WEDNESDAY, 12 MARCH 2003 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:03.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 0000.

                             NEW MEMBERS

                           (Announcement)

The Speaker announced that the vacancies that had arisen as a result of resignations of Mr J H Slabbert, Mr M A Mzizi and Mr H J Bekker had been filled, in accordance with item 6(3) of Schedule 6 to the Constitution, 1996, by the nomination, with effect from 7 March 2003, of Mr B C Ngiba, Mr T Shabalala and Ms T E Millin.

                                OATH

Mr B C Ngiba and Mr T Shabalala, accompanied by Ms S A Seaton and Ms L R Mbuyazi, made and subscribed the oath and took their seats.

                         SOLEMN AFFIRMATION

Ms T E Millin, accompanied by Ms S A Seaton and Ms L R Mbuyazi, made and subscribed the solemn affirmation and took her seat.

The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, there has been an agreement that questions will not take precedence today. We will start with the subject for discussion on the Order Paper, which is in the name of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party on the peaceful and multilateral resolution of the situation in Iraq.

  THE PEACEFUL AND MULTILATERAL RESOLUTION OF THE SITUATION IN IRAQ

                      (Subject for Discussion)

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, Deputy President, and hon members, as we meet, the drums of war are getting louder, but the orchestra of peace is also getting stronger. Therefore, today’s debate is crucial.

The tense discussions in the UN Security Council on the same issue underscore the fact that we are facing one of the most decisive moments impacting on the future of humanity. The threat to multilateralism and international peace and security has never before confronted us so sharply. Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, has said:

All around the globe, people want to see the Iraqi crisis resolved peacefully. War would cause great human suffering; it may lead to regional instability and economic crisis. If there is anybody who doubts the Secretary-General’s warning, let me give some information on the consequences of the 1991 Gulf War. According to Dr Singh, Unicef’s senior representative in Iraq,

… in 1989, the literacy rate was more than 90%. Iraq had reached a stage where the basic indicators we use to measure the overall well-being of human beings were some of the best in the world.

According to the Economist Intelligence Unit,

… the Iraqi welfare state was, until recently, amongst the most comprehensive and generous in the Arab world.

Today, tragically, a man-made disaster has befallen the Iraqi people. According to a recent Unicef report, nearly one in four children aged between six and twelve do not attend school. Close to one million children under the age of five suffer from chronic malnutrition. Infant mortality today is more than double what it was at the end of the 1980s. The under- five mortality rate is two-and-a-half times what it was in 1989. Preventable illnesses such as diarrhoea and respiratory infections account for 70% of child deaths. There is an increase in the number of orphans needing state assistance, which existing institutions are unable to provide, and there has been a sharp increase in maternal mortality.

The Unicef report concluded that the basic causes include, inter alia, the effects of two major wars, civil strife, over a decade of sanctions, inadequate resource distribution, poor institutional capacity and inadequate human resources. Dr Al-Ali, a cancer specialist, writes:

Before the Gulf War, we had only three to four deaths a month from cancer. Now it is 30 to 35 patients dying every month. We don’t know the precise source of contamination, because we are not allowed to get the equipment to conduct a proper survey or to even test the excess level of radiation in our bodies.

He goes on to say:

The mushroom grows huge, and the fish in what was once a beautiful river are inedible. Even the grapes in my garden have mutated and cannot be eaten.

Dr Aswadi, a paediatrician, says:

What happened in Hiroshima is almost exactly the same here. We have an increased percentage of congenital malformation, an increase of malignancy, leukaemia and brain tumours

Professor Rokke, the US Army physicist responsible for cleaning up Kuwait after the last war said:

I am like many people in southern Iraq. I have 5 000 times the recommended level of radiation in my body. Most of my team is now dead.

Professor Sikora, the chief of the cancer programme at the World Health Organisation, wrote:

Requested radiotherapy equipment, chemotherapy drugs and analgesics are constantly blocked by the sanctions committee. There seems to be a rather ludicrous notion that such agents could be converted into chemical and other weapons.

He went on to say:

You get only little bits of drugs here and there, and so you cannot have any planning. It’s bizarre.

Dennis Halliday, who spent 34 years with the UN, resigned in 1998 as the UN’s Humanitarian Co-ordinator for Iraq in protest at the effects of the embargo on the civilian population. He commented:

I had been instructed to implement a policy that satisfied the definition of genocide … The policy of economic sanctions is totally bankrupt.

I have only referred to some elements of the negative consequences of war and sanctions. I am sure that no right-thinking person in this House can question the South African Government’s responsibility to find a peaceful solution to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The vast majority of governments and people want to ensure that we achieve the disarmament of Iraq peacefully through UN Security Council Resolution 1441.

The Pope and other religious leaders have consistently said that a war against Iraq cannot be morally justified. The no-war position is supported by the majority of humanity. This is reflected by the decisions of the major multilateral organisations, inter alia, the EU summit, the AU summit, the League of Arab States summit, the Organisation of Islamic Conference summit and, of course, the latest NAM summit.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations has warned:

What will happen in Iraq will have serious implications for other issues for many years to come, including international terrorism and the situations in the occupied Palestinian territories, Afghanistan and elsewhere. It has the potential of weakening the United Nations and deep divisions will be sowed between nations and between peoples of different religions.

In support of these correct positions, millions of people throughout the world are engaged in unprecedented protests against the war. A few days ago, a petition against the war, signed by a million Americans, was handed over to the USA Mission to the United Nations.

I read today in the newspapers that hon Mr Leon wants clarity on South Africa’s position. Let me once again try to give him some clarity on the matter. The South African Government strongly supports the full implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 on the elimination of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and all our activities have had one purpose, and one purpose only: To try to convince Iraq to provide its full co-operation on the implementation of the resolution.

I must stress that Resolution 1441 deals with weapons of mass destruction. It is not about fighting terrorism or so-called regime change.

To achieve these objectives, I recently visited eight countries in the region, and held substantial discussions with leaders of those countries. In February this year, I led a delegation to Iraq to share our experiences and approach to disarmament. This was my third visit in the last few months. During our visit, we met all the top Iraqi personnel involved in the weapons of mass destruction programmes. We had full and frank discussions, and much information and documentation was provided to our delegation.

The latest report of Dr Blix and Dr El Baradei to the UN Security Council, which I will refer to later, coincides, in large measure, with the evaluation of the South African delegation. Our delegation focused on the need to provide fully transparent and proactive co-operation. We encouraged the Iraqi delegation to substantively address outstanding issues. Iraq requested South African assistance in validating their proposed methodology in trying to prove that they have destroyed their VX and anthrax stockpiles. We are presently considering this request.

The Iraqi experts informed us that the outstanding problems surrounding Iraq’s nuclear weapons programmes should not be insurmountable, and that these issues are being dealt with substantively with the IAEA inspectors.

The South African and Iraqi delegations also discussed the issue surrounding the Al-Samud II missiles, and we pointed out to them the urgent necessity of the destruction of the Al-Samud II missiles. Other difficulties being experienced with regard to the verification of the destruction of Iraq’s former missile programmes were also substantively discussed. The South African delegation also underlined the importance of the adoption of Iraqi legislation prohibiting weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems. We provided the Iraqis with South Africa’s own national legislation and regulations in this regard.

The Iraqi delegation informed us that they had provided nine reports recently to the inspectors which would deal substantially with some of the outstanding issues. They also briefed us on the massive campaign to coerce or bribe top Iraqi officials, politicians, military officials and scientists to defect to the West. In their understanding, this influences their position on the requests for interviews to be granted abroad.

In my speech during the debate on the President’s state of the nation address, I quoted exclusively from Dr Blix and Dr El Baradei’s reports to the UN Security Council on 14 February 2003 to try to indicate that some progress was being made. The most recent reports of Dr Blix and Dr El Baradei on 7 March 2003 indicate that, now, substantially good progress is being made. According to Dr Blix, difficulties about helicopters and aerial surveillance planes operating in the no-fly zones have been overcome. In the last month, Iraq has provided the names of many persons who may be relevant sources of information. Intelligence authorities previously had claimed that weapons of mass destruction are moved around Iraq by trucks, in particular, that they are mobile production units for biological weapons. Several inspections have taken place, and no evidence of proscribed activities have so far been found. The Iraqi side denied reports that proscribed activities are conducted underground. According to Dr Blix, no underground facilities for chemical or biological production or storage have been found so far.

He goes on to say:

As of today, there is more tangible progress. Iraq has accepted that the Al-Samud II missiles and associated items be destroyed, and has started the process of destruction under our supervision.

According to him:

This constitutes a substantial measure of disarmament. More papers on anthrax, VX and missiles have recently been provided. There is a significant Iraqi effort under way to clarify a major source of uncertainty as to the quantities of biological and chemical weapons, which were unilaterally destroyed in 1991.

He says:

One can hardly avoid the impression that after a period of somewhat reluctant co-operation, there has been an acceleration of initiatives from the Iraqi side since the end of January.

UNMOVIC is currently drafting the work programme which will contain our proposed list of key remaining disarmament tasks. It will describe the reinforced system of ongoing monitoring and verification. He says correctly:

Disarmament and verification cannot be instant. It will take months.

Similarly, the report of Dr El Baradei on the nuclear programme is very positive, and he goes on to say that excellent progress has been made, and all the outstanding issues that had been raised and the allegations made about enriched uranium, aluminium tubes and about the acquisition of magnets have all been found to be incorrect. Indeed, on the issue of the accusation that Iraq and Niger had a treaty or agreement on uranium acquisition, it has been found that this document is not authentic. It is false and, therefore, he has disregarded the document.

Given all this, the question we must all answer is: Do the two latest reports not indicate substantial success? I want to believe that the vast majority of humanity believes it does.

The issue of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction has brought the international community generally, and the UN Security Council specifically, to a dangerous level of division and tension. In the UN Security Council, there are two opposing positions: One, the position of the United States, Britain and Spain arguing that Iraq is in material breach of Resolution 1441, and that March 17 should be the final deadline before sanctioning war. This is supported by Bulgaria.

On the other side, there is the position of France, Russia and China, supported by Germany and Syria, arguing that the inspections are producing results, and the inspectors should be given an extension to complete their work. Yesterday, the British apparently made a compromise proposal that the timetable should be extended to the end of March. With regard to the non- permanent members, the three African countries, Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, and the two Latin American countries, Chile and Mexico, are undecided.

We are aware that they are under tremendous pressure. It is reported that some countries have proposed a time extension of 45 days. We believe that any timetable must take into account the work programme of the inspectors and must avoid any ultimatum for war. We sincerely hope that the AU and NAM member countries who are in the UN Security Council will be influenced by the AU and NAM resolutions.

President Mbeki recently stated:

Our obligation to defend what we stand for requires that we reassert and vigorously defend our commitment to the peaceful resolution of international conflict.

It demands of us that we do everything we can to protect and advance the principle and practice of multilateralism. This requires that we fight even harder for the democratisation of the international system of governance … This requires that we respect the decisions we take collectively.

He goes on to say:

Let it not be said of us, as Yeats said:

 The best lack all conviction while the worst  are  full  of  passionate
 intensity. The NAM summit concluded that the rich and powerful exercise  an  inordinate influence  in  determining  the  nature  and  direction   of   international relations. Will the UN Security Council respond to the  voice  of  the  vast majority of people in the world? The United  Nations  was  founded  to  save humanity from the scourge of war. Its responsibilities demand that  it  seek a peaceful resolution of conflicts. The outcome of  the  debate  in  the  UN Security Council would have a defining influence on  how  the  international community addresses conflict situations and major problems  in  the  future. This is an extremely serious issue which needs  our  careful  consideration, and will have far-reaching implications. The objectives of the  founders  of the United Nations to prevent war must be central to our deliberations.

As I have indicated, according to the latest reports, however belatedly, there is now substantial co-operation from the Iraqi government. Some argue that this would not have happened without a credible show of force, and a real threat of the use of such force. Whatever the reasons, Iraq is now co- operating, and progress is being made. The UN Security Council must capitalise on this.

What happens in Iraq will have unprecedented consequences for other issues in the region and the world. The conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis will get worse, and a solution will become more difficult. Furthermore, it will make it more difficult to deal with other serious issues such as North Korea, the Cote d’Ivoire, the DRC and Burundi. If the UN Security Council is divided over Iraq, how will the United Nations collectively and successfully tackle other challenges, inter alia, the scourge of terrorism, underdevelopment, poverty and HIV/Aids?

Today some countries, the so-called `coalition of the willing’, are threatening to act outside a UN Security Council mandate. We agree with the Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, that if countries act outside the council and take military action, it would not be in conformity with the UN Charter and the legitimacy of their actions will be questioned. Some British legal experts even believe that UK troops fighting without UN sanction could be accused of committing war crimes.

It is my belief that any action outside the UN Security Council will also signal the absolute weakening if not the destruction of the United Nations system and its institutions. Dennis Halliday, a humanitarian in Iraq said:

The longer the sanctions go on, the more we are likely to see the emergence of a generation who will regard Hussein as too moderate and too willing to listen to the West.

This demands that we must succeed in peacefully implementing Resolution 1441, and we must urgently move to end the sanctions regime against Iraq.

Given this reality, and the dangerous consequences of war, and the reported progress of the inspectors, is war necessary? Billions say no''. I hope in this House we hear the anguished voices of billions, and unite around the slogan:Disarmament - yes, war - no’’. [Applause.] This is in our national interest, which I believe coincides with humanity’s interests. If we fail, we will have to answer the question posed by the poet Langston Hughes:

What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? Or fester like a sore … Does it stink like rotten meat … Or does it explode?

The dreams of billions must not be deferred, because who wants an explosion? Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr L ZITA: Madam Speaker, today is yet another occasion for us as South Africans to make known our stance on the imminent unilateral US-led war on Iraq. It is again one of those moments when we are called upon to declare our stand as a nation and as a people on one of the most disturbing features of the twenty-first century, the emergence of the violent unipolarity of United States of America.

Thirteen years ago, the Soviet Union disappeared. For many, this was portrayed as the end of that period in history. Many anticipated the rise of a world based on the foundation of democracy and human rights as well as the onset of a dialogical pursuit of national interests in a polycentric world. Today we can say that such a view was an illusion whose time has come to pass.

In defining our standpoint on this matter of profound gravity, it is important that we clarify our premises. As South Africans, we are not anti- America. We are a country that has had a lasting relationship and friendship with the United States of America which dates back to the experience of Pixley Seme, one of the founding leaders of the ANC, at the beginning of the last century. It is a relationship that has been further developed since the advent of democracy in our own country.

What we are opposed to is not the United States of America but its plan, not only to unilaterally go to war with Iraq, but its stated designs both to change the regime in Iraq as well as to redraw, in its interest, the map of the Middle East. This is an issue that all progressives are opposed to, including the former US president, Jimmy Carter. In an opinion piece in the New York Times he writes,

As a Christian and as a president who has severely been provoked by international crises, I became thoroughly familiar with the principles of a just war. It is clear that a substantial unilateral attack on Iraq does not meet these standards.

Our second premise is our opposition to all dictatorships, including the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein over the people of Iraq. Our opposition to the US-led war is not in defence of Saddam Hussein. It is in defence of a principle. It is in defence of the right of nations to self-determination. [Interjections.] It is our opposition to all forms of aggression on other countries by anyone, no matter how powerful such aggressors are.

Our third premise is that we condemn all forms of terrorism. On the occasion of the 11 September attack we, as South Africa, joined the world in expressing our disgust of the terrorist attack on innocent civilians. We do not believe that a war on Iraq will make the world a place that is safe from terrorism. In fact, it is our contention that a war on Iraq will serve as a convenient platform for all those who seek to present a case for belligerence in the Arab world against infidels.

Our fourth premise is our agreement with all progressive nations and peoples that we have to put an end to all weapons of mass destruction. No nation, the United States of America included, should own such weapons. [Applause.] Our call against war is not a defence for Iraq to amass nuclear weapons. We are merely saying, together with billions of others the world over, that a UN initiative for disarming Iraq is in place. If there is a problem of capacity, tempo and process, those should be addressed. Unilateralism is not the answer.

We are opposed to a unilateral war on Iraq because, in many ways, it is a telling statement to the US government to re-examine its conduct and the criteria for defining its national interest. Saddam Hussein as well as Al Qaeda’s Osama Bin Laden were, at some point in their lives, allies of the US. It is now time that this narrow definition of national interest be reviewed in favour of a genuine policy that is underpinned by a commitment to democracy and democratic rights.

We are opposed to this war because it is a continuation of a dangerous trend - the continued undermining by the US of legitimate structures of global governance. It is difficult for us to ignore the observations by George Monbiot of the Guardian Weekly that in pursuit of its interests, particularly of those of its powerful constituencies, the US government has already rendered the World Trade Organisation unworkable and is now bent on doing the same to the UN. Monbiot writes, I quote,

Last month President Bush warned the UN Security Council that accepting a new resolution authorising a war on Iraq was its last chance to prove its relevance …

He continues:

Earlier, a leaked document from the Pentagon shows that this final opportunity might already have passed.

He detects a link between the $60 million support from the chemical industry for the mid-term election victory by the republicans and the present attempt by the US to scupper commitments made at Doha for easy access to drugs by developing countries.

If indeed there is such a link, are we out of place when we ask ourselves: who is to benefit from the destruction of Iraq? Is this war not just a smokescreen to oil the profits of American corporates in the defence and oil industries? This indeed seems to be the case, as US journalist Mark Tran reports that US engineering companies have already been awarded contracts for the post-war reconstruction of Iraq. One such company is Kellogg Brown and Root, an oil service company in which US Vice President Dick Cheney was chief executive from 1995 to 2000. Is this the real reason behind the war?

As South Africans, we call for a peaceful disarmament of Iraq. We call for the strengthening of the global mobilisation against the war. We call for the stabilisation and democratisation of the Middle East and the speedy resolution of the Palestinian question.

Lastly, the present crisis reflects the urgency of the need to strengthen the institutions for democratic global governance. [Applause.]

Mr C W EGLIN: Madam Speaker, as you are aware, about ten days ago, the Chief Whip of the Opposition read on my behalf a question in the debate in this House. In particular, it was started off by the Deputy Minister reporting on his mission to Baghdad, which was highly topical because he had already made some statements in Baghdad. I did that partly because it was an important mission, and partly because, quite frankly, I would like to establish a precedent that when important missions are undertaken by Ministers, or even the President, on behalf of the country, in a relatively short space afterwards, those people should return to Parliament and report to Parliament. Then a discussion can take place where the public is fully aware, and one doesn’t have to wait for months and months before a discussion can take place on a matter of serious importance which is being conducted on behalf of the Government by a Minister. [Applause.]

It may be necessary to change the Rules, but I think that the concept of an extended committee of the House, with the same general rules that apply at the committee stage in the portfolio committees, could well apply in the House on these important matters. I believe it will help the public and Parliament to be informed; it would sensitise the executive to the need of accountability, and it would allow the proceedings of Parliament to become more topical and more relevant than they are today.

I was hoping that we were going to have a discussion on the Deputy Minister’s mission to Baghdad. I was rather surprised when we were told that six very prominent South African citizens with a scientific Armscor background would be going to Baghdad. I then found out that their leader was none other than Mr Essop Pahad, who has no knowledge of the scientific disposal of weapons of mass destruction. But, nevertheless, he went there. [Interjections.]

When the Deputy Minister concluded his mission, he made a statement, and then he answered some questions. A number of these questions need further questions to be answered.

First of all, he said:

… we appreciate our interaction with the team where full and transparent discussions were held. There was no issue that was not discussed. Issues included key areas of nuclear, biological and chemical programmes.

Against the background of frank, open discussions, a simple question to the Deputy Minister is: Does he believe that Iraq in fact possesses weapons of mass destruction or not? What has happened with Iraq? That was the core of going over there. Against this background, he says:

No, no. It is difficult to make any assessment in this regard. We have carefully studied the reports of the inspectors and have raised outstanding issues … The answers to these questions have been provided in our interactions.

But there is no answer to the question: What did you find out about weapons of mass destruction?

Secondly, he went on, quite correctly, piggybacking on President De Klerk who started the process of disarming the weapons of mass destruction in

1. Nevertheless, he says:

Confidence in the destruction of South Africa’s weapons of mass destruction was based on a political decision to be fully transparent, and to co-operate fully and to build confidence.

Did you in fact find out that this is happening in Iraq?

No, …

he said,

… I said it is difficult to say because I haven’t spoken to the inspectors.

And so, you can go on and on and on.

He went there but there are evasions, and more evasions. When in Baghdad, he said, they were given very important secret and sensitive information - often for the first time - and that this information is going to be very useful because it will enable them to help the Iraqi government. I want to say this: If you have to use sensitive information to help the Iraqi government, you have an equal responsibility, as a member of the UN, to help its inspectors by making this information available to them. [Applause.] I am just telling you that you can’t say you have secret information and that you want to help one side. You have, in fact, a commitment to helping the other side as well.

We are living in traumatic times. Already the world is divided and is poised on the brink of war - with all its death, destruction, human tragedy and its vast unpredictable consequences for people and mankind. And as we sit here today and have a kind of almost pleasant and exciting but inconsequential debate, 15 people are sitting in New York - at the UN Security Council - to make a decision which is going to affect the lives of all of us, not only here, but around the world.

What are they considering? Firstly, they are going to consider UN Resolution 1441. That resolution is very clear in what it says. It says that the Iraqi government of 4 November 2002 was deemed to be a danger to the peace of the world. [Interjections.] This resolution was supported by all countries and our present Government. Secondly, it says ``… without delay, all the weapons of mass destruction must be removed.’’ And thirdly, it says the Iraqi government must co-operate with the inspectorate in its verification of this process.

Among the first things that they have to consider - we can shout and scream

• is whether this resolution is being complied with or to what extent it has been complied with. All the other reasons are irrelevant.

Furthermore, they are going to ask what decisions they will have to make as a consequence of their discussions on their findings. Once again, it is quite clear that they are going to have to take some decisions, either that, in fact, the process is continuing or collapsing, or that something else has got to be put in its place. And thirdly, they are going to ask what the framework is within which they have got to take their decisions. They have got to take that within the framework of the UN Charter and its Articles 39, 41 and 42.

Article 39 says you have to declare that there is a threat to the peace of the world. Article 41 says you have to try to use means other than the use of force to try to achieve the objective. And Article 42 says that if you find that that is impossible, you are entitled to use force. So, they have to look at this. [Interjections.]

An Hon MEMBER: Where does it say you should use force?

Mr C W EGLIN: I said it says ``you are entitled to use force’’. It says:

Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or prove to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain and restore international peace. [Interjections.]

That is the quotation. Mr Chairman, let’s get our position clear on this because this is not a rough-and-tumble debate. This is a very important debate about the future of mankind.

There are three things. The one thing on which the Minister was correct is that the UN Security Council is not considering what is now known as ``regime change’’. I want to make it very clear that I think in fact that Iraq could be in a better position and the world would be safer if there was a regime change in Iraq. But that is not the issue. I want to make it quite clear that our belief if that any unilateral decision to go to war to achieve regime change in Iraq, or for that matter in any other country, would herald a new era, not based on international law but on international anarchy. That is our clear view on that matter.

Secondly, our view, and I said it in the debate on 4 March 2003, on the issue ofÿ.ÿ.ÿ. [Interjections.] If the debate had gone according to my schedule, I wouldn’t have to retire at all!

We have made it quite clear that any decision to find a solution to the Iraqi issue on the weapons of mass destruction must be taken multilaterally, and it must be based on the UN Charter and on the tenets of international law. I am reading from my Hansard of 5 November 2002:

Military action without the sanction or outside the framework of international law are bound to have far-reaching consequences, not least of which could be the polarisation of the international community or the undermining of the fragile unity that has been created around the concept of combating terrorism.

Thirdly, the UN Security Council has got a third decision to make: It has to see that the provisions of Resolution 1441 are implemented. They can’t duck that one; it is their responsibility. All we say is that we believe that we should support the UN Security Council in whatever its decision is.

As we have said, we hope that it will not come to a stage when the UN Security Council would consider it necessary to authorise the use of force. But, taking into account that on 11 occasions in the last 12 years it has authorised the use of force, it is possible it will use force. And we believe it should follow, as far as it can, the route of peace. But it cannot say in advance that it will not apply Article 42 of the convention because it would actually emasculate the authority of the UN. You would actually say you are going to take away from the very provisions of … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Chairperson, I have listened with amusement to the manner in which the hon Mr Eglin has attacked the Deputy Minister for visiting Baghdad. The manner in which the Deputy Minister reacted reminded me of the Afrikaans saying:

Hy het ‘n klip in die bos gegooi en die jakkals het getjank. [Applous.] [He threw a stone into the bush and the fox howled.]]

The biggest mistake we could ever make is to underestimate the consequences of a war in Iraq. But similarly the biggest mistake we could ever make is to underestimate the consequences if Iraq in fact has weapons of mass destruction and uses them at some moment in the future.

Which side do we choose? Do we choose Bush or Saddam Hussein?

The simple truth is: One is struck by uncertainty as demonstrated by the Deputy Minister, by confusion and the inability to uncover the truth. There are too many vitally important questions to which there are no convincing answers. To mention but a few: Would President Bush and Prime Minister Blair start a bloody war if they think that war can be avoided? [Interjections.] Does President Hussein in fact hide weapons of mass destruction? Yes or no? [Interjections.] Will Dr Blix ever be able to find the needles in the haystack? [Interjections.]

The Deputy Minister said that we should say no to war, but yes to disarmament. I agree with you but it is an oversimplification because I want to ask the Minister: What happens if Saddam Hussein does not disarm? [Interjections.] No, I do not want to go there. You have got Pik Botha going there. What should I do there? And Winnie!

The Iraq issue has split the world into various opposing camps. Millions of people are taking to the streets to object to the war. Many millions support the war. Some countries say that war is inevitable. Others say war is necessary.

In my opinion, the whole Iraqi question hinges on but one vital question: Does President Hussein have weapons of mass destruction, yes or no? [Interjections.] If you know, why does Dr Blix not know? Have you been to Iraq? Have you looked at everything? [Laughter.]

If President Hussein has those weapons and does not want to destroy them, then war seems to be inevitable. On the other hand, if he does not have them, then war is, of course, not necessary. It is around this very question that world opinion is totally split. In fact, the opposite views are so strongly voiced that we are witnessing an international political arena undergoing a historic and fundamental change. To mention but a few almost unbelievable examples of how the world is divided over the Iraq issue: Countries such as Britain and Spain and France who fought two world wars together are now in opposite camps. France and Germany on the other hand are countries who fought each other in two world wars, and are now in the same bed. The African Union opposes the war. Spain, Bulgaria and Australia are in favour of the war. The Non-Aligned Movement opposes war. The United States and many others are in favour of war. Some are still undecided. The Iraq issue has torn the world apart. [Interjections.]

In fact, a huge and ominous cloud … why does that member not ask his Whip for a turn to speak here? You probably do not get a turn to speak here, because you will only talk nonsense. [Laughter.] In fact, a huge and ominous cloud of approaching disaster is covering the world, be it the war or be it the use of weapons of mass destruction by President Hussein. In fact, the four horsemen of the Apocalypse may soon be out, preparing to run the bloody path of war, or the equally bloody path of the unthinkable results of weapons of mass destruction.

This debate may well in future be classified as the most important one in the new South Africa. The Deputy Minister called it a crisis, because the war may start within a few days.

The main question which we as the public representatives of millions of South Africans today have to seriously address is: Where does South Africa position itself in relation to this approaching disaster … [Interjections] … whether the approaching disaster is war or whether it is the effects of weapons of mass destruction? We have but one duty of paramount importance: The interest of our country South Africa and our citizens. We must be guided by this principle and by no other motivation.

Clearly, South Africa’s best interest is served by avoiding war in Iraq and, even more so, by destroying weapons of mass destruction if they were to be found.

The consequences of the war will be disastrous, as the Deputy Minister has pointed out. The consequences of the proliferation of the weapons of mass destruction will be equally disastrous. At the same time, the self-interest of South Africa should be our guiding light in this crisis. We must also acknowledge that stopping the war in Iraq should preferably be obtained through multilateral means. Similarly, if Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction, their dismantling should also preferably be achieved through multilateral means.

The remaining big question, which the Deputy Minister did not answer, is: What will South Africa’s position be if the United States and its partners ignore the United Nations and start the war? [Interjections.] It is obviously a huge problem with numerous factors to be considered. The dubious track record of President Saddam Hussein is but one factor. So also the constant discovery of items of war.

I pity Dr Blix, because how is he to find the needles in the haystack? [Interjections.] If President Hussein in fact has weapons of mass destruction, he is certainly going to hide them so well that no Dr Blix will find them. [Interjections.] The hon Deputy Minister appears to trust Saddam Hussein. President Bush and many others, on the other hand, do not trust him.

In conclusion, it is clear that the world is caught in a type of catch 22- situation. The consequences of both decisions will be disastrous. The appropriate road ahead seems to be to watch every single development very carefully every day and continuously keep in contact with all role-players. We, from our side, pray that our leaders will have the wisdom - and that includes the Deputy Minister - and the courage to take the right decisions at the right moment in the best interest of our land and all its citizens. We wish you well and we hope you take the right decision. [Applause.] Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Chairperson, the hon Koos van der Merwe said: The war may start within a few days. Unfortunately, that is a possibility that this House will have to deal with timeously.

Die Nuwe NP se standpunt oor die naderende oorlog teen Irak bly onveranderd. Irak moet voldoen aan alle VN-vereistes oor ontwapening, insluitende dié van resolusie 1441. Doen hy dit nie, moet die Veiligheidsraad en nie die VSA op sy eie nie, strafmaatreëls teen Irak instel wat selfs militêre optrede kan insluit, in terme van artikel 43 van die VN-handves.

Ongelukkig gaan die vraag nie meer vandag daaroor of die VSA Irak moet binneval of nie. Die harde werklikheid is - en ek ondersteun nie hierdie standpunt nie - die VSA gaan Irak aanval, ongeag wat die wapenverslag van die inspekteurs sê. Die VSA gaan Irak aanval ondanks die feit dat Frankryk, Rusland en China hulle vetoreg gaan gebruik om so ‘n aanval te keer. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[The New NP’s position on the impending war against Iraq remains unchanged. Iraq must meet all UN requirements on disarmament, including those of Resolution 1441. If it does not do this, the Security Council and not the USA on its own, must institute punitive measures against Iraq, which can even include military action, in terms of section 43 of the UN Charter.

Unfortunately, today the question is no longer whether the USA should invade Iraq. The hard reality is - and I do not support this position - the USA is going to attack Iraq, irrespective of what the weapons report of the inspectors says. The USA is going to attack Iraq despite the fact that France, Russia and China are going to use their veto power to prevent such an attack.]

Unfortunately, the USA has reached a point of no return. They say that once you have drawn your sword you have to use it. [Interjections.] Perhaps the USA drew its sword too soon. Fact is, if they back down now, it will be interpreted by rogue states and organisations such as Northern Korea and Al- Qaeda as a sign of weakness; it will create a perception that the only superpower in the world is nothing more than a paper tiger, with devastating consequences for the safety of the free world.

The only thing that can stop the US attack on Iraq, however, is if Saddam Hussein goes into exile, as proposed by the leaders of the Gulf States. [Interjections.] It is not my proposal. It is the proposal of the leaders of the Gulf States. Perhaps the South African Government should, once again, raise this possibility with Saddam Hussein. I want to repeat: The question whether the US should attack Iraq in order to disarm them is no longer relevant. The US will attack Iraq and the only relevant remaining question is: What will South Africa’s position be when the US attacks Iraq, with or without UN consent?

The only sensible thing for South Africa to do will be to stay neutral at all times. [Interjections.] If we want to sign our death warrant economically, then we must openly come out on the side of Iraq. In the field of international diplomacy there is no such thing as friends, only interests. It will not be in South Africa’s national interest to side with Iraq in a case of war. The best option for South Africa will be to stay neutral at all times. It seems, however, as if a position - I will come to the issue of a principle - of neutrality is not self-evident.

When it was suggested by the New NP during the debate on the state of the nation address that economic factors, such as US investments in South Africa and benefits flowing from the African Growth and Opportunity Act should be considered before openly siding with Iraq in case of war, it was slated by the hon President in his reply as an unprincipled position. Then there was the letter from the South African Government to Saddam Hussein, handed to him personally by none other than the Deputy Minister himself. Rumour has it that it was in fact a letter of support for Saddam Hussein. [Interjections.] It will be appreciated if the hon Deputy Minister could cast more light on the content of that letter.

Iraq is thousands of kilometres away from South Africa and America’s war should not automatically become South Africa’s war. The previous NP government had a not-too-pleasant experience in this regard. The US encouraged South Africa to invade Angola and then left us high and dry when they withdrew the promised back-up support. [Interjections.] Regardless of that, the US remains the only superpower in the world and it would be plain foolish to side with an opponent of theirs who, in any case, falls in the same category as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin.

Humanitarian aid to the civilian population of Iraq, who will become the main victims of the war, is the right thing to do and should be encouraged. Support for the regime, however, will be a fatal diplomatic blunder to the detriment of South Africa’s national interest. The time has come for the South African Government to say in no uncertain terms what South Africa’s position will be in the case of a US attack on Iraq, warranted or unwarranted. We anxiously await the reply of the hon Deputy Minister in this regard. [Applause.] Mr W G MAKANDA: Chairperson, multilateralism as an instrument of conflict resolution in the world remains fundamental and central to regional and world peace. Its evolution and conceptualisation in the ruins and ashes that marked the end of the great war undergirded the formation of the League of Nations in 1919. The compromise of this principle of multilateralism thereafter caused the demise of the league and could be linked to the rise of Nazism and the events that triggered the Second World War.

In 1946, after the defeat of Nazism, the victors launched the UN, hoping it would succeed where the league had failed. This organisation was buttressed by numerous organs, specialised to target several aspects of national and international concern, which are pertinent to war and peace and which would assist the United Nations in carrying out its mandate of maintaining world peace.

Peace has always been elusive because some governments and the cliques they serve are guided by self-interest in their ordering of national, regional and international priorities. It takes extraordinary leadership qualities for a leader and his government to subject personal and sectarian interests to those of the greater community, the nation and the world. Individual super states have consistently fermented, funded and equipped limited local wars scattered all over the globe in pursuit of esoteric agendas. This is true of the US in several theatres of war over many decades.

At this moment as we speak, the world is perilously poised on the brink of an apocalypse whose tragic consequences cannot be fathomed and will be visited on the innocent, poor, illiterate and voiceless majority who cannot begin to comprehend the cause and make any sense of the devastation being perpetrated ostensibly on their behalf.

President Bush, in his anti-terrorist crusade and mission to apprehend Osama Bin Laden, woke up one day convinced that this latter monstrosity had metamorphosed and assumed the face of Saddam Hussein. The raw materials and the finances that had featured in the development of biological weapons used by Iraq in her war against Iran had been provided by the US and the UK.

Bush and Blair have long sounded the battle cry and continue to bay for Iraqi blood. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Ms F HAJAIG: Deputy Chairperson, Deputy President, Ministers, comrades, friends and colleagues, world peace stands at a crossroads today. Will the arrogant and intransigent stance of the United States and the United Kingdom prevail or will the voices calling for peace and justice be heard? Will Iraq, once regarded as the cradle of civilisation, survive the onslaught on its territorial integrity? Will the Iraqi people - women, men and children - survive another attack of bombs, CS gas, hunger and suffering?

The death of 5 000 children a year from leukaemia, brain tumours and Hodgkin’s disease is possibly related to the use of depleted uranium from munitions used by the US in 1991 against Iraq. What further havoc will United States’ and the United Kingdom’s forces wreak on the Iraqi people with its state-of-the-art weaponry?

Millions of people from all corners of the world have protested against the war on Iraq. Countries like Germany, Russia, China, France and many others are all saying that there is a real alternative to war, which is to strengthen and continue inspection and the peaceful disarming of Iraq. As China said, there is no reason to close the door to peace. And that is what we are asking for today.

Our people, especially the women of this country, and I would like to say this on behalf of the women from my party - I am sure the women from the other parties will also agree - that as a woman and as women of this nation and as women from other nations, we do not want war. [Applause.] We want peace because it means development. We want peace. [Interjections.] No, you people are just like Bush and Saddam. You are all warmongers.

The United Nations Monitoring, Inspection and Verification Commission’s Mr Blix reported to the UN on the 7 March and he said:

At this juncture, we are able to perform professional no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance.

He continued to say:

The destruction of weapons undertaken constitutes a substantial measure of disarmament.

That’s Blix’s words, not mine.

He goes on to say:

We are not watching a breaking of toothpicks. Lethal weapons are being destroyed. Until today …

7 March, that is -

… 34 Al-Samud II missiles including 4 training missiles, 2 combat warheads, one launcher and 5 engines have been destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision.

The UN Resolution 1441 is being complied with. Iraq is disarming and the United Nation’s inspection team must ensure that the disarmament process is thorough and complete. Just as we have declared Africa a nuclear weapon- free zone, so would we want to see the establishment, in the Middle East, of a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction. Security Council Resolution 487 of 1981 and Resolution 687 of 1991 affirm the need for a speedy establishment of a nuclear weapon-free zone in that region. The only country in the region that has not joined the Treaty on the Non- proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is Israel.

Israel continues to develop and stockpile nuclear arsenals. Peter John Kirsh said that it has between 200 and 400 atomic warheads. Sharon is in perfect tune with the Bush regime and enjoys its full support. While Bush is demanding the destruction of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, he does not ask the same of Israel. Why? An excellent example of hypocrisy of the American government! [Applause.] How can there ever be peace in that region? [Applause.]

The United Nations is the organisation founded on the need to preserve international peace and security, as we all know. The UN is the most authoritative voice in the world of complex multilateralism and interdependence. The UN Security Council must redouble its efforts to bring about a peaceful resolution to the situation in Iraq in line with international law and the provisions of the United Nation’s Charter.

The legitimacy and the credibility of the UN must not be undermined by this issue. When the UN Security Council passes resolutions, they are binding on all member states. If a member state is attempting to abide by a UN Security Council resolution, it should be encouraged to do so. Any unilateral action by the US should be deplored in the strongest terms. It is interesting that the US is prepared to spend $140 billion on a war against Iraq but it is not prepared to pay its arrears to the United Nations! [Laughter.]

A war in Iraq will not only hurt the Iraqi people, but will destabilise the whole region, the prime source of oil energy, which will in turn affect the world economy. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Adv Z L MADASA: Chairperson, war is not inevitable. All the members of the UN Security Council are still saying this despite their differences. This is good news for now. Iraq has a critical role to play to ensure that the status quo remains.

As far as disarmament is concerned, according to Resolution 1441 that was passed unanimously by the UN Security Council, Iraq has disarmament obligations. It is erroneous for some to argue that Iraq is not posing any danger. Why was the resolution passed without opposition? The said resolution goes on to say that if Iraq does not disarm, it will face serious consequences.

The threatened military action against Iraq, if it is carried out without the backing of the UN Security Council, would be a breach of the UN Charter and international law. The implicit reference in the resolution to serious consequences does not trigger an automatic use of military force, in my view. Therefore, a second resolution authorising the use of force is necessary. The UN Security Council, for example, will have to state the terms and objectives of such military action.

Is Iraq disarming? The credible threat of use of force against Iraq is working. Dr Blix’s report bears this view out where he refers to the latest Iraqi moves to co-operate more. If one reads the development more carefully, Iraq’s co-operation with inspectors is closely linked with the developments in the UN Security Council. Dr Blix said in this regard, and I quote:

One can hardly avoid the impression that after a period of somewhat reluctant co-operation, there has been an acceleration of initiatives from the Iraqi side since the end of January. But Dr Blix went on to mention that, inside Iraq, it is difficult to do interviews with scientists without undue influence. He also says that Iraq tried to mislead them on the range of Al-Samud II missiles. Therefore, their destruction cannot be seen as a voluntary exercise. Had the inspectors accepted Iraq’s word, these arms would still be intact, in breach of disarmament obligations.

On the issue of the SA inspectors, Dr Blix in his report said that Iraq is more than capable of accounting for its weapon, as it has done so in the past in admirable detail. Therefore, it puzzles me what value our unsolicited help to provide inspectors will add in this process.

As far as the 9/11 attack on the US is concerned, it has been argued by some that since the 9/11 attack on the US, the rules of use of military action have changed. I differ with this view. Despite that horrible attack, there is still a need for evidence to exist in order to determine as to whether there are terrorists links with the state under consideration. No incontrovertible evidence has been produced and accepted by the UN Security Council that Iraq has such links. In any case, Resolution 1441 has to do with disarmament, not terrorism or regime change.

With regard to multilateralism, despite the vitriolic attack on the US and UK for their intended unilateral action on Iraq and President Bush’s bellicose rhetoric for regime change, it must be stated that these two countries have, up to now, shown admirable restraint and respect for the UN process. This is why war has not yet started. Therefore, it is unfair, so far, to accuse these countries of ignoring the UN process when we read that they are phoning everyone to this hour to drum up support for their approach.

I have serious doubts if oil is the issue - if it is only the US and UK who are interested in Iraqi oil, and that other countries like France and Russia are just indulging in a holy opposition to war.

In conclusion, war should be averted if at all possible. If Iraq disarms, not step by step but immediately, it looks like the war drums may fade away. Thank you very much. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr C P MULDER: Agb mnr die Adjunkvoorsitter, niemand kan tog ooit van oorlog hou omdat dit vir hom lekker is nie. Oorlog is iets vreesliks. Juis daarom behoort almal in beginsel ten gunste van die vreedsame beslegting van geskille, ook dié tans in Irak, te wees. En tog is oorloë iets wat bestaan vir solank die mensdom bestaan.

Alle lidlande van die VN, ook die VSA, het deur middel van artikel 2 van die VN Handves afstand gedoen van oorlog as ‘n middel om hulle geskille te besleg. Daar word egter wel deur artikel 42, saamgelees met artikels 53 en 51, daarvoor voorsiening gemaak dat ‘n staat homself teen aggressie kan verdedig. Ook kan state deur middel van ‘n VN resolusie van die Veiligheidsraad gemagtig word om geweld te gebruik teen ‘n moondheid wat internasionale vrede bedreig. Wat is egter vandag die feite op die tafel? Die VSA beskou Irak as ‘n land wat internasionale vrede bedreig, juis vanweë Irak se geskiedenis. Hy het Koeweit aangeval, reeds chemiese wapens teen sy eie bevolking gebruik, die Koerde, en daar is aanduidings dat Irak wel verbintenisse met Al Qaeda het. Verder is die VSA die land wat sonder aanleiding op 11 September 2001 in sy hartland, New York en Washington, aangeval is.

Dit is goed en reg dat ons hierdie saak vandag bespreek. Wat egter duidelik is, is dat indien die VSA nie deur middel van ‘n VN Veiligheidsraad resolusie gemagtig gaan word om geweld teen Irak te gebruik nie, die VSA daarsonder, as wêreldmoondheid, in elk geval sal voortgaan met ‘n oorlog teen Irak om so sy eie belange te beskerm en te bevorder, of ons in Suid- Afrika daarvan hou of nie.

Die vraag is: waar laat dit ons hier in Suid-Afrika?

Die internasionale politiek is vol dubbele standaarde. Die enigste reël in die internasionale politiek is dat lande hulle eie belange beskerm. Daarom is die VF se standpunt in alle internasionale sake, maar ook spesifiek in die Irak-krisis, dat Suid-Afrika moet kies wat in die beste belang van Suid- Afrika is. Daarom sal ons ‘n fout maak as ons kant kies vir Saddam Hoesein. Dit beteken nie dat Suid-Afrika vir die VSA moet kant kies nie. Suid-Afrika behoort Suid-Afrika se beste belange eerste te stel. Daardie belange is tans dat ons nie betrokke moet raak by ‘n oorlog duisende kilometer van Suid-Afrika af nie.

Tegnies het die Suid-Afrikaanse Regering nie kant gekies nie, maar prakties is alle aanduidings daar dat die Suid-Afrikaanse Regering tog kant gekies het in hierdie konflik. Hulle het vir Irak en diktator Saddam Hoesein kant gekies.

As die verskillende mediaverklarings en die mediaonderhoude van die Regering oor die Irak-krisis fyn ontleed word, sien ons simpatie en geen werklike veroordelings van Saddam nie, slegs heftige kritiek op die VSA. Die agb lid Winnie Mandela wil selfs persoonlik afsit na Irak om Saddam te gaan beskerm teen die VSA. Sulke optrede en verklarings is nie in Suid- Afrika se belang nie.

Wat egter vir my ‘n raaisel bly, is dat ons vandag tyd afstaan vir ‘n debat oor die vreedsame beslegting van die situasie in Irak, maar geen tyd kan vind vir ‘n debat oor die vreedsame beslegtiging van die situasie in Zimbabwe, wat Suid-Afrika baie meer direk en regstreeks raak nie. Dit bly vir my baie vreemd. Baie dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr C P MULDER: Hon Mr Deputy Chairperson, surely no one can like war because he enjoys it. War is something terrible. Precisely for this reason everyone should, in principle, be in favour of the peaceful resolution of disputes, including the current one in Iraq. And yet wars have existed for as long as mankind has existed.

All member states of the UN, including the USA, renounced war as a way of settling their differences by way of section 2 of the UN Charter. However, provision is made by way of section 42, read together with sections 53 and 51, that a state can defend itself against aggression. States can also, by way of a UN resolution from the Security Council, be authorised to use force against a state which is jeopardising international peace.

However, what are the facts on the table today? The USA views Iraq as a country jeopardising international peace, precisely because of Iraq’s history. It attacked Kuwait, has already used chemical weapons against its own population, namely the Kurds, and there are indications that Iraq has ties with Al Qaeda. Furthermore, the USA is the country which was attacked in its heartland, New York and Washington, without provocation on 11 September 2001.

It is good and right that we are discussing this matter today. However, what is clear is that if the USA is not going to be authorised to use force against Iraq by way of a UN Security Council resolution, as a world power the USA will proceed with a war against Iraq without it in any case to protect and promote its own interests, whether we in South Africa like it or not.

The question is: Where does that leave us here in South Africa?

International politics is full of double standards. The only rule in international politics is that countries protect their own interests. For that reason the FF’s position in all international matters, but also specifically in the Iraq crisis, is that South Africa must choose what is in the best interests of South Africa. Therefore we would be making a mistake if we chose Saddam Hussain’s side. This does not mean that South Africa should choose the USA’s side. South Africa should put South Africa’s best interests first. Those interests are currently that we should not become involved in a war thousands of kilometres from South Africa.

Technically the South African Government has not chosen sides, but in practice all indications are that the South African Government has indeed chosen sides in this conflict. They have chosen the side of Iraq and dictator Saddam Hussain.

If the various media reports and the media interviews from the Government on the Iraq crisis are closely analysed, we see sympathy and no real condemnation of Saddam, only strong criticism of the USA. The hon member Winnie Mandela even wants to take off for Iraq personally to go and protect Saddam against the USA. Such actions and statements are not in South Africa’s interests.

However, what remains a mystery to me, is that today we are taking time for a debate on the peaceful resolution of the situation in Iraq, but cannot find time for a debate on the peaceful resolution of the situation in Zimbabwe, which affects South Africa far more directly and immediately. This remains very strange to me. Thank you.]

Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Deputy Chairperson, as we count the days, hours and minutes to the impending attack on Iraq by the United States, there are many who believe that war can still be averted. Rightfully so, the majority of countries do not believe that war is the only solution to make Iraq comply with the United Nations resolution. This realisation is brought about by the consequences that the war will have on Iraqi civilians and global stability.

As South Africans, we have an obligation to stand up and be counted among nations committed to bringing about peace and long-lasting solutions to the current impasse in Iraq. We, therefore, view the South African Governments’ role in this regard as a positive step in the right direction. The United Nations’ acceptance of South Africa’s initiative to add value to the whole process in realising the set objectives of the United Nations, as far as Iraq is concerned, forms the basis on which we need to view Deputy Minister Pahad’s role.

It is not fair, at this point, to conclude whether the trip to Baghdad by the South African team was worth it or not. The Deputy Minister and his team’s efforts should be appreciated and welcomed. [Applause.]

We are confident that the Deputy Minister’s team’s efforts to help Iraq honour the obligations imposed by the United Nations Security Council’s Resolution 1441, to bring us back from the brink of war, will bear fruit only if indeed the Iraqi government is sincere that they have complied beyond any reasonable doubt. It has to be pointed out that at this point in time we have no reason to speculate whether they have complied or not. What is crucial at this point is to wait for the United Nations inspectors to table their report as to the real status of Iraq’s disarmament in this regard.

We fully support and believe in the integrity of the South African scientists who accompanied hon Pahad on his mission. Their wealth of experience and knowledge, as independent scientists of note, cannot be questioned, as this will really help to corroborate the United Nations’ report. Their role and mandate to Iraq was clear: to help ensure that Iraq is truly free of weapons of mass destruction, as it claims that it does not possess any. At this stage, the report prepared by the South African team pertaining to their brief … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Deputy Chairman, all countries with weapons of mass destruction must disarm. We further call upon the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the United States and Britain to verify disarmament. [Laughter.] [Interjections.] [Applause.]

The American government wants to use the United Nations for legitimacy, yet usurps its power by allowing President George W. Bush to use the new US doctrine of pre-emption, which declares that the United States has the right to invade sovereign countries and overthrow their governments if they are seen as hostile to US interests.

The PAC questions whether such a country should continue to be a member of the United Nations, when it works contrary to the rules of this world body. The PAC knows that the US is demanding that countries in the global South, such as North Korea and Iraq, disarm, yet it has no intention of disarming. It is clear that the United States wants to have unilateral power and a military monopoly to attack at will any country with wealth which it covets, in this case the oil interests in Iraq.

It is shocking that the US has just tested its most powerful, life- destroying bomb, while it demands the disarming of other nations. [Applause.] We will continue to support a veto by the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, enabling them to block action against Iraq.

A war against Iraq will have a devastating effect on the economies of the world, especially those of the developing countries. We reject the foolish view that weapons of mass destruction are in safe hands when possessed by the nations of the North, but are unsafe in the hands of the countries of the South.

World peace today is threatened by some countries of the North, which possess weapons of mass destruction and want to enjoy a military monopoly and domination over unarmed nations.

History is about to repeat itself. World war broke out, with disastrous consequences for mankind, when the League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations, was defied by its members. The League of Nations collapsed, to the detriment of peace, and World War II broke out, killing millions of people.

If the USA attacks Iraq without the authorisation of the UN Security Council, the UN will go the tragic way of the League of Nations. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Deputy Chair, the MF supports the former US President, Jimmy Carter, in his sentiments that alternative methods to attain peace have not been explored by the Bush pro-war team; that solid evidence to justify going to war has not been given; and that if war is imposed, it violates basic religious principles and disrespects international law. Besides that, the former president also noted that it may destabilise the Middle East and increase possible terrorist attacks on the US.

So what is the US up to? Media reports of Bush’s statements have shown a pro-war campaign that is justified purely by the intensity of the calls to go to war. Most importantly, the defiance of the UN is unacceptable. The MF feels that Bush should take the advice of Carter and rather support the UN by standing as a military threat if Iraq does not comply with the UN’s resolution, and not go to war.

Reports have been made that Iraq continues, wilfully, to destroy weapons of mass destruction under UN supervision. According to Chief Weapons Inspector, Dr Hans Blix, and Dr El Baradei, Iraq has been co-operating with disarmament demands. Accordingly, there is no evidence that Iraq has resumed its nuclear programme. Inspectors have found no indication of nuclear-related prohibited activities at any inspected sites. According to Dr Hans Blix, even if Iraq is willing, it would take months to disarm. Peaceful disarmament is possible and there are many alternatives to war, in this instance. Noting that, the MF feels that the pro-war campaign by Bush poses a greater threat to world peace than weapons of mass destruction. Bush claims that there will be minimal loss of civilian lives but we don’t want any loss of lives nor does the rest of the world, as so many take to the streets in antiwar protests. In this instance, it appears as though hearing and sensibility have been lost and determination for a blood bath is craved. The US claims that this wilful disarmament by Iraq is just a charade and that whilst destroying weapons, Iraq continues to produce them. Where is the evidence for such claims?

The MF hopes that the report given to the Secretary-General of the UN, Kofi Annan, and our President, the hon Thabo Mbeki, by our team of South African disarmament experts who visited Baghdad will be made public so that South Africans may be made aware of the situation in Iraq, allowing us to take a stance on this issue. The MF supports antiwar initiatives and feels that alternative methods should be explored to ensure that Iraq complies with the UN resolution to abolish weapons of mass destruction.

The MF supports the ministerial view. The MF says: No to war and no to the loss of lives. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Deputy Chair, the United Nations appointed inspectors in order to satisfy itself whether Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction or not. This, indeed, was a wise move so that we can all come to know whether they possess them, and if they do possess them, then those weapons of mass destruction should be destroyed peacefully.

Even before the process is over, the United States says: No, we are going to attack Iraq, whilst they were actually party to the resolution that said: We must go and search and satisfy ourselves whether indeed there are weapons of mass destruction. This is, indeed, a very serious matter. Any serious observer of the current situation in Iraq will have been struck by the US’s attitude to these developments.

Equally, one cannot fail to be struck by the visionary exhaustion of the US and United Kingdom. One key sign of this poverty of vision is the two countries’ insistence on the use of force to disarm Iraq when the majority of the countries in the whole world are prepared to use the UN team of inspectors to disarm Iraq. We can only conclude that the US and Britain have agendas other than to search for weapons of mass destruction.

How can we explain the fact that the UN Resolution 1441 seeks to investigate the presence of weapons of mass destruction through peaceful means and yet the US and Britain insist on war? How can one explain the fact that the US has already deployed thousands of troops in preparation for war when the inspectors have reported that Iraq is co-operating beautifully?

As far as Azapo knows, the question of removing Saddam Hussein and the government of Iraq from power is not part of Resolution 1441. The fact that the US and Britain want to replace the government of Iraq with their own tells us more about their attitudes. The fact that the same US government believes that the resolution of the North Korean crisis should be done on a multilateral basis and yet rejects the same process which is under the United Nations’ auspices tells us a lot about them. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Dr Z P JORDAN: Deputy Chairperson, I wish to reiterate the ANC’s position of opposition to all weapons of mass destruction irrespective of which state possesses them. I wish also to use this podium to call upon those states that have developed such weapons to follow South Africa’s example by totally dismantling them.

Today the governments of the United States and Britain plan placing a new resolution before the United Nations Security Council which gives Iraq until 17 March to comply fully with the previous resolution or face war. South Africa, and I assume all parties in this august House, fully supports the existing United Nations Security Council’s resolutions which demand that Iraq destroy all weapons of mass destruction that it has developed and that the Iraqi government proactively assist the UN weapons inspectors in verifying their destruction.

In his most recent report to the UN Security Council, the UN’s Chief Weapons Inspector, Dr Hans Blix, has indicated that Iraqi co-operation, even if reluctant, is now forthcoming. The indecent haste with which the US and British governments wish to rush into war is cause for profound concern throughout the world. Millions of ordinary citizens, including thousands of Americans, have taken to the streets to give expression to that concern. Former President, Jimmy Carter, has added his voice to those counselling the observance of international law and greater patience on the part of the Bush administration. Prime Minister Blair is faced with the prospect of a revolt within his own cabinet because of his haste. Our concern is fuelled also by the more bizarre happenings that have accompanied this frenzied rush into war. Hon members will recall the laughable attempt by the British Foreign Minister, Jack Straw, to pass off a PhD thesis by an American student as solid intelligence gathered by Britain’s secret services. Such acts of bad faith suggest a hidden agenda.

The belligerent statements of US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, threatening to go to war even without British participation heighten our anxieties. I truly wish that our fears were far less well-founded, but we continue to read disturbing media reports of how the spoils of this planned war are already being divided amongst the prospective victors. The Guardian from Britain, for example, reports that a select group of companies includes Kellog Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, an oil services company where the Vice President Dick Cheney held the position of chief executive from 1995 to 2000. Kellog Brown and Root has already won a government contract to oversee firefighting operations at Iraqi oilfields after any US-led invasion while other companies also having strong ties to the US administration including the construction company Bechtel, the Fluor Corporation and Louis Berger group, already are involved in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

The report continues and says that to speed up the projects, the United States Agency for International Development invoked special authority to solicit bids from just a few companies. The move bypassed the usual rules that would have permitted a wider array of companies to seek the contract which was first reported by Time magazine and the Wall Street Journal.

Even more bothersome are reports that the United States intends using Iraq as some sort of laboratory to test new weapons systems. A report by an American journalist, Jim Krane, reads:

If the United States unleashes a military attack against Iraq, US forces are expected to unsheath several new weapons and tactics, including devices still under development. He quotes a Bush administration official as saying: The only time you get realistic feedback on new capabilities is during wartime. The military will take advantage of that time to test new weapons.

All these things seem to suggest that there is some agenda other than the disarming of Iraq behind the actions of the Bush administration and the Blair government. [Applause.] I submit that it cannot be in South Africa’s national interest to allow the multilateral institutions, so painfully built up since 1945 for our collective security, to be subverted and destroyed because of the impatience of one country and its ally. It cannot be in South Africa’s national interest to allow the world to be reshaped and recast by the military power of one superpower and its ally.

Yes, indeed, Boy Geldenhuys, we are being asked to choose. But it is not a choice between Saddam Hussein and the United States of America. The choice that we are being required to make is to choose between an international order based on the rule of international law or one based on the dictum that might is right. [Applause.] I think that the members of this august House know which of those the people of South Africa prefer. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                          NOTICE OF MOTION

The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day of this House that:

That the House calls on -

(1) all nations to dismantle weapons of mass destruction in their possession and to pursue the objective of a world free of weapons of mass destruction;

(2) all members of the Security Council of the United Nations Organisation to oppose unilateral military action against Iraq; and

(3) members of the Security Council to respect internationally agreed multilateral processes and institutions aimed at maintaining global peace which is a necessary condition for socio-economic development.

                 CELEBRATION OF KING MOSHOESHOE DAY

                         (Draft Resolution)

The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Chairperson, I move without notice that the House -

That the House -

(1) notes that the people of Lesotho celebrated King Moshoeshoe Day on 11 March 2003;

(2) believes that -

   (a)  this was the celebration of a hero of our  struggle  who  fought
       tirelessly  against  colonialism,  land  dispossession,   racial
       oppression and economic subjugation of the African people; and


   (b)   his  resistance  against  colonialism  continues   to   inspire
       generations of African people as they work towards  the  revival
       of the African continent and the building of  a  peaceful,  just
       and fairer world; and

(2) commemorates the heroic battles waged by the Basotho people under the leadership of King Moshoeshoe:

     Setjhaba se tswele pele ho tlisa ntjhafatso ya Afrika yohle!


     [The nation continues  to  advance  the  rebirth  of  Africa  as  a
     whole!]


     Kgotso, pula, nala, bana ba Morena Moshoeshoe!


     [Let there  be  peace  and  prosperity  for  all  the  children  of
     Moshoeshoe!]


     Moshwashwaila wa ha kadi Lebeola!.

Agreed to.

        THE ROLE OF CHILD PROTECTION UNITS IN THE PROTECTION
                   OF THE CHILDREN OF SOUTH AFRICA

                      (Subject for Discussion)

Mr M WATERS: Deputy Chair, first and foremost I would like to thank Madam Speaker for allowing this debate to take place, because it brings out into the open one of South Africa’s worst and darkest secrets: the abuse of our children. And while we applaud ourselves that we brought the World Cup to our country, thousands of overseas fans now know our deepest and darkest secret. Knowing that people from outside are now aware of what we do to our children makes me hang my head in shame, as we all should particularly in this House, where we are in a position to make a difference but have not.

When Madam Speaker spoke to the Committee on Public Service and Administration she asked one very pertinent question. It was: Is the Public Service organised and skilled enough to deliver services? The answer from many departments was a resounding no, and particularly from child protection units.

Recently, I personally visited all 45 child protection units throughout our country in order to see for myself what the situation was on the ground; what it was really like. As Helen Suzman advised us, if you want to know what is happening on the ground, you should go to see for yourselves. So I did.

The findings are in this report which the Minister of Safety and Security received - hand delivered - on the day that it was released. I was shocked by the sheer numbers of child and baby rape: the figure for 2001 has just been released: it is 44 466. I repeat: 44 000 children and babies raped. That is one every 12 minutes. By the time I finish my speech here today, another child will have been raped. Also shocked by the unacceptably low conviction rate, I decided to find out the real reasons behind it all.

The officers of the CPU are a child’s first line of defence. However, instead of finding units fully resourced, trained and equipped, I discovered units overworked, stressed and hopelessly underresourced.

The Government has declared child abuse a top-priority crime. The facts speak for themselves and indicate that what is said here in Parliament has very little effect on the ground.

According to the Minister, there should be 1 432 officers at CPUs. The actual figure of 739 means we are short 693 officers, or a staggering 48,4%. The Western Cape is the most severely affected being 78% underresourced, followed by Mpumalanga which is 71% underresourced.

Do these figures reflect the Government’s commitment to combating child abuse and rape? No, they do not.

Understaffing results in higher workloads for CPU officers. Their ability to help child victims depends largely on the sheer volume of cases they have at any one time. An officer has many duties to perform: helping victims and taking them for medical examinations, investigating and gathering evidence, transporting victims to and from court, and testifying in court. What is clear is that there is a limit to the caseload one individual can possibly cope with, no matter how talented or dedicated that individual may be.

According to a reply to a parliamentary question, the ideal number of dockets a detective in the Police Service should be carrying at any one time is 18, and that is this pile here. This reflects 18 dockets. The national average, though, is a shocking 62 dockets, and this is the average caseload that every child protection officer is carrying at the moment. Sixty-two dockets! [Interjections.] Nobody can investigate this number of dockets thoroughly.

Gauteng’s average caseload is 55 per investigating officer; the Northern Cape is 58; KwaZulu-Natal is 64; the Western Cape is 77; and Mpumalanga is 104.

I ask you how any human being can investigate cases properly when he or she has 60, 80 or 100 cases to investigate. It is no wonder so many of the accused get away with rape and abuse. We all agree that these workloads are excessive, but what are we as members of Parliament doing about this? We demand higher conviction rates, but fail to empower the very units that could deliver what we all want.

Fifty-three per cent of officers at these specialised units have never received training in child protection. I repeat: 53% of all officers at CPUs have never received training in child protection. One would think that all CPU officers would be trained in child protection before joining a unit. This is not so.

At the Phuthaditjhaba CPU not one officer has been trained in child protection. The same in Durban South. In Pietermaritzburg 84% of officers have had no training in child protection; and the figure for East London is 79%.

So let us recap. We have underresourced the CPUs by 48%, we give officers three and half times their workload, and we fail to arm investigating officers with basic training. Yet we are all up in arms because the conviction rate for child rape is a miserable 8%. It is an absolute outrage that the ANC Government can claim to be committed to doing all it can.

To add insult to injury, the physical environment in which officers are expected to work and the lack of basic equipment, such as vehicles, are also hampering investigations. Many police officers are expected to cram themselves into tiny offices. In Mmabatho three investigators use the kitchen as their office. Buildings are run-down. For example, the Temba CPU is in a dilapidated building; while at the Port Shepstone CPU the roof is collapsing. Security is also a major problem. At the Richards Bay CPU they have had four break-ins in two years. The Pietermaritzburg unit has had two burglaries in two years. Middelburg, Louis Trichardt, Rustenburg and De Aar have all been burgled in the past two years. At Port Elizabeth there was an attempted rape of a police officer while she was in the lift going to her office.

Aside from the facilities and resources needed to help children, each CPU must have resources to conduct investigations. Telephones are not always available, and investigators use their own cellphones knowing that they will not be paid for their expenses. The high mileage and poor condition of vehicles mean that their reliability comes into question.

In order for investigating officers to do their work, they need to either pick up the phone or jump into a vehicle. If they cannot do that, they cannot conduct basic investigatory work.

At the Benoni CPU all the vehicles have car radios, but they are so old that the radio cannot pick up the channel that the police are currently using, rendering them useless. Last year two officers of the Germiston CPU went to retrieve an abducted child. Both officers were wounded, one critically. Neither of the officers had hand-held radios on them, so no backup could be called for. The second officer had to leopard crawl, while injured, to his partner and use her cellphone to call for help. You’re probably thinking: Why didn’t he crawl to the car? Well, the car didn’t have a radio in it either.

The work these police officers do is, by its very nature, highly disturbing and traumatic. This is made even more difficult by the resource shortage and working conditions described, yet counselling or debriefing for officers hardly ever happens. According to the Police Service, counselling sessions should take place at least once every two years.

KwaZulu-Natal presents the worst picture. In the eight years that the Pietermaritzburg unit has been operational, no one has ever been debriefed. In Ladysmith it has never happened, even when a member of the unit’s own child was raped. They never sent anyone in to give debriefing.

At Port Shepstone there was a debriefing session, but only after an officer tried to shoot himself. The Goodwood unit in the Western Cape has lost 29 members in the last six years owing to stress, and not even the officers who worked on baby Tshepang’s case were given psychological support, even when they requested it.

Many units are not being paid overtime. When I visited the Pietermaritzburg unit the members were on a go-slow and had been for four months, working only until 4pm during the week. That means there was no one on duty at night or over weekends when most children are raped and abused.

The area management told them that there was no money for overtime. I immediately wrote to the Minister and the National Commissioner. Within a week the problem was resolved, and the police officers received all their back pay. But why does it take an opposition MP to become involved for any action to be taken? It is also a pity that the overtime disputes at the Durban North and Durban South units still have not been resolved.

In addition to not being properly staffed or equipped to combat the scourge of violence against children, these officers do not receive much help either from government departments that are supposed to assist.

At state hospitals the shortage of doctors forces raped children to wait in queues for three to five hours before being examined. Some doctors are even refusing to examine raped children, citing that they are not trained to do so. The DA has documentary proof of this from the East London, Vereeniging and Port Elizabeth units.

Delays in obtaining DNA results mean that many cases are withdrawn from the court roll. Instead of taking 84 days for DNA to be analysed, it can take up to a year, but in most cases four to six months. Once a case is withdrawn the suspect is released from prison, ready to intimidate the victim.

According to the Minister of Social Development, there are 1 400 vacancies for social workers. This results in assessment reports for victims taking over one year to complete. Excessive delays mean that many cases are withdrawn from the court roll.

Many courts still lack basic equipment that would allow a child to give evidence in a separate room via a TV monitor. Owing to the lack of intermediaries, the equipment is not used and a child is forced to give evidence in court and in front of the accused. Some cases have been withdrawn, as in Vereeniging, owing to the nonappearance of intermediaries where three rapists were set free with a warning by the magistrate. Where there is equipment, such as in Germiston, it has been broken for over two months.

When cases go to the High Court, the investigating officer has to ensure that the victim and the accused are present. The lack of staff and vehicles poses a problem. At the De Aar unit in the Northern Cape, when travelling to the Kimberley High Court, the victim sits in the front of the car while the accused sits in the back. Can you imagine the fear that the child must go through?

This is but a snapshot of the life of an officer working at a CPU. And it is no wonder we only have a conviction rate of 8%.

The DA would like to make some recommendations: that vacant posts of police officers at all CPUs, of social workers and of those working at forensic laboratories be declared scarce skills so that all vacant posts can be filled; that all CPU officers receive immediate training in child protection and basic detective work; that all doctors working at state hospitals immediately receive training in how to use the new crime kits and how to complete the J88 form; that the Department of Health undertake to train doctors in how to conduct forensic examinations of children; that the training of magistrates and prosecutors who deal with children be speeded up; that a group of intermediaries be assigned to a cluster of courts on a full-time availability basis; that a judicial inspectorate be appointed in order to ascertain the immediate needs analysis of all CPUs; and, that unfinished cases from 2001 and before be prioritised and concluded with the possible establishment of Saturday courts.

If all these recommendations were implemented, maybe we as South Africans could hold our heads up high at the next world conference or World Cup. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson and hon members, notwithstanding some of the observations that the hon Waters has made, I would really like to appeal to members of this House to remember at all times when we discuss issues of crime, that we should understand that all of us, given that we are peace-loving South Africans and law-abiding citizens, belong on the same side. The message that we should send out is that we, all of us here, public representatives of our people, are fighting the criminals out there. That’s the message we should give. [Applause.]

I want to express my appreciation to police officials who, risking their lives, continue to provide policing in South Africa. I do this because if the criminals, who are listening to this debate, get an impression that South Africa’s policing has totally collapsed … [Interjections] … It has not. Therefore I want to appeal to those speakers who will speak after me to understand that we are united as public representatives in the fight against crime. [Applause.] And we will give the criminals out there no quarter at all.

In the past six weeks three of our children lost their lives violently. These murders happened in the area of our country where this House is located. Kayleen Clayton, a 12-year old schoolgirl, was murdered in her home in Ottery on February 7. Two suspects were arrested and they appeared yesterday at the Wynberg Magistrate’s Court. Tyrone Steenkamp, aged 6, was caught in gang warfare crossfire last week, and died outside his home where he was playing. Miquela Appolis, aged 9, also died in similar circumstances yesterday. The police made an arrest last night and more arrests are in the offing.

Our sympathy goes to the parents, the relatives and friends of these murdered children. We promise that all the perpetrators of these crimes will be brought to book, and that more resources will be mobilised to deal with gangsterism on the Cape Flats.

Apart from the resources that will come from the department, we need community support, particularly as it relates to information, for us to deal exhaustively with the gangsters in every corner of our country. The police structure that handles investigations of crimes of this nature, like murder and gangsterism, is the Serious and Violent Crimes Unit whose members made the arrests I have referred to.

The matter under discussion today has been, since the year 2000, the subject of a broader programme of interaction between the Minister of Safety and Security and a significant number of role-players, including members of this House. The matter has to do with our democratic transformation.

You will recall that my predecessor, Comrade Steve Tshwete, delivering his Budget Vote speech in this House on 7 June 2001, explained the Ministry’s integrated approach to policing. This approach necessitated the reorganisation of the various police structures we inherited from the previous regime.

Structures that had to be reorganised included the Detective Service. It became necessary for the department to adopt a new stance in regard to investigations and capacity-building.

In the past investigations were fragmented, available intelligence was not shared, and there was often duplication of both functions and payments for information leading to successful investigations and prosecutions. The reorganisation helped to enhance and strengthen the capacity of SAPS’ detectives at a local level, effectively, to investigate crime.

The process of change has not been without bumps and hiccups. There is unevenness as we develop the new structures. This has not impacted negatively on the Police Services’ ability to create an atmosphere of safety and security for all our people. Policing has not collapsed as a result of the reorganisation.

On the contrary, the new structures enjoy better co-ordination and resource allocation. As in the case of other areas of our transformation agenda, we knew that there would be resistance on the part of some of our members to the changes we’re introducing. The great majority of our members, though, accept the transformation of the Service, and give of their best as they serve our country and our nation.

During the course of 2000, the department launched an extensive communication and consultation process to get the buy-in from all role- players in regard to the restructuring. It was necessary to do this, given that inherent in the restructuring would be the phasing-out of some units that existed before 1994.

I will not list the various structures and organisations that were consulted on this matter, but allow me to say they included the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the Banking Council, the Farming Community Institute for Security Studies and Business Against Crime.

Subsequent to the changes, the Minister has responded to more than 15 parliamentary questions on the restructuring. I raise this because it is clear to me some of us in this House may not have understood the reorganisation that we mounted to transform the South African Police Service.

The matter of the Child Protection Units is one of the areas of our work that has not been understood. The first Child Protection Unit was established in 1986. Further interaction subsequently influenced more changes in the way we handled child protection. The argument was advanced by many of our partners at community level that we needed to redefine our approach by broadening our mandate to cover women.

The response to this saw the establishment of the first Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Unit in 1995. This became a multipurpose structure whose scope of work became broader than that of the Child Protection Units. The FCS, as we refer to these units, deal with all crimes against women and children.

Government’s transformation programme is not only confined to personnel. The democratic changes we are introducing include the restructuring of state organs so that they become appropriate vehicles to advance our democratic ideas.

The challenge we face also requires new strategies and tactics. The restructuring within the South African Police Service is the response to the new challenges and tactical questions of the day.

Before the year 2000 we had 534 specialised units in the Detective Service. We have to date shut down 270 of them. The personnel from the affected units were integrated into the Serious and Violent Crime Units, and the Organised Crime Units.

The main thrust of this exercise is to ensure integrated policing through multidisciplinary interventions under one operational management structure. Every element of the new structures is influenced by the operational dictates of the crime that we combat.

The multidisciplinary units deal with clusters of crime defined as organised crime, serious and violent crime, commercial crime and crime against women and children. We adopted a phased approach to bring in the new structures.

The 45 units that the hon member has referred to, which deal with crimes against women and children, comprise 32 Child Protection Units, and 13 Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Units. These units have 945 members. A new allocation during the current financial year will raise the number to 1 284. [Applause.] We eventually will deploy 1 476 such members to deal with crimes against women and children, mobilised under 53 units. The units will have 738 vehicles. At the moment the 945 members have access to 374 vehicles.

The South African law enforcement regime demands that all members of SAPS must be trained in their basic police course to understand all relevant legislation regarding, among others, our law on domestic violence, sexual offences and victim empowerment. All of them have to undergo that basic training.

Throughout the year we arrange education and training sessions, as well as workshops and seminars to keep members abreast of new developments in detective and investigative methods. Between the beginning of April and the end of December last year, we trained 925 SAPS members to deal with crimes against women and children. There are 81 members who are undergoing training at the moment.

In the next financial year, we will admit to five Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Units investigators’ training courses for 375 members. I want to stress that all our detectives are trained to handle crimes against women and children, including sexual offences. [Applause.] Any detective, therefore, who is first on the scene of such a crime, will be able to handle all the challenges he or she will confront.

Given the fact that crimes against women and children happen behind closed doors or in secluded places, where the victims know the perpetrators, the police through a process of direct engagement, through a system of partnerships, have built good relations at community level that have inspired confidence in their work. The police, in the circumstances, enjoy a level of acceptability that they were not accorded in the past. This results in more people coming forward to report crimes against women and children ensuring, therefore, better success in the investigation of such crimes.

Last year, the Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Units’ investigators opened 32 710 case dockets. By the end of the year, 19 512 cases were already before court. The courts meted out 98 life sentences and 10 984 years imprisonment to perpetrators who sexually abused children, among cases that were finalised last year. The imposed life sentences were a direct result of the enactment by Parliament, in 1997, of the Criminal Law Amendment Act that provided for mandatory minimum sentences for crimes such as the rape of children under the age of 16.

The Department of Justice will be piloting, through Parliament, the Sexual Offences Bill that among other things will make it easier for victims of sexual offences to testify in court. The Bill creates a category of vulnerable witnesses, including children, who will receive assistance from support persons and intermediaries. They will be able to give evidence through one-way mirrors, and there are already 31 courtrooms in South Africa where these one-way mirrors have been installed.

To date the Department of Justice has established, country-wide, 27 sexual offences courts. More of these will be created. Support persons and intermediaries already exist. They include members of the Teddy Bear Clinic in Soweto and Bee Courtwise in Pretoria and Johannesburg. Trauma clinics and community safety centres have also been established to service victims of crimes against women and children.

In conclusion, let me say that the SAPS Detective Service will be fully restructured by the end of 2005. This means that the Child Protection Units that we still have will be transformed into the Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Units that will take over all investigations regarding crime against women and children. Our crime combating programme will be boosted by the deployment of sector police who will be in close proximity of the people where they live; their response time to cries for help will be quicker, while their mere presence and visibility in the designated sectors would be a strong deterrent against crime.

We expect that crimes against women and children will be reduced as a consequence. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Mr E T FERREIRA: On 15 October 2002, this House debated the issue of child rape as a matter of public importance at the request of the Minister of Home Affairs and President of the IFP, Dr Mangosuthu Buthelezi. The feature of that debate was the unanimous condemnation of acts of sexual abuse directed at children. A further feature of that debate was widespread calls for the problem to be attacked at the level of the wider society.

Unfortunately, since that debate, the picture relating to sexual abuse of and violence against children has not dramatically improved. We still read and hear stories of child rape and other forms of violence against children on a far too regular basis. There should be no doubt that an entire generation of South Africans experienced violence as a way of life under apartheid. A systematically brutalised and traumatised society has been one of the worst legacies of our past. In addition, a generation of South Africans appear to have ingrained violent behaviour in various forms and manifestations as a way of coming to terms with their own personal circumstances and experiences. In my opinion, the crux of the problem that faces us lies in the repairing the tears in our moral and social fabric. It lies in repairing our own degeneration. I will return to this issue.

The topic of today’s debate is the role of the Child Protection Units in protecting our children. I want to raise a few points directly relating to these units. Firstly, the Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Units of the SAPS, to name them accurately, are mainly reactive by the very nature of policing. There is very little that these units can do in the absence of evidence of a crime having been committed. To expect them to be proactive in protecting our children is unfortunately not very realistic.

Secondly, there are currently 45 of these units, with another five in the process of being established. More units are planned for the future. The IFP supports the establishment of more of these units with better staffing and more resources. But, it is also very important to point out that these units have successfully brought some 19 000 cases to court, while only about 2 000 cases were finalised in 2002. The lack of success in finalising these cases in the criminal justice system means that unit officers are left with massive unfinished caseloads and numerous delays resulting from postponements in court appearances also means less time spent on actually investigating and solving new cases, leading to a general deterioration in staff morale and motivation.

Notwithstanding the dedication and hard work of Child Protection Officers, it is a sad reality that not even establishing one such unit for every street in South Africa would solve the problem of sexual and other forms of violence against children. No, the solution lies much closer to home. The solution lies in repairing the damage to our moral and social fabric. The solution lies in re-establishing normal and acceptable standards of behaviour, standards that can never include the option of using violence under any circumstances. It lies in effectively addressing unemployment and poverty and it lies in tackling issues such as illegal substance and alcohol abuse, something that we do not seem to be terribly keen on in South Africa to look at.

In order to repair our scarred society, we need a collective effort by the community, our leaders, our churches, our civic organisations and our parents. In fact, every single South African can and has to make a contribution to the pressing national objective of healing our society. The contribution can be of any size or shape, but we should realise that it is our collective responsibility to make a difference.

In last year’s debate, Dr Buthelezi stated that we need to bring about the spirit of a revolution of goodwill, in which we all become responsible for making a difference. Today, this statement is still as accurate and relevant as ever. It is up to each and every one of us to accept our national duty and responsibility to translate the revolution of goodwill into a healing and caring society where our children are nurtured and cherished and not brutalised and traumatised.

If we do not accept this responsibility, we run the risk of allowing the moral decay in our society to become endemic to the extent that it can never again be repaired. I personally believe we are frightfully close to that.

Mnr J SCHIPPERS: Adjunkvoorsitter, weens die feit dat mens van die geboorte tot volwassenheid ‘n ontwikkelingsperiode deurmaak, moet die reg voorsiening maak vir ‘n groot aantal reëls om die regsposisie van kinders te organiseer.

Die betrokkenheid van kinders by misdaad moet in twee kategorieë verdeel word. Enersyds, misdaad deur kinders gepleeg en andersyds, misdaad wat teen kinders gepleeg word.

Vandag se onderwerp handel oor misdaad teen kinders, wat uitsluitlik die funksie van die beskermingseenhede is. Dié eenheid vorm deel van ‘n groter struktuur, naamlik die Familiegeweld-, Seksuele Misdaad- en Kinderbeskermingseenheid.

Op 20 September 2002 het die agb Alie van Jaarsveld vraag 1443 aan die Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit gevra:

1.(a) Hoeveel poste is tans vakant by die kinderbeskermingseenhede in elke provinsie; en

(b) wanneer sal die vakante poste gevul word; en

1. Of die Minister bereid is om ‘n verklaring in dié verband te maak.

Die antwoord wat die agb lid ontvang het was baie duidelik en baie pertinent en die lid het reeds die Minister daarvoor bedank. Die Minister sê in sy antwoord dat die huidige personeelkomponent van die Familiegeweld- , Seksuele Misdaad- en Kinderbeskermingseenhede word in die tabelle voorsien. ‘n Opsomming van die tabelle toon dat 1 497 poste in die 9 provinsies goedgekeur is, waarvan 900 gevul en 597 nie gevul is nie. Dit gee vir ons ‘n onderbemansyfer van 40% landwyd. Die provinsies wat die ergste geraak word is: Limpopo met ‘n onderbemansyfer van 73%, Weskaap met 72%, Mpumalanga met 58% en Noord-Kaap met 56%. Die Minister sê verder dat die kritiese korttermyn tekort aangespreek sal word deurdat 445 nuwe lede in die 2003/2004-boekjaar aangestel sal word om direk of indirek by die groter struktuur betrokke te wees.

Die Grondwet van Suid Afrika sê duidelik in seksie 28(1)(b) dat elke kind die reg het tot ‘n familie of ouerlike sorg of toepaslike alternatiewe sorg as die kind uit die familie-omgewing verwyder word. Seksie 28(d) sê dat kinders beskerm sal word teen enige vorm van mishandeling, verwaarlosing, misbruik of minderwaardige behandeling.

Hoe sê ‘n moeder op die Kaapse Vlakte aan haar kind om nie by ‘n maatjie te gaan speel nie, want jy sal deur ‘n dwaalkoeël getref word as bendes onder mekaar veg, soos dit gister in Steenberg met Lulu Apollis en Vrydag met Tyrone Steenkamp in Ravensmead gebeur het. Hoe sê ‘n moeder aan haar kind om nie lekkers of geskenke by vreemdelinge te neem nie, anders gaan jy verkrag en vermoor en jou lykie sal in ‘n vlak graf gevind word. Hoe sê ‘n moeder aan haar kind om veilig skool toe te gaan, en dan wreed aangeval of vermoor word, of deur ‘n motor omgery word. Ons ouers, veral in die agtergeblewe gebiede wat deur misdaad en armoede geteister word, het ‘n uiters moeilike taak. Die beskermingseenhede moet bemagtig word om ons kinders op straat en in die gemeenskap te beveilig.

Die probleme wat die eenhede in die gesig staar is legio. Ek noem slegs een: Die forensiese inligting word nie met die grootste omsigtigheid behandel nie en die resultate is eers na maande beskikbaar. Die Nuwe NP wil langs hierdie weg ons diepste medelye aan die Apollis- en Steenkampfamilies betoon en mag die Here hulle troos.

Agb Minister, ons moet die gety van misdaad teen kinders omdraai. Ons moet die bendegeweld stop. Ons moet die verkragting van kinders en vroue in huise, skole en op strate stop. Dit is in u en u departement se hande om ‘n einde daaraan te bring.

Die Nuwe NP sal enige wetgewing steun om dit ‘n werklikheid te maak. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr J SCHIPPERS: Deputy Chairperson, owing to the fact that one goes through a developmental period from birth to adulthood, the law should make provision for a number of rules to organise the legal position of children.

The involvement of children in crime should be divided into two categories. On the one hand, crimes committed by children and on the other hand, crimes committed against children.

Today’s topic deals with crime against children, which is exclusively the function of the protection units. This unit forms part of a bigger structure, namely the Family Violence, Sexual Offences and Child Protection Unit.

On 20 September 2002 the hon Alie van Jaarsveld asked question 1443 to the Minister of Safety and Security:

1.(a) How many posts are currently vacant at the child protection units in every province; and

(b) when will these vacant posts be filled; and

1. Whether the Minister is prepared to make a statement in this regard.

The answer which the hon member received was very clear and very pertinent and the member has already thanked the Minister for that. In his answer the Minister says that the current personnel component of the Family Violence, Sexual Offences and Child Protection Units are provided in the schedules. A summary of the schedules shows that 1 497 posts in the 9 provinces have been approved, of which 900 have been filled and 597 have not been filled. This gives us an understaffed figure of 40% nationwide. The provinces which have been the worst affected are: Limpopo with an understaffed figure of 73%, Western Cape with 72%, Mpumalanga with 58% and Northern Cape with 56%. The Minister further says that the critical short-term shortage will be addressed by appointing 445 new members in the 2003/2004 financial year to become directly or indirectly involved with the bigger structures.

The Constitution of South Africa clearly states in section 28(1)(b) that every child has the right to family care or parental care or appropriate alternative care if the child is removed from the family environment. Section 29(d) says that children will be protected against any form of maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation.

How does a mother on the Cape Flats tell her child not to go play with a playmate, because you will be hit by a stray bullet when gangs fight amongst each other, as happened yesterday in Steenberg with Lulu Apollis and Friday with Tyrone Steenkamp in Ravensmead. How does a mother tell her child not to take sweets or gifts from strangers otherwise you will be raped and murdered and your little body will be found in a shallow grave. How does a mother tell her child to go to school safely and then the child is brutally attacked or murdered or run over by a car. Our parents, especially in the disadvantaged areas which are devastated by crime and poverty, have an extremely difficult task. The protection units should be empowered to be able to protect our children on the street and in the community.

The problems which stare the units in the face are innumerable. I name merely one: The forensic information is not handled with the greatest circumspection and the results are only available months later. Along these lines the New NP would like to express its deepest sympathy to the Apollis and Steenkamp families and may the Lord comfort them.

Hon Minister, we must turn the tide of crime against children. We must stop the gang violence. We must stop the rape of children and women in their houses, schools and on the streets. It is in the hands of you and your department to bring an end to this.

The New NP will support any legislation to make this a reality. I thank you.]

Ms ANNELIZÉ VAN WYK: Chairperson and hon Minister, the investigation and report by Mr Waters should not be ignored. It should also not be used to score political points. It contains valuable information that should be used to inform the Minister of Finance, Minister of Safety and Security, Minister of Justice and the National Commissioner of the SAPS. The Minister of Finance should take note and make provision for the critical shortages in a dedicated budget allocation. Both the Ministers for Justice and of Safety and Security should use the information to inform their own policies and the National Commissioner in determining priorities and allocating human and other resources. We cannot plead lack of resources and then open a special court to deal with poaching, as was done last week, and not prioritise a legal system that adequately addresses the special needs of the child victim.

The debate before the House today is, in essence, a sad one. The necessity for any parliament wherever it may be in the world to entertain such a debate is a serious charge against the entire community, yes, against the nation as a whole. Children are indeed the most vulnerable members of our society. We also claim sometimes in cliché that the children are our most valuable resource for the future. If we all agree on this, why is it then that we neglect them? Why are we as individuals, communities, indeed as a nation, the authors and the creators of a legacy that we will be judged on?

I am using the word ``we’’ deliberately. There is no question in my mind that to fight incidents where children are the victims, a holistic approach is needed. The work of the CPUs happens after the fact that the child has already become a victim. What I am pleading for is an approach where we prevent the child becoming a victim. In order to achieve this, we need the involvement of all relevant Government departments, civil society and the nation as a whole. Education should go beyond teaching children about their rights. It should also instil in children, at the right age, the responsibilities that come with parenthood.

The Department of Social Development should start acting as an early warning system. They should identify children that are more likely, because of their circumstances, to become victims and develop strategies for intervention at an early stage. Closer co-operation with the SAPS is a must and non-negotiable. Civil society and our communities should become our first line of defence. They must speak out, protect and get involved. We cannot turn a blind eye. Having knowledge of children who are at risk and not acting on it makes society co-responsible.

Madam Speaker, this ANC Government successfully defeated apartheid and led us into a democratic society. We ask now that it, with the same vigour, demonstrate the political will to put an end to these barbaric incidents in our society.

Mr F T MASERUMULE: Chairperson, this morning when I was about to complete my preparation for this debate, I realised that I had run short of something. There is an expression in the African culture which is only available in Sepedi. I tried to check if we have that expression in English and found out that we do not. I am going to try my best. The expression says Motswa-leeto tlama setlhako sa ga-Ramakgokela gobane moo o ya go ke kgole fela o tla fihla mosepedi ga a lape'. [Applause.] It simply says, `it has been a very long journey but ultimately we have arrived at a point where we are able to say opportunities are there now for all of us to begin to address the ills of this legacy we inherited.’’ If I was born and brought up in the same environment which Mr Waters comes from, with the same background and same ideology, as a young MP like himself, I would have been more wiser. [Laughter.] I am not querying your right to say what you want to say, but what I am querying is the manner in which you are saying it and what you want to get from what you are saying. You should be warned that we are dealing here with child abuse and sexual offences. For your own information, if you do not know, this issue is even more emotional than the land question itself. [Interjections.]

You cannot begin to politicise and electioneer on an issue of this nature. [Interjections.] As a grassroots activist, those who remember vividly in their pretty minds what the President said at this podium in 1996 during the adoption of the new Constitution, to those who care to remember. He said: `I am an African’’, and if I remember well, every single leader in this House made the same declaration. Do you know what that means in the African culture? When a child is born, it is born into a network of aunts, uncles, relatives and neighbourhood in a normal African family situation.

The point is, while we do appreciate the efforts and the attempts and while the police do need my pleas and yours, at the same time, as Africans, we have a responsibility to create an environment in this network of uncles and aunties in a neighbourhood and it is incumbent upon all of us to make it easy for the police to do their work; to create an environment where a child can live and grow up peacefully. [Applause.] Those who know dialectical materialism will remember that it is said in dialectics: ``If you are on the left and you run out of ideas, you want to move the extreme left to end up on the right and once you are on the right, in order for you to survive, you must lie and use violence’’. [Interjections.]

This is exactly what Hitler used to do. Hitler’s motto was `A lie told many times becomes the truth.’ I am not so worried whether the police are failing or succeeding. That is not my worry. My worry is what I myself as an individual - where I am staying and living on a day-to-day basis - am doing to make sure that the Letsema campaign, Imbizo, Farhanani, Ditirisano and Moral Renewal Regeneration is working. [Applause.] That is my worry. A word of comradely advice to those who want to be advised: I am sure those who do not know ANC well should know it now because they have been given a chance to know it. What is left is for them to understand it even better.

The ANC is built like a family because a branch is like a fundamental organ, like a family. [Interjections.]

In conclusion, unfortunately, Mr Waters is not part of the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security. He is missing a lot of this information. Two weeks ago we met the human resource unit of SAPS. We also met with ICD last week and this morning we engaged with the national management of the SAPS. I was really surprised at how the police themselves were so open. I do not know now why we should go about and research about what they are doing because they were so open about it. Another warning to Mr Waters: If you want your DP organisation to become once more the next largest minority in this Parliament … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Rev K R J MESHOE: Deputy Chairperson, according to statistics, there is a rape or attempted rape of a child every 12 minutes in our country. More than 120 000 children were raped and abused over a 21-month period, resulting only in an 8% conviction rate. The CPUs which were designed to combat this growing plague are failing to make an impact and stem the tide of this crime against humanity.

However, this is not through a fault of their own. The CPUs are filled with dedicated, yet demoralised police officers who work very long hours to cope with the workload. They continue to work in appalling conditions with a lack of basic resources such as manpower, vehicles and operating expenses.

How can an officer with about 100 cases that must be investigated at a time do justice to his or her job? Consequently, because of this and other reasons, the CPUs dismally fail to protect our children. Our Government must admit that their liberal laws have betrayed South African children.

At the root of the problems faced by the CPUs is not only a lack of resources, but the atmosphere this Government has created that produces criminals and perpetrators of these heinous crimes against our children.

By legalising pornography, which inflames the passion of lust in men, the incidents of the rape of children have been increasing. As we have said before, pornography is the theory but rape is the action.

The ACDP calls on Government to pass legislation that would require all Internet service providers to be registered so that they can be regulated. The public must know which service providers are endorsing and allowing child pornographers to use their services so that they can be held accountable for the damage caused by their service. There are immoral undisciplined lawyers in this country who made an arrangement with an orphanage in Pretoria to use the services of orphans under their care to produce child pornography.

It is a shame and a disgrace that children who must be protected by society are being used by greedy lawyers who are only interested in satisfying their lust and greed. The ACDP calls for such legal practitioners to be scrapped from the roll and never to be allowed to practice law again. [Applause.]

Mrs M A SEECO: Chairperson, according the hon Minister of Safety and Security, there are currently 32 Child Protection Units which received 18 737 cases, comprising 4 031 enquiries and 14 706 dockets for investigation in the last six months of 2002. A total of 52 life sentences were imposed, and there were 1 013 cases of crime against children under the age of 18 years.

The worst type of child abuse is that which happens in the home, behind closed doors. There is no specialised unit that can ever effectively combat this abuse and protect children without the co-operation of the community. This includes making members of the public aware of each and everybody’s role in combating crime and protecting children.

Police members that are allocated to these units should specialise in psychology services to enable them to talk the language of the children. The role of the units should involve the services of social workers. Police stations should have their people in the service.

Rona jaaka setshaba sa Afrika re boele morago re itekole, re tshwane le koko fa e elama ditsuane go di sireletsa. Bana ke setshaba sa ka moso. [Legofi.] [We as the African nation should go back and engage in some introspection, just like when a hen protects its young. The children are tomorrow’s future. [Applause.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Deputy Chairperson, the MF denounces all forms of child abuse and urges the protection of the children of our nation. In summary, according to the hon Waters, Child Protection Units are reported as being understaffed and the officers are overworked. They have between 60 to 100 cases as opposed to the acceptable 18 dockets per officer that they should have. More crucial is that many lack specialised training. In Pietermaritzburg, 84% of officers have no specialised training or trauma support services.

Arising from the hon Waters’ report, the MF feels that the department should seriously look into the fact of the matter. Child Protection Units are extremely important. We need to ensure resources to the sector so that needs may be met. The MF supports initiatives to institute adequate and efficient Child Protection Units.

The MF acknowledges the department’s hard work and commitment. Child Protection Units are a major service to the South African people, and service delivery appears hindered by minimal resources. The MF pleads that the budget allocated to this sector assist in overcoming this shortfall.

Thank you, hon Minister, for highlighting the initiative that is taken by the department in training personnel in the Child Protection Units.

The MF is quite impressed by the Bulgarian child protection state policy, where a national council for child protection service is the state agency for child protection. As members of Parliament, I think we should look into all initiatives and assist our police department and Child Protection Units through community unity. Thank you. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, I think you are becoming a little too rowdy here. I appreciate your good behaviour for all this while. We have just another 20 minutes to go. If you will oblige and keep the House in good order.

Adv P S SWART: Chairperson, I am stunned and shocked at the way the ANC treated the serious report by a committed member of this House. [Applause.] Normally, the hon Maserumule is quiet in our portfolio committee. I just want to tell him today that hon Waters is not a member of a portfolio committee. It wasn’t his job to go around this whole country during the recess and visit all the CPUs. He did it because he cares. [Applause.]

Most of us are parents. And if asked about our biggest treasure, we will all state unequivocally that our children are most precious to us. Even those without children, like the hon Waters, will support this sentiment.

En dit is presies hoekom hierdie debat of die nodigheid daarvan so ontstellend is. Ons is altyd vinnig om lippediens te betoon aan hierdie beginsel, om filosofies te verklaar:``The level of civilisation is measured by the way in which it treats its children.’’

Maar hierdie is nie die eerste debat oor ons kinders in hierdie Huis nie. Dit is sekerlik ook nie die laaste nie. Die klem mag skuif van morele oplewing tot by die verkragting van ons kinders, of soos vandag, die kinderbeskermingseenhede, maar die blote nodigheid hiervoor onderstreep ‘n siek verrotting in ons samelewing. Dit is die hoofklag teen ons vandag.

As individue gee ons om vir ons kinders, maar kollektief, in besonder in hierdie Huis, blyk ons nie in staat nie of onwillig om ons woorde met dade te volbring. Ons skree ``wolf, wolf!’’ oor die verkragting en misbruik van ons kinders, maar ontbreek die politieke wil om vinnig en effektief op te tree om hierdie spiraal van geweld te breek.

Ek was verstom toe die agb Minister tydens die GCIS se mediakonferensie beweer het dat hy in die media van die Watersverslag moes hoor. Sy departement is immers die eerste linie van verdediging teen misdade teen ons kinders en daardie eenhede heel voor. ‘n Opposisieverslag behoort nie die mannekragtekorte uit te wys nie. Hy moes binne dae nadat hy sy pos aanvaar het, dit vasgestel en reggestel het. [Tussenwerpsels.]

Behalwe vorige vrae en voorstelle in hierdie Huis het ek in Augustus 2002 ‘n brief aan die Minister geskryf om probleme uit te lig en sekere aanbevelings te maak. ‘n Amptelike brief en nie ‘n brief in die media nie. Geen ontvangserkenning. Ek wag steeds op ‘n antwoord. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[And that is precisely why this debate or its necessity is so upsetting. We are always very quick to pay lip-service to this principle, by philosophically declaring:” The level of civilisation is measured by the way in which it treats its children.”

But this is not the first debate about our children in this House. It is also certainly not the last. The emphasis may move from moral revival to the rape of our children or, like today, the child protection units, but the mere necessity for this highlights a sick decay in our society. That is the main accusation against us today.

As individuals we care about our children, but collectively, in particular in this House, we appear to be either unable or unwilling to fulfil our words by means of deeds. We shout “wolf,wolf!” about the rape and abuse of our children, but lack the political will to act fast and effectively in order to break this spiral of violence.

I was astounded when the hon Minister alleged during the GCIS media conference that he had to hear about the Waters report in the media. His department is surely the first line of defence against crimes against our children and those units at the very front. An opposition report should not point out the shortages in people power. He should, within days of accepting his post, have established and rectified it. [Interjections.]

Apart from previous questions and proposals in this House I wrote a letter to the Minister in August 2002 to point out problems and make certain recommendations. An official letter and not a letter in the media. No acknowledgement of receipt. I am still waiting for an answer.]

But maybe this attitude is best described in remarks to the Pretoria Press Club on 10 May 2002, during his first week in office. When questioning the figure that one in three South African children were abused, the Minister said and I quote, Is that realistic? I have more than three children at home and yesterday not one was abused.'' It sounded like Minister Maduna claiming that, and I quote,We have been standing here for 26 seconds and nobody has been raped,’’ when he was questioned about the rape statistics on American TV.

However, the problem is much bigger than just Cabinet’s apparent lack of commitment. Hidden in the statistics are very ominous indicators. Analysis of dockets indicates that in almost 90% of child rapes, the offenders are known to the victims, often being family members, especially uncles. Almost 40% of cases are withdrawn within 48 hours with more before the case goes to court. This indicates, to our shame, a high level of tolerance and/or condonation within society itself.

We have lost a generation due to the atrocities of apartheid. Today, through our inaction, we are sacrificing another generation to the monster of child rape and abuse. The very least we can do is to ensure the sufficient staffing and resourcing of our CPUs, those dealing with the most unfortunate in our society, the innocent and vulnerable children, victims of crimes, often too young to understand what happened to them. This proper staffing shouldn’t necessitate a debate. It should always have been a given to us.

Let our epitaphs not read, ``They said they cared, but then, they did not act.’’

Ubuntu'' beteken in besonder, om die agb Seremane se welbekende spreuk te gebruik: Jou kind is my kind. [Ubuntu’’ specifically means, to use the hon Seremane’s well-known saying: Your child is my child.]

Let us live this through proper deeds, not hollow words. On behalf of the children of South Africa: Thank you, hon Waters. [Applause.]

Mr M T MASUTHA: Deputy Chairperson, hon members, I rise on behalf of the majority party, the ANC, to add our voice to the clarion call against violence on the most vulnerable in our midst, namely, our children.

In doing so, I wish to echo the sentiments of our President who, in launching the 16-day campaign against violence against women and children towards the end of last year, had the following to say:

Our country is involved in the important 16 days of activism on violence against women and children. The country’s response to this critical issue has been most commendable. We take this opportunity to thank everybody who has taken this campaign seriously, including the mass media. The 16- day period will end on 10 December, International Human Rights Day.

The point, however, is that having mounted the continuing offensive for the protection of the lives, safety and security, dignity and welfare of the women and children of our country, we should not terminate our work on this matter when the 16-day period ends.

We will have to continue beyond this date to ensure that we bring down the levels of violence against women and children to lower levels than those that obtain today. A critical element of this is sustaining the public consciousness in all our communities and localities about the challenge we continue to face.

He then continued, and I quote:

This will require that we get a better understanding of the incidence of this crime in our country. In our continued work, we should look for concrete results. One concrete result must be a radical reduction of the numbers of victims of these crimes. Another must be a major upward movement with regard to the overall climate of safety and security as it relates to women and children in particular, and all our people in general.

These results must come about in part because the wrongdoers begin to understand that they will not get away with their crimes. This is particularly important because much of the abuse to which the majority of our people are firmly opposed occurs behind the closed doors of family homes. Accordingly, we have to ensure that the united voice of our people against violence against women and children penetrates into and is heard in the very private homes within which the women and children of our country are abused.

I must, at this point, state that the calling for this debate today by the DP, following the recent publication of its so-called report on conditions and activities of Child Protection Units with the theme, and I quote ``South Africa’s betrayed children - Government’s broken promise’’ is hardly surprising considering the fact that the 2004 elections are just around the corner. [Interjections.]

In the aforesaid report, the DP has attempted to mount a scathing attack on Government to try and convince the electorate that this a government that simply does not care by saying the following, amongst others, and I quote: Of critical importance, we want to draw the attention of the public to lack of willpower and of the impotence of the ANC Government in ensuring that police are capable of helping child victims.

Government efforts have amounted to a little more than ineffectual noisy gongs and clanging bells.

[Interjections.]

I can simply respond to these unfortunate utterances by alluding to the words of Shakespeare’s Macbeth by saying they are simply ``full of sound and fury signifying nothing’’.

As the Minister of Safety and Security has already responded to these accusations as they pertain to the police, let me confine myself to the role of the justice system and the efforts of Government towards enhancing the capacity of that system to deal with this challenge more effectively.

A key initiative by both the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the National Prosecuting Authority to address the area especially of sexual offences against women and children has been the launching and rolling out of specialised sexual offences courts. The intricate nature of sexual offences against women and children, particularly because of their intimate nature, requires magistrates and prosecutors to be especially sensitive to the needs of survivors of these crimes.

Moreover, the scientific and complex nature of the evidence needed to secure convictions requires all role-players to have specialised skills and expertise. Hence the establishment of these courts. Among the more essential requirements of these courts are a minimum of two dedicated and experienced prosecutors per court; dedicated and experienced magistrates; victim assistance services; case managers; a pool of intermediaries and counselling services; special courtrooms fully equipped with essential facilities such as closed circuit television sets; waiting rooms for children and adults away from the suspects; private consultation areas, and anatomical dolls to enable young children to testify in a manner appropriate to their age.

Twenty-nine of these courts have already been established to date and are currently functioning throughout the country. Eleven more are due to be launched by April this year. According to the statistics applied by the National Prosecuting Authority for the period January to December 2002, derived from 10 of these courts which are located in Parow, Cape Town and Wynberg in the Western Cape; Pretoria and Protea in Gauteng; Bloemfontein and Welkom in the Free State; Port Elizabeth in the Eastern Cape and Thohoyandou in the Northern Province, there were 1 711 cases finalised with full verdicts, of which 1 095 were convictions and the remaining 616 acquittals. In addition, the total number of cases withdrawn was 935, far less than the 1 711 that were finalised.

This is clear evidence that the system is working, and that a clear message is being sent to perpetrators of crimes against women and children that the vigilant eyes of the law are upon them, and that they will not be allowed to continue with their evil ways unchecked.

Allow me to reiterate the President’s call for communities to roll up their sleeves and participate in this collective effort to fight this scourge. Government alone cannot overcome the challenge. We all come from our respective families and communities from which these challenges arise, and are all, therefore, equally responsible and accountable in ensuring that, as people and as a nation, we isolate those amongst us who have become the rotten potatoes and resuscitate our family and social values.

Children play a pivotal role in perpetuating human existence. Without them humanity will simply cease to exist. They carry the values, traditions and human practices that are passed on from one generation to the next. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: There is a document that I am going to circulate to members of the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security. This document is going to indicate the real state of play in our police stations. I want to pick up on only a few of these police stations and areas because someone did refer to them.

The first case is that of Limpopo. Someone spoke about Limpopo in reference to a question that I had to respond to. In Limpopo, we have 90 police stations. Our contingent of members there is 9 028, made up of functional police members as well as civilians and reservists. There are four CP units. [Interjections.] There are four, and the total number of members in these units is, at the moment, 51. In future, we will have 146 members in these units. The 51 members have 18 vehicles available to them, but when we have 146 members, they will have 73 vehicles. You will see when you read this report that, in each case, there will be one vehicle for two members of these units.

The next point mentioned was the Western Cape. In the Western Cape, we have 136 police stations, and we have 12 205 members, including functional police officials, civilians and reservists. There are two CP units with 46 members based in Goodwood, Mitchells Plain and Southern Cape. We are going to push this number to 138. The 46 members are served by 24 vehicles, but when we have 138 members, there will be 69 vehicles. It is the same proportion - one vehicle to two members.

In Mpumalanga, there are 100 police stations with 6 383 members composed, as I have already indicated, of four CPUs with 39 members. In the future, there will be 94 members served by 47 vehicles.

This document, as I said, will be made available to members of the portfolio committee. The reason we are making this available to you as members of the portfolio committee is so that you can interact with the units where they are based, and check what the real situation is in these provinces in regard to this matter.

I owe Mr Waters an appointment. He wrote asking to see me, but at the time, it had already been indicated to me that we were going to have this debate. I suggested that my office should get back to him and indicate that I am ready to meet with him, but that we should meet after this debate. I do want to meet, because I want us to interact on the basis of the report that you have. [Applause.]

I find it rather strange that someone like the hon Paul Swart would come here and actually launch an attack on me. He says, firstly, that he wrote a letter and that I did not respond to the letter. He says that this is my character. Obviously, it’s informed by some attitude which I displayed at some point. I meet with the hon Swart. The hon Swart interacts with me on a number of issues. I don’t know about the letter that he is talking about. [Interjections.]

Secondly, they are talking about this report. I will tell you what happened here. They released this report to the media, and I got a copy of the report a week later. That is the position. [Interjections.]

Mrs S V KALYAN: I have a point of order.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, Minister! What is your point of order?

Mrs S V KALYAN: I rise on a point of order: An hon member on the other side called the hon Paul Swart a liar.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Is there any hon member …

Mrs S V KALYAN: I also have a second point of order.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: First, let us dispense with the first one. Was there any hon member who called the hon Swart a liar? [Interjections.]

Hon member, what is your second point of order? [Interjections.]

Mrs S V KALYAN: The second point of order is the persistence of certain members in this House to continuously meow at me whenever I stand up and make a point. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, we have a …

Mrs S V KALYAN: We have a ruling in this House on this, and I would like you to rule on that again. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Yes, there is a ruling in the House, and if anyone … [Interjections.] Order! Hon members, you are very free to make interjections, but when it comes to certain expressions, there are certain expressions which are very offensive in their very nature, and we have had a ruling on that. I think it is imperative that every single member of this House upholds the ruling in order that we can have a Parliament which is a dignified Parliament.

I cannot rule in general terms unless we know who the offending party was. [Interjections.] I would like to admonish you generally that it is unacceptable, and I would like you, therefore, to ensure that the proceedings in this House go along in a dignified manner.

Hon Minister, you may proceed.

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: All documents that I get at my office

• I am sure this is the same with every member here who has an office - will reflect a date on which those documents were received. I will show you the date when we meet, Mr Waters, on which we received the document. I still want to contend that that document was given to me later than it was released to the media. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

                      GEOSCIENCE AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

There was no debate.

Bill read a second time.

The House adjourned at 18:54. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                        MONDAY, 10 MARCH 2003

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. Introduction of Bills:

 (1)    The Minister for Safety and Security:


     (i)     Anti-Terrorism Bill [B 12 - 2003] (National Assembly -  sec
          75) [Explanatory summary of  Bill  and  prior  notice  of  its
          introduction published in Government Gazette No  24076  of  15
          November 2002.]


     Introduction and referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM)  for
     classification in terms of Joint Rule 160 on 10 March 2003.


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

National Assembly:

1. Referrals of Bills to committees:

 (1)    The Child Justice Bill [B 49 - 2002] (National  Assembly  -  sec
     75), that was introduced and referred to  the  Portfolio  Committee
     on Justice and Constitutional  Development  for  consideration  and
     report on 13 September 2002, is now also referred to the -


     (a)     Portfolio Committee on Social Development;
     (b)     Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security;
     (c)     Portfolio Committee on Education;
     (d)     Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services; and
     (e)     Joint Monitoring Committee on  Improvement  of  Quality  of
          Life and Status of Children, Youth and Disabled Persons.


     The Portfolio Committee on Justice and  Constitutional  Development
     to  report  after  having   conferred   with   the   abovementioned
     committees.


 (2)    The Compulsory HIV Testing of Alleged Sexual Offenders  Bill  [B
     10 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), introduced on 26  February
     2003, is  referred  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Justice  and
     Constitutional Development, the Portfolio Committee on  Safety  and
     Security,  the  Portfolio  Committee  on  Health  and   the   Joint
     Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life  and  Status
     of Women. The Portfolio Committee  on  Justice  and  Constitutional
     Development  to  report  after  having  conferred  with  the  other
     committees mentioned above.

1. Referrals of tabled papers to committees:

 (1)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Provincial and Local Government. The Report of the  Auditor-General
     is referred to  the  Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts  for
     consideration and report.


     Report and Financial Statements of the Municipal Demarcation  Board
     for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on  the
     Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 208-2002].


 (2)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Provincial and Local Government:


     Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Municipal  Infrastructure
     Investment Unit for 2001-2002.


 (3)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio  Comittee  on
     Finance:


     (a)     Thirty-ninth Annual Report of  the  Registrar  of  Friendly
          Societies for 2001.


     (b)     Report of the Public  Investment  Commissioners  for  2001-
          2002 [RP 214-2002].
     (c)      Statement  of  the  National  Revenue,   Expenditure   and
          Borrowing as at 31 October 2002.


     (d)     Proclamation No R 81 published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          24075 dated 15 November 2002: Commencement  of  the  Financial
          Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, 2002  (Act  No  37  of
          2002).


     (e)     Proclamation No R 85 published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          24143 dated 13 December 2002: Commencement of  section  51(1),
          made in terms of section 51(2) of the Revenue  Laws  Amendment
          Act, 2001 (Act No 19 of 2001).


     (f)      Government  Notice  No  R  1595  published  in  Government
          Gazette No 24176 dated 20 December 2002: Regulations in  terms
          of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 2001 (Act No  38  of
          2001).


     (g)      Government  Notice  No  R  1464  published  in  Government
          Gazette  No  24088  dated  22  November  2002:  Amendment   of
          Regulations in terms of section 90 of the Banks Act, 1990 (Act
          No 94 of 1990).


     (h)      Government  Notice  No  R  1465  published  in  Government
          Gazette  No  24088  dated  22  November  2002:  Amendment   of
          Regulations in terms of section 90 of the Banks Act, 1990 (Act
          No 94 of 1990).


     (i)     Government Notice No 1511 published in  Government  Gazette
          No 24131 dated 29 November 2002: Approval  of  allocations  in
          terms of section 9(1) of the Division  of  Revenue  Act,  2002
          (Act No 5 of 2002).


     (j)     Government Notice No 1513 published in  Government  Gazette
          No 24132 dated 29 November 2002:  Statement  of  the  National
          Revenue, Expenditure and Borrowing as at 31 October  2002,  in
          terms of section 32 of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999
          (Act No 1 of 1999).


     (k)     Government Notice No 3464 published in  Government  Gazette
          No 24220 dated 30 December 2002:  Statement  of  the  National
          Revenue, Expenditure and Borrowing as at 30 November 2002,  in
          terms of Adjustments Appropriation Act, 2002  (Act  No  73  of
          2002).


     (l)     Resolutions of the Standing Committee  on  Public  Accounts
          for  2002  and  replies  thereto  obtained  by  the   National
          Treasury:  Twelfth,  Fourteenth,   Nineteenth,   Twenty-sixth,
          Twenty-seventh,   Twenty-eighth,   Thirtieth,   Thirty-second,
          Thirty-third,   Thirty-fourth,   Thirty-sixth,   Thirty-eighth
          reports, 2002.


 (4)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Health:
     (a)     Exchange of Notes between the Republic of South Africa  and
          Japan on Cooperation in  KwaZulu-Natal,  tabled  in  terms  of
          section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (b)     Memorandum of Understanding between the Republic  of  South
          Africa and the Government of the Italian Republic in the field
          of Health in Gauteng Province,  tabled  in  terms  of  section
          231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (c)     Memorandum of Understanding between the Government  of  the
          Republic of South Africa and the  Government  of  the  Italian
          Republic in the field of  Health  in  KwaZulu-Natal  Province,
          tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (d)     Agreement between the Government of the Republic  of  South
          Africa and the Government of the Federal Republic  of  Nigeria
          on Cooperation in the field of Health  and  Medical  Sciences,
          tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (e)     Basic Agreement between the Government of the  Republic  of
          South  Africa  and  the  World  Health  Organization  for  the
          establishment of  Technical  Advisory  Cooperation  Relations,
          tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (f)      Declaration  of  Intent  between  the  Government  of  the
          Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
          Rwanda on Institutional Cooperation in the  field  of  Health,
          tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (g)      Declaration  of  Intent  between  the  Government  of  the
          Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
          Angola on Cooperation in the field of Health, tabled in  terms
          of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (h)      Declaration  of  Intent  between  the  Government  of  the
          Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
          Senegal on Cooperation in the field of Health, tabled in terms
          of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


 (5)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Environmental Affairs and Tourism.  The  Reports  of  the  Auditor-
     General are referred to the Standing Committee on  Public  Accounts
     for consideration and report:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of the  National  Botanical
          Institute for 2001-2002, including the Report of the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of South  African  National
          Parks for 2001-2002, including  the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


 (6)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Environmental Affairs and Tourism for consideration and report:


     (a)     Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses  and  Petrels,
          tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.


     (b)     Stockholm  Convention  on  Persistant  Organic  Pollutants,
          tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.


 (7)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Safety and Security.


     Regulation No R 721 published in Government Gazette No 23443  dated
     24 May 2002: Regulations tabled in terms of section  24(1)  of  the
     South African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No 68 of 1995)


 (8)     The  following  paper  is  referred  to  the  Joint  Monitoring
     Committee  on  Improvement  of  Quality  of  Life  and  Status   of
     Children, Youth and Disabled Persons and to the Standing  Committee
     on Public Accounts for consideration:


     Letter dated 29 October 2002 from the Minister  in  the  Presidency
     to the Speaker, tabled in terms of section 65(2)(a) of  the  Public
     Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1  of  1999),  explaining  the
     delay in the tabling of the Annual Report and Financial  Statements
     for the Presidency and the National Youth Commission.
 (9)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Arts,  Culture,  Science  and  Technology  and  to   the   Standing
     Committee on Public Accounts for consideration:


     Letter dated 29 November 2002 from the Minister of  Arts,  Culture,
     Science and Technology to the Speaker, tabled in terms  of  section
     65(2)(a) of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act  No  1  of
     1999).


 (10)The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on Trade
     and Industry and to the Standing Committee on Public  Accounts  for
     consideration:


     Letter dated 3  December  2002  from  the  Minister  of  Trade  and
     Industry to the Speaker, tabled in terms  of  section  65(2)(a)  of
     the Public Finance  Management  Act,  1999  (Act  No  1  of  1999),
     explaining the delay in the tabling of the Annual  Report  for  the
     Department of Trade and Industry.


 (11)The following paper is  referred  to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Transport:


     Report of the  Road  Accident  Fund  Commission  appointed  by  the
     President to inquire into, and make  recommendations  regarding,  a
     system for the payment of compensation or benefits in the event  of
     the injury or death of persons in road accidents  -  Volumes  1,  2
     and 3.


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


     Agreement between the Government of the Republic  of  South  Africa
     and  the  Government  of  the  Federal  Republic  of   Nigeria   on
     Immigration Matters, tabled in  terms  of  section  231(3)  of  the
     Constitution, 1996.


 (13)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Public Enterprises:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of Alexkor Limited for  the
          year ended 30 June 2002.


     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of Alexkor Limited for  the
          year ended 30 June 2001.


     (c)     Report and Financial Statements  of  Aventura  Limited  for
          2000-2001.


 (14)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Water Affairs and Forestry:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of the Albany  Coast  Water
          for the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (b)     Report and Financial Statements of the  Amatola  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (c)     Report and Financial Statements of the Botshelo  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (d)     Report and Financial Statements of the Ikangala  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (e)     Report and Financial Statements of the Magalies  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (f)     Report and Financial Statements of the Mhlathuze Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (g)     Report and Financial Statements of the Overberg  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (h)     Report and Financial Statements  of  the  Pelladrift  Water
          for the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (i)     Report and Financial Statements of the Sedibeng  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (j)     Report and Financial Statements of the Bloem Water for  the
          year ended 30 June 2002.


     (k)     Report and Financial Statements of the  Namaqua  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


     (l)     Report and Financial Statements of the Rand Water  for  the
          year ended 30 June 2002.


     (m)     Report and Financial Statements of the Bushbuckridge  Water
          for the year ended 30 June 2001.


     (n)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Umgeni  Water  for
          the year ended 30 June 2002.


 (15)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Trade and Industry:


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Board  on  Tariffs
          and Trade for the period 1 January 2001 to 31 March 2002.


     (b)      Report  of  the  South  African  Council  for   the   Non-
          Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction for the period  1
          July 1999 to June 2000.


     (c)     Report and Financial Statements  of  Trade  and  Investment
          South Africa for 2001-2002.


 (16)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development:


     Interim Report of the Special Investigating Unit for the  period  1
     April 2002 to 30 September 2002.


 (17)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Sport and Recreation  and  to  the  Standing  Committee  on  Public
     Accounts for consideration:


     Letter dated 23  January  2003  from  the  Minister  of  Sport  and
     Recreation to the Speaker, tabled in terms of section  65(2)(a)  of
     the Public Finance  Management  Act,  1999  (Act  No  1  of  1999),
     explaining the delay in the tabling of the  Annual  Report  of  the
     South African Sports Commission.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly:

Papers:

1. The Speaker:

 Letter dated 5 March  2003  from  the  Minister  of  Transport  to  the
 Speaker, tabled in terms of section  65(2)(a)  of  the  Public  Finance
 Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999), explaining the  delay  in  the
 tabling of the following annual reports:


     Department of Transport


     A large volume of audit evidence was requested from the  Department
     on 11 July 2002 and documents were supplied  for  audit  until  the
     auditors finalised their audit.


     A first draft Audit Report was only received on 22 August 2002  and
     discussed at an Audit Committee meeting on 27 August 2002.  Because
     the Audit Report  contained  a  qualification  regarding  the  late
     submission  of  supporting  audit  evidence,  the  Audit  Committee
     decided that the Department should rather attempt  to  remove  this
     qualification and submit its Annual Report late than to accept  the
     qualification, because the Department was of the opinion  that  the
     evidence was indeed supplied during the audit.


     The Department then approved that the audit  work  should  continue
     as an attempt to resolve  the  qualification  in  the  draft  Audit
     Report. The audit was continued and resulted in  the  qualification
     being removed from the Audit Report.


     Cross Border Road Transport Agency


     The  financial  statements  were  supplied  on  31  May  2002,  but
     incorrect opening balances, emanating from 1998/99,  were  not  yet
     resolved and the financial statements did  not  fully  comply  with
     Generally Accepted Accounting Practice.


     An agreement was reached between the Agency and the Office  of  the
     Auditor-General  that  amended  financial   statements   would   be
     supplied for audit on 26 September 2002. This  caused  a  delay  in
     the  finalisation  of  the  audit  and  Annual  Report  within  the
     prescribed timeframes.


     Road Accident Fund


     The provision for outstanding claims has a material impact  on  the
     financial statements of the Road Accident Fund. The  Road  Accident
     Fund's internal actuary calculated  a  provision  for  the  2001/02
     financial statements, which would have  been  substantiated  by  an
     external report at a later stage. Due to  the  materiality  of  the
     provision,  the  Office  of  the  Auditor-General  insisted  on   a
     comprehensive  actuarial  report  from  external  actuaries  before
     finalising their audit. This report was only received on 16  August
     2002 and resulted in the late finalisation of the audit.


     South African Maritime Safety Authority


     In terms of section 55(b) of the Public Finance Management Act  the
     Accounting Authority must  approve  the  financial  statements.  No
     Board  meetings  were  however  held  to  approve   the   financial
     statements within the prescribed time frames.


     The Audit Management letter was only received on 8 August 2002  and
     the  first  draft  Audit  Report  on  16  August  2002.  The  Audit
     Committee took a  resolution  on  9  September  2002  that  certain
     issues be further investigated and cleared before the audit  report
     is finalised.


     S A National Roads Agency Ltd


     Information regarding  a  long-term  forecast  of  future  expected
     revenues and expenditures for the LSR (Loan Supported  by  Revenue)
     calculations, was only supplied for  audit  on  8  September  2002.
     Although  this  is  required  before  an  audit  opinion   can   be
     expressed, the information forms no part of the accounting  records
     and does not represent actual transactions.


     The Audit Management letter was only received  on  16  August  2002
     and a report on the review of the  Information  Technology  General
     Environment was only issued on 10 August 2002.  These  reports  had
     to be responded to before the audit could be finalised and  led  to
     the delay in finalising the audit.


     Urban Transport Fund


     The financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2001  did  not
     comply with Generally Accepted Accounting  Practice  and  contained
     inconsistencies with the financial statements of previous years.


     A number of qualifications appeared in the draft Audit  Report  for
     the  year  ended  31  March  2001.  It   was   found   that   these
     qualifications were as a result of poor drafting of  the  financial
     statements and opening balances that were  not  correctly  captured
     in the ledger when the Urban Transport Fund  started  its  seperate
     accounting system with effect from 1 April 2000.


     The errors on the  financial  statements  were  corrected  and  the
     first draft Annual Report of the  Urban  Transport  Fund  for  both
     2001 and 2002, excluding the Audit Reports, were  supplied  to  the
     auditors on 19 September 2002 to  enable  them  to  finalise  their
     audits for both years.

1. The Acting Minister of Transport:

 Report  to  the  National  Assembly  on  the  National  Land  Transport
 Transition Act, 2000 (NLTTA).


 Copies of the report is available at the Office of the Clerk of  Papers
 on request.
                       TUESDAY, 11 MARCH 2003

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly:

1. Referrals of tabled papers to committees:

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


     (a)     Report and Financial Statements of  the  Universal  Service
          Agency for 2001-2002, including the  Report  of  the  Auditor-
          General on the Financial Statements of the  Universal  Service
          Agency for 2001-2002 and the Report of the Auditor-General  on
          the Financial Statements of the  Universal  Service  Fund  for
          2001-2002.


     (b)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  Department  of
          Communications for 2001-2002,  including  the  Report  of  the
          Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of the  Department
          of Communications for 2001-2002.


 (2)    The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Communications and to the Standing  Committee  on  Public  Accounts
     for consideration:


     Letter from the  Minister  of  Communications,  dated  26  February
     2003, tabled in terms of section 65(2)(a)  of  the  Public  Finance
     Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999), explaining the  delays  in
     the  tabling  of  the  Reports  and  Financial  Statements  of  the
     Department of Communications and the Universal Service Agency.


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


     Report and Financial Statements of  Vote  No  30  -  Department  of
     Public Works for 2001-2002, including the Report  of  the  Auditor-
     General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.


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


     Report and Financial Statements of Vote No 13  -  Statistics  South
     Africa for 2001-2002, including the Report of  the  Auditor-General
     on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 148-2002].


 (5)    The following paper is referred to  the  Standing  Committee  on
     Public Accounts for consideration and to  the  Portfolio  Committee
     on Finance for information:


     Report of the Office  of  the  Auditor-General  on  the  Budget  of
     Income and Expenditure for 2003-2004 [RP 11-2003].


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


     A list of approved early naturalisation applications  in  terms  of
     section 5(9) of the South African Citizenship Act, 1995 (Act No  88
     of 1995).


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


     Report of the Regulating Committee for Airports  Company  of  South
     Africa and the Air Traffic and Navigation Services Company Ltd  for
     2001-2002, established in terms  of  section  11  of  the  Airports
     Company Act, 1993 (Act No 44 of 1993).
 (8)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development:


     (a)     Proclamation No R 6  published  in  Government  Gazette  No
          24351 dated 7 February 2003: Commencement of sections 8 to 13,
          15 to 22 and 24 to 28 of the Debt Collectors Act, 1998 (Act No
          114 of 1998).


     (b)     Government Notice No R 185 published in Government  Gazette
          No 24351 dated 7 February 2003: Regulations made in  terms  of
          section 23 of the Debt Collectors Act, 1998  (Act  No  114  of
          1998).


     (c)     Government Notice No R 186 published in Government  Gazette
          No 24351 dated 7 February 2003: Determination of date for  the
          purposes of section 8(1), made in terms of the Debt Collectors
          Act, 1998 (Act No 114 of 1998).
     (d)     Government Notice No R 239 published in Government  Gazette
          No 24393 dated 14 February 2003: Determination of amounts  for
          the purposes of certain provisions of the  Criminal  Procedure
          Act, 1977 (Act No 51 of 1977) made in terms of the Act.


 (9)    The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Finance for consideration and report:


     (a)     The Budget Speech of the Minister of Finance - 26  February
          2003 [RP 22-2003].


     (b)     Estimate of National Revenue for 2003 [RP 19-2003].


     (c)     Taxation Proposals: Income Tax.


     (d)     Division of Revenue Bill [B 9 - 2003], tabled in  terms  of
          section 10(1) of the Intergovernmental Fiscal  Relations  Act,
          1997 (Act No 97 of 1997).


     (e)     Budget Review 2003 [RP 21-2003].


     (f)      Taxation  proposals  in  respect  of  customs  and  excise
          duties; and


     (g)     "Annexure  E:  Memorandum  to  accompany  the  Division  of
          Revenue Bill",  tabled  in  terms  of  section  10(5)  of  the
          Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act, 1997  (Act  No  97  of
          1997).


     (h)     Appropriation Bill [B 8 - 2003].


     (i)     Estimate of National Expenditure 2003 [RP 20-2003].


 (10)   The following  papers  are  referred  to  the  Joint  Monitoring
     Committee  on  Improvement  of  Quality  of  Life  and  Status   of
     Children, Youth and Disabled Persons and to the Standing  Committee
     on Public Accounts for consideration:


     (a)     The Program  on  the  Office  on  the  Status  of  Disabled
          Persons which is part of Vote No 1 - "The Presidency".


     (b)     The Program on the Office on the Rights of the Child  which
          is part of Vote No 1 - "The Presidency".


     (c)     Program 5 - National Youth  Commission  which  is  part  of
          Vote No 1 - "The Presidency".


 (11)    The  following  paper  is  referred  to  the  Joint  Monitoring
     Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life  and  Status  of  Women
     and  to   the   Standing   Committee   on   Public   Accounts   for
     consideration:


     The Program on the Office on the Status of Women which is  part  of
     Vote No 1 - "The Presidency".
 (12)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Foreign Affairs:


     Memorandum on Vote No 3 - "Foreign Affairs", Main Estimates,  2003-
     2004.


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


     Memorandum on Vote No 4 - "Home  Affairs",  Main  Estimates,  2003-
     2004.


 (14)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Provincial and Local Government:


     Memorandum on Vote No 5 - "Provincial and Local  Government",  Main
     Estimates, 2003-2004.


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


     Memorandum on Vote No 6 - "Public  Works",  Main  Estimates,  2003-
     2004.


 (16)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Communications:


     (a)     Memorandum on Vote No 7 -  "Government  Communications  and
          Information System", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


     (b)      Memorandum  on  Vote  No  27  -   "Communications",   Main
          Estimates, 2003-2004.


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


     (a)     Memorandum  on  Vote  No  8  -  "National  Treasury",  Main
          Estimates, 2003-2004.


     (b)     Memorandum on Vote No 13 - "Statistics South Africa",  Main
          Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (18)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Public Enterprises:


     Memorandum on Vote No 9 -  "Public  Enterprises",  Main  Estimates,
     2003-2004.


 (19)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Public Service and Administration:


     (a)      Memorandum  on  Vote  No  10   -   "Public   Service   and
          Administration", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


     (b)     Memorandum on Vote No 11  -  "Public  Service  Commission",
          Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


     (c)     Memorandum on  Vote  No  12  -  "South  African  Management
          Development Institute", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


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


     (a)     Memorandum on  Vote  No  14  -  "Arts  and  Culture",  Main
          Estimates, 2003-2004.


     (b)     Memorandum on Vote No 18 - "Science and  Technology",  Main
          Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (21)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Education:


     Memorandum on Vote No 15 - "Education", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (22)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Health:


     Memorandum on Vote No 16 - "Health", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (23)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Labour:
     Memorandum on Vote No 17 - "Labour", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (24)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Social Development:


     Memorandum on Vote No 19 - "Social  Development",  Main  Estimates,
     2003-2004.


 (25)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Sport and Recreation:


     Memorandum on Vote No 20 - "Sport  and  Recreation  South  Africa",
     Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (26)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Correctional Services:


     Memorandum  on  Vote  No  21  -   "Correctional   Services",   Main
     Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (27)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Defence:


     Memorandum on Vote No 22 - "Defence", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (28)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Safety and Security:


     Memorandum on Vote No 25 - "Safety and Security",  Main  Estimates,
     2003-2004.


 (29)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Justice and Constitutional Development:


     Memorandum  on  Vote  No   24   -   "Justice   and   Constitutional
     Development", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (30)   The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee  on
     Agriculture and Land Affairs:


     (a)     Memorandum on Vote No 26 - "Agriculture",  Main  Estimates,
          2003-2004.


     (b)     Memorandum on Vote No 30 - "Land Affairs", Main  Estimates,
          2003-2004.


 (31)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Environmental Affairs and Tourism:


     Memorandum on Vote No 28 -  "Environmental  Affairs  and  Tourism",
     Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (32)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Housing:


     Memorandum on Vote No 29 - "Housing", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (33)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Minerals and Energy:


     Memorandum on Vote No 31 - "Minerals and Energy",  Main  Estimates,
     2003-2004.


 (34)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Trade and Industry:


     Memorandum on Vote No 32 - "Trade and  Industry",  Main  Estimates,
     2003-2004.


 (35)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Transport:


     Memorandum on Vote No 33 - "Transport", Main Estimates, 2003-2004.


 (36)   The following paper is referred to the  Portfolio  Committee  on
     Water Affairs and Forestry:


     Memorandum on Vote No 34  -  "Water  Affairs  and  Forestry",  Main
     Estimates, 2003-2004.

                      WEDNESDAY, 12 MARCH 2003

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Minister in The Presidency on 10 January 2003 submitted a letter, requesting Parliament to advise the President on the appointment of Commissioners to serve on the National Youth Commission as envisaged in section 4 of the National Youth Commission Act, 1996 (Act No 19 of 1996).

   Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent:

 (1)    Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 12 March 2003:


     (i)     Local Government:  Municipal  Structures  Second  Amendment
          Bill [B 68B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75).

National Assembly:

1. The President has in terms of section 91(3)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No 108 of 1996), appointed Brigitte Sylvia Mabandla as Minister of Housing with effect from 25 February 2003.

   Membership of Assembly:

 (a)    The following member vacated his seat in the  National  Assembly
     with effect from 5 March 2003:


     Yengeni, T S.


 (b)    The vacancy which occurred owing to Mr J H Slabbert vacating his
     seat with effect from 7 March 2003, has  been  filled  with  effect
     from 7 March 2003 by the nomination of Mr B C Ngiba.


 (c)    The vacancy which occurred owing to Mr M A  Mzizi  vacating  his
     seat with effect from 7 March 2003, has  been  filled  with  effect
     from 7 March 2003 by the nomination of Mr T Shabalala.


 (d)    The vacancy which occurred owing to Mr H J Bekker  vacating  his
     seat with effect from 7 March 2003, has  been  filled  with  effect
     from 7 March 2003 by the nomination of Ms T E Millen.