National Assembly - 22 October 2002
TUESDAY, 22 OCTOBER 2002 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:04.
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 S K LOUW: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes - (a) reports that President Thabo Mbeki was warmly received by the people of Greenfields, Bekkersdal, Roslyn factory workers in Tshwane and stakeholders in Sandton when he visited these areas as part of the presidential imbizo campaign in Gauteng last weekend, and that the masses of our people used this occasion to interact with the President on Government’s programme for transformation; and
(b) that the Government imbizo campaign gives practical expression
to the commitment of the ANC to the people-driven process of
change and development;
(2) believes that the enthusiasm of the people and their massive turnout to those events reflect their unwavering support for the ANC as the leading organisation for change; and
(3) welcomes the turnout to these events and the warm reception which the people of Greenfields, Bekkersdal, Roslyn factory workers and Sandton stakeholders gave the President.
[Applause.]
Mr D K MALULEKE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:
That the House -
(1) notes that the confirmed scoreboard relating to the floor-crossing shows that the New NP has failed dismally in its efforts to destroy the DA;
(2) notes further that on the final day of floor-crossing the number of New NP councillors is 305 and the number of DA councillors is 1077; and
(3) concludes that -
(a) the decks are now cleared for the real political battle between
the ANC and the DA; and
(b) the New NP is irrelevant and will not survive the next election.
Mrs I MARS: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) notes with delight that the introduction of the daily lottery game, Keno, has been delayed indefinitely;
(2) congratulates the Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Alec Erwin, for taking note of the numerous and continued complaints and criticisms received with regard to Keno;
(3) hopes that the delay in the introduction of Keno will give the relevant authorities the time needed to look at the implication of a daily lottery and the effect that it will have, especially on poor people; and
(4) encourages the Government to investigate urgently the effects of the National Lottery on the poor and the apparent failure of the authorities to channel the financial resources to needy and deserving causes.
Dr Z P JORDAN: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) Comrade Wolfe Kodesh, a veteran of the ANC and of the SA
Communist Party, passed away last Friday;
(b) Comrade Wolfe Kodesh served his country as a soldier during the
war against fascism, and was a founding member of the nonracial
soldiers' union, the Springbok Legion; and
(c) Comrade Wolfe played an important role in organising safe houses
for many MK comrades, including Comrade Nelson Mandela during
the days of underground work, as a founding member of uMkhonto
weSizwe; and
(2) acknowledges the contribution made by this stalwart of our movement and patriot in the struggle to achieve a liberated, nonracial, nonsexist and democratic South Africa.
May his soul rest in peace!
[Applause.]
Mr A Z A VAN JAARSVELD: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the New NP:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) the DA leader in the Eastern Cape, Mr Athol Trollip, called the
150 DA members from Bizana who resigned from the DA last week
and joined the New NP, ``straw supporters'', in spite of the
fact that all of them had legitimate KwaZulu-Natal DA membership
cards;
(b) according to Mr Mthembu, former DA district co-ordinator in
Bizana, Mr Trollip bused 15 KwaZulu-Natal members to the recent
DP/DA congress in the Eastern Cape and used them as voting
fodder, with specific instructions to vote for him in the
leadership election against the honourable Dr Tertius Delport,
and that Dr Delport lost with 13 votes in this election;
(c) the leader of the DP/DA constantly makes unsubstantiated claims
that the DA's black support base is growing daily; and
(d) the question remains, however, how many of these black
supporters are perceived by the majority of his caucus as straw
or fake members only to serve the purpose of window-dressing and
voting fodder.
[Applause.]
Prof L M MBADI: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the UDM:
That the House -
(1) acknowledges the growing urgency of social development in South Africa, especially with regard to issues surrounding malnutrition, household food security and poverty eradication which have already claimed hundreds of lives in South Africa this year; (2) notes that the chief motivating factor behind the introduction of the National Lottery was to ensure that worthy causes would be supported in order to perform their vital tasks in the area of social development, household food security and poverty eradication;
(3) therefore condemns news that R332 million in lottery funds are lying idle in Government accounts, because the RDP programme has been disbanded and the Departments of Trade and Industry and of Finance appear unable to resolve the matter; and
(4) calls upon the Government to rectify immediately this shocking and unnecessary bureaucratic bungle that contributes to the growing perception that the National Lottery is doing nothing except harming the very people that Government promised would be assisted by it.
[Applause.] Ms N E LAMANI: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes the ANC Youth League exhumed the remains of its first president, Comrade Anton Lembede;
(2) further notes that Comrade Lembede will be reburied in Mbumbulu, KwaZulu-Natal next Sunday, and this event will be attended by, amongst others, former President Nelson Mandela;
(3) believes that Comrade Lembede -
(a) played an important role, together with former President
Mandela, in transforming the ANC into a mass movement for
democratic change; and
(b) served as an inspiration to generations of young people to work
towards the realisation of a liberated, nonracial, nonsexist and
democratic South Africa;
(4) congratulates the ANC Youth League for giving this patriot a decent burial; and
(5) vows to continue working for the realisation of the ideals he fought for throughout his life.
Dr P W A MULDER: Mev die Speaker, hiermee gee ek kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting van die Huis namens die VF sal voorstel:
Dat die Huis daarvan kennis neem dat -
(1) in die pas afgelope studenteraadsverkiesing by die Universiteit van Pretoria, wat op ‘n partypolitieke grondslag geveg is, die DA vierde was met 623 stemme, die PAC jeug se Pasma derde was met 676 stemme, die ANC/Sasco-alliansie tweede was met 979 stemme en dat die verkiesing deur die Vryheidsfrontjeug en Tas oortuigend gewen is met 2008 stemme, terwyl dit betekenisvol is dat die Nuwe NP nie aan die verkiesing deelgeneem het nie;
(2) aangesien die Universiteit van Pretoria die enigste universiteit is waar studenteraadsverkiesings op ‘n partypolitieke grondslag tussen so baie partye plaasvind, die verkiesingsuitslag as ‘n duidelike aanduiding van jongmense se huidige politieke voorkeure gesien kan word;
(3) die groei in steun vir die VF aan die huidige politieke moddergooiery tussen die DA en die Nuwe NP toegeskryf kan word, asook die taaldebat rondom universiteite, aangesien die posisie van Afrikaans by die Universiteit van Pretoria een van die belangrike temas vir die VF se verkiesingsveldtog was; en
(4) die uitslag by Tukkies die groei wat die VF die afgelope tyd landswyd op alle vlakke ervaar, bevestig en dat die verkiesing in 2004 hierdie tendens verder sal bevestig. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the FF:
That the House notes that -
(1) in the recent student council election at the University of Pretoria that was fought on a party-political basis, the DA was fourth with 623 votes, the PAC youth’s Pasma third with 676 votes, the ANC/Sasco alliance second with 979 votes, and that the election was convincingly won by the Freedom Front Youth and Tas with 2008 votes, while it is significant that the New NP did not participate in the election;
(2) since the University of Pretoria is the only university where the student council elections take place on a party-political basis among so many political parties, the result of the election can be seen as a clear indication of the youth’s current political preferences;
(3) the growth in support for the FF can be attributed to the current political mudslinging between the DA and the New NP, as well as the language debate concerning universities, seeing that the position of Afrikaans at the University of Pretoria was one of the most important themes of the FF’s election campaign; and
(4) the outcome at Tukkies confirms the growth that the FF has recently been experiencing at all levels throughout the country, and that the election in 2004 will further confirm this trend.]
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of Azapo: That the House -
(1) notes the increase in the levels of unemployment, the deepening poverty and ever escalating food prices;
(2) notes further that -
(a) these are the results of the Government's macroeconomic
policies;
(b) whilst recognising the relief programme initiated by the
Government, Azapo nonetheless believes that the issuing of
vouchers and other measures are not a sustainable solution,
unless accompanied by job creation programmes; and
(c) Azapo urges the Government to speed up land redistribution so
that the people can produce food on their own as a strategy to
alleviate poverty and reduce unemployment.
Ms X C MAKASI: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that the theme for this month is ``the protection of the rights of the child’’;
(2) further notes that Pretoria High Court Judge Eben Jordaan sentenced a Roodepoort couple for murdering their child and for assault with the intent to do grievous bodily harm to their second child;
(3) believes that child abuse is a gross human rights violation, is barbaric and inhumane;
(4) further believes that the courts, the law enforcement officers and the people as a whole have a duty to protect children, to uphold and to defend the rights of children;
(5) welcomes the sentence against the couple; and (6) hopes that this sentence will serve as a deterrent to others to desist from such barbaric acts.
[Applause.]
Mr N J CLELLAND-STOKES: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:
That this House -
(1) notes that President Mbeki’s new luxury jet was sneaked into the country in the dead of night;
(2) further notes that -
(a) many world leaders use their countries' commercial airlines;
(b) the president of Botswana flies economy class, if necessary;
(c) the Australian prime minister's new jet is less luxurious than
President Mbeki's; and
(d) this jet has cost the people of South Africa almost R600 million
and will cost the taxpayer R13,6 million per year to maintain;
and
(3) concludes that this new jet represents the deepening rift between the ANC elite and the South African people, and is truly a case of ``the ego has landed’’.
[Applause.]
Mr B W DHLAMINI: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) notes that according to the recently published biography of former Springbok rugby player Chester Williams, there were numerous injustices that he had to endure as a black player in South African rugby teams during his time as a player;
(2) further notes that several prominent black rugby players have come out in support of the allegations made by Williams;
(3) realises that discrimination against a player on the basis of race is totally unacceptable and cannot be tolerated; and
(4) calls on all parties concerned to work together to stamp out racism and discrimination in rugby and sports in general.
Ms E GANDHI: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the hon Nkosazana Zuma, received an award from the International Women’s Forum in a special ceremony titled ``Women who make a difference’’, in Mexico last Saturday;
(2) further notes that this award recognises Minister Zuma’s role in -
(a) pioneering laws that contributed to affordable drugs and
medicine;
(b) fostering a better quality of life for people through the
provision of primary health care; and
(c) efforts aimed at bringing about peace, security and stability on
the African continent;
(3) believes that this award is a recognition of the ANC Government’s programme to build a better life for the people of South Africa, the region and the continent; and (4) congratulates Minister Nkosazana Zuma for receiving this prestigious award.
[Applause.]
CONGRATULATIONS TO SOUTH AFRICAN SPORTSMEN
(Draft Resolution)
Mr T D LEE: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) extends its congratulations to -
(a) Ernie Els on his fourth victory in the World Match Play golf
championships at the weekend; and
(b) Gary Kirsten, who became the first cricketer in the world to
score centuries against every test-playing nation when he
accumulated 150 runs against Bangladesh;
(2) acknowledges the credit that our sportsmen bring to South Africa with their performance on the world stage.
Agreed to.
PLOT TO ASSASSINATE JUDGE UNCOVERED
(Draft Resolution)
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes an alleged plot to assassinate a top woman judge, Justice Lucy Mailula;
(2) further notes that Justice Mailula is well known for her tough stand against criminals, rapists and murderers;
(3) also notes that the police are reported to have timeously uncovered this diabolic plot to kill one of the shining examples of women judges in our country; and
(4) congratulates the police for a job well done, and urges the VIP Unit to tighten security around all judges.
Agreed to.
The SPEAKER: Order! I wish to acknowledge, and wish members to welcome, the presence amongst us of the president of the Swiss parliament and her delegation, who are visiting this Parliament. [Applause.] We welcome you, Madam President, and we hope that we will develop closer relations between our two legislatures. [Applause.]
CONSIDERATION OF FIFTH REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON AFRICAN UNION
Ms B MBETE: Madam Speaker, I would like to start by briefly sketching the background to the Working Group on the African Union, that is, the parliamentary working group on the African Union. Hon members will remember that when the President addressed Parliament on 31 October in 2001, he made reference to the positive contribution of this Parliament during the ratification of the Constitutive Act in 2000. The President further appealed to us to continue to contribute ``to the form, content and direction of the union’’ before it was launched.
After that particular debate in October 2001, on 16 November the House formed the Working Group on the African Union so that we could focus on the work that had to be done, as requested by the President. We decided that this group had to be small. It had to be separate from the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs, which we believe has enough on its plate as it has to deal with the whole broad spectrum of the foreign policy of the country. So, this working group was formed, consciously, as a very small group, and its members are from the different parties in Parliament.
We were formed, as I have said, in November 2001. Our serious work started at the beginning of this year. As hon members know, we are today tabling our fifth report. We have reported on various matters earlier this year, including two seminars that we have held in the course of this year which looked at issues and details about the African Union.
At some point this year we discussed whether we should continue as a working group now that the African Union has been launched in Durban. A decision was taken, on the basis of the amount of work that is still facing us in Parliament, to focus on various aspects of the African Union, and that we should continue as this working group. However, at that point we issued an invitation to all parties in Parliament to come and join us. We encouraged hon members not only to join us when we hold seminars on various aspects of our work, but to actually join the working group. I am sad to report that, in fact, there has not been any enthusiasm from members of Parliament.
We take this opportunity still to appeal to members of the various political parties to join us. If one considers the fact that South Africa is the chair of the African Union, members of Parliament dealing with whatever portfolios in Parliament ought to be interested in the work, organs, structures and procedures of the African Union, so that as we interact with fellow Africans in our work and in international relations in particular, we are able to be enriched and empowered by the work that is done in this working group.
In this, our fifth report, we propose to convene a third workshop on the challenges of the establishment of the African Union. But I would like to report that this morning the working group had its meeting and we decided that instead of having this seminar in November, as we propose in the report that is before members, we should rather postpone it to early next year, because we believe that we would benefit, if we do that, from the fact that we have commissioned research.
We have four different research areas or projects that are going on simultaneously at the moment. But, in addition, if the extraordinary session of the Assembly of the African Union does take place either late this year or early next year to consider the proposed amendments to the Constitutive Act, as tabled by Libya, then we would at least, when we do have that seminar, benefit from a progress report that would come from that extraordinary session of the Assembly of the African Union. We hope that members agree with us that it would be better for us to postpone this seminar from November to early next year.
I would now like to look briefly at the challenges that face South Africa as the country that is chairing the African Union. I think that the major challenge emanates from the fact that we are chairing the African Union at a time when it is in the process of being established. To start with, a process of disestablishment of the OAU is still going on. The OAU had its own structures which were totally different from the structures which are being formed on the basis of the Constitutive Act. So, the previous secretariat of the OAU is currently acting as an interim commission, which is one of the organs of the AU which was launched in July. The challenge is that we have to be looking at issues in terms of the vision and the mission of the AU. We have to give political guidance at a time when, in fact, there is a lot of work that has to continue in order to operationalise the organs of the AU. The four organs of the AU that were launched in Durban in July this year are the Assembly, which is the forum of the heads of states; the Executive Council, which is the structure of the foreign ministers of Africa; the Committee of Permanent Representatives, which is the committee of ambassadors who are based in Addis Ababa; and the Commission, which is the structure which used to be the secretariat and which headed by the former secretary-general of the OAU, but which is now a commission that is headed by a chairperson who is currently an interim chairperson of the Commission.
Members will realise that the Commission is a very important structure, because it is the structure that actually drives the implementation of the programme and the decisions of the African Union, and that runs the headquarters of the African Union in Addis Ababa. As I say, currently it is the former secretariat. The five regions of Africa are supposed to be seized with the process of recruiting ten commissioners who will then be appointed at the July 2003 summit of the AU.
At the Durban summit it was decided that we need to make sure that there is 50% representation of women in the Commission of the African Union. So, each of the five regions of Africa, as they nominate their two commissioners for possible appointment in July next year, must nominate a man and a woman. This is a decision which was taken by the summit in Durban in July this year. Therefore we, as South Africa and as SADC, need to do our own internal work in the region to consider our two nominees, a man and a woman, who would then be considered for appointment at the next summit.
The importance of the role of the Commission is also crucial, in particular, because there are specific portfolios that are headed by eight of the commissioners in the Commission. The Commission, of course, has its chairperson and deputy chairperson. There are eight additional commissioners, each of whom heads a different portfolio. This is very important for us to note. Even as we think about how we are approaching the issue of the recruitment of commissioners, we need to look at the issue of which portfolios we think are the most important.
I would like to talk briefly about the amendments which I referred to earlier on and which, as I said, are likely to be considered by an extraordinary session of the Assembly, which is likely to sit either at the end of this year or at the beginning of next year. These proposed amendments were submitted by Libya. The Working Group on the African Union of Parliament has divided into three task teams. One of them has been looking at the issue of the establishment of the AU and has, among other things, considered the question of these proposed amendments.
The view of the task team is that a number of these proposed amendments from Libya have the unfortunate effect of moving the powers of persuasion from collectives in the African Union to individuals. I would like to give members an example. Article 6 refers to the Assembly and states that the Assembly shall meet once a year in ordinary session, and at the request of any member state, and, on approval by a two-thirds majority of member states, the Assembly shall meet in extraordinary session. The amendment that is being proposed says that at the request of its chairperson or any of its members, and on approval by a two-thirds majority of all its members, the Assembly shall meet in extraordinary session.
In our view, it is not a good idea to move that possibility of persuading other member states to hold an extraordinary session from member states to individuals who sit in the Assembly. We believe that that is not a good idea. Therefore, we are proposing to our executive that this is not an amendment that should be entertained, and that we should rather retain the term ``member state’’. If one retains that language, it means that an issue will be considered by a country through its structures, hopefully through its parliament, and then a position will be adopted and taken forward to persuade other member states, rather than a position being adopted by the chairperson or members of the Assembly, in other words, the heads of states who sit in that forum.
I see that the light is flickering. I hope that I have said enough to give members some idea as to what this working group has been doing. [Applause.]
Mr W J SEREMANE: Madam Speaker, this being a debate on matters African, allow me the indulgence of fulfilling my family responsibilities in a truly African fashion.
The Seremanes, the Moshafis, the Lebekos and the Segatlhes wish sincerely to thank members of this Parliament for their strengthening and comforting messages of condolence and support during the sad period of bereavement for our son, Kedifentse, and two weeks later for my father-in-law, George Lebeko. Thanks too for the messages of support that some members continue giving to Esther, my wife, and my younger sister, Mmabatho, as they go through their sensitive surgical operations. May God bless all of you a hundredfold.
Re a leboga go menagane. [Thank you very much.]
Inkomo ma swi twa. [Thank you.]
The task before us is to consider the fifth report of the Working Group on the African Union. We have repeatedly affirmed that Africa needs organs such as the African Union, the Pan-African Parliament and related initiatives, such as the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. It seems there is strong agreement on the need for the existence of these initiatives. However, the differences are on the modus operandi or approaches for achieving the various objectives to make the 21st century Africa’s time.
It is also an African self-constructed challenge of two scenarios which I term the ``kneepad’’, cap-in-hand existence, and the pulling-up-of- bootstraps, self-assertive scenario. Africa has to choose. The Setswana idiom … ….mphemphe wa lapisa, motho o kgonwa ke sa gagwe … [… people should refrain from asking from others, and work for themselves …]
… holds true and stares Africa in the face. Translated the idiom says: Self-reliance is better than begging or depending on alms and hand-outs.
The Working Group on the African Union was established in order to consider the implementation of the Constitutive Act of the African Union. Without overlooking the qualitative contents of the reports, it is heartening that in a period of just one year, we already have the fifth report of the working group. Do they not deserve a pat on the back?
The introduction of the fifth report states, inter alia, that two seminars were held especially for parliamentarians to familiarise members with the African Union and related issues. We recommend further seminars, not only for parliamentarians, but for civil society at large. It does not speak well of Africa’s ministers of finance, and ministers of trade and industry to have scant information on Nepad, etc. What about the people on the ground if that is the case?
The aforegoing therefore endorses the report’s recommendation that the working group be mandated to continue with its work on the African Union, no mean task, I must say. We support this recommendation and other recommendations will follow.
The raising of awareness and popularising of the African Union mentioned in paragraph 2(a) are commendable and should really be made a joint responsibility of all AU members, that is, African parliaments. The parliamentary delegations to these interactive meetings should be as inclusive and as representative as possible of diverse views and opinions that are prevalent, yet always striving for consensus to facilitate ultimate unity in action and implementation.
Africa is still very fragmented in many respects. Without in any way wishing to nullify Africa’s diversity or its beauty and splendour, this is a hard fact for Africa to face. The second recommendation states that there is a need for interacting with other African parliaments and parliamentary formations, including the SADC parliamentary forum. This seems to be a reasonable proposition. However, fiscal implications should be considered carefully. Countries can ill afford unending meetings, jamborees and talkshops when poverty-stricken citizens continue to starve and buckle under the heavy yoke of poverty, some of it self-inflicted by shortsighted economic policies and practices.
Paragraph 2(b)(i) states that the ratification of the protocol should by now have been accomplished. The meeting of African parliaments tried to do that in Cape Town recently. We must allude to this in terms of representative participation. Here I cite the delegation from Lesotho which fully and fairly represented all parties in Lesotho, the ruling party, as well as minority and opposition parties, for the simple reason that this kind of equity and justice binds all views people may have to the ultimate outcome of deliberations. Marginalising others is actually creating a problem with regard to implementation and outcomes. This must always be borne in mind when we want to do things together on our march to the establishment of a Pan-African Parliament, which is no easy task as the acronym PAP may suggest to many others.
Paragraph 2(b)(ii) states that we also need to consider financial implications. Spending in faith is not always desirable. We should remember the poor, the sick, the disabled and the disadvantaged citizens in all our efforts. The economic health and social problems will not be solved by words or rhetoric from summits and seminars.
Having said that, this does not discount dialogue and interaction, nor frugality and efficient systems and practices that are imperatives that Africa must constantly uphold and strive for.
The third recommendation does not prescribe, but rightly proposes. The National Assembly must apply its mind to this. In conclusion, I wish to point out that the following concepts and initiatives related to the African Union should be looked at closely and put under scrutiny: political governance, economic corporate governance, human rights and the rule of law, and monitoring and evaluating the AU and Nepad. The core themes must be looked at constantly. Peer group review mechanisms should not be avoided, but vigorously explored, put in place and implemented unflinchingly without fear or favour.
Maverick states must be checked and chastised in some corrective manner. Whilst respecting the sovereignty of member states, there is a need to understand and accept that human rights are indivisible, and no nation can live and conduct itself in total isolation of its neighbours. Zimbabwean blunders in dealing with legitimate concerns do impact negatively on neighbours, despite the sovereignty notion. Mutually benefiting peer group review mechanisms should not be cynically and maliciously misconstrued as the bellicose wish to overrun or topple neighbours. Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Speaker, I rise on behalf of the IFP to support the fifth report of the Working Group on the African Union. Even in doing so, may I, on behalf of all of my colleagues in the House here, commiserate with the hon Joe Seremane on the sad losses and the bereavement that his immediate and extended family have experienced, as well as in respect of the ill health that his wife is suffering. Joe, our best wishes go with you.
Having said that, may I then say how beholden I am to both Mr Seremane and the Deputy Speaker for laying out in front of members the work that has been done by the committee in respect of advancing the aims of the African Union.
The injunction today holds that we should think globally and act locally. Likewise, we should be thinking continentally and also acting locally. We need to do this because throughout the world the need to achieve an economy of scale has become imperative. If we see what has happened recently with the referendum in Ireland, the clear message is that the markets of the world are expanding. Now, if we think of the Asian markets, India and China and Malaysia, they make up virtually half of humanity. Their market is virtually a market of about three billion people, and if we look at the European Union now, it is in a position where very soon the euro will be able to challenge the supremacy of the dollar. That is how strong the European market has become.
As for us in South Africa, just 12 years ago we were battling to put a parliament of all the people of this country together, and eight years down the road our challenge is not only to advance the cause of this Parliament, but, at the same time, to begin to argue for the establishment of a Pan- African Parliament. We need to do this in order that we can meet the push- pull principle that operates in the economies of the world.
South Africa, for example, is an economy that is being pushed by global requirements for greater competitiveness and better quality, and as we begin to answer these questions of the push, if we make the advances, then we also begin to pull the neighbouring economies into that structure. We have to make certain that we have a pool of skills, the capital and the know-how to be able to compete effectively in the marketplace.
As we mentioned the other day when we were questioning the President, South Africa has to have a growth rate of at least 6%. A growth rate of about 3% will not be adequate to remove poverty, hunger and joblessness in our economy. We have to try to reach 6%, and I submit that we cannot do so unless we begin to achieve economies of scale. And to be able to achieve economies of scale, we have to look at Africa as the total market, a market of a little less than one billion people.
At the same time, as we hope to advance politically and economically, we need to recognise that the African Union and the manner in which it is structured - the Deputy Speaker mentioned this - present a unique opportunity for Africa to advance human rights. Zimbabwe, for example, at the moment is not a role model. With an assault on civil liberties the educators in Zimbabwe, the lawyers in Zimbabwe, the judges in Zimbabwe are all being constrained. That can never be right, and that can never be healthy. And as Zimbabwe goes down economically, one of the big markets of South Africa is going down economically. If Zimbabwe had been a vibrant and strong economy, our own growth rate would have been elevated.
It is in our interest, not only economically, but also from a humanitarian point of view, to see that human rights advance. My colleague Joe Seremane spoke about Nepad, the new opportunities for partnership, and the need to be able to have good governance, greater accountability and greater transparency in Africa as a whole, so that people can trade with one another in such a manner that the economies of all the African countries will grow.
This African Union will serve as a catalyst to ensure that these engines of growth will begin to produce the kind of growth we want.
I would like to look quickly at the Pan-African Parliament. The Pan-African Parliament will enable all of Africa, Africa’s leaders, to find a venue where they can, on a sustained basis, have dialogue and persuade one another. The Deputy Speaker emphasised the need for us, collectively, to persuade one another to better practices, better ways of doing things, and to growing the economies of all of our respective countries. If we have an exchange of ideas and the opportunity to harmonise our laws, the more we harmonise our laws, the better and easier it will become for us to trade with one another.
We would also be able to advance along the route of IT, air travel, ground travel, and all the other infrastructure development that would be so essential for Africa to begin to exploit its potential. Remember that Africa is extremely rich in natural resources, particularly water, which will become a very crucial factor in 10 to 15 years’ time.
With these resources, what is lacking is the psychological element. We as Africans do not think proudly of ourselves as Africans; we do not think positively of ourselves as Africans. We are more inclined to pull ourselves down and to degrade ourselves, rather than beginning to give ourselves the chance that Africa has a right, that the African Renaissance is a reality, that Nepad will deliver, that the African Union is not merely a replica of the old organ, but that it is entirely new, and that the Pan-African Parliament will be the cherry on the top.
We need to begin to reverse the way in which we have begun to see ourselves as Africans. Cape Town was the cradle of humanity, Cairo was the cradle of civilisation, and if the cradle of humanity and the cradle of civilisation come together, what is there that is not possible? We have had a 40 000 to 50 0000 years advance start on which we have not capitalised. Now comes the opportunity for us to do so, and particularly to advance the role of women in Africa, because it is through women, who are less combative and less inclined to make war, that we stand the best chance of putting Africa on the map. Forward, Africa!
Dr R H DAVIES: Madam Speaker, successful regional integration programmes have all had in common the fact that they have been driven by a high level of political will. The European Union, which is widely seen as one of the most advanced regional integration projects of recent history, was driven by a strong political commitment in continental Western European states, rooted in the perception that economic and political integration were essential to create new realities in Europe that would overcome the rivalries between various continental powers that had torn that continent apart in two world wars.
Conversely, a number of ambitious but often objectively necessary regional integration programmes, particularly but not only in developing regions, have faltered precisely because they have received mere lip service and have not been underpinned by any real substantive political commitment. The AU, or more precisely the transition from the OAU to the AU, was inspired by a very well-founded perception by the continent’s leaders that there was a need for Africa to take a major step forward towards advancing the long- cherished goal of building African unity to cope with the new challenges posed by globalisation and the related threats of marginalisation.
The process which we know as globalisation has created important new realities. It is associated with a major technological revolution, the rise of information and communication technology, of microelectronics and of ICT- derived knowledge as the major driving force of productivity and accumulation. Various writers have compared this transition to the Industrial Revolution of 18th and 19th century Europe in terms of its significance for the organisation of production, and the development of productive forces in all branches and sectors of economic activity. It is, of course, posing major new demands in terms of infrastructure development, particularly in the telecommunications area. Nepad highlights the challenges facing Africa in this regard when it notes that there are only 918 mainline telephones per 1 000 people in Africa, compared to 146 for the world as a whole, and 567 for high-income countries.
Globalisation is also associated with a massive increase in cross-border economic activity. At the same time, and inextricably linked to the very same processes, it has seen widening inequality and marginalisation of communities and previously existing productive activity, all underpinned by unfair trade rules and by inappropriate policy prescriptions.
The AU project and Nepad are both predicated on the recognition that Africa needs to act collectively to cope with these challenges. Nepad sets a goal of achieving 7% growth and of halving the number of people in absolute poverty on this continent by the year 2015. While Nepad defines an agenda of collective action within the continent, as well as between the continent and external partners to address infrastructural development, to promote human resource development and to advance sectoral programmes, including agriculture which is critical on this continent, the AU Constitutive Act seeks to propel the continent further towards building both socioeconomic and political unity.
Success in advancing both the sectoral and infrastructural objectives of Nepad and the more directly integrationist goals of the AU will need to be underpinned by a firm political commitment. The programmes themselves, both the Nepad programmes and the AU integrationist programmes, will have to be driven by a firm development-oriented political leadership. There will also have to be political commitment to acting collectively to confront challenges that no single country can successfully overcome. The political will needed to drive the AU and Nepad programmes needs to be built not just at the level of heads of state and of ministers, executives and governments, but also at the level of parliaments and of civil society constituencies.
It would have been very easy for us in this Parliament to have approached the issue of the AU with a burst of activity after the President’s call which the Deputy Speaker referred to in her speech or around the time of the Durban Summit, followed by a return to business as usual in which the question of African unity had only a marginal place in our daily work programmes. I believe that it is to the credit of the leadership of this Parliament, and to yourself, Madam Speaker, and the Deputy Speaker in particular, that you have recognised that there is a need for this Parliament to maintain the momentum of its work on the African Union.
One of the key recommendations in the report of the working group which is before the House today, is that the Working Group on the African Union must continue its work, must continue to function and must do this at least until work on the AU is firmly embedded in the routine activities of portfolio committees and other structures of our Parliament.
There are a number of recommendations in this report which have been dealt with by previous speakers and which will also be taken up by speakers who will follow me. I am going to confine my remarks to a few points which were made in the working group’s task team which dealt with issues of socioeconomic integration and the involvement of civil society. Previous reports of the working group have identified the need for us to develop further clarity and to take forward a debate on the strategic approach to building socioeconomic integration on the continent.
From the Constitutive Act and the Sirte Declaration and other founding documents, it is possible to discern broad agreement and guidance on certain general themes. These include a strong sense that there is a need to accelerate the process of building socioeconomic, as well as political integration, and also a view that regional bodies such Ecowas, SADC, Comesa and the Southern African Customs Union are important building blocks to broader continental integration. At this point I think we should just take note of and welcome the fact that a new Southern African Customs Union Agreement was signed in Gaborone yesterday. This agreement will be presented to this Parliament for ratification early next year. We will have an opportunity to discuss it in detail then. Then I think today we should just take note that this new SACU agreement provides for us in South Africa to act collectively with our partners in the Customs Union in taking decisions on issues which previously were the exclusive prerogative of South Africa. It marks a new mode of decision-making, a new mode of collective decision-making which I think will stand us in good stead in our broader endeavours on the African continent.
However, while the founding documents do give us a broad indication and a broad direction, there are many critical issues which are not yet defined in any detail. These include the relationship between the infrastructure, sectoral and social development programme of Nepad - now the programme of the AU - and the more directly integrationist agenda foreseen in the Constitutive Act and the Sirte Declaration. In various workshops and discussions in the working group on this topic, several of us have argued - and this has been a theme in earlier reports to this House as well - in favour of a developmental approach to promoting socioeconomic integration. There is a considerable body of literature which has argued that conventional trade integration approaches which focus on removing tariff and regulatory barriers, and moving in linear succession from free trade areas to customs unions and common markets and finally economic unions, are not necessarily the most appropriate in developing regions where the major barriers to interregional trade are not necessarily tariffs or regulations, but underdeveloped production structures and inadequate infrastructure.
This is not to say that trade integration issues are not important, but rather that they have to be part of a wider agenda also embracing also sectoral co-operation and strategic co-ordination, in which developmental considerations inform decisions about the rates and pace of trade integration. The problem is that, as the literature on integration theory tells us, a developmental approach to integration, embracing a positive agenda of co-operation and co-ordination, requires the building of a high level of political commitment and political will to drive it.
Mindful of some of these complexities and of the need to take forward debates on this issue, Parliament has commissioned a research team, led by the Human Sciences Research Council and the Africa Institute, to investigate the approaches to and experiences of subregional integration efforts on our continent. We are not looking to a mere assembly of empirical facts, but rather to the highlighting of lessons and experiences that can inform a strategic and conceptual debate on the appropriate approach to promoting socioeconomic integration on our continent. The working group is proposing that this research team should work in conjunction with the reference group composed of parliamentarians, and that the results of this research should be available both to inform decisions of executive structures and debates by parliamentarians, both within our own country and across the continent. Hopefully, some of the results may be available at the time of the workshop early next year. The other issue which the task team on socioeconomic integration concerned itself with was the issue of civil society involvement in AU processes. Here we were not necessarily very profound. We, along with many others, noted that there is a certain amount of civil society apathy around AU processes, and yet if unity has to be built, it is critical that it is driven by processes that reach beyond Government officials, to embrace formations of civil society. Indeed, I think we need to take account of the fact that there is already a very high level of what could be called informal integration on our continent, which is, as we know, divided into countries by artificial boundaries imposed by colonialism that divided pre- existing communities.
People-to-people integration in West Africa and Southern Africa, to cite just two regions, is already quite marked with unrecorded trade, migration, common cultures and languages reaching across national borders. The porous borders that we often talk about need to be seen not just as a threat, but also as an opportunity for taking integration processes further forward. We must find ways in our discussions on promoting integration to draw in our communities and involving them in decisions on the agendas to take us forward. The working group’s recommendations in this regard are quite modest. Parliament can and should play a role in interacting with civil society formations in this country and outside, to exchange views and assist in promoting further dialogue on this question.
We are beginning an important journey. It is one that has the potential to result in a major step forward to achieving the unity that has long been recognised as essential for our continent to address the critical challenges facing us. If we rise to this challenge, we would have taken a major step towards achieving the goal of making the 21st century an African century. However, this will require hard work and continued engagement. The working group is recommending to this House that we continue to make our contribution in this regard. [Applause.]
Mrs ANNA VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, belonging to the Working Group on the African Union gives one the opportunity to experience participatory democracy functioning in a self-evident, almost casual manner - participatory in the sense that representatives of almost the entire South African political spectrum are working side by side, jointly doing our Parliament’s share of developing the African Recovery Plan.
The undramatic tone of these deliberations gives the lie to the really dramatic fact that in a continent chronically riven by strife and, just right next door, to the ongoing horror on our border, here a group of politically diverse parliamentarians are the living proof that peace attends the adherence to the principles of a constitutional democracy. It is beginning to seem a long time ago now, but I shall never forget the almost palpable disappointment of the mass media that South Africa did not erupt in the violence they had so monotonously and perhaps ignorantly predicted for us when the result of the 1994 elections became known. It is great to be a South African.
Afrika staan in die teken van transformasie. Die sekondêre stryd wat deur buitekontinentale magte oor hom afgebring is, was deel van ‘n ongelukkige fase van sy transformasie waarvan die nagevolge nog lank nie verwerk is nie. Deels was dit ook deur sy eie toedoen, en die volwassenheid wat nou toenemend sigbaar word, kan gesien word in die wyse waarop daar hand in eie boesem gesteek word en eerlik gesoek word na oplossings. Dit lyk soms of die publiek en die wêreld nog nie mooi begryp watter groot ding daar besig is om hier te gebeur nie. As ‘n mens so terugkyk oor die geskiedenis dan wonder ‘n mens hoe dit sou wees as die ou demokrasieë in die genadelose kollig van die openbare media en die meedoënlose blik van die kykende miljoene hul duisende jare van langsame ontwikkeling en bloedige stryd sou moes voltrek.
Ons het die literêre nalatenskappe van die Odusseia en die Illias; ons lees in die geskiedenisboeke van Genghis Khan; ons lees van die Visigote, die Vandale, die Vikinge, en dit is soos veraf verhale - iets onwerkliks wat ons nie aangaan nie. Ons lees in die Bybel en in die Koran van moord- en rooftogte, stryd en oorwinnings van duisende jare gelede en ons voel dit nie aan ons vel nie. Afrika beskik nie oor hierdie luukse nie.
Ons moet die lang, tydsame pad van ons voorsate nou in die tegnologiese eeu aflê met die tyd wat op ons inteleskopeer, terwyl ‘n nogal nie te geduldige wêreld soos ‘n kritiese skoonma gereeld op ons pik. ‘n Skoonseun is nooit volmaak nie, maar daar sal ver gesoek moet word om ‘n skoonseun soos mnr Thabo Mbeki te kry - tekortkominge en al - want die lobola wat hy bring, is die Afrika-unie en Nepad, en die G8 het dit aanvaar en sy bruidskat op die tafel gesit. Ons taak is om die transformasie reg te laat verloop. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Africa bears the stamp of transformation. The secondary struggle that external continental powers have brought down on it was in fact already a part of an unfortunate phase of its transformation, of which the consequences have not by far been processed yet. It was also partly due to its own doing, and the maturity that has now become increasingly visible can be seen in the manner in which it is searching its own heart in its sincere search for solutions. At times it appears as if the public and the world do not entirely understand the enormity of that which is happening here. If one looks back on the history one wonders how it would have been if the old democracies were in the ruthless spotlight of the public media and the relentless glance of millions watching how they had to carry out thousands of years of slow development and bloody struggle.
We have the literary legacy of the Odusseia and the Illias; we read about Genghis Khan in history books; we read about the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Vikings, and it is like distant tales - something unreal that does not concern us. We read in the Bible and in the Koran about murder and robbery, struggles and victories of thousands of years ago and we are not touched by it. Africa does not dispose of such luxury. We must now travel the long and slow road of our forefathers in this age of technology, with time closing in on us, while a rather impatient world invariably regularly carps at us like a critical mother-in-law. A son-in- law is never perfect, but you would have to look far and wide to find a son- in-law like Mr Thabo Mbeki - in spite of his shortcomings - because he brings the African Union and Nepad as lobola, and the G8 accepted this and put his dowry on the table. Our task is to make the transformation proceed smoothly.]
Wise and sensible leadership is required to undo the consequences of the disastrous socialist policies of the Cold War period, which left Africa so far behind the Oriental economies. They escaped the misfortune of having leaders advised and educated by the socialist intellectuals of Albion. They escaped being infected by the second-hand indignation transferred to them from self-serving movements across the Atlantic and elsewhere. They also largely escaped the effects of reckless revolutionary promises. Transformation has to deliver not only redistribution, but also accessible and sustainably growing economies. Taking away the farms or jobs in the hands of productive minorities will not restore sub-Saharan Africa to what it was before, among other things, the impulse of the Little Ice Age in the northern hemisphere sent scores of pioneers to warmer climes.
Mr Mbeki and his colleagues in many African states know this. We know this. As regional leader, our task is to assist in bringing the benefits of transformation to the peoples of Africa without losing or destroying the human infrastructure and the administrative systems that implement delivery and, most importantly, where these do not exist, to grow and develop them.
Die begrip ``parlement’’ stem nie oral in Afrika ooreen nie. In heelwat lande bestaan daar hoegenaamd nie so iets nie. Dit alleen behoort ‘n aanduiding te gee van die taak wat Suid-Afrika, sy leierskap en sy vennote in hierdie visie op hande het. Dis moeilik genoeg om ‘n minister so ver te kry om die insigte te deel wat parlementslede soms ontwikkel weens hul blootstelling aan gewone kiesers of rolspelers. Oral het kabinette en uitvoerende gesag die neiging om parlemente te gebruik wanneer dit hulle pas en notisie van hulle te neem as dit hul doelwitte dien.
Ons sal ons rol as toesighouer oor die belange van die publiek en as wetgewers al baie beter kan speel as ons administratief meer doeltreffend kan funksioneer. Ook meer bystand per parlementslid sal ons in staat stel om onsself beter te bemagtig om die werksaamhede van ministeries en departemente te volg, ons kiesers by te staan en die publiek te betrek by besluitneming. Des te meer geld dit die res van Afrika. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[All over Africa the concept ``parliament’’ differs. In a considerable number of countries nothing of the sort exists. This alone should give an indication of the task at hand for South Africa, its leadership and its partners in this vision. It is difficult enough to get a minister to share the insights that members of parliament develop at times due to their exposure to ordinary voters or role-players. Cabinets and executive powers all over have the tendency to use parliaments whenever it suits them and to take notice of them if they serve their objectives.
We would already be able to play a better role as the overseer of the public’s interests and as legislators if we could function more effectively with regard to administrative functions. More support for each member of Parliament will also enable us to empower ourselves more to pursue the activities of Ministries and departments, to support voters and to involve the public in decision-making. This applies even to a greater degree to the rest of Africa.]
The role of Parliament in curbing the misuse of power by the executive and the state cannot be overstated. Existing parliaments need to be more proactive in promoting participation in an open democratic culture in their respective countries and in realising the objectives of the AU and Nepad. The New NP would like to move that the fifth report of the AU working group be adopted by Parliament. [Applause.]
Mr W G MAKANDA: Madam Speaker, on behalf of the UDM I wish to convey our deepest sympathies to hon Seremane for the tragic loss of his son and the passing on of his relative. May they rest in peace.
The African Union has been launched and a task team has been charged with deliberating on the functioning of its priority organs. It is hoped that the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament will put Africa on the course of building African unity and the realisation of the African dream of a peaceful, productive, prosperous and an independent continent that can interact with others as an equal on the global stage.
This is a great ideal, and all Africans ought to pool their energies and resources to realise it. However, we must be realistic and recognise that this will be a long and arduous road. We are a deeply fractured continent as a consequence of our history. While we should not dwell on these weaknesses, we need to put them into perspective when we chart the way forward. Our acknowledgement of the difficulties we encounter on the African terrain will inform the tactics and strategies that we will adopt from time to time.
We need to deal meaningfully and effectively with Africa’s internecine wars which deplete our human, natural and economic resources. We have to stop the plundering of our economic resources by rapacious international giants which are driven by a profit motive and relegate the continental developmental needs to the background.
There is an imperative to reduce economic dependence on the North. Nepad is intended to bring about this objective. It is, however, important to realise that the responsibility to drive this process is in Africa’s hands, rather than in the hands of the developed North. Africa is drawn in colour. We are a multicultured community with a diverse history of slavery and colonialisation. Therefore our levels of development are varied and uneven. As a consequence of this, we have evolved or had imposed on us different and sometimes conflicting political institutions. In applying the peer review mechanism of the AU, we must constantly bear this in mind when evaluating adherence by member states to the principles of the AU. No one country can afford to be seen to be prescribing to its peers.
The parliamentary institution, as we know it, is a borrowed concept from our former colonisers. It can be put to good use and yield worthy results. There may be others who would argue that they have developed their own unique institutions from their peculiar social and cultural circumstances. It would not be wise to use value judgments in appraising such deliberative organs. There must be a way by which we can march in step and arrive at our ultimate goal, notwithstanding our great diversity. We support this report.
Adv Z L MADASA: Madam Speaker, I would like to commend our Parliament for not only establishing the Working Group on the African Union, but for the work done so far. I believe that we as a country must forge ahead with this process, as most nations are looking to us not only to lead, but also to show the way.
It is of great concern, however, that the transition from the OAU to the AU is still in a shambles. There is still no clarity as to the retention of personnel or otherwise. We appeal to the commission of the AU to work towards resolving this issue.
It is also of great concern that there is no indication yet whether the protocol establishing the Pan-African Parliament is now ratified by the requisite number of member states of the AU. The delay in the coming into existence of the Pan-African Parliament means the dream of our peoples to have a common platform and actively participate in decision-making regarding the challenges facing the continent will remain but a dream. The culture of democracy, good governance, respect for human rights, the rule of law and the strengthening of democratic institutions will remain ink written on paper if the Pan-African Parliament is not established.
Lastly, there is an immediate need to co-ordinate all the activities of the AU and its organs. The growing dichotomy between the AU process and Nepad is a cause for concern. We appeal to those involved to work together and amalgamate their activities. We support the recommendations of the report.
Ms S C VAN DER MERWE: Madam Speaker, in considering this report of the AU working group, I would like to address a few points on the importance and the necessity of our involvement as a parliament and as a country in the unfolding development of the African Union and its organs.
The African Union, like the OAU before it, is set in a specific time in history. When the OAU was formed in Addis Ababa in 1963, its task was broadly to mobilise the states of Africa to free the continent from colonial rule and apartheid. The OAU was successful in achieving this objective and now, at the start of the 21st century, the challenge for the new African Union is the economic development of the continent and the eradication of poverty.
This project requires a unity of purpose amongst the countries of Africa. It requires the same single-mindedness that the countries of the continent showed in liberating Africa from colonial occupation. At the launch of the African Union in July, our President made a call to us as South Africans to build that unity of purpose. He said:
The first task is to achieve unity, solidarity, cohesion, co-operation among the peoples of Africa and African states. We must build all the institutions necessary to deepen political, economic and social integration of the African continent. We must deepen the culture of collective action in Africa and in our relations with the rest of the world.
The African Union thus provides us with the instrument with which to focus on this integration of Africa with the institutions of the African Union, and the New Partnership for Africa’s Development is the vehicle for action.
Members will know that the African heads of state have endorsed Nepad as the development framework for the African Union. In doing so, they have affirmed their commitment to the promotion of democracy and its core values. They have committed themselves to working with renewed determination according to agreed principles, including the rule of law, the equality of all citizens before the law, individual and collective freedoms, equality of opportunity for all, the inalienable right to participate in the election of their leaders, adherence to the separation of powers, and others.
In this context, the Nepad steering committee has been working on the codes and standards and indicators for good governance on the continent. Next month, the Nepad heads of state implementation committee will meet in Nigeria to finalise the terms of the declaration of what has become known as the declaration on democracy, political, economic and corporate governance. The declaration will be supported by the now well-known African peer review mechanism, and is aimed at enhancing African ownership of its development agenda through a system of self-assessment that ensures that the policies of African countries are based on best current knowledge and practice. The African peer review mechanism is essentially an instrument voluntarily acceded to by member states of the African Union as an African self- monitoring mechanism. Its mandate is to ensure that the policies and practices of the participating states conform to the agreed political, economic and corporate governance values, codes and standards that will be contained in the declaration.
Once the implementation committee has met and finalised the contents of the declaration, participation in the process will be open to all member states of the African Union. Countries wishing to participate in the peer review mechanism will notify the chairman of the Nepad implementation committee, and this will entail an undertaking to submit to periodic peer reviews, as well as to facilitate such reviews and be guided by agreed parameters for good political governance, and good economic and corporate governance as well.
It is proposed that the peer review mechanism will be directed and managed by a panel of between five and seven eminent persons. The members of the panel must be Africans who have distinguished themselves in careers that are relevant to the work of the peer review mechanism and, in addition, members of the panel must be persons of high moral stature and demonstrate commitment to the ideals of Pan-Africanism.
The declaration and the peer review mechanism are not intended as instruments of punishment, but are instruments for development. Their words and their intentions will say that if we as a country subscribe to the terms and objectives of the declaration and submit ourselves to review by our peers, then we will benefit. If we do not, we exclude ourselves. It is as simple as that.
Which country would decide to exclude itself from the benefits of a better Africa, a programme of development for her people and a united bargaining tool for better trade access and development aid? There is no punishment, therefore, through subscribing to the declaration and applying standards of good governance, only self-banishment from the benefits of Nepad, if one does not.
In many ways, Nepad programmes are already underway in forums all over the continent. For example, there was the meeting, this past weekend in Johannesburg, of the finance Ministers from all over the continent. Ministers were united at this occasion in urging the continent to move quickly to finalise the peer review mechanism and show progress in implementing it. In fact, both Ghana and Uganda have already made know their intention to participate in the peer review mechanism.
The Africa Institute in Pretoria has gathered African academics together to discuss ways for them to popularise the African Union and Nepad programmes through the various institutions they represent. Members from this Parliament are engaged in multilateral parliamentary forums on the continent to build alliances and share information. In fact, our President himself is in Algeria today, meeting with the South African-Algerian Binational Commission.
It is important that we remember that Nepad is a partnership, and central to the Nepad vision is the building and sustaining of a genuine and constructive partnership between African states at one level, and the developed world at another. This involves harnessing the political will of the African leaders, as some of my colleagues have mentioned, to drive the initiative by building strong African institutions, expertise and capacity through partnerships premised on mutual benefit.
The G8 countries have entered into this partnership with us and have committed themselves to a plan of action on Nepad. The finance Ministers meeting in Johannesburg, which I referred to earlier, raised the important point in the partnership equation, and that is the equal responsibilities of our partners in developed countries.
In reviewing our African partners through the peer review mechanism, it should also be possible to review commitments made by our other partners in the developed world to monitor aid and trade. For example, to what degree have they fulfilled the commitments they have made? To what extent do they allow African countries ownership of their own programmes? To what degree do aid commitments come with strings attached? Then, of course, there is the burning question of access for African countries to developed country markets.
These will not be easy issues, but for our part, self-monitoring will be a central part of our accountability to our partners. For our developed country partners, the key commitment will be to ensure that all policies affecting African development are consistent with our mutual development goals, including market access and issues of debt and so on.
There are those who are sceptical about Nepad and whether it will work where other international initiatives have failed. Nepad is the first African-driven initiative. Our greatest incentive, therefore, is to make it work.
These are our projects, and we must work in our communities, in our unique and creative ways, to make this a broad programme for all our people, and we must succeed.
We in the ANC support the recommendations of the fifth report of the working group that the work is not complete, that we must continue with this work, and that we must enthusiastically take up the challenges that the AU faces. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, before I call on the next speaker, I would like to acknowledge members of the Zambian parliament who are visiting and are looking particularly at the work done in the Portfolio Committee on Health. Welcome, hon members. [Applause.]
Dr P W A MULDER: Mev die Speaker, tydens die Koue Oorlog het Afrika en die Organisasie vir Onverbonde Lande ‘n baie belangrike rol gespeel in die balans tussen die Weste aan die een kant en die Oosblok-lande aan die ander kant.
Met die val van die Berlynse Muur, en met die opbreek van die Sowjet-unie, het hierdie internasionale magsbalans totaal en permanent verskuif en is Afrika se rol geminimaliseer. Die nuwe magsblokke lê hoofsaaklik in Amerika aan die een kant, en Europa in die ooste, met die ou Oosbloklande wat ‘n mindere rol speel en Afrika wat totaal eintlik geïgnoreer word.
Teen hierdie agtergrond het die VF die stigting van die Afrika-unie gesteun. Ons dink dit is belangrik. Dit is belangrik dat Afrika homself red, want die res van die wêreld sien dit nie as ‘n prioriteit sover dit hulle aangaan nie. Maar ons het wel voorwaardes gestel en ons is ook bekommerd oor sekere sake. Een van die sake waaroor ons bekommerd is, is byvoorbeeld die Afrika-unie se strukture. Die Afrika-unie se strukture is tot ‘n groot mate dieselfde as die Europese Unie se strukture; daar is sekere oorvleuelings na albei kante toe. ‘n Belangrike verskil is egter dat in Europa se geval die Europese Unie met slegs enkele lede begin het. Daarvandaan is die Europese Unie uitgebrei deur nuwe lede by te kry wat aan sekere vereistes voldoen het, en wat dan gemaak het dat hulle lidmaatskap verdien. Eintlik presteer hulle om dit dan te kan verdien.
In Afrika se geval is alle Afrika-lande dadelik lede van die Afrika-unie. Die risiko hieraan verbonde is dat enkele lande wat dwarstrek of wat probleme veroorsaak, die hele AU se geloofwaardig en sukses kan vernietig. Ek kan aan Mugabe en Zimbabwe dink. Ek kan aan Libië dink, en nog voorbeelde.
Omdat Afrika-state hulle nie in die Afrika-unie hoef in te presteer''
nie, soos met Europese lande die geval is, is die peer review
mechanism’’, die oorsigmeganisme, wat my betref baie belangrik om te
verhoed dat die Afrika-unie as ‘n nuwe inisiatief dalk misluk. Ek dink die
gebeure in verskillende lande in Afrika bevestig dit, ook die Ivoorkus nou.
Daarom is dit vir ons uiters belangrik dat hierdie meganisme moet werk. Dit
is nog nie vir ons duidelik presies hoe dit aangepak gaan word nie, maar as
die Afrika-unie en Nepad misluk, dink ons nie Afrika gaan ‘n tweede kans
kry nie; dit mag ons laaste kans wees om ‘n sukses te maak hiervan.
(Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER: Madam Speaker, Africa and the Non-aligned Movement played a very important role during the Cold War in the balance between the West on the one hand and the Eastern bloc countries on the other.
The international power balance shifted totally and permanently with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the breaking up of the Soviet Union, and Africa’s role was minimalised. The new power blocks lie mainly in America on the one hand and Europe to the east; with the old Eastern bloc countries playing a lesser role, and Africa which is in fact totally ignored.
It is against this background that the FF has supported the establishment of the African Union. We think that it is important. It is important that Africa saves herself, because the rest of the world, as far as it concerns them, does not see this as a priority. However, we have certainly set conditions and we are also concerned about certain issues. One of the issues that concerns us, for example, is the structures of the African Union. The structures of the African Union are to a great extent similar to the structures of the European Union; there are certain overlappings to both sides. However, an important difference is that in the case of Europe the European Union started with only a few members. The European Union then expanded by acquiring new members who complied with certain requirements, which had them earn their membership. In fact, they achieved in order to deserve it.
In the case of Africa, all African countries became members of the African Union immediately. The risk here is that one or two countries who are recalcitrant or cause problems could destroy the credibility and success of the AU. I can think of Mugabe and Zimbabwe. I can think of Libya, and more examples.
Because African states do not have to achieve in order to belong to the African Union, as is the case with European countries, the peer review mechanism, the overseeing mechanism, as far as I am concerned, is very important to prevent the possible failure of the African Union as a new initiative. I think the events in various countries in Africa confirm this, as now in the Ivory Coast. It is therefore very important to us that this mechanism should work. It is not yet clear to us exactly how it will be tackled. We do not think that Africa will get a second chance if the African Union and Nepad fail; it may be our last chance to make a success of this.]
Mr I S MFUNDISI: Madam Speaker and hon members, the decision on 11 July 2000 by the 53 heads of state and governments on the African continent to adopt the Constitutive Act of the African Union has to be hailed as a major step in bringing Africans closer to one another. That the African Union was established in South Africa with pomp and fanfare earlier this year, makes it even more significant for us. The 40 objectives of the AU are a clear indication that the body is set to ameliorate living conditions of all people on the continent, and we all have to strive towards realising that. In summary, the objectives clearly point out that we all have to be our brothers’ keepers. We are indebted to the Speaker of this House for the passion she has for the African Union. May we, in the same breath, keep in mind the unanimous acceptance of the motion she passed in this House, calling for the Pan-African Parliament to be based in South Africa. That has to be realised.
We depend greatly on the strength of our colleagues who serve on the Working Group on the African Union to work tirelessly on the project. We hope our representatives at the recent IPU council, which was held in Geneva in September, have put across the feelings of South Africans on the AU.
We believe, in keeping with the recommendation of the meeting of African parliaments, held in this Chamber in June this year, that the SADC parliamentary group has actively set up a representative steering committee of parliamentarians to champion the cause of establishing the Pan-African Parliament. We concur that to keep Africans across the continent abreast of developments around the African Union, parliaments should hold workshops to educate the people on what the African Union is and what it aims to achieve. The UCDP is in total support of working towards the realisation that, as Africans, re ka kgona [we can].
Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Speaker, the PAC supports the 5th report and recommendations of the Working Group on the African Union. The ravages of slavery and colonialism sent Africa into the abyss of unprecedented inhumanity and humiliation. What can be done to restore Africa to her former power and glory must be done speedily and wisely.
Africa cannot be an economic slave of other nations for ever. The PAC is therefore interested in the African Union as a finished product which shall serve the best interests of the continent’s people, especially economically and technologically. We want to say loud and clear that the African Union must create a world of interdependence in which Africa is an equal partner.
Africa has resources. These resources must benefit her people more and develop this continent. Africa is reputed to have 80% of raw materials, compared with Europe’s 20%. There is no need for Africa to go to G8 countries, cap in hand. The G8 countries benefit from the raw materials of this continent which, by the way, must be exported from Africa to those countries as finished products.
The African Union must insist on the cancellation of Africa’s so-called debts, because it is Africa that is owed trillions of dollars in reparations for slave trade and colonialism. Nepad must be a strong economic arm of the African Union and Africa must look to herself more than to external forces. Self-reliance is the best policy.
Finally, I want to say that it seems that Nepad will be separated from the African Union. For instance, Nepad will not be set up in Addis Ababa, but in Pretoria, where it will remain a separate, independent unit. However, allow me to conclude by saying that the African Union is the greatest pan- African vision for our continent. It is a vision that must succeed. As Dr Kwame Nkrumah put it a long time ago: ``I have been accused of pursuing a policy of the impossible, but I cannot believe in the impossibility of achieving African union more than I could ever have thought of the impossibility of attaining African freedom.’’
Africa must unite. We have before us not only an opportunity, but a historic duty.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, the MF expresses its satisfaction with the work produced by the Working Group on the African Union and supports the 5th report of the working group. The recommendations made by the working group on the Constitutive Act of the AU were found to be valid. The involvement of civil society is needed so as not only to allow for a broader spectrum of input on issues, but also to allow for our citizenry’s participation as a constitutional right. The suggestion to involve the NCOP is thought to be of importance and linked in a similar way to the involvement of civil society.
The MF feels that this may be expanded to even further levels of governance so as to establish a level of involvement of the three spheres of government. The MF further agrees that it is important that Parliament maintains a hands-on strategy throughout the entire process. The establishment of the AU is extremely important. The world is watching and what we do and how we do it will determine the status it attains globally.
It is agreed that South Africa should not have an arrogant, know-it-all approach to this. It is important for us to note that even though we are often praised for our achievements, we do still have a lot to learn. We have borrowed a lot from the Western world. How much does the rest of Africa respect that? As with any native culture, it is felt that a degree of culture needs to be respected and upheld.
The MF acknowledges time constraints, but regards it as very important that we should not entertain slapdash methods, but that we should put a body in place that in the long run will not be the victim of much criticism.
The MF feels that a study should be conducted among the countries that form part of the AU and, instead of implementing the South African way as the only way, perhaps we could reach a compromise between member states and establish a body to represent South Africa, not produce a carbon copy of South Africa. There are many of loopholes in our system and there are many African tactics and systems that we all could learn from.
Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, in his answer to a question from the AEB, President Mbeki said in this House two months ago that the question of recognising diversity and promoting the rights of cultural, linguistic and religious communities was an important one for the success of the African Union.
At the moment, however, the Constitutive Act of the African Union does not reflect these sentiments and promises of the President. The AEB asks the question: When, how and to what extent will this principle be made part of the Constitutive Act and how will it be implemented in practice?
There is a danger that the African Union, the African Renaissance and
African development could be perceived and practised as a sort of pan-
Africanism. Because of the legacy of colonialism, too often rhetoric is
heard of Africans'' andforeigners’’, real Africans'' and second-
hand latecomers’’. The AEB is of the opinion that there is a big difference
between African loyalty and Africanism.
Anton Lembede het in 1946 reeds Afrika slegs vir Afrikane opgeëis. Alle nie- Afrikane, uitlanders, Asiërs en Europeërs is as indringers beskou wat geen beduidende bydrae kon lewer tot die nasionale ontwaking, nasionale renaissance of wedergeboorte - sy woorde destyds al - wat onvermydelik op Afrika wag nie.
Hy wou Afrikane in ‘n homogene nasie saamsnoer, gelei deur ‘n nasionale beweging waarvan alle Afrikane lede moes wees en alle nie-Afrikanistiese erfenisse geminag word. So het Afrikanisme ‘n nasionale beweging behels wat raseksklusief rakende lidmaatskap en leierskap moet wees, maar allesomvattend met betrekking tot die reikwydte van sy magstryd.
Verder is daar nie net geen nie-Afrika opposisie geduld nie, maar ook totale eenstemmigheid vereis onder Afrikane, wat nie slegs beteken dat begrippe soos veelparty-demokrasie en veelvolkigheid taboe is nie, maar dat onderlinge leiersverskille tussen Afrikane ook ‘n verbode gedagte is.
Dit kan die Achilleshiel van die Afrika-unie word. Ons sien dit reeds in die tipe solidariteit rondom mnr Mugabe. Dit is noodsaaklik dat die beginsels van demokrasie en tussengroepsverdraagsaamheid, wat uitgaan van die beginsel dat Afrika aan al sy mense behoort, duidelik verdiskonteer word in die ``Constitutive Act’’ en die toekomstige handelinge van die Afrika-unie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Anton Lambede as long ago as 1946 claimed Africa for Africans. All non- Africans, foreigners, Asians and Europeans were regarded as invaders who could not make a meaningful contribution to the national awakening, national renaissance or rebirth of the nation - these were his words then already - which inevitably awaited Africa.
He wanted to join Africans in one homogeneous nation, led by a national movement to which all Africans must belong and all non-African heritages must be despised. So Africanism entailed a national movement which had to be racially exclusive in terms of membership and leadership, but entirely comprehensive in terms of the range of its power struggle.
Furthermore, not only was non-African opposition not tolerated at all, but total unanimity amongst Africans was demanded, which not only means that terms like multiparty democracy and multinationality were taboo, but that mutual leadership differences among Africans were also a forbidden idea.
This can become the Achilles heel of the African Union. We have already seen this in the type of solidarity concerning Mr Mugabe. It is imperative that the principles of democracy and inter-group tolerance, which holds the principle that Africa belongs to all its people, are clearly incorporated in the Constitutive Act and the future actions of the African Union.]
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Speaker, whilst we are debating the fifth report of the Working Group on the African Union, it is pleasing to note that African leaders are beginning to agree on the need to consolidate the resources within the African Union in order to advance the affairs of the continent. For too long Africa has depended on others for its development, with the result that its own economic and industrial power has been eroded. It is indeed now the time to build a common economic objective. For example, our communications were devised under colonial rule to communicate with Europe and elsewhere, instead of between our states, cities and areas in rural Africa.
Azapo accepts that the unity of Africa is a process, and the events of the past six months have indeed convinced us that the African Union is here to stay. Political unity, accompanied by economic unity, should give us the power and the will to change the circumstances under which the poor live in Africa. We in Africa have vast mineral, agricultural and water resources. These important resources can be fully exploited and utilised for the common good of all Africans.
Azapo has learnt with disappointment that some African states reject the concept of a common army for the maintenance of peace. We do not see any wisdom in rejecting this concept because we believe that there is nothing wrong in maintaining a military force for self-defence and the protection of African states.
With the advent of American imperialism, if we do not build a military force to defend the African Union in one way or another, individual states in Africa that may be targeted for attack by this imperialist out of insecurity may find themselves abandoning the African Union.
Azapo accepts this report and supports the recommendations.
Mr D J SITHOLE: Madam Speaker, the establishment of the African Union was the continuation of the statement made 39 years ago by the African leaders who met at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and founded the OAU. Their actions were informed by a determination to define Africa not as individual countries, but as a collective bound together by geography, history and destiny. It was the unity of our people, not defined by colour, religion or colonial language, which informed their endeavours to free the continent from colonialism and construct a society at peace and free from foreign domination and bondage. It was the OAU and the people of Africa who, through their efforts and conviction, led the world to declare apartheid a crime against humanity.
They are today committing themselves to a fight to establish peace throughout the continent by ending all conflicts through negotiations based on the principle of justice and peace for all. The unwavering support and increased involvement of the people of Africa in the struggle for peace, development and the reconstruction of the continent will ensure that even those who have lost hope will again realise that we are determined to succeed.
We must admit that there are difficult challenges ahead and we must confront them. One of the immediate difficulties is the fact that postcolonial states, as inherited from the colonial period, remain largely untransformed. These states are used as an instrument for self-enrichment by sections of the continent’s political elite, rather than for creating a better life for all. It is this self-enrichment mentality that has created most of the conflicts on the continent.
The African Union presents a turning point in the history of the continent and is encouraging creative thinking and approaches in resolving conflicts. It has placed before us the agenda for development. The challenge is to transform the African postcolonial states, to liberate them from the greed of the political elite and to reorientate them towards serving the needs of the people. The continent must rid itself of the people who always see danger in changes and transformation, for they want to protect the old system that has benefited them.
Society is in constant motion and our ability to understand the changes and prevailing new conditions will determine our success. Change is a permanent feature of society. Those who fail to recognise that the world is not static will always criticise those who embrace change and want to move forward.
Change presents new conditions and challenges, but it is those who are inspired by revolutionary theory who will enter the battlefield without assumed or preconcieved ideas, but armed with the correct understanding that what is needed is to succeed.
The successful launch of the African Union in Durban was indeed one of the continent’s biggest achievements. Amongst the decisions taken at the summit is the establishment of a one-year interim period with the African Union affairs managed by an interim commission, as well as the adoption of the protocol on the establishment of a peace security council as an organ that will enable the union to deal with issues of peace and security which may intervene in the affairs of member states as and when necessary.
The assembly declared that the next 10 years, starting from this year to 2011, will be a decade for capacity-building in Africa. The assembly committed African leaders to the speedy establishment of the Pan-African Parliament and the economic, social and cultural council.
Nepad as a programme of action of the African Union, is a programme informed by the wealth of experience accumulated since independence. It is driven by a commitment each African leader makes, not only to his peers but also to the people of the continent, to good governance, democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and endeavouring to prevent unresolved situations of conflict on the continent.
Those leaders who are committed to building a strong African Union and to the success of its programme will subject themselves to peer review mechanism as envisaged by Nepad. It is only those progressive African countries that are driven by a desire for progress that will embrace the peer review mechanism. This mechanism entails a periodic assessment of the performance of member states on issues such as democracy and political and economic governance. An independent panel will do the assessment and its conclusions will not be used to punish, but to lend a hand to those who are falling behind. This mechanism is a voluntary mechanism and has no precedence in the world. Yes, we still have unresolved conflicts: the Western Sahara, the DRC and now recently Côte d’Ivoire.
The birth of the African Union must give hope to those who are still engaged in a fight for independence. Having suffered under colonialism, no African state must be allowed to subjugate other Africans to conditions such as those that existed in East Timor and in South Africa before 1994.
The role of ordinary people in this process of reconstruction and development is critical. It is through mass mobilisation of civil society and participation as a people that we will succeed. Our people are and remain the prime makers of history. The African Union is founded on the very strong principle of mass mobilisation and popular participation, to the extent that a special organ is envisaged for civil society representation. The creation of the Pan-African Parliament as an organ will ensure further participation of our people and the creation of a better life. We should accept that those who fear change will criticise the African Union and Nepad, but they will provide no solution. They pronounce themselves as revolutionaries and are quick to label anything that seems to challenge their comfort zones as neo-liberal.
We must engage with them and teach them that people do not live and eat slogans, and that shouting at the top of our voices does not address the realities of our continent. It is those who are engaged in real struggle who understand that solutions are not easy, but engage in a constant battle to better the lives of our people on the continent.
As we struggle for the creation of a better life we need to give hope to children who know no life of their own, but only the life imposed on them by those who want to exploit the resources of the continent. A nation that does not value its children has no future, and the protection of children should be at the centre of AU programmes if we are to succeed.
Given the fact that our country is the current chair of the African Union, it is the submission of the working group that the National Assembly should extend its mandate to pursue work around the African Union; that the working group should convene a workshop for members of both Houses of Parliament to sharpen their understanding of the task ahead; that the working group, through the Speaker and the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs, should explore mechanisms to ensure that at least the SADC region is taken on board in popularising the African Union; that a mechanism should be put in place to adopt an African resource centre within the premises of Parliament to ensure that we build a reservoir of knowledge, since it is through expansion of knowledge that we will be able to succeed in building a better Africa; and that Parliament should adopt a resolution in support of the President, the Deputy President, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the whole executive for the good work they are doing in rebuilding and reconstructing the continent, since it is fitting that Parliament should thank them for the good work. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Report adopted.
MEDICAL SCHEMES AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Madam Speaker, hon members, the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill, 2002, is a small yet critically important piece of legislation from a health policy perspective. It signifies our determination to systematically break the barriers of access to affordable care. It demonstrates that we shall be resolute in picking up conduct and behaviour that threaten to reintroduce the perversities that have led us to a dangerous and unsustainable cost spiral.
However, in doing so, we shall combine a ruthless determination with wisdom and judgment which can only teach us that to deal with the specific, we also need to understand the general. We are consciously aware that the Medical Schemes Act regulates a multibillion rand industry in our country. This is not an insignificant part of our national economy.
We also are painfully aware that there are many interlinkages in what constitutes our financial services sector. So an intervention in one area may have ramifications well beyond a particular sector. It is this understanding and logic that informed our painstaking engagement with my colleague, the Minister of Finance, in defining the parameters of this piece of legislation.
As all hon members are aware, this engagement between the Health and Finance Portfolio Committees was also not an easy one. The media was not very helpful in clarifying issues to the public either. This is behind us now.
I must now thank the Portfolio Committee on Finance, in particular, for understanding the concerns of the Portfolio Committee on Health, as well as Dr Abe Nkomo, the former chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Health, for his steadfastness in this engagement with the Portfolio Committee on Finance.
Of course, we also relied heavily on the experience of the Medical Aid Schemes Council. We thank the council for its focus in advising us. I also take this opportunity to salute and thank my colleague, the Minister of Finance, Mr Trevor Manuel, for his co-operation.
Together with amendments that were made to the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Bill, commonly referred to as the FAIS Bill, the Bill creates a basis for the development of a sound regulatory framework for health brokers.
We share the concern of the Minister of Finance that consumers will be best protected if minimum standards of conduct apply to financial advisers across all sectors, including health advisers. We therefore fully endorse the need for health brokers to be subject to a common code of conduct applicable to other financial advisers, and hence the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill deletes reference to a specific code of conduct for health brokers to be promulgated under the Medical Schemes Act.
Similarly, we fully endorse changes to the FAIS Bill whereby health brokers, once accredited under the Medical Schemes Act, will be regarded as licensed under the FAIS Bill and will also be subject to the provisions of that piece of legislation.
At the same time, the conduct of health brokers is an issue of considerable significance from a health policy perspective. The capacity to effectively regulate this sector of the private health financing industry is an essential component of ensuring that health policy objectives underpinning the Medical Schemes Act are met.
Some of the major objectives of the Medical Schemes Act include, among others, promoting nondiscriminatory access to private health care; improving governance of medical schemes in the interests of its members; ensuring greater financial strength in the medical schemes industry; protecting medical schemes and members against abuse and unlawful practices; and bringing greater stability to a historically underregulated environment.
Health brokers have the potential to significantly contribute towards these health policy objectives through providing independent best advice to members or potential members of medical schemes, thereby guiding them to make the best possible decisions to meet their health care needs; growing the total number of beneficiaries of medical schemes and thereby reducing an unnecessary burden on the public health sector through focusing their activities on the employed but currently uninsured market; contributing to the stability of the risk pools by advising against unnecessary fragmentation of employer groups; and resisting and reporting discriminatory and unlawful practices which threaten to undermine the policy intentions of the Medical Schemes Act.
On the other hand, health policy objectives could be severely jeopardised if even a small portion of the 7 000 or so brokers operating in the health care environment failed to act in a manner consistent with the implementation of health policies. Two examples will suffice.
Firstly, the greatest barrier to entry in the medical schemes environment is the rapidly escalating costs of medical scheme contributions. The high cost of medical scheme coverage not only results in differential access to private health care based upon income, but also on related issues such as health status. The Registrar of Medical Schemes, in his annual report of 2001, again identified nonmedical costs as being a significant driver of the inflation of contributions.
A progressively smaller percentage of member contributions is being spent of purchasing medical care, while an increasing proportion of contributions is spent on nonmedical items. This trend cannot be allowed to continue.
Clearly, there are many components of this nonmedical care expenditure, and we are looking critically at each of them. One component, however, is amounts paid to brokers, either directly by medical schemes as commission, or indirectly through the payment to brokers of so-called co-administration fees by administrators, and that figure is difficult to attempt to qualify. It is therefore worth noting that R290 million was spent on broker commission in the year 2001.
Commission paid to brokers is a legitimate medical scheme expense, but there needs to be an appropriate regulatory framework to ensure that there is not uncontrolled expenditure on brokers contributing to the spiral of non-healthcare expenditure of schemes, and that compensation is appropriate for genuine value added by brokers to medical schemes. Within the context of the medical schemes environment at present, this is an important regulatory objective.
Secondly, I have already said that brokers have the potential to contribute significantly to a more stable medical schemes environment and to expand medical schemes coverage to previously uncovered individuals. However, if motivated by perverse financial incentives rather than the best interests of members and the medical schemes environment as a whole, health brokers can potentially contribute significantly to the instability of the environment.
For example, while advising members or employer groups to move from one medical scheme to another may be the best advice in particular circumstances; if motivated purely by financial incentive, it could contribute to large-scale churning in the medical schemes environment, which significantly undermines administration process and adds to administrative costs for medical schemes.
Clearly this is a concern, especially in an environment where there has been very minimal growth in the overall number of beneficiaries since 1996.
It can also exacerbate the worrying trend which has developed since 1994, namely a shift of members out of the more protected restricted medical schemes environment to the open schemes environment. This is of concern because the risk pool and the future claims experience in a restricted scheme are more predictable.
Again, without the capacity to regulate broker conduct in a manner consistent with the development of health policy, our capacity to realise the crucial health policy objective of ensuring stability and sustainability in the medical schemes environment would be compromised.
The importance of regulatory oversight of health brokers, from a health policy perspective, resulted in the important function of accreditation of health brokers remaining a function of the Council for Medical Schemes and the retention in the Medical Schemes Act of the provision for the Health Minister to make regulations regarding broker remuneration and the conditions under which a broker may provide advice and other services.
Clearly, regulatory interventions, from a health perspective, over and above the common framework provided by the FAIS Act, will be exercised only in so far as such additional intervention is necessary and appropriate for the implementation of health policy.
I can see the red light is flickering, but it was important for me to give the background. I will at the end summarise by actually explaining what is contained in the amending Act. [Applause.]
Mr L V J NGCULU: Madam Speaker, Minister and hon members, I rise in full support of the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill. This Bill is a continuation of the road the ANC chose for South Africans, the road to a better health care system. We did so in 1998 when this House passed the Medical Schemes Act, whose objective was to protect the people from being risk-rated and discriminated against on the basis of age, gender and their state of health. This Medical Schemes Amendment Bill marks an important departure from the past system, which was uncaring and unresponsive to the needs of the poor and working people.
We stand here today as a continuation of that agenda: the road to a caring society, championed by the people’s movement, the ANC. We are today piloting the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill, whose central focus is the protection of the consumer and the vulnerable. This Bill seeks to regulate the market conduct of health care brokers and to broaden the definition of broker services in order to provide for the conditions under which such brokers can be licensed. Such brokers will be licensed and accredited if they meet the proper requirements as set out in this Bill and in the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, or FAIS Act, passed by this House last year.
In the FAIS Bill, in particular, it was agreed that health brokers would be regulated by the provisions of this Act under the Department of Health. This was so agreed, given the fact that health per se is not a commodity, but an essential element of the wellbeing of the people.
Yet this issue will not be treated in isolation, but there will be a symbiotic relationship between what Health does and what Finance does in terms of the control of and conditions for brokers. Therefore an integrated approach to such regulation is an essential component.
It is unacceptable and objectionable that health brokers sold medical scheme membership to people, moving them around as if people were a pack of cards. Such a shuffling of members is by and large based on the financial interests of brokers and not on the health conditions and benefits of consumers.
Another element of this legislation is to ensure that broker fees are regulated and to avoid a situation where people are charged exorbitant and unreasonable amounts. Now the broker fees will be regulated and controlled by the Council for Medical Schemes. This is to ensure that the policy objectives of the Medical Schemes Act of 1998 are met, in particular with regard to the role of health-care brokers, given the fact that they can impact positively or negatively on factors such as the stability of the medical scheme risk pool and non-health care expenditure of medical schemes
- that is, where administration costs such as brokers services are passed on to the consumers without consumers themselves benefiting.
As we have said earlier, the key and central objective of this legislation is the protection of the consumer by ensuring that medical schemes and health care brokers act in the interests of the beneficiaries. This is in keeping with the vision of the Department of Health, which strives for a caring and human society in which all South Africans have access to affordable and good quality health care.
As the ANC we support this Bill. [Applause.] Mrs S V KALYAN: Madam Speaker, seven million people of the South African population subscribe to private medical schemes. Now, given that the percentage is so small, it is indeed a competitive industry, so much so that the consumer is often at the losing end due to manipulation by some brokers and their agents. Often the principal broker does not pay his so- called agents a fair or timeous commission. The agent or sub-broker may then switch his members to another medical scheme for monetary gain. An inadvertent result of this could be that the member may not have medical cover during the transition from one medical scheme to another.
The object of the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill is to build, broaden and tighten the definition of a broker to ensure proper accreditation, and to determine desirable business practice and good conduct. Member-churning for the purpose of monetary gain is unethical and should be rooted out.
Furthermore, the co-administration fees that brokers are claiming from medical schemes are undesirable, because the medical scheme does the administration, not the broker. This practice of co-administration under the guise of servicing the clients has in reality given rise to many perverse incentives in the industry at great cost to the members. Brokerage costs, as nonmedical costs, have amounted to some R229 million in 2000, and the unintended consequence of this practice on members increased membership fees in return for reduced medical cover.
While the broker is an important role-player, I think an obligation rests on the industry to explore other avenues of compensation to brokers for maintaining client relations which will eliminate churning, but not be at the cost of the member. The proposed amendment will result in improved governance and oversight of medical schemes; protect schemes against fraud; reduce opportunistic behaviour by consumers; offer protection to the consumer against unlawful and abusive conduct, both by medical schemes and unscrupulous brokers; and create greater financial stability within the private health care sector. The DP supports this amendment.
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Madam Speaker, the IFP congratulates the Minister of Health on the original Bill. We also congratulate the ANC component of the Portfolio Committee on Health, and the flexible head of the monitoring unit at the Medical Schemes Council, for taking on board amendments which were brought by Old Mutual Health in their submissions. As a result, with regard to the entire Bill, we support it.
Every effort should be made to stem the flood of rising health care costs which the Minister has alluded to, and these measures are applauded. This legislation is likely to make brokers more competent, more honest and more accountable. That is why we support it without hesitation. However, it is rather like treating a heart attack with one aspirin: It is useful, but it is useless without several other measures. What are they?
I want to refer members to the IFP’s often repeated, but not yet tried, policy for health care funding. It has become all the more applicable in line with moves to consider the Taylor Commission’s proposals for social security.
Medical schemes are not a Pandora’s box. What comes out is what goes in. If our legislation does not provide incentives to make the schemes competitive and efficient and to bring on board young people, but rather makes provision for anyone to be covered at any age, and provides provisions which allow for opportunistic behaviour, the industry will continue to ail and to fail in its objectives.
There are proposals made by the Taylor Health Commission on health aspects, not social welfare aspects, that further decrease or maybe even outlaw savings and further regulate and engineer to make all our dreams come true. If implemented, they could make the situation worse. We must not forget that the current situation that we are in has arisen out of our legislation, and as a result costs have gone up, memberships have gone down, and benefits have decreased.
The IFP has offered simple solutions. Firstly, the Financial Services Board and the Registrar must jointly regulate and monitor medical schemes. We need hard-headed financial experts, as well as do-gooders, as this amending Bill has indicated. Secondly, we agree that we should introduce a social health insurance, not as a double tax to be soaked up by Government like a sponge, but a social health insurance which is an option amongst many others from which every working person must choose.
We also believe that we must resort far more to public-private partnerships to take care of nonworking people and of the excessively ill. Instead of the risk equalisation fund, which is proposed by the Taylor Commission, we suggest a risk pool to cope with the high cost of certain illnesses, such as antiretroviral treatment for Aids. Why? We argue that there is a danger that an equalisation fund will become top heavy and bureaucratic, and even reward failing schemes for their inefficiency, whereas the risk pool would be funded by contributions from private schemes and Government, and would become much more efficient. In short, the IFP offers not Midas, but Merlin, providing wise and workable solutions.
Dr S J GOUS: Madam Speaker, this is the second amendment to medical schemes legislation within a very short period of time. Perhaps this is an indication of the severe pressure that this environment is experiencing. We are all acutely aware that contributions are increasing at rates that far exceed the inflation index, while at the same time cover and services are significantly reduced.
Common sense dictates that at this rate the end point is a zero sum, and that medical schemes, as we know them, might be unsustainable in the long run. The fact that medical inflation is normally above the average inflation because of new technology and exchange rates, can explain only part of the problem. The other part of the problem is the administration costs, or so-called nonmedical costs. This legislation attempts to address this second category.
It has been estimated that brokers’ costs contribute about R230 million per annum towards the so-called nonhealth expenditure. Current legislation only allows payment to brokers for introducing members to a scheme. This lead to the so-called churning of members, which is simply the moving of members from one scheme to another.
The second problem was that the position of medical brokers in terms of the financial advisory and Intermediary Services Act, or FAIS, was not clear. This led to some instability in the medical scheme sphere.
Now there has been a negotiated agreement between the Department of Health and the National Treasury in terms of which medical brokers fall within the framework of FAIS. However, accreditation of medical brokers stays a function of the Council for Medical Schemes. This means that a medical broker cannot be registered as such, unless he is accredited by the Council for Medical Schemes.
This proposed legislation now formalises this agreement and furthermore gives a clear definition of a broker to include the ongoing provision of service to members. The function of a medical broker is also clearly defined. Future regulations shall now hopefully be able to prevent misuse and unethical practices, and lead to a more stable environment for medical brokers. This is obviously not enough to address the total crisis in the medical schemes environment, but it at least clears up the position of the medical broker.
The New NP will support this legislation.
Ms N F MATHIBELA: Madam Speaker and hon members, every South African is concerned about having access to appropriate health care for themselves and their families when they really need it. That is why the ANC introduced legislation to regulate the private health industry. We wanted to make sure that every citizen would have the same opportunities and the same rights. We care about all our citizens, not only a few.
It is important that both the public and private health sectors see themselves as part of an overall national health system with the objective of expanding access to adequate health care for our entire population.
When it comes to getting access to health care in the private sector, health brokers have an important role to play in ensuring that people get the sort of health care that they need. Choosing between medical schemes and all the benefit options among medical schemes can be very confusing to the average person on the street. Brokers can assist these people to understand the best medical scheme options to meet their own health care needs. Health brokers can therefore help to advance the objectives of the national health system if the advice they provide is independent and the best advice for the client concerned.
The Medical Schemes Amendment Bill goes a long way in recognising this role of brokers. At the same time, it is very important that consumers are optionally protected against any unscrupulous health brokers that may wish to exploit the trust of the public for their own financial gain. Together with the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, the amendments now being made to the Medical Schemes Act create enabling conditions for an environment in which consumers can feel confident that their interests are being looked after. It is in the interests of consumers, brokers and medical schemes that unlawful, unethical and discriminatory conduct is wiped out. We hope that all of these interest groups will come together to use the legislative environment which has been created to achieve this.
The ANC therefore supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Mr D G MKONO: Madam Speaker, hon Minister, hon members, the growth in the medical scheme sector over the past few years has been phenomenal. Growth can be expected to continue as the law and escalating medical fees force South Africans to become members of medical schemes.
The medical scheme sector has become a multimillion-rand industry which affects the lives of countless South Africans. The result of these developments has been the need to improve the quality of regulation in the medical scheme sector in order to protect citizens and ensure that those who act as medical scheme brokers comply with the same high standards and regulations that other professionals in the medical sector are held to.
The amending Bill before us therefore amends the Medical Schemes Act of 1998, in order to include the definition of a broker as a person whose business involves three broad areas of activity, namely the introduction or admission of members to a medical scheme; the transfer of members from one medical scheme to another; and the ongoing provision of benefits and access to services offered by the medical scheme. This definition expands the category of people who can be defined as brokers by extending the type of work associated with such brokers beyond the mere introduction and admission of members, to include the ongoing provision of advice and services. The Bill ensures that the wide range of people who are engaged in these activities are regulated in accordance with the rules that apply to accredited brokers. What this ensures is that no person may act as a broker or receive remuneration for such activities if such a person is not accredited and does not submit to the conditions for providing such services.
The Bill paves the way for a single gateway for accreditation of health brokers. Furthermore, it enables the legislative framework for the agreement on joint regulation of medical brokers by the Council for Medical Schemes and the Financial Services Board.
It is hoped that these provisions will protect South Africans from unscrupulous business activities in this sector, and thus also assist medical schemes to conduct their business in a proper way, with the necessary credibility and integrity.
The UDM therefore supports the Bill. Mrs R M SOUTHGATE: Madam Speaker, Madam Minister, the Bill provides for a new definition of ``broker’’, and gives greater clarity on the duty of a broker. This may well lead to better client relations and trust in the medical schemes industry. Clients are normally dependent on the expertise of industry personnel and will take at face value the advice provided by such persons. The Bill differentiates between the role of a broker and other medical scheme providers, thus limiting the confusion and possible overtrading of medical schemes products.
The broker is required by the new provisions to give as much information as possible to clients and to provide them with the correct product fit from time to time to suit the needs of the customer. The advice given and options they provide to the client will become more transparent, with a lower risk of manipulation benefiting broker deals.
The Bill provides that a broker’s compensation should be determined according to the rules of a medical scheme. The ACDP agrees that broker accreditation is vital for professionalism and accountability. We are, however, of the opinion that in terms of medical scheme services, a broker who is accredited should benefit from an ongoing compensation in terms of continuous service. The Bill only intimates the potential to do so, but does not adequately prescribe this role. We hope that greater clarity will be achieved within the industry as it seeks to address the compensation ratio of brokers in this regard.
Mme M A SEECO: Modulasetilo, Ma-Aferika Borwa a mantle, re tlhaloganya rotlhe fa sekema seno sa melemo e le tekanabeng. Rona ba mmala wa sebilo, ga se re tswele mosola go le kalo ka gonne bagaetsho kwa metseng selegae ga ba ungwe thata. Ba a swa ka go tlhoka kalafi e e tlhwatlhwa ka gonne ba sa akarediwe ke sekema seno sa melemo. Ba aparetswe ke lehuma le botlhokatiro.
Badiredipuso ba re bonang kalafi e e botoka ka ntlha ya sekema seno sa melemo, bangwe re sotla ka sona ka tiriso e e boatla ya matlole a sona, ntswa seno e le ``mmetlakgola o e lebisa bagaabo’’. UCDP e tlotlomatsa molawana ono. (Translation of Tswana paragraphs follows.)
[Mrs M A SEECO: Chairperson, beautiful South Africans, we all understand that this medical aid scheme is not enough. We, as the black people, do not benefit that much because our people in the rural areas do not earn a lot. They die due to a lack of proper medical attention because they are excluded from this medical aid scheme. They are poor and jobless.
Some public servants who receive better medical attention because of this medical aid scheme abuse its funds, even if they should think of other people. The UCDP agrees to this Bill.]
In the memorandum of the Bill it is stated that there has been some lack of clarity with regard to how medical scheme brokers should be regulated in their conduct of business and the extent to which this can be done by the Financial Services Board. An agreement had been reached between the Council for Medical Schemes and the Financial Services Board regarding the regulation of brokers, and the Bill is meant to address that.
The Medical Schemes Act 131 was passed in 1998, and it essentially aimed to provide for improved governance and administration of medical schemes. This Act is now amended through the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill. The objectives are to extend the definition of ``broker’’ and to provide for conditions under which a broker must be accredited.
Clause 2(a) does not stipulate that only medical schemes may compensate
brokers. The definition of a broker should perhaps include what is spelt
out in clause 2(c) of the amendment Bill. This makes reference to a broker
as someone who has received accreditation. It is suggested that the word
accreditation'' be included in the redefinition of the wordbroker’’.
Clause 3 amends section 67 of the principal Act to allow the Minister, after consultation with the council, to make regulations relating to the conditions under which brokers may provide advice and other services to a medical scheme beneficiary or other persons.
We congratulate the Minister on this Bill.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, each sphere of government has its magnifying glasses on the loopholes that need to be closed in response to the change brought about in our society, namely democracy. A revamp of structures and the introduction of a constitutional state set the stage for transportation, but also for the adjustments that needed to be made to legislation, in this case the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill.
In an open and democratic society governed by its people, we as representative authorities have to ensure the good governance and management of all spectrums. For this, we must thank the Minister.
Medical schemes have been the topic of the debate and concern a number of times. The 1998 Act appears to be a well-drafted piece of legislation whose mechanisms needed just a few amendments, as is being done here. We need to constantly reassure the public that delivery is taking place.
When a Bill is being amended, this does not necessarily mean that it has failed, but rather that the legislation has a few loopholes and needs to go back to the drawing board for a little adjustment. It also demonstrates the earnestness of the Government to deliver, and reflects constant review of policy, which is very important for a rapidly changing society.
The amending Bill makes provision for clarity regarding the term ``broker’’ and other measures pertaining to this position.
The MF supports the amending Bill. [Applause.]
Dr E E JASSAT: Madam Speaker, hon Minister, hon members, this afternoon I propose to deal briefly with the genesis of this Bill. The Medical Schemes Act, that is the principal Act, was gazetted in 1998. The Act replaced the Medical Schemes Act of 1967. It was meant to act in tandem with the private health financing policy set out in the White Paper on the transformation of the national health system issued in 1997.
A strategy for implementing the policy had been captured in the document ``Reforming Financing of Private Health Care in South Africa.’’ The preamble outlining the aims of the present Bill states, amongst other things, that the Bill seeks to protect the interests of members. The principal Act does not specifically speak of brokers.
An amendment to the Medical Schemes Bill of 1998 was introduced late last year. It defined brokers and attempted to limit the purposes for which medical schemes may compensate them, and to provide for the regulation of their professional conduct.
On 19 October 2002, the personal finance supplement of the Johannesburg Star carried this report, and I quote:
The life assurance industry is reconsidering a decision it made three years ago to revive tough restrictions on financial advisers that prevented them from advising you to switch from one life assurance policy to another. Switching generates a new set of commission for advisers, but also additional costs and potential losses for you.
During the past two years, since the restrictions were dropped, there has been a massive increase in switching in the life assurance industry. This is exactly what has taken place with medical schemes. In order to prevent such a trend in the private health sector, and to pre-empt perverse incentives, this amending Bill is being introduced.
On 6 September the Council for Medical Schemes issued a press release warning that it was, and I quote again -
… cracking down on unacceptable and unlawful behaviour amongst brokers selling medical scheme membership.
It has been estimated that brokers contribute in excess of R230 million to the non-health costs of the medical scheme industry, clearly adding to the burden of members. We are very happy to note that the outcome of the negotiated agreement between the National Treasury and the Department of Health will ensure that brokers will be subject to a common framework, provided by the FAIS Act, but leaving the accreditation of brokers under the Medical Schemes Act to be a function of the Council for Medical Schemes.
With these few words, on behalf of the ANC, I would like to support this Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Mr Chairperson, I am sure that members will agree with me that we have indeed taken solid steps in discharging our duty, and this is symbolised by the consensus of parties in support of the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill.
May I say that the UCDP would have been advised to introduce its own amendments during the deliberations of the portfolio committee. We would have included them, so that there would be complete consensus. Without the capacity to regulate broker conduct in a manner consistent with the development of health policy, as I said, our capacity to realise the crucial health policy objective of ensuring stability and sustainability in the medical schemes environment would be compromised. That would also compromise our objective of protecting members of medical schemes.
The importance of regulatory oversight of health brokers, from a health policy perspective, resulted in the important function of the accreditation of health brokers remaining a function of the Council for Medical Schemes, and retention in the Medical Schemes Act of the provision for the Health Minister to make regulations regarding broker remuneration and the conditions under which a broker may provide advice and other services. As we have heard, all the parties agree with that.
Clearly, regulatory interventions, from a health perspective, over and above the common framework provided by FAIS, will be exercised only in so far as such additional intervention is necessary and appropriate for the implementation of health policy.
An important change that is introduced by this amending Bill, however, is that for the first time the Medical Schemes Act will provide explicit recognition of the role of health brokers in providing ongoing service and advice to members of medical schemes, as opposed to the existing wording in the Act, which is restricted to services relating to the introduction of members only.
This was a necessary amendment to prevent regulatory arbitration of brokers between the Council for Medical Schemes and the Financial Services Board, in light of the provisions in the FAIS Act which included ongoing advice in respect of health products as a function of financial service providers.
In the absence of this amendment, the Medical Schemes Act, with the implementation of the FAIS Act broker award, effectively has been able to opt out of the regulatory jurisdiction of the Medical Schemes Act by structuring their services in such a way as to exclude so-called introductory services and to provide only for ongoing services.
Explicit recognition in the Bill of the role of brokers in providing ongoing service, as reflected in the expanded definition of ``broker’’, as already mentioned, has been welcomed by industry brokers, and particularly by organisations representing health brokers.
In its presentation to the portfolio committee during the public hearings on the Bill, the Financial Planning Institute, for example, indicated its support for the amending Bill in general, and welcomed the recognition of the ongoing role of the broker in the industry.
They and other commentators have urged that the statutory recognition for the role of brokers in providing ongoing service to members should also be reflected in the regulations under the Medical Schemes Act, in so far as those regulations provide a framework for the regulation of the remuneration of health brokers. These comments have been taken into account in the reformulation of the amendments to the regulations contained in the Medical Schemes Act which is due to be promulgated shortly.
I believe that the debate on the appropriate regulatory jurisdiction for health brokers which surrounded the passage of the FAIS Act through Parliament and gave rise to these amendments, was a necessary and fruitful debate that resulted in an optimal framework for the regulation of health brokers. In the implementation of this framework, I look forward to a healthy co-operation between the Council for Medical Schemes and the Financial Services Board, which will result in an environment in which consumers are optimally protected.
In conclusion, let me express my infinite gratitude to the portfolio committee for the work they did on this Bill and, again, for reaching a unanimous consensus on the amendments to be made to this Bill. [Applause.]
Debate concluded. Bill read a second time.
OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES IN MINES AND WORKS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Mr Chairperson and hon members, I have pleasure in presenting to the House the proposed amendments to the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act of 1973.
At the outset, I would like to thank the Portfolio Committee on Health for the manner in which they processed this Bill and for reaching a unanimous decision, again, on the amendments to be effected. I am pre-empting the UCDP! In particular, I would like to thank the chairperson, hon James Ngculu, for guiding the discussions on this Bill.
In the past, occupational health has been neglected and yet the fact remains that, globally, over a million workers die from work-related diseases and injuries, and there are over 160 million cases of work-related diseases annually. In South Africa, the burden of disease resulting from working in mines is unacceptably high. Approximately 25 000 compensation applications are made per year for occupational diseases resulting from working in mines.
The types of lung diseases that commonly occur are silicosis, which is caused by the inhalation of dust, asbestosis, chronic obstructive airways disease and coal workers’ pneumoconiosis. In the past, compensation for these occupational diseases was a privilege of the few. Prior to 1993, only white mineworkers were entitled to be examined by the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases and received compensation if they had a certifiable disease.
The Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act was amended in 1993 to allow all miners, both black and white, to be examined by the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases. In 1997, the Mine Health and Safety Act was implemented, which took the responsibility for benefit medical examinations of current mineworkers away from the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases and placed this responsibility on the employer. This change greatly improved the efficiency of the system.
In order to continuously improve the efficiency of the system and to prevent backlogs, consultations were held with the relevant stakeholders. A tripartite committee comprising workers, namely the National Union of Mineworkers and the Mineworkers’ Union; the employers, which is the Chamber of Mines; and Government, which is the Department of Health and the Department of Minerals and Energy, was initiated in 1997 to consider sections of the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act which affected its efficient administration. This was necessitated by the amendments that had been effected to the Act in 1994, which made its interpretation and administration difficult.
The tripartite committee made three main recommendations that required further amendments. In summary, these recommendations related to the period between medical examinations, placing responsibility for medical care costs on the employers where the disease was contracted and, most importantly, making it a criminal offence if any person who assists the miner charges exorbitant fees.
I will expand on each of these amendments and explain the need and rationale for the changes. The first amendment relates to the change in the period for re-examination of the ex-mineworker. Currently, the Act states that the ex-mineworker can be re-examined after six months, yet the World Health Organisation has produced guidelines on public health surveillance for people who have been exposed to dust such as silica and asbestos, and recommends that re-examinations should be performed every 24 months.
The reason for this is that there is a slow progression of disease caused by these dusts, and that X-ray changes, which are essential for the diagnosis of the disease, do not show up within a short period. Therefore, examinations performed every six months will not have a significant value. There is a better chance that changes can be detected on the X-rays if examinations are performed every 24 months, and this will also help immensely in quantifying disability. In addition, frequent X-rays are discouraged because we know that frequent use of X-rays negatively affects a person’s health. For these reasons, we are therefore amending section 22 of the Act, from six months to 24 months for the re-examination of the ex- mineworker.
The House can be reassured, however, that under section 32(3) of the Act, provision is made that if the doctor who examines the ex-miner realises that the condition of the ex-miner is getting worse and the application is supported in writing by the examining doctor, the director of the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases has to give permission for examination, even if the period is less that 24 months.
The second amendment relates to the issue of who is responsible for the payment of compensation. Section 36(A) of the principal Act is amended to provide that the owner of the mine or works shall for a period of not more than two years from the date of commencement of a compensatable disease, pay the reasonable costs incurred by or on behalf of a person in his or her service, in respect of the medical aid necessitated by such disease.
A further amendment is made to place responsibility on the employer of the mine where the disease was contracted. Section 36(A)(1) is therefore amended to provide that the owner of the mine where the compensatable disease was contracted should continue to pay the reasonable costs incurred by the miner or on behalf of a person in his or her service, even if the miner has moved to work in another mine.
The third, and I believe the most important change, relates to the problem we have been experiencing around unscrupulous behaviour of certain persons who assist the miners to get their compensations. It has saddened us to discover that many people who have been compensated ended up receiving a small amount of money, due to the so-called community representatives and attorneys who invariably take a lion’s share of the claimant’s benefit as a fee.
I am sure that the House will agree that this kind of practice, of exploiting the most vulnerable, is unacceptable and must be stopped. Hence, section 124(1) of the principal Act is amended to provide that if a person charges for services rendered in respect of assistance in claiming any benefit of this Act, charges a fee or claims remuneration from a person - in this case the miner - which is in excess of 0,5% of the benefit awarded to such a person, he or she will be guilty of an offence.
These are the amendments which are tabled before the House. They may appear to be minor amendments, but they have far-reaching implications and they will unblock some of the problems experienced thus far.
I must thank the NUM-Cosatu delegation for making a lucid presentation to the portfolio committee and for agreeing with the Department of Health to change the period for re-examination of ex-miners from six months to 24 months, even though their original proposal had been 36 months. In their own words, they said the Bill represented a significant step in addressing the unnecessary problems and limitations imposed by the Act, and facilitates the harmonisation of the compensation system in our country.
I am also aware that the portfolio committee has considered the submission which was made by the Chamber of Mines. I am confident that hon members will agree that there are sound and reasonable arguments for these changes, and will support the proposed changes. These changes are also essential to ensure that, overall, we create greater efficiency in the system and, more importantly, we carry out our mandate as elected representatives to protect the public and, in this case, the ex-miners. [Applause.]
Mrs M M MALUMISE: Chairperson, today I want to pay tribute to all those workers who died as a result of occupational diseases and thus a lack of safety standards in their workplace. In 2002, when we have the latest technology at the tips of our fingers, when nothing seems impossible any longer, we still find that people are dying in the mines. Spare a thought for the workers who died on the sugarcane farms in KwaZulu-Natal, the chemical workers and the woman who lost her baby because she was locked up in a factory and could not get out.
Since the ANC has been in government, occupational health and safety have been given much more prominence than ever before. We have, as the ANC Government, made it clear that our workers, the vulnerable and the poor are our most important constituency, and that is why we make policies to make the lives of workers easier. We stand by our motto, ``a better life for all’’, and we demand that the heads of industry take our resolve seriously. Our efforts to improve the lives of our workers will not be derailed by negligence and an unwillingness to provide safer working conditions.
Today we are sending out a clear message to industry that we are going to watch them and make sure that they start implementing our legislation. We are saying to the respective unions that we need them to be even more proactive, to represent the interests of workers tirelessly, to educate workers about their rights, such as their right to safe working conditions. We also want to appeal to the paralegals and others who assist the claimants not to act unethically by robbing the poor and sick of their payouts.
The poor state of occupational health service provision in South Africa has been well documented. The Erasmus Commission noted as far back as 1976 that very little time, money and organisation had been put into the prevention of occupational diseases. Industry has a shameful record in controlling occupational disease. They have been negligent in preventing occupational ill health and they have been even slower in compensating workers who are suffering from occupation-related diseases. They have been quick to invest their profits on the stock market, but have been slow to invest in their workforce.
It is estimated that up to two million people are eligible for benefit examinations in respect of occupational diseases, but financial and medical resources are available for only a small fraction, fewer than 32 000 per year.
Compensation is a right for all workers. The provision of effective and accessible services for identifying and compensating occupational injuries and disease is an obligation that our Government is taking seriously, hence the legislation. It is especially important that industry honours its contract with its employees to prevent diseases, and to pay compensation precisely because our public health is buckling under the strain of too many preventable diseases such as HIV/Aids, TB, malaria, cholera and so on. The vast number of migrant workers who have returned to their rural homes do not have access to medical services which are able and willing to investigate their condition and complete the necessary forms. As a result, South African and international industries which exposed workers to injurious dust or toxic chemicals have been able to disown their responsibilities, and thereby transfer significant costs to the state and to already poor families. This is indeed a shame. This point is underscored by studies done in Lesotho which show that there has been a systematic transfer of the costs of disability due to injury or ill health to the communities from which workers have been recruited.
Community-based activity in the Northern Province, the Border district in the Eastern Cape, Welkom where I come from and the Northern Cape shows that there is a huge reservoir of undetected, and therefore uncompensated occupational lung disease.
Enacting the legislation we are debating today is a matter of urgency. We must work hard to strengthen our capacity to implement our policies, and we must ensure that we review occupational health and safety legislation from time to time. Resources must be committed to extend occupational health services at all levels, and we need to put in place measures to ensure that statutory obligations are complied with. If we are moving from the premise that occupational health service is based on the infrastructure of provincial health services and the district health level, we will have to strengthen these levels of our health system so that people receive the services they deserve.
Since prevention is the primary aim, occupational health must be practised at work places, not in clinics and hospitals when workers fall ill and when it is too late. Because workers with work-related problems will present to the general curative health services, occupational health services need to be integrated into these comprehensive services. In effect, this means that the primary responsibility for control of hazards and for the provision of occupational health services lies with the employer.
Lastly, next time hon members buy a fine piece of gold jewellery or a crystal-clear diamond or even a pot for a plant, they should say a prayer: ``Our heavenly Father, we pray today in the name of Jesus that you give physical, social, spiritual and financial help and strength to the worker who is putting his life and health on the line’’. The ANC supports this transformatory Bill. [Applause.]
Mrs S V KALYAN: Chairperson, there is no doubt in any of our minds that the mining industry is one of the pillars of the South African economy. This industry is a major employer with just under 400 000 in its service in the year 2000. Whilst sudden death or injury remains the most feared consequence of working underground in general, the reality is that the annual certifications for preumoconiosis, plus new cases of TB in miners far exceed the annual number of injuries reported in this population.
Silica inhalation and silicosis greatly increase the risk of TB in miners. The HIV epidemic has added a deadly ingredient by further increasing the risk of TB in HIV positive miners. Death while on treatment for TB is now the most common form of mortality amongst active gold miners and exceeds the death rate from accidents. Lung disease and hearing loss are two major mining-related diseases which are carried for life by a large number of former and present miners. Many of the former miners suffer from preumoconiosis, which is the deposit of dust in the lung and the lung’s reaction to it.
This amending Bill will go a long way towards enhancing the quality of life of miners who may be ill as a direct result of an occupational disease in the sense that it seeks to extend the application for the medical examination from six to 24 months. The extension is based on World Health Organisation guidelines and is very relevant, because it is based on the fact that the latency period for occupational diseases is quite long. In some cases it is known that these diseases may manifest some ten years after exposure.
There is no doubt in my mind that an obligation rests on the industry to lessen the burden of occupational disease. One such strategy would be to look at a preventive approach based on exposure management, as opposed to the present reactive management systems.
The capping of the compensation fee is also a welcome amendment. There have been many reported cases of so-called community representatives and attorneys assisting miners to claim for compensation, but who actually end up taking the bulk of the money, and the miner is no richer or wiser. This protection clause will ensure that the money actually reaches the person it is intended for.
It is my considered opinion that this amending Bill goes a fair way to address the responsibility of the mining industry to its workers in respect of occupational diseases.
The DP supports this Bill. [Applause.]
Dr R RABINOWITZ: Chairperson, on behalf of the IFP I would like not only to echo hon Malumise’s prayer for the mineworkers, but say that we all owe them a debt of gratitude for the contribution that they have made towards building up the country. Certainly we owe it to them to look after health compensation. We are in the fortunate position of being able to support both Health Bills brought before Parliament today, and even to support an amendment brought by the unions, because they clarified the conditions under which compensation should be paid.
In miner terminology, I believe that this Act is referred to as the ``Odimwa Act’’. It does appear, however, that although we support the amendments, the overall Odimwa Act does have its limitations. At the hearings I asked one of the people from the unions who was making a submission, why, in his opinion, there was such a reduction in health services provided by the mines. They were once among the best services provided in the country. He answered that the mines were not interested in people; they were only interested in resources.
Pursuing the question further with some of the mine representatives, I sought further answers and got from them a very different set of responses. As with the previous Bill, I would say their problems and those of the mineworkers would be solved by many of the IFP’s policies. Health is not a commodity, and it cannot be left to respond to market forces, but it involves people, and they respond to the positive or perverse incentives which governments provide.
If the Government decides who must do what, where, it leads to unintended consequences, and it turns out that mines providing reduced provisions to workers is one of the unintended consequences of our policies. They say that because of a combination of union pressure, unrealistic demands of Government and workers, the threat of bureaucratic licensing and procurement procedures, secrecy provisions around Aids and the politicisation of Aids, the mines have decided to progressively withdraw from providing health care.
What are the IFP’s solutions? We must provide more meaningful public- private partnerships in which Government shares both the burdens and the cost of providing care with the public sector. Incentives for treatment must be provided in rural areas for poor people, for labourers and for mineworkers, to private management organisations and NGOs. The Government must lay down minimum standards and encourage original and innovative solutions from all its partners.
While we are amending this Act, we are aware of other wider problems around worker compensation. There is another Act, the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, which contradicts some of the provisions of the legislation under discussion. The Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act also deals with compensation of mineworkers, but evidently it provides for different conditions, and there will be contradictions between that Act and Odimwa. It is essential that we have compensatory provisions which are appropriate and which stop victims, such as people with asbestosis, from being trapped in a vacuum, and which stop the mines from being threatened with closure because they have to cope with suits which require ongoing punitive damages.
Yes, we did take on board submissions by the mines, but it appears that they are not completely comfortable with the changes that we introduced afterwards. The tripartite agreement to which the mines referred was agreed to in the days of Olive Shishana, and that goes back quite a long time. Since then, under the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, the Compensation Commission is evidently mired in fraud charges. As I said, the provisions of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act which covers mineworkers are in conflict with the provisions of the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act.
In view of the black economic empowerment objectives of the mine charter and the mineral and energy legislation, it will not be a good idea to burden the mining companies with responsibilities that cripple them, rather than holding them to account. While this legislation moves in the right direction, while we still have secrecy around Aids, while there is a contradiction with other legislation, and while bureaucratic commissions are not running efficiently, we are not necessarily doing the best that we can for our mineworkers in the near and distant future.
Dr S J GOUS: Mr Chairperson, it is understandable that working in mines is a dangerous business. Mineworkers are exposed to an extremely dangerous environment and are not only at risk in terms of accidents, but also in terms of exposure to elements that can have a detrimental effect on their health and, in most cases, many, many years after the exposure.
Currently this principal Act provides that the director of the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases may refuse an application if the person concerned was medically examined within a period of six months immediately preceding the date on which such application is received, unless the application is supported in writing by a medical practitioner. This amending Bill proposes to extend this period to 24 months. The reason for this is that diseases caused by exposure normally take many years to develop. Apart from tuberculosis and certain forms of heart disease, we refer to exposure diseases collectively as pneumoconiosis. These include silicosis, asbestosis, coal workers’ lung disease and mixed dust pneumoconiosis. This proposal is in line with World Health Organisation recommendations and also prevents over-exposure to X-rays, which can have a negative effect on their own.
The Bill further seeks to ensure that the owner of a controlled mine or a controlled works shall, for an unlimited period from the date of the commencement of a compensatable disease, pay the reasonable costs incurred by a person, even if he leaves the mine or works.
Lastly, the Bill seeks to address the situation where a so-called commissioner, community representative or attorney who is assisting a claimant, ends up receiving most of the compensation. This amount is now clearly limited to 0,5% of the benefit awarded and will go a long way in protecting the interests of the worker.
Overall, this is good legislation and the New NP shall support it. [Applause.]
Mr M I MOSS: Mr Chairperson, the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Amendment Bill is a very good one, not only for those workers who suffer injuries at work, but also for those who contract diseases and illnesses through inhalation.
I want to concentrate mostly on the effect that these diseases had on asbestos mining. Asbestos mining in South Africa stopped in 1979, but many people are still dying, in spite of these mining operations no longer taking place. The legacy of asbestos mining has resulted in enormous suffering for South Africans with asbestos-related diseases and for those who have lost loved ones as a result of these illnesses. Most victims of asbestos-related deaths are from the Northern Cape and Limpopo provinces. The poor, dangerous and inhumane working conditions that mineworkers were exposed to were not the only causes of death. The workers and communities are still dying today as a result of dust they are inhaling from the asbestos mine dumps.
A 1962 confidential report by the Pneumoconiosis Research Unit of South Africa revealed that people who lived in Prieska, Koegas, Kuruman and Penge were in danger of contracting asbestosis, even though they had no industrial exposure to asbestos dust inhalation. An article in a South African journal by Prof Tony Davis, former director of the National Centre for Occupational Health in Johannesburg, referred to 13% of deaths in Prieska having been caused by mesothelioma, an asbestos-related disease.
Vandag vind ‘n mens baie weeskinders in Kuruman, nie net as gevolg van Vigs en MIV, soos vandag gesê word nie, maar baie van hierdie jongmense is vandag ouerloos as gevolg van hierdie asbessiektes. Baie van hierdie jong kinders sterf vandag selfs nadat die myne al toegemaak het voor hulle nog gebore is - ‘n baie treurige situasie! [Today one finds many orphaned children in Kuruman, not only as a result of Aids and HIV, as is being said today, but many of these young people are orphaned today because of these asbestos-related diseases. Many of these young children are still dying today, even after these mines had been closed down before they were born - a very sad situation!]
Many departments, namely Health, Justice, Labour, Minerals and Energy, and Environmental Affairs and Tourism are involved in addressing and trying to resolve the suffering of these communities.
The Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism has for some years now monitored asbestos-related issues. The committee did not only concentrate on the negative impact that asbestos has on the environment, but also on the impact it has on the South African citizens at large. A national asbestos summit was held from 23 to 26 November 1998 where four departmental commissions were established, one of which dealt with health remediation and compensation to sufferers of asbestos-related diseases.
The House of Lords in London, on 20 July 2000, gave a judgment in favour of more than 3 000 asbestos workers, allowing their claims to be heard in London. The defendant, Cape PLC Asbestos, had been attempting to stop the case from being heard in the courts. The decision meant that the South Africans would be able to process the case immediately.
Cape PLC, one of the world’s largest asbestos companies, operated in South Africa from the 1890s until 1999, when it disinvested. Blue and brown asbestos mining took place on a massive scale in the Northern Cape and Limpopo provinces, respectively. Thousands of workers developed serious and fatal diseases such as asbestosis and the cancer known as mesothelioma.
Although an out-of-court settlement was reached in favour of the workers to be compensated, to date no money has been paid to these workers. Pressure groups in South Africa and Britain are campaigning by picketing and other means to ensure that Cape PLC does compensate the South Africans who are dying and suffering as a result of asbestosis.
The claimant lawyer, solicitor Richard Meeran of Leigh, Day and Company, said at the time of the judgment: The House of Lords decision is a victory for justice which has signalled a new era both in terms of the legal accountability of multinationals and the protection of human rights by the English courts. I hope Cape PLC will now settle the claims as quickly as possible to help alleviate the desperate suffering of the victims.
Leigh, Day and Company are also acting on behalf of hundreds of other asbestos victims in actions against Turner Newhall in relation to the operations in Swaziland, Zimbabwe and India.
The South African Government fully supported the claimants’ case before the House of Lords in London, and made representations as to the public interests of South Africa.
An asbestos summit which took place in Brazil two years ago was overwhelmingly in favour of all asbestos mining being banned.
The Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism visited Zimbabwe where asbestos mining is still taking place on a big scale. Although the report of the visit found the mining in Zimbabwe to be fairly safe, if mined correctly, South Africa should support the growing international feeling that asbestos mining and related products be banned, especially when alternative products can be found. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M N RAMODIKE: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, it is my privilege to stand in for hon Mrs Nkabinde who is indisposed. The UDM supports this amending Bill. The principle motivation for the amending Bill before us today is the fact that section 32 of the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act of 1973 has not been amended since its enactment.
Section 32 of the principal Act determines that the director can refuse any application for medical examination with a view to seeking compensation for diseases listed in the Act if the applicant underwent a medical examination within six months before the director receives such an application.
In the past 29 years, however, World Health Organisation guidelines on public health surveillance, as well as International Labour Organisation standards have indicated that the period of six months provided for in the principal Act is too short; therefore it is necessary to extend this period to 24 months.
Two reasons have been advanced for the extension to 24 months with regard to medical examination for compensatable diseases. The first is the slow progression of these compensatable diseases. The second reason advanced is the use of X-rays to determine the degree and extent of a compensatable disease in a patient. Frequent exposure to X-rays by applicants, as implied under the six months prescription, could have a detrimental effect on such a person’s health.
The amending Bill before us also contains amendments that will enhance the protection that employees in mines and works are entitled to, and as such it is a welcome and necessary edition to the framework of legislation that protects and promotes occupational health. The UDM supports this amending Bill.
Mr I S MFUNDISI: Chaiperson, hon members, amendments to the almost 30-year- old piece of legislation on occupational diseases in mines and works are long overdue - however, better late than never.
The amendment of section 32(3) of the said Act puts paid to the inhumane treatment that is meted out to people who work on the mines. It has to be borne in mind that in most cases such workers are ordered to strip down to their natural outfits for examination and follow one after the other, without due regard to the different age groups. We welcome that such examination will be done after two years. However, we call for the exercise to be performed in a humane and dignified manner befitting people.
We in the UCDP are opposed to dishonesty and welcome whatever punitive steps may be taken against those who attempt to misrepresent and conceal any information that is required to ensure good health in the workplace. We also welcome the amendment that makes it mandatory for owners of mines and any controlled works to compensate people who contract diseases while in their employ.
This legislation will ensure that we do not have cases of people suffering from lung diseases such as mesothelioma or asbestosis while mining houses continue to send them from pillar to post instead of compensating them, as is the case with Cape PLC.
Unscrupulous service providers, be they lawyers or whoever, have to be on the lookout. They need to know that surcharging people in dire need of help is not only unethical; it is also punishable by law. We hope that the amendments will help do away with the greed of some lawyers and doctors. Our people should learn to get fulfilment in what they do and be passionate in rendering service to the disadvantaged without looking forward to gain.
The UCDP supports the Bill.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, those hard at work within our mines and other works are exposed to harsh circumstances in terms of health conditions and activities that may be detrimental to one’s health. Just recently the news focused on the high number of affected persons and deaths as a result of asbestos plants. These were just persons in neighbouring areas to these sites. What about the persons working on these sites?
Miners have to travel into tunnels and to depths in mines that pose a danger to their health and life. These workers belong to our citizenry. We have a duty to protect them, as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. We have to administer these principles and ensure that human rights in our country are upheld. One of the sections of the Bill of Rights refers to health.
Africa is rich in mineral wealth, and we have a team of brave people hard at work to recover and find this. It is our duty in turn to ensure that the good health and safety of these parties are well protected. The MF notes that occupational diseases are a rising problem within this sector, and supports this amending Bill fully in administering the process. [Applause.]
Dr A N LUTHULI: Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members, I shall speak on the Bill to amend the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act of 1973, referred to as the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Amendment Bill,
- This Bill is supportive of the Mine Health and Safety Act of 1998 already in existence in the Department of Minerals and Energy.
The Mine Health and Safety Act provides that employees must undergo an exit medical examination before or as soon as possible after termination of employment. The exit certificate thus obtained forms the basis for a future compensation claim.
The Bill provides for four amendments. However, I will only deal with three, because the fourth one is simply a technical issue.
The first amendment concerns section 32(3) of the principal Act which refers to the frequency of medical examinations. The principal Act provides that a director may refuse an application if the person concerned was medically examined within a period of six months prior to the date on which such an application is received, unless the application is supported in writing by a medical practitioner.
The amendment extends the period from six to 12 months. The reason for extending the period is that compensatable diseases, which cover pneumoconiosis, platinioses - that is platinum salt excess - and TB associated with pneumoconosis, amongst others, progress slowly. This may not show at all or may not reflect progress at six-month intervals, even on X-rays. The other reason is that frequent X-ray use carries a health risk.
The second amendment concerns section 36A of the principal Act. This section currently provides that the owner of a controlled mine or works shall, for a period of not more than two years from the date of the commencement of a compensatable disease, pay the reasonable cost incurred by or on behalf of a person in his or her service, or who was in his or her service at the commencement of a compensatable disease in respect of medical aid necessitated by such disease. The Act states that the employer is only responsible for paying the medical bills for two years. What happens thereafter? The Act also refers to reasonable costs. It is left to the discretion of the employer to decide what is reasonable and what is not. That was not at all in the interests of the workers.
The amendment states that, firstly, any person who works or has worked at a
mine or works, or any other person acting on behalf of such a person, may
at any time apply to the director for a medical examination of such a
person, for the purpose of determining whether such a person is suffering
from a compensatable disease, or, if he has previously been found to be
suffering from such a disease, the degree of such a disease. The two-year
period has been altered to read that at any time such a person can be
subjected to examination.
Secondly, the Bill also amends that section of the principal Act which
refers to paying for the reasonable costs incurred. The Bill states that
the owner of a controlled mine or works shall, from the date of
commencement of a compensatable disease, pay the legitimate and proven
costs incurred. We are saying proven costs'' because there will have to
be some evidence that in fact the miner did incur some costs, such as
accommodation, travelling and meals wherever they had to go to get such an
examination. They would have to keep receipts, which is what we mean by
proven costs.’’ And by ``legitimate’’ we mean that has to be for the
reason of going to find out whether in fact there is a lung disease or not.
This removes the two-year limit that is imposed by current legislation on the liability of the owner of the controlled mines or works. The effect of the removal of this two-year limitation is that the liability of the owner of a controlled mine or works in respect of the legitimate and proven cost of medical aid will be unlimited.
The third amendment concerns section 124(1) of the principal Act. Currently section 121(1) determines two acts that shall cause a person to be guilty of an offence. The amendment inserts an additional paragraph (c) which determines that a person who, in exchange for services claiming any benefit of this Act, charges a fee of more than half a percent of the benefit awarded to a claimant for his or her services, shall be guilty of an offence. This amendment has been necessitated by the fact that so-called commissioners, community representatives and attorneys, by assisting people in claiming such benefits in terms of the Act, end up taking the bulk of compensation money awarded to the claimants.
In conclusion, I want to say that this legislation is a commitment once more by our Government to ensuring that our people do not continue to be victims of predators because they are poor and ignorant. Once more the unions must help our Government in ensuring that this legislation is seen to be implemented. The unions must press for effective preventative measures to be accorded each and every miner as, once acquired, these diseases are incurable.
The ANC supports this Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, I would like to thank the members of the portfolio committee and the different parties for supporting this amending Bill. These are urgent implementable amendments. I heard hon Dr Rabinowitz’ complaint that there are contradictions between the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Act and the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act. The latter is actually administered by the Department of Labour.
I thought we had discussed this with her, that in fact in 1999 cabinet took a decision that we needed to rationalise this legislation. She knows this is work in progress and very soon we will see the removal of these contradictions, but we had to amend this Act because we think these changes are very implementable and very urgent in terms of trying to address the plight of former miners, as well as current miners. I do not think that should be a real problem for her because she knows that this is work in progress and it is being attended to.
She neither supported nor opposed the Bill. I do not know on which side the IFP stands, but in the portfolio committee the member did not oppose the Bill. I suppose that is still the stand of IFP, that it supports the Bill, because she did not mention whether they support or oppose the Bill when she made her speech.
Regarding the other issue that was raised, I think by the UCDP, about medical examinations, let me briefly say that these are indeed done in the privacy of consultation rooms and the health facilities of the Department of Health. We try to do them as confidentially as is humanly possible.
There was also a comment that perhaps we are not quite addressing the issues in the rural areas. Let me assure the members of Parliament that we are indeed trying to extend these services to the rural areas as well.
The national Department of Health is working with the provincial Departments of Health on this matter so that we can extend the benefit medical examinations to the provinces as well. We consider this a very important exercise. As we said at the beginning, we are the elected representatives of our people, and we have to represent them in the best way that we can in an effort to improve the quality of care that we give to our people.
As members can see, the amendments that have been put before the House today are really an effort on our side to improve the health care system so that it delivers efficient and quality health care to our people. I thank members for listening to us and for supporting us on the two amendments. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time. The House adjourned at 17:29. _______
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FRIDAY, 18 OCTOBER 2002
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 18 October 2002 in terms of
Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bill as a section 75
Bill:
(i) Local Government Laws Amendment Bill [B 61 - 2002]
(National Assembly - sec 75).
TABLINGS: National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:
(a) Proclamation No R 63 published in Government Gazette No 23674,
dated 31 July 2002: Commencement of the Promotion of
Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No 3 of 2000).
(b) Government Notice No R 1022 published in Government Gazette No
23674, dated 31 July 2002: Regulations on Fair Administrative
Procedures, made in terms of the Promotion of Administrative
Justice Act, 2000 (Act No 3 of 2000).
(c) Proclamation No R 67 published in Government Gazette No 23761,
dated 16 August 2002: Commencement of the Implementation of the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, 2002 (Act No
27 of 2002).
(d) Government Notice No R 1089 published in Government Gazette No
23761, dated 16 August 2002: Implementation of the Rome Statute of
the International Criminal Court Act, 2002 (Act No 27 of 2002).
(e) Proclamation No R 70 published in Government Gazette No 23862,
dated 23 September 2002: Referral of Matters to the existing
Special Investigating Unit and Special Tribunal, made in terms of
the Special Investigating Unit and Special Tribunals Act, 1996
(Act No 74 of 1996).
- The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Ingonyama Trust Board for
2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2001-2002.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Agricultural Research
Council for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General
on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 191-2002].
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Communications on the Broadcasting Amendment Bill [B 34 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 18 October 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Communications, having considered the subject of the Broadcasting Amendment Bill [B 34 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 34A - 2002].
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Health on the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill [B 37 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 18 October 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Health, having considered the subject of the Medical Schemes Amendment Bill [B 37 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 37A - 2002].
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Health on the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Amendment Bill [B 39 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 18 October 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Health, having considered the subject of the Occupational Diseases in Mines and Works Amendment Bill [B 39 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 39A - 2002].
MONDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2002
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The following Bills were introduced by the Minister of Trade and
Industry in the National Assembly on 21 October 2002 and referred
to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms
of Joint Rule 160:
(i) Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill [B 63 - 2002] (National
Assembly - sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior
notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette
No 23958 of 18 October 2002.]
(ii) Patents Amendment Bill [B 64 - 2002] (National Assembly -
sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its
introduction published in Government Gazette No 23958 of 18
October 2002.]
The Bills have been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Trade
and Industry 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.
(2) The Minister of Health submitted the Wysigingswetsontwerp op
Mediese Skemas [W 37 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75) to the
Speaker and the Chairperson on 21 October 2002. This is the
official translation into Afrikaans of the Medical Schemes
Amendment Bill [B 37 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), which
was introduced in the National Assembly by the Minister on 16
August 2002.
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
Activity Report of the Auditor-General for 2001-2002 [RP 211-2002].
- The Minister of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology:
Report of the Human Sciences Research Council for 2001-2002 [RP 170-
2002]. 3. The Minister of Housing:
Annual Financial Statements of the Department of Housing - Vote 16 for
2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2001-2002.
TUESDAY, 22 OCTOBER 2002
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister of Finance:
(a) Resolutions of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for
2002 and replies thereto obtained by the National Treasury -
Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, Tenth and Seventeenth Reports, 2002.
(b) Government Notice No R 1141 published in Government Gazette No
23801, dated 6 September 2002: Notice in terms of sections 1 and 5
of the Military Pensions Act, 1976 (Act No 84 of 1976).
(c) Government Notice No R 1163 published in Government Gazette No
23816, dated 6 September 2002: Regulations issued in terms of
section 18A (1A), made in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act
No 58 of 1962).
(d) Government Notice No R 1168 published in Government Gazette No
23820, dated 13 September 2002: Regulations: Steps to be taken to
liquidate, wind up or deregister a company, made in terms of the
Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 58 of 1962).
(e) Government Notice No 1159 published in Government Gazette No
23817, dated 13 September 2002: Determination of interest rate for
purposes of section 105(b), made in terms of the Customs and
Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91 of 1964).
(f) Government Notice No 1160 published in Government Gazette No
23817, dated 13 September 2002: Determination of interest rate for
purposes of the definitions of "prescribed rate" in section 1,
made in terms of the Value-Added Tax Act, 1991 (Act No 89 of
1991).
(g) Government Notice No 1161 published in Government Gazette No
23817, dated 13 September 2002: Determination of interest rate for
purposes of the definition of "prescribed rate" in section 1, made
in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1991 (Act No 58 of 1962).
(h) Proclamation No R 71 published in Government Gazette No 23894,
dated 30 September 2002: Date of coming into operation of sections
40(1) and 41(1), made in terms of the Revenue Laws Amendment Act,
2001 (Act No 19 of 2001).
- The Minister of Trade and Industry:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Department of Trade and
Industry - Vote 31 for 2001-2002, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 177-
2002].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Competition Tribunal for
2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 205-2002].
(c) Report and Financial Statements of the National Lotteries Board
for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2001-2002 and the Report of the Auditor-
General on the National Lottery Distribution Trust Fund for 2001-
2002. 3. The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Department of Justice and
Constitutional Development - Vote 23 for 2001-2002, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2001-
2002 [RP 210-2002].
(b) Report of the South African Law Commission for 2001-2002 [RP 209-
2002].
National Assembly:
Papers:
- The Speaker:
Report of the Public Service Commission on Fleet Management in the
Eastern Cape - 2002.
- The Minister of Education:
Letter from the Minister of Education, tabled in terms of section
65(2)(a) of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999),
explaining that the delay in the tabling of the Annual Report and
Financial Statements of the Department of Education was due to
unforeseen delays that occurred with the technical design and layout of
the report which delayed the printing for tabling.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government on the Local Government Laws Amendment Bill [B 61 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 22 October 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local Government, having considered the subject of the Local Government Laws Amendment Bill [B 61 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 61A - 2002].
The Committee reports further, as follows:
- The Committee feels that it is unacceptable that the Bill should have been introduced to Parliament so late and that the Committee should have had a limited time in which to process it. However, as the Bill dealt mainly with minor technical amendments, the Committee was able to apply its usual rigour to the Bill, particularly in respect of the substantive clauses, and has been able to complete the processing of the Bill within the timeframes decided upon. Despite this, the Committee would have preferred to receive the Bill earlier, and urges the Ministry and the Department of Provincial and Local Government to avoid a recurrence of this.
-
The Committee acknowledges the need to extend the transitional period relating to the MECs’ authorisations of the division of powers and functions between District and Local Municipalities from 5 December 2002 to 30 June 2003. The Committee feels that it is important that consideration be given, in the division of powers and functions between District and Local Municipalities, to:
-
Alignment of publication of notices of the Minister’s authorisation of the four “national” powers and functions and MECs’ publication of notices of the adjustments of the remaining powers and functions. The publication of these notices takes place by no later than the end of January 2003 in order to give municipalities adequate time to prepare and to budget accordingly.
-
Alignment, over time, of the Minister’s authorisations of powers and functions and MECs’ adjustments of these powers and functions.
-
Review of the Minister’s authorisations and the MECs’ adjustments, over time, to ensure that the important role allocated to District Municipalities in legislation and policy is fulfilled.
-
-
The Committee was careful to ensure that the clauses seeking to validate the Cape Valuation Ordinance are of a technical nature. They are necessary to ensure that the current valuations of municipalities in the Western, Northern and Eastern Cape are legally valid.
-
Related to the issue of validating the Cape Valuation Ordinance is the dispute between the Cape Town metro municipality, the Rates Action Group and the Robertsons. While it is the right of the parties to dispute or to pursue legal action, the Committee feels that all the parties in the dispute should seek to resolve their differences through discussion and negotiations. It is regrettable that a section of the ratepayers is exploiting an unfortunate technical loophole as the basis for its legal action against the Cape Town Municipality to address its concerns over the current equitable valuations and rates policy of Cape Town. The Committee feels that these ratepayers’ concerns about the current equitable valuations and the rates policy might be more usefully served by engaging with the municipality on the current valuations and substance of the rates policy. In this context it is desirable for aggrieved parties to utilise appropriate objection and appeal procedures. If the effect of the current valuations of the Cape Town Municipality results in an undue financial burden for any category of ratepayers, the municipality needs to explore, through its rates policy, whether there is anything that it can do to provide relief to those ratepayers.
-
In processing the clause dealing with the remuneration of councillors, the Committee noted that municipalities are providing allowances and benefits to councillors in contravention of the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act, 1998. Many of these municipalities purport to provide these in terms of provisions contained in provincial ordinances, but these provincial ordinances have had no legal effect since the enactment of the Remuneration of the Public Office Bearers Act. The Committee recognises that councillors’ salaries and allowances need to be adequate, but the dissatisfaction of municipalities around this should be negotiated through the appropriate channels. The present practice of transgressing the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act is unacceptable, and the Committee urges that:
-
The Ministry and the Department of Provincial and Local Government take steps to stop this practice.
-
The MECs for local government act more decisively against these transgressions.
-
The Ministry and the Department of Provincial and Local Government seek to have the relevant provisions of the provincial ordinances repealed as soon as possible.
-
The Committee Chairperson send a copy of this part of the Report to the Ministry and the Department of Provincial and Local Government and the MECs for local government and request them to act expeditiously.
-
- The Committee feels that the negotiations with the relevant stakeholders on the Property Rates Bill should be completed reasonably soon and that that Bill should be introduced in Parliament next year.
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development on the Administration of Estates Amendment Bill [B 54 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 22 October 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered the subject of the Administration of Estates Amendment Bill [B 54 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 54A - 2002], and endorses the classification of the Bill as a section 75 Bill.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Labour on Visit to Consani Engineering, dated 17 September 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Labour, having undertaken a fact- finding visit to Consani Engineering in Elsies River, Western Cape, on 14 May 2002, reports as follows:
Table of Contents
Topic Paragraph
Terms of reference A Background B Procedure C Findings D Concluding remarks E Recommendations F
A. Terms of reference
The Committee visited Consani Engineering in order to: * Examine the level of compliance with occupational health and safety standards in the workplace * Obtain information on the accident rate * Gain insight into the procedures relating to inspections * Gain exposure to various workshops and working conditions related to them.B. Background
The multi-party delegation consisted of 10 members: Ms E Thabethe ANC (Acting Chairperson) Ms T E Lishivha ANC Mr D D Mabuza ANC Ms H F Malebana ANC Mr S A Mshudulu ANC Mr M J G Mzondeki ANC Mr G G Oliphant ANC Mr N van Wyk ANC Mr N S Middleton IFP Mr M N Ramodike UDM Mr G Matloporo, Ministry of Labour; Mr T Ngonyama, Provincial Executive Manager: Western Cape; Mr T Bailey, Manager: Inspectorate and Enforcement Services, Western Cape; and Ms N Nonkelela, Committee Secretary, accompanied the delegation.C. Procedure The Committee requested the Department of Labour (the Department) to arrange a visit to a suitable workplace. Consani Engineering was selected as it was a high-risk plant.
Before departing, the delegation was escorted to the regional office of the Department in Barrack Street, Cape Town, where a Mr Ngonyama and a Mr Bailey briefed the delegation on the background of Consani Engineering. The delegation was informed that inspectors usually inform a company of their intention to conduct inspections. An unannounced visit is undertaken only after a complaint has been lodged. Then the delegation departed for the plant in Elsies River.D. Findings
Consani Engineering was established in 1929 by an Italian family. It was taken over by Murray and Roberts during the 1990s, and is in the process of integrating all the other factories under its control. Consani Engineering is in the business of making three types of tanks: * Standard tanks for storing multiple products * Special tanks for maintaining the temperature of a product * Gas tanks for storing dioxide products. The plant is classified as a high-risk plant. Institutional mission The mission of the plant is divided into values and goals. Values include looking after the company's interest, enjoying the work, assisting others where necessary and supporting the mission. Goals include guarding against negligence, striving to be on time and leaving the area clean. Inspections The plant engineer briefed the delegation on matters relating to inspections. The number of inspectors inspecting a particular site is dependent on the number of people they need to consult. For example, if an entire company needs to be inspected, four or five inspectors will be present. Inspection procedures * Inspectors are furnished with the relevant documents after a complaint has been lodged * The employer appoints an investigator * Health and safety inspectors meet with the company's safety committee * Inspectors make recommendations to the employer * Two checklists are used - the information checklist contains inspection guidelines and the requirement checklist contains the standard at which inspections should be conducted * During an investigation three notices may be issued: - A contravention notice is issued when an employer has contravened an Act - An improvement notice is issued when an employer is notified to improve the conditions of employment - A prohibition notice is issued when a situation is life- threatening and prohibits an employee from using a certain machine until it is repaired * An employer has 60 days within which to comply with the regulations. If a matter is very serious, a follow-up notice is served. If the employer still fails to comply, the matter is handed over for prosecution. Safety committee The plant engineer is the chairperson of the safety committee. The committee meets every three months and considers only issues of safety. The forepersons from each workshop are members of the committee. Unions Three unions are represented at the plant: * National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa (NUMSA) * National E Trade Union (NETU) * Metal Workers Union (MWU). The plant manager is chairperson of the MWU. Injuries During April 2002 there were 27 minor injuries (scratches and bruises) and three major injuries (back injuries and loss of eyesight). Some injuries resulted from pressure due to workload. Other injuries were caused by negligence. There were 50 safety representatives at the plant. Sheet metal workshop Workers in this section make metal boxes, and it is a noisy zone. The workshop consists of 15 to 20 workers working on shifts and supervised by a foreperson. Inspections are conducted on a monthly basis and recommendations are submitted to the safety committee. Tank workshop Workers in this section make dish plates. One worker lost an arm while operating a machine, and the matter was under investigation. Spin workshop The workshop has two forepersons. Three injuries (loss of limbs) were recorded during May 2002. All injuries are registered, no matter how minor. Component workshop Workers in this section make frames which are supplied to all the other worshops at the plant. It is also a noisy zone. Durban workshop Workers in this section assemble tanks. The delegation observed a female worker working here. Clearing workshop Workers work on shifts in this workshop. African employees told the delegation that bureaucracy still existed in the workshop, since their complaints were delayed in favour of white and coloured employees. They also said that white and coloured employees were allocated overtime. Injuries occurred mostly due to torn clothing and broken shoes. Interaction with workers and HR manager As far as workers were concerned, the management delayed the replacement of worn safety clothes. One worker said it might take two months to replace an overall. One worker whose eyesight was adversely affected while on duty, claimed that he was not aware of what compensation was due to him. Another worker claimed that safety representatives did not always accurately reflect workers' views. Workers said they were unhappy about transport to their homes at night, especially in view of incidents of gangsterism in the area. Some workers also indicated that they had been casual workers for more than two years. As far as the HR manager was concerned, the HIV/Aids policy could not be implemented because workers were not co- operative. He requested the Committee to assist in this regard. Employees with disabilities were not retained due to the nature of the plant's operations. They were granted leave and disability pensions, and were not trained in skills needed outside the company. Theft and substance abuse were serious problems. A policy was in place to provide counselling and support services to persons affected by substance abuse. Occupational health and safety training was conducted at various levels within the company.E. Concluding remarks
The delegation expresses its appreciation for the warm reception it received for the duration of its visit at Consani Engineering. It also wishes to thank the Cape Town regional office of the Department for taking care of the logistical arrangements, as well as the inspectors who assisted to make the visit informative and worthwhile. After presenting its findings and recommendations to the National Assembly, the Committee will liaise with the Department to ensure that the concerns raised are addressed. The Committee will also ensure that important aspects of health and safety, namely training programmes on health, receive attention. Furthermore, the Committee intends: * Following up on matters raised by workers, such as the delay in the replacement of safety clothes * Meeting with safety representatives on matters raised by workers who are not well-represented * Assisting in solving problems related to implementing the HIV/Aids policy, perhaps by sending someone to address workers.F. Recommendations The Committee recommends that:
* The Department and the company set aside a day to meet with the health and safety committee * The provincial department of labour make the reports from the inspectorate available to the Committee. A composite update on the inspection of Consani Engineering must also be made available * Outstanding cases be followed up * Durable gloves be made available for workers * Structured training programmes on health and safety be examined by the Department * Recommendations emanating from the safety committee, as well as minutes of previous meetings, be acquired and monitored by the Department.
Report to be considered.