National Council of Provinces - 26 February 2002
TUESDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2002 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
____
The Council met at 14:02.
The Deputy Chairperson took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mnr J L THERON: Voorsitter, ek gee kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting van die Raad sal voorstel:
Dat die Raad -
(1) die ANC-regering versoek om ernstige oorweging te skenk aan die effektiewe funksionering van Scopa (die Staande Komitee oor Openbare Rekeninge); (2) kennis neem dat twee belangrike lede reeds moes bedank, naamlik Andrew Feinstein, die ANC se woordvoerder, en Gavin Woods, die voorsitter van die komitee, omdat die ANC-lede van die komitee die effektiewe funksionering van die komitee erg benadeel;
(3) kennis neem dat Gavin Woods sê: ``Parliament has failed the people’’, en dat die gesamentlike ondersoekspan na die wapentransaksie (JIT) nie geregtigheid laat geskied het nie; en
(4) die ANC versoek om nie ‘n ``puppet’‘-voorsitter aan te wys nie en om nie verder die effektiewe funksionering van die komitee te benadeel nie, en so die Parlement se goeie naam verder deur die modder te sleep nie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Mr J L THERON: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting I shall move:
That the Council -
(1) requests the ANC Government to give serious consideration to the effective functioning of SCOPA (the Standing Committee on Public Accounts);
(2) notes that two important members have now already had to resign, namely Andrew Feinstein, the ANC’s spokesperson, and Gavin Woods, the chairperson of the committee, because the ANC members of the committee are seriously harming the committee’s effective functioning;
(3) notes that Gavin Woods is saying: ``Parliament has failed the people’’, and that the joint investigation team into the arms transaction (JIT) did not let justice prevail; and
(4) requests the ANC not to appoint a puppet chairperson and not to prejudice any further the effective functioning of the committee, thereby dragging Parliament’s good name further through the mud.]
FLIGHT CAPTAINS ON SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS
(Draft Resolution) Dr P J C NEL: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) notes with extreme concern for the safety of passengers and crew that South African Airways -
(a) is considering taking on entry-level pilots as flight captains;
(b) pilots normally first serve a copilot apprenticeship of between
13 and 17 years before graduating to flight captains and do not
become flight captains on entry level; and
(c) is also threatening to enforce early retirement for any pilot
who reaches the age of 50 or who is older than 50; and
(2) requests the Minister of Transport to take the necessary steps to ensure that South African Airways does not -
(a) compromise the safety of its passengers and crew by allowing
entry-level pilots to become flight captains without first
serving a copilot apprenticeship for a reasonable period; and
(c) force experienced and senior pilots to retire on reaching the
age of 50.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! Is there any objection to the motion?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: I object to the motion, Chairperson.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): Order! In the light of the objection, the motion may not be proceeded with. The motion without notice will now become notice of a motion.
GOOD WISHES TO MARK SHUTTLEWORTH
(Draft Resolution)
Dr E A CONROY: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) wishes our fellow South African, Mark Shuttleworth, who is also fondly known among South Africans as ``Boeranof’’, well in his final preparations toward countdown for the epic and adventurous voyage he will soon be taking into outer space with his fellow Russian astronauts and travel companions;
(2) salutes his pioneering spirit, which does us proud; and
(3) will be applauding him at that final moment of liftoff.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
DEFEAT OF SA PROTEAS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr N M RAJU: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) notes with utter disappointment the abysmal performance of the SA Proteas against the touring Australians in the first cricket test match just completed at the Wanderers in Johannesburg;
(2) further notes that this fourth continuous defeat of the SA national cricket XI at the hands of the Aussies from Down Under is hurting every South African lover of sport; and
(3) expresses the hope and optimism that hopefully the national cricket team has reached its nadir, and will rise like a phoenix from the ashes of ignominious defeat to become a formidable force in international cricket once again and reclaim its status with grit, determination, passion and a sense of national pride.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONGRATULATIONS TO SA POLICE SERVICE ON SOUTH COAST OF KWAZULU-NATAL ON CRACKING ARMED ROBBERY SYNDICATE (Draft Resolution)
Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) takes note that the SA Police Service on the South Coast of KwaZulu- Natal last week arrested seven men, recovered 19 stolen vehicles, seized four firearms and recovered stolen goods worth thousands of rands after cracking an armed robbery syndicate;
(2) further notes that the robbers were involved in a spate of armed robberies on the South Coast of KwaZulu-Natal in recent months; and
(3) congratulates the SAPS on the South Coast of KwaZulu-Natal and urges them to continue their good work in the interests of all the citizens of the South Coast of KwaZulu-Natal.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
RAPE SELF-DEFENCE PROGRAMME AT SCHOOLS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr J HORNE: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) congratulates the Minister of Education and his department, as well as the private sector, for having joined forces to launch a self- defence programme at schools in response to the shockingly high rape statistics;
(2) notes that according to Rape Crisis a woman is raped every 23 seconds in the country and that according to a study carried out by Unisa, based on police information, a million women and children are raped annually; and
(3) calls upon all schoolgirls in the country to actively participate in the self-defence programmes, which will provide them with the necessary tools to protect themselves against would-be attackers and rapists. Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): I take this opportunity to welcome the hon Dr M G Buthelezi, Minister of Home Affairs, to the NCOP and accordingly …
… sicele inkosi ukuthi ikhulume nathi. [… we would like to ask the inkosi to speak to us.]
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Mhlonishwa Sihlalo ohloniphekileyo, malungu a hloniphekileyo … [Hon Chairperson, hon members …]
… it is always a very great privilege to be in this House for reasons which I have stated and restated whenever I have been here. I am here today to state that the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, ushered in a new dispensation in the constitutional history of this country. Of utmost significance is the provision that the Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic. Therefore, law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid and obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled.
The Department of Home Affairs, in its attempt to realign legislation under its administration in line with the Constitution, has identified the Births and Deaths Registration Act as falling into that category of legislation in need of minor adjustments in line with the Bill of Rights and the democratic values of human dignity, equality and freedom enshrined in our Constitution.
The Births and Deaths Registration Act, Act 51 of 1992, was enacted to regulate the registration of births and deaths in the country. In spite of its being enacted before the 1994 constitutional dispensation, the amendments already effected to the principal Act did not cover all aspects brought about by the new dispensation.
In terms, therefore, of section 28, subsection 3 of the Constitution, a child is defined as ``a person under the age of 18 years’’, and the definition of a major, provided for in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act, has to be amended to be in line with the definition provided by the Constitution. Section 1 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act defined a major or a person of age as any person who has attained the age of 21 years, or who is, under the provisions of section 2 of the Age of Majority Act, Act 57 of 1972, declared to be a major, and it includes a person under the age of 21 years who has contracted a legal marriage, whereas a minor or a minor person is defined as any person who is not a major or a person of age.
In line with the equality clause set out in section 9 of the Constitution, it is deemed expedient that parents of children born during the subsistence of a marriage should be allowed to jointly decide to raise their children under the surname of either the father or the mother, or under both their surnames joined together as a double-barrelled surname.
Section 9 of the Constitution entrenches the right of all South Africans to be equal before the law, and to have equal protection and benefit of the law. The state is enjoined not to unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on the grounds of gender or sex. An amendment of section 9 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act is viewed in this line so as to afford both parents equal treatment and benefit of the law.
In the same vein, a widow had to be allowed to also add to the surname which she assumed after the marriage, any surname that she bore at any prior time. An amendment of section 26 of the Act is therefore necessary to afford a widow the same benefits as married or divorced women.
In terms of section 25(1)(b) and (c) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act, the consent of the natural father of a child born out of wedlock is required when an application for an alteration of the surname of a minor is contemplated. This requirement was introduced in 1997 when the Natural Fathers of Children Born out of Wedlock Act, Act 86 of 1997, was enacted. An opportunity was lost then to introduce a well-known common-law principle that such consent is unnecessary if the mother of the child has sole guardianship.
The amendment of section 25(1)(b) and (c) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act is to introduce this well-known common-law principle that where the mother or father has sole guardianship of the child, the consent of the other parent is not required in dealing with the affairs of the child.
Last but not least, a competent court, as referred to in section 25(1)(b) and (c), is not defined in terms of section 1 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act. In the absence of such a definition, the jurisdiction of the Magistrates or Children’s Act to adjudicate on matters affecting the interests of the child as contemplated in terms of section 25(1)(b) and (c) of the Act is excluded as all questions pertaining to the status of the person must always be referred to the High Court.
With the legal costs and complications involved when the matter has to be brought before the High Court, it is necessary to define a competent court so as to extend the jurisdiction to lower courts which are accessible to the people on the ground.
With those few words I humbly request that this House accept the Births and Deaths Registration Amendment Bill. [Applause.]
Ms L JACOBUS: Chairperson, the hon the Minister raised a number of issues that I had planned to raise as well, but we had not conferred with each other before this sitting. But the Minister and the Chairperson have indicated on a number of occasions that the reason why we have debates is to inform the public out there and the people that we are supposed to be representing on legislation and what exactly it means to them, so I am going to say what I intended to say anyway.
It is once more a pleasure and privilege to address this honourable House at this, the third sitting of the third legislative year of the second Parliament of the democratic Republic of South Africa. We are about to enter the month of March, which has been identified by the hon the President as the month in which to celebrate or highlight the human rights of all South Africans.
The right to choose is probably one of the most fundamental human rights that any human being should be able to enjoy. Section 9 (3) of the Bill of Rights reads as follows, and the hon the Minister made reference to this Section of the Constitution:
The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth.
Out of all these I want to highlight three and these are gender, sex and marital status. The hon the Minister has also dealt with this sufficiently and therefore I will not go into the details. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Act No 4 of 2000 which was passed in February of the year 2000, expands on and substantiates even more these mentioned grounds of nondiscrimination.
In Chapter 5 of that Act, a distinct responsibility is placed on the Government and its institutions to promote equality and to prevent unfair discrimination on the grounds that I have just mentioned.
The Bill before us allows for the following. Firstly, it allows for the inclusion of the definition of ``competent court’’, which now includes a magistrates’ court and a children’s court, as well as the redefinition of a major, or a person of age, as such a person is commonly known, from the age of 21 to 18. These two amendments are proposed to bring this Bill in line with current legislation around child care as well as section 28(3) of the Constitution. This is in clause 1 of the amending Bill.
Secondly, it provides for the reregistration of a child in the surname of either or both of the parents. I refer hon members to clause 2 of the amending Bill, to which the Minister has also alluded.
Thirdly, it provides for the regulation of the alteration of the surname of a minor, in clause 3. Lastly, it provides for a widow to assume a previous surname - that is in clause 4 of the amending Bill - which means that if a woman was married, and she had assumed the surname of her husband, she can then revert back to her so-called maiden name if she so wishes.
In conclusion, I want to remind the House that this democracy of ours is eight years old, but we have moved a long way in deepening it, and many countries across the world attest to this. Our Constitution, policies and subsequent legislation are rated amongst the best in the world. The best way in which we can honour this Constitution of ours is to give life to it, and the best way to give life to it is to practise what we have committed ourselves to doing.
In the front line of service delivery are our civil servants. They are the ones who are expected to give life to the Constitution and all laws flowing from it. The Department of Home Affairs must therefore embark on a process whereby its employees are informed and trained on all policies and legislation that pass through Parliament for implementation by themselves.
We can all relate personal stories about our experiences with the Department of Home Affairs over many years. Many a time people claim not to have known, and therefore I am making the point that the onus rests on us to ensure that the people that are in the front line of delivery should know what we have decided, what we have legislated on and how it will impact on the lives of people.
In our deliberations and interaction with the department on this Bill I have related experiences of both myself and constituents that have interacted with the department. These experiences resulted from the fact that employees were not aware that certain laws had been amended and/or repealed.
Our democracy is growing up. We cannot claim to be in our infancy any more. Our hon President has set the tone when it comes to service delivery. I quote from what he said:
… we will strive to give real meaning to the strategic challenge facing the Public Service, Batho Pele! This spirit of service to society … is what guides us as we pursue the restructuring of the Public Service.
I want to add to that also ``the pursuance of democracy’’.
With these few words I place before this House the committee report which proposes the adoption of this amending Bill, B53 of 2001. [Applause.]
Mnr J HORNE: Mnr die Voorsitter, agb Minister en lede van die Huis, Suid- Afrika het ‘n jong Grondwet waarvan die hele inhoud gebaseer is op die demokrasie. Dit mag soms nodig wees om bestaande wetgewing uit die vorige bedeling in lyn te bring met die Grondwet. Hierdie wetgewing waaroor daar vandag debat gevoer word, is ‘n uitvloeisel daarvan.
Artikel 1 van die Wet ondergaan maar net ‘n administratiewe aanpassing en daarom is repliek daarop nie nodig nie, want dit is net die ouderdomsgrens wat verander van 21 jaar na 18 jaar.
Die wysiging van artikel 9 van die Wet bepaal dat die kind se van onder òf die van van die vader òf die van die moeder geregistreer kan word, of gesamentlik onder beide ouers se vanne. Wat dit aanbetref is daar tog ‘n mate van kommer, alhoewel daar verskillende standpunte mag wees, dat dit verwarring mag veroorsaak. Dit is oor die eeue heen simbolies in ‘n huwelik dat die vrou en kinders die vader se van aanneem. Nou word die wese van die simboliek aangetas. Dit blyk tog aan die einde van die dag dan seker die paartjie se keuse te wees.
Artikel 25 van die Wet word gewysig om te bepaal dat die vader se toestemming in geen opsig nodig is as die moeder deur ‘n hof volle toesig oor die kinders ontvang het nie. In ‘n regstaat soos Suid-Afrika mag dit wetteregterlik reg wees, maar hierdie kinders moet tog in vrede en harmonie grootword. As die beeld van die vader versteur word, loop die kind gevaar om ongebalanseerd die lewe in te gaan, wat tog riskant is. Die praktyk het keer op keer bewys gelewer dat ‘n kind wat vaderskap ontbeer letsels daarvan oorhou.
Ten slotte, die wysiging van artikel 26 van die Wet beteken dat ‘n weduwee ook haar van kan verander. Dat dit verwarring onder haar kinders kan veroorsaak, is ‘n ope vraag.
Aan die ander kant sê die Bybel dat daar sewe broers was. Die eerste broer het getrou en gesterf. Daarna het die ander ses broers ook met die vrou getrou en hulle het ook gesterf. Die vrou het toe gesterf. Die dissipels het vir Jesus gevra aan wie die vrou sou behoort as hulle almal in die hemel sou kom. Jesus het hulle geantwoord dat sy aan niemand sou behoort nie, want in die hemel sal ons almal hemelinge wees.
Artikel 26 het seker dieselfde bedoeling.
Nieteenstaande ons kommer en die verwarring wat dit in die praktyk sal meebring, steun die Nuwe NP die wetgewing om dit in lyn te bring met ons Grondwet. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr J HORNE: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and members of the House, South Africa has a young Constitution, the whole content of which is based on democracy. It may, at times, be necessary to bring existing legislation from the previous dispensation in line with the Constitution. The legislation that is being debated today is in consequence of this fact.
Section 1 of the Act will merely undergo an administrative adjustment and comment upon it is therefore unnecessary, as it is just the age limit which changes from 21 years to 18 years.
The amendment of section 9 of the Act provides that a child’s surname may be registered under either that of the father, or of the mother, or jointly under both parents’ surnames. In this regard there still is a degree of concern, although there may be varying points of view, that this may create confusion. For centuries it has been symbolic in a marriage for the wife and children to adopt the father’s surname. Now the essence of that symbolism is being tampered with. At the end of the day it is surely the couple’s decision.
Section 25 of the Act is amended in order to provide that the father’s consent is in no way needed when the mother has been granted full custody by a court. In a constitutional state such as South Africa this may be statutorily correct, but these children must surely grow up in peace and harmony. If the father’s image is distorted, the child will be in danger of beginning life in an unbalanced way, which after all is risky. In actual practice it has been proven time and again that a child in want of a father will bear consequential scars.
Finally, the amendment of section 26 of the Act means that a widow can also change her name. Whether this may create confusion among her children is an open question.
On the other hand, the Bible says that there were seven brothers. The first brother got married and then died. Afterwards the other six brothers also married this woman and they also died. Then the woman herself died. The disciples then asked Jesus to whom this woman would belong if they all went to heaven. However, according to Jesus’ answer she will belong to nobody, because there we will all be denizens of heaven.
I suppose section 26 has the same intent.
Irrespective of our concerns and the confusion it will bring on in practice, the New NP supports this legislation in order to bring it in line with our Constitution. [Applause.]]
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Mr Chairperson, hon Prince of KwaPhindangene, Dr M G Buthelezi, the Minister of Home Affairs and hon members, let me congratulate the Minister and his department on the Bill which is on the Table. Let me also congratulate the chairperson of the committee, Miss L Jacobus, on a job well done, as the Bill ended up getting support from all parties serving in the committee. We, the IFP, fully support this Bill.
Firstly, the amendment of section 9 of Act 51 of 1992 as amended by section 4 of Act 41 of 1995 and section 1 of Act 43 of 1998, which deals with notices of births and deaths, states that, and I quote:
… the notice of birth … shall be given under the surname of either the father or the mother of the child concerned or the surnames of both the father and mother joined together as a double barrelled surname.
Secondly, this Bill gives freedom of choice to a child born out of wedlock to easily alter a surname and assume a surname of his or her choice. This Bill, in its wide scope of freedom of choice, allows a widow to assume a previous surname if she so wishes. This, indeed, is democracy in the true sense of the word.
Mphathisihlalo, kuyangithokozisa mina ukukhuluma kulo mThethosivivinywa ochibiyelayo osezithebeni. Lo mThethosivivinywa ukhuluma ngokwaziswa kokuzalwa nokufa. Sonke siyazi ukuthi uma kuzelwe umntwana kushicilelwa emabhukwini omthetho, kutholakale isitifiketi sokuzalwa. Kunjalo noma umuntu ehamba emhlabeni, kuyaziswa emabhukwini omthetho, kuphume isitifiketi sokufa.
Engiqonde ukukusho lapha ngukuthi lo mThetho uchibiyela emidala ebisebenza ibuye ichibiyelwe nayo - empeleni lona uchibiyela umThetho ka 1992. Okusemqoka nokuhle ngawo ngukuthi unika inkululeko ethe xaxa kubazali bomntwana kanye nakumntwana ozelwe ekhaya. Uma kukhishwa isaziso sokuzalwa ingane ezelweyo ingabhalwa ngonina noma ngoyise, noma kungabhalwa izibongo ezimbili esikababa nesikamama. Kanti-ke umntwana uma esekhulile naye unelungelo lokuzikhethela isibongo athanda ukubizwa ngaso.
Siyayazi inkinga ebibakhona uma ingane ebizalelwe ekhaya, hhayi emshadweni, isifuna isibongo sayo. Bekuba umzukuzuku iphuma ingena ifuna uyise ukuba ayisize ishintshe isibongo sakomalume, ekhaya komame phela.
Kulo mThethosivivinywa esiphezu kwawo, akusekho konke lokho. Umntwana uma esekhulile eseneminyaka engaphezu kuka-18 uyakwazi ukuzishitshela isibongo azibize ngaleso asithandayo kwezabazali bakhe, ngaphandle kwenkinga. Kanjalo nakubafelokazi, ikhona inkululeko ngoba umfelokazi uma ethanda, uzokwazi ukubuyela esibongweni sakhe sokuzalwa ngaphandle kwenkinga.
Lo mThethosivivinywa ochibiyelayo muhle kakhulu, siyawuvuma sonke. Thina be- IFP siwushayela ihlombe. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[Chairperson, it is a pleasure for me to talk about this amending Bill that we are discussing here. This Bill talks about giving notice of births and deaths. We all know that if a child is born, it should be recorded in an official register, and a child should get a birth certificate. It is the same when a person dies. His death is registered and a death certificate is issued.
What I am trying to say is that this Bill amends the previous ones, which were used and amended. In fact, this one amends the Act of 1992. What is good and important about it is that it gives more freedom to the parents when a child is born at home. When notice of a birth is given, a child can be included in the record under a father’s or a mother’s name. Even two surnames, the father’s and the mother’s, can be recorded. And when the child is grown up, he or she has a choice of adopting a surname that he or she likes.
We know of the problems that emerge when a child is born out of wedlock. The child would want its surname. It used to be hard for a child looking for a father so that he could help him or her change their mother’s surname.
We will never experience that scenario as far as this Bill is concerned. When a child is over 18, he will be able to change his surname and adopt the one he likes without any problem. This applies to widows too. There is freedom, because if a widow likes, she will be able to take back her maiden surname without any hitch.
This amending Bill is very good, and we all accept it. We in the IFP applaud it. [Applause.]]
Ms E C GOUWS: Mr Chairperson, I thank you for this opportunity. But I wish I could have had six minutes when I spoke in the Presidential debate or a Health debate because there is always much to say about HIV/Aids. Six minutes for the Births and Deaths Registration Amendment Bill is rather generous.
The Bill seeks to amend the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1992, so as to define an expression; to reduce the age of majority; to provide for the registration of a child in the surname of either or both parents; to further regulate the alteration of the surname of a minor; and to allow a widow to assume a previous surname; and to provide for matters connected therewith. Ons by die DP verwelkom hierdie reg van die individu om self te besluit oor sy naam of van waarmee hy deur die lewe wil gaan. In my eie geval, sou ek hierdie geleentheid gehad het, sou ek al op hoërskool ontslae geraak het van die Claassens deel van my naam en dit nogal na ‘n heel aanvaarbare Embrensia. Ek was baie kere baie verleë as ek my naam hardop moes gee. Kinders in daardie jare was duiwels en in daardie jare was ‘n van vir ‘n familienaam, veral vir ‘n dogter, ‘n saak waarmee gespot is.
Dit sal nou natuurlik vir die familienavorsers moeilik wees om die stambome van families op te spoor. Daar sal ongetwyfeld families wees wat nie hiermee genoeë neem nie, want vir hulle is ‘n van van kardinale belang om elke moontlike voorvader of -moeder op te spoor met ‘n trotse familienaam. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[We in the DP welcome this right of the individual to decide for himself or herself about the name or surname with which he or she wants to go through life. As far as I am concerned, if I had had this opportunity I would have dropped the Claassens part of my name, and that after a quite acceptable Embrensia, as long ago as at high school. There were many times when I was embarrassed if I had to say my name aloud. In those years children were veritable devils and in those years a surname as a family name, especially for a girl, was something to be ridiculed.
It will now, of course, be difficult for the family researchers to trace the genealogical trees of families. There will undoubtedly be some families that will not be pleased with this, because for them a surname is of the utmost importance to trace every possible ancestor or ancestress with a proud family name.]
One of my colleagues in the DP has already taken the opportunity - maybe the first in Parliament - to do this. The colleague married a Miss Stokes and then he added his wife’s surname to his. My colleague is Nick Clelland- Stokes. [Applause.]
When the DP support, they support in style. The DP supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Mr J O TLHAGALE: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and hon House, I have chosen to deal with the clauses of this Bill randomly as the spirit moves me, rather than in any chronological order. [Laughter.] Section 9 of the principal Act is amended in order to make provision that parents of children born during the existence of a marriage be allowed to register their children under the surname of either the father or the mother or under both their surnames joined together as a double-barrelled surname.
I am not a student of anthropology, nor am I well-versed in cultural
beliefs and customs of our people, but what I do know is that a child born
of a Mokwena man would belong to the Bakwena clan, that is, the people of
the crocodiles'', and would assume a crocodile as his or her totem.
[Laughter.] If he or she were to be registered under the surname of the
mother who, for argument's sake would be a Monogeng, that is, people of
the snakes’’, then he or she would be regarded as having lost his or her
affinity to the people of the crocodiles, that is the Bakwena clan, to
which he or she biologically belongs.
I am aware that at the committee level I had voted in support of the Bill, but I regret that today I should withdraw my support on account of the above-mentioned cultural impediment. [Applause.]
Ms S N NTLABATI: Just as Mrs Gouws said … I ask for your protection please, Mr Chairperson, from Shenge. Mrs Gouws said six minutes was generous. Worse than that is eight. Everybody has said almost everything there is to say, but, anyhow, I would say that this piece of legislation is a cry of ``Viva’’ to women, thanks to you mntwana, thanks to you, Shenge. But, it does represent a challenge as to how many people outside will know about it. So, the challenge to all of us who are here is to educate, as we go out, the beneficiaries of this piece of legislation, which is an amendment of a lifetime solution to many women’s problems.
I notice the progressiveness of the piece of legislation because, of course, it brings down, from 21 to 18 years the age of majority. The social environment of children today makes them more mature, even from 15 years of age. At least, this is a most notable thing to me.
Lastly, I would say that the indignity of women having to go around looking for the natural father when they want to go to these offices is no more. I must say that, unlike Ntate Tlhagale, who did not say anything at the committee meetings, I did warn, at committee level, of the cultural issues. I asked about double-barrelled or triple-barrelled surnames, and whether, when it goes down the line, it would not take us even up to four surnames. The last thing I said is that I want to ask the elderly people their opinion, because in our culture we usually say that when a child cries and cries endlessly, one has got to look for that family. Ke Bakoena, ke Bataung, ke eng [There are Bakoenas, the Bataungs or whatever]. But somewhere down the line I am not sure if, 50 years from now, we are going to know what to do. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M L Mushwana): I was not actually surprised to see Mr Tlhagale still holding on to the culture. I still see him in a Bophuthatswana tie. I am sure he still holds to the culture. [Interjections.] Maybe the hon the Minister will be able to answer the Bakoena issue.
The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I think all that is left for me to do is to thank the chairperson of the Select Committee on Social Services, Ms Jacobus, for the support she has given to the Bill, and also for her emphasis, which is similar to that of Ms Ntlabati just now, on the obligation we have, as members of Parliament, to remind our people of their rights under the Constitution, because all that the legislation does is remind us, as the population, of the rights that we have under our Constitution.
All members of the House have emphasised the beauty of the choice that is given by the Constitution. Mr Horne did, and I also enjoyed him referring us to the question that Christ gave, about that widow, but of course, Christ was talking about the hereafter, not about this world. He said that, in the hereafter, there is no such thing as marriage or married people, but I really admire, as a Christian, that this House has good Christians like Mr Horne.
I also thank Mrs Vilakazi for saying the obvious, that of course as we enter this world our entry is recorded as much as when we exit to join those who are in eternity. That fact is also recorded.
I thank all members of this House because all supported the Bill, apart from Mr Tlhagale, who withdrew support on cultural grounds, because he says that one must make a distinction between crocodiles and snakes. I can appreciate his dilemma. As a traditional leader I do understand his dilemma, because in terms of our culture these things are very important. Therefore I can understand his confusion because it is a duty of traditional leaders to uphold the customs and traditions of the people. So although, as a Minister, I would like to argue against him, I am in a dilemma because as a traditional leader it is my duty to uphold the customs and cultures of my people.
On the whole I must say I am most grateful to hon members of this House for making my work so simple, because there are no queries that they have posed which need my elucidation or any amplification. As I always say, when one is in this House one is always impressed by the dignity with which people express their views and the whole atmosphere. One really feels kuseNdlini yeziNgwevu [in the NCOP] when one is in this House. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
The Council adjourned at 14:44. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FRIDAY, 22 FEBRUARY 2002
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 21 February 2002 in terms
of Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bill as a section
75 Bill:
(i) Media Development and Diversity Agency Bill [B 2 - 2002]
(National Assembly - sec 75).
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister of Finance: (a) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1997-98 [RP 190- 2001].
(b) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the
Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1998-99 [RP 187-
2001].
(c) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the
Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1999-2000 [RP
188-2001].
(d) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the
Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 2000-2001 [RP
189-2001].
- The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:
Proposed Regulations made in terms of the Promotion of Access to
Information Act, 2000, submitted to Parliament in terms of section
92(2) of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No 2 of
2000).
- The Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry:
Report and Financial Statements of the Sedibeng Water Board for 2000-
2001.
MONDAY, 25 FEBRUARY 2002
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 February 2002 in terms
of Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bill as a section
75 Bill:
(i) Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Bill [B 1 -
2002] (National Assembly - sec 75).
(2) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 February 2002 in terms
of Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bill as a money
Bill (section 77):
(i) Appropriation Bill [B 4 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec
77).
(3) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 February 2002 in terms
of Joint Rule 160(6), classified the following Bill as a section
76 Bill:
(i) Division of Revenue Bill [B 5 - 2002] (National Assembly -
sec 76).
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Council of Provinces:
-
Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Labour Relations Amendment Bill [B 77B -2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 22 February 2002:
The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill [B 77B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with proposed amendments, as follows:
CLAUSE 45
- On page 17, in line 25, to omit “500 employees or more” and to substitute “more than 500 employees”.
CLAUSE 48
-
On page 21, in line 13, to omit “substitution for subsection (3)” and to substitute “addition”.
-
On page 21, in line 14, to omit “(3)” and to substitute “(4)”.
CLAUSE 58
- On page 29, in line 36, to omit “2001” and to substitute “2002”.
-
Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Basic Conditions of Employment Amendment Bill [B 70B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 22 February 2002:
The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Basic Conditions of Employment Amendment Bill [B 70B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with proposed amendments, as follows:
CLAUSE 21
-
On page 7, in line 21, to omit “of employment”.
-
On page 7, in line 28, to omit “member” and to substitute “part”.
CLAUSE 24
- On page 8, in line 42, to omit “2001” and to substitute “2002”. TUESDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2002
-
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- The Speaker and the Chairperson:
The following changes have been made to the membership of Joint
Committees, viz:
Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Children, Youth and
Disabled Persons:
Appointed: Reid, L L R.
Discharged: Bhengu, F.
Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women:
Appointed: Morutoa, M R.
National Council of Provinces:
-
The Chairperson: (1) Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 26 February 2002: To be submitted to President of the Republic for assent:
(i) Births and Deaths Registration Amendment Bill [B 53 - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75).
-
The Chairperson:
(1) The following private member's legislative proposal was
submitted to the Chairperson on 4 December 2001, in accordance
with Rule 178:
(i) Sectional Titles Amendment Bill (Dr E A Conroy).
The legislative proposal has been referred to the Select Committee
on Members' Legislative Proposals by the Chairperson, in
accordance with Rule 179.
- The Chairperson:
The following papers have been tabled and are now referred to the
relevant committees as mentioned below:
(1) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
Security and Constitutional Affairs:
Proposed Regulations made in terms of the Promotion of Access to
Information Act, 2000, submitted to Parliament in terms of section
92(2) of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No
2 of 2000).
(2) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Land
and Environmental Affairs:
Report and Financial Statements of the Sedibeng Water Board for
2000-2001.
(3) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Finance:
(a) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1997-
98 [RP 190-2001].
(b) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1998-
99 [RP 187-2001].
(c) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 1999-
2000 [RP 188-2001].
(d) Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements
of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 2000-
2001 [RP 189-2001].