (Alt); Masithela, N H (Alt); Mofokeng, T R.


     Discharged: Mabe, L L.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers

1. The Minister of Labour:

 Report and Financial Statements Services Sector Education and  Training
 Authority for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on
 the Financial Statements for 2002-2002 [RP 94-2002].

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly:

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Education on the Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 31 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 17 September 2002:

   The Portfolio Committee on Education, having considered the subject of the Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 31 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 76 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 31A - 2002].

2. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs on the Agricultural Debt Management Amendment Bill [B 45 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 17 September 2002:

   The Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs, having considered the subject of the Agricultural Debt Management Amendment Bill [B 45 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendment.

3. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism on the Protocol on the Development of Tourism in the Southern African Community, dated 17 September 2002:

   The Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Protocol on the Development of Tourism in the Southern African Community, referred to it, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve the said Protocol.

 Request to be considered.