National Assembly - 25 March 2003
TUESDAY, 25 MARCH 2003 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:02.
The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! I have to announce changes in party membership that have occurred in terms of Schedule 6A to the Constitution.
Mr D G Mkono has left the United Democratic Movement and joined the African National Congress on 24 March 2003. [Applause.]
The following members have left the the New National Party and joined the Democratic Alliance: Mrs S M Camerer, Mr J W le Roux, Mr C M Morkel, Mr A H Nel, Mr I J Pretorius, Dr P J Rabie, Mr C R Redcliffe and Mr F J van Deventer on 24 March, and Mr W P Doman on 25 March 2003. [Applause.] Ms T E Millin has left the Inkatha Freedom Party on 25 March 2003 and formed a new party, namely the African Independent Movement. [Interjections.]
Mr C Aucamp has left the Afrikaner-Eenheidsbeweging on 25 March 2003, and has become a member of a party called National Action. [Interjections.]
The Assembly will only adapt its operations and functioning at the close of the window period. In the interim, receiving parties must make their own arrangements to accommodate new members. Any specific concerns that parties may have or problems they may encounter should be raised with me.
We shall now proceed with notices of motion. Does any member wish to give notice of a motion?
Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: Yes?
Dr C P MULDER: I would like to enquire whether it is in order, in terms of the Rules of the House, that members of the DA, under the leadership of Mrs Camerer, are seated amongst the members of the DP, under the leadership of Mr Tony Leon. Normally we have separate seating arrangements for different parties. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! As I indicated, at the end of the window period we will be looking at the seating arrangements. Until then, whoever the receiving parties are, or wherever people can find hospitality, they should seek and find it. [Applause.]
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr D H M GIBSON: Madam Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move -
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) the hon Winnie Madikizela-Mandela has failed to present herself
for the purpose of being disciplined by the Speaker; and
(b) the decision of the House to reprimand and discipline the
honourable member was taken last year and that she is in
contempt of the House; and
(2) resolves that the hon Madikizela-Mandela be given one further day within which to attend Parliament, failing which her party should be requested to remove her as an MP.
Mr J SCHIPPERS: Madam Speaker, I give notice that I shall move:
That the House discuss the necessity of introducing the death penalty. Thank you. [Interjections.]
SUCCESSFUL HOSTING BY SOUTH AFRICA
OF ICC CRICKET WORLD CUP
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) South Africa has successfully hosted the Cricket World Cup,
which officially ended on Sunday, 23 March 2003; and
(b) the United Cricket Board, Government, Business, all South
Africans and countless volunteers contributed to ensuring that
this World Cup was a success; and
(2) believes that this international event hosted by South Africa, with certain games played in Zimbabwe and Kenya, attracted the attention of millions of viewers across the world, further confirming the status of South Africa as a safe and trusted venue for future world events;
(3) congratulates -
(a) the newly crowned Cricket World Cup champions, Australia, on
their victory over India in the Cup Final on Sunday; and
(b) the International Cricket Council in organising the most
successful Cricket World Cup.
Agreed to.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
(Announcement)
The SPEAKER: Order! Only members of the parties I will call out will be allowed to make statements.
TUBERCULOSIS AWARENESS CAMPAIGN
(Member's Statement)
Ms P TSHWETE (ANC): Madam Speaker, despite tuberculosis being a curable disease, over 5 000 people are killed by it each day. South Africa has the seventh highest infection rate in the world with 243 306 infections. It is due to this sharp increase in TB infections that our Department of Health joined forces with the World Health Organisation, NGOs and CBOs to launch the ``Dots cured me, it will cure you too’’ awareness campaign on World Tuberculosis Day, yesterday, 24 March 2003.
Through this campaign, we are especially encouraging those suffering from TB, firstly, to attend primary health care clinics that this Government has established in most communities around the country; and, secondly, to finish their treatment. It is especially developing countries including ours that are hard hit by poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, overcrowding and a high incidence of HIV/Aids that contribute to the spread of TB. Hence, as the ANC, we advocate a comprehensive approach that strengthens our poverty alleviation programmes as part of the treatment of TB and related diseases.
We call on members of Parliament and the public at large to encourage people to observe their treatment, because TB is curable. [Applause.]
BY-ELECTION VICTORY FOR DA
(Member's Statement)
Mr J SELFE (DA): Madam Speaker, the five by-elections contested by the DA last week were a defining test of opposition support in the run-up to the 2004 elections.
The DA won all five by-elections. [Applause.] The New NP contested only the Swellendam by-election. The New NP came a dismal third in this by-election, proving that it has been destroyed as an electoral force in South Africa, because it left the DA and entered into an alliance with the ANC.
In the by-election in Pretoria, the DA soundly beat the FF and the CP, proving that the DA is overwhelmingly the party of choice of Afrikaans- speaking South Africans. [Interjections.]
The DA made good progress against the ANC, both in Phalaborwa and Vryheid, where the ANC polled only 8 votes, compared with the 703 for the DA. [Interjections.] It is clear that the voters support the DA’s principled opposition to the ANC. They reject the New NP’s co-option by the ANC, and the narrow option of the far right. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
MINERAL AND PETROLEUM ROYALTY BILL
(Member's Statement)
Mr E J LUCAS (IFP): Madam Speaker, Parliament passed the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Bill in June 2002, and the President signed it on 3 October 2002. The Act, which will fundamentally change the mining landscape in South Africa, could, however, not be implemented immediately owing to the requirement that a money Bill had to first be passed by the legislature.
After a considerable delay, the Minister of Finance made the Mineral and Petroleum Royalty Bill public on 20 March 2003. In essence, the Bill introduces a royalty regime for mining that imposes a quarterly charge on holders of mineral rights for the extraction and transfer of South African mineral resources. The Minister also announced that approximately four weeks would be allowed for public comment on the draft money Bill.
Although we feel that more time should be made available for public comment, the IFP wants to urge all relevant stakeholders to engage the national Treasury with immediate effect so that their comments and inputs are taken into account in the final version of the Bill that will be tabled in Parliament.
In doing so, we also want to remind stakeholders that Parliament does not have the power to amend a money Bill once it has been tabled. We can either accept or reject it, but we can make no changes to it. It is therefore vital that inputs be made at the earliest possible time and definitely before tabling. Thank you.
CAPE METRO LISTENING CAMPAIGN SUCCESS
(Member's Statement)
Mr D A A OLIFANT (ANC): Madam Speaker, the ANC is taking bold steps towards giving life to the principle of a people-centred government, which is the foundation of our democracy. Let me quote few examples. On 1 April 2003, the Cape Town Metropolitan Council will be hosting the last leg of the listening campaign, which started on March 5 with the mayor and Exco visiting different areas in Cape Town. The overwhelming response towards this campaign shows that the general public of Cape Town is beginning to feel part of their municipality because, for the first time, they have an opportunity directly to interact with the City Council on issues of service delivery.
The Eastern Cape government is planning an Exco outreach programme, starting from March 31 and running until April 4, in which the Government will be talking to the people of the Lusikisiki district and answering questions on issues of delivery.
Similar programmes are happening in Gauteng through the Government’s roving executive programme, and in the Northern Cape this has been going on for a few years with huge success. These listening-to-the-people sessions are aimed mainly at the people in order for them to have a direct say in the running of the Government and their country. I thank you. [Applause.]
NEW NP ONCE AGAIN DOES THE RIGHT THING
(Member's Statement) Dr B L GELDENHUYS (Nuwe NP): Mevrou die Speaker, die Nuwe NP-lede wat oorgeloop het na die DP is 'n tydelike terugslag vir die Nuwe NP, maar as die agb leier van die DP dink dit is 'n nekslag, maak hy die fout van sy lewe. Dit sal nie die eerste keer wees dat die Nuwe NP 'n prys betaal omdat hy die regte ding doen nie.
Toe die ou NP in 1992 besluit het om ‘n beleid van magsdeling te aanvaar, het die party geskeur, maar dit was die regte ding om te doen. Toe die ou NP in 1990 besluit het om ‘n ooreenkoms met die ANC aan te gaan oor Suid- Afrika se toekoms, het baie kiesers in 1999 die rug op die Nuwe NP gekeer omdat hy dan kwansuis die mense by Kodesa sou uitverkoop het, maar dit was die regte ding om te doen. Toe die Nuwe NP nou weer besluit het om saam met die ANC te werk, in belang van die mense wat hy verteenwoordig en in belang van politieke versoening, het ‘n paar van sy LPs oorgeloop na die DP toe, maar weer was dit die regte ding om te doen. [Applous.]
Die Nuwe NP sal aanhou om die boodskap van samewerkende regering met entoesiasme uit te dra, want dit is die regte ding om te doen. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.) [Dr B L GELDENHUYS (New NP): Madam Speaker, the New NP members who crossed over to the DP have caused a temporary setback for the NP, but if the hon leader of the DP thinks that this is a knock-out blow, he is making the mistake of his life. It would not be the first time that the New NP has to pay a price for doing the right thing.
When the old NP decided to adopt a policy of power-sharing in 1992 the party was split, but it was the right thing to do. When the old NP decided to enter into an agreement on the future of South Africa with the ANC in 1990, a lot of voters turned their backs on the New NP in 1999, because they had supposedly sold out the people at Codesa, but it was the right thing to do. When the New NP recently again decided to co-operate with the ANC in the interests of the people it represented and in the interests of political reconciliation, a few of its MPs crossed over to the DP, but once more it was the right thing to do.
The New NP will continue to advocate with enthusiasm the message of co- operative governance, because it is the right thing to do. [Applause.]]
REMUNERATION OF VOLUNTEERS
(Member's Statement)
Mr J T MASEKA (UDM): Madam Speaker, hon members, volunteers are playing a vital role in rendering important services in some government departments that are heavily understaffed. Some of these volunteers have been volunteering for a long period of time - up to four years - without any form of remuneration whatsoever. These volunteers have to travel long distances to and from places where they render services with transport money provided by families or relatives. They are expected to be clean and presentable at all times, even though they are not remunerated.
When posts occur in these departments they are not even considered for employment, even if they have the necessary experience for the post. However, a person who has no working experience is employed just because he or she has academic qualifications or is known by someone in a senior position in that department. I suggest that this issue of remuneration and possible employment of these valuable volunteers be seriously considered by all departments that are benefiting from the services of these volunteers. I thank you.
COUP IN CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC
(Member's Statement)
Mr G P MNGOMEZULU (ANC): Madam Speaker, on 1 March 2003 a coup d’état took place in the Central African Republic. This coup d’état was organised by the reactionary rebel forces of Francois Bozize, who immediately after the coup declared himself the head of state of that country.
Bozize is the Central Republic’s former chief of staff who organised two unsuccessful coups between 2001 and 2002 to overthrow the democratically elected government of President Ange-Felix Patasse.
In keeping with the decisions and declarations adopted by the Algiers and Lomé Summits and the provisions of the Constitutive Act of the African Union, we wish to unequivocally reject, condemn and denounce in the strongest possible terms the unconstitutional means by which a regime change took place in that country.
As South Africa plays a leading role in dealing with global issues such as good governance, human rights, democracy, peacekeeping and peace building, we wish to applaud the Department of Foreign Affairs for adding its voice to the worldwide condemnation of the unconstitutional transfer of power in the Central African Republic. I thank you. [Applause.]
FF OPPOSED TO FLOOR-CROSSING
(Member's Statement)
Dr P W A MULDER (VF): Mevrou die Speaker, die VF het hom in hierdie Raad teen die oorloopwetgewing uitgespreek en het ook daarteen gestem. Die vraag is waarom. Omdat ons glo dat dit ondemokratiese wetgewing is en die kiesers se wense ignoreer.
Ons glo selfs dat dit gevaarlik kan wees en onstabiliteit in Suid-Afrika kan bring. Jy kan ten gunste van oorloop argumenteer in ‘n kiesafdelingstelsel, waar die keisers vir ‘n spesifieke kandidaat stem, soos voor 1994. Jy kan nie ten gunste van oorloop argumenteer in ‘n proporsionele stelsel nie, waar die kiesers vir ‘n betrokke politieke party stem. Die persentasie steun wat die politieke party by die kiesers kry, is ook in ‘n presiese verhouding van die hoeveelheid verkose lede wat in hierdie Parlement of ander wetgewers sal sit. Die oorloop van lede verander hierdie verhouding.
In KwaZulu-Natal, byvoorbeeld, het die kiesers gestem dat die ANC nie die provinsie regeer nie, maar wel die IVP. Oorloop maak dit nou moontlik in daardie provinsie met sy geweldsgeskiedenis dat die ANC dalk mag regeer sonder dat daar ‘n verkiesing was.
In 1999 het die kiesers gestem dat die ANC nie ‘n twee-derde meerderheid kry in hierdie Raad nie. Met die oorloop van lede na die ANC kry die ANC nou ‘n twee-derde meerderheid, waarmee verskanste artikels in die Grondwet verander kan word. Dit is nou moontlik sonder dat daar ‘n verkiesing was.
Ons het selfs nou partye in hierdie Parlement wat nog nooit aan ‘n verkiesing deelgeneem het nie. Daarom sê die VF dat oorloop ondemokraties en selfs gevaarlik is in die Suid-Afrikaanse situasie. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER (FF): Madam Speaker, the FF has expressed itself in this House against the floor-crossing legislation and also voted against it. The question is why. Because we believe that it is undemocratic legislation and that it ignores the wishes of the voters.
We even believe that it could be dangerous and bring instability to South Africa. One could be in favour of crossing the floor in a constituency system, in which the voters vote for a specific candidate, as before 1994. We cannot argue in favour of crossing the floor in a proportional system, in which the voters vote for a particular political party. The percentage of support that a political party receives from the voters is also in a precise ratio to the number of elected members that will serve in this Parliament or other legislatures. The floor-crossing of members alters this ratio.
In KwaZulu-Natal, for example, voters voted that the ANC would not govern the province, but indeed the IFP. Floor-crossing in that province, with its history of violence, now makes it possible for the ANC to govern without there having been elections.
In 1999 the voters voted that the ANC would not have a two-thirds majority in this House. With the floor-crossing of members to the ANC it now has a two-thirds majority, with which entrenched sections in the Constitution can be changed. This is now possible without there having been an election.
We even now have parties in this Parliament that have never participated in an election. Therefore, the FF states that crossing the floor is undemocratic and even dangerous in the South African situation. I thank you.]
DIVIDENDS OF PETRO SA AND CEF GROUP STRENGTHEN TREASURY
(Member's Statement)
Mr M T GONIWE (ANC): Madam Speaker, the ANC notes with profound appreciation the recent special dividend of R1,6 billion contributed by Petro SA and the CEF Group to the Treasury.
Petro SA, which was formed in January 2002, has helped turn around the white elephant Mossgas into a possible milk cow whose proceeds will certainly contribute to the attainment of our overarching goal of poverty reduction. Petro SA and other state entities have a crucial role to play in increasing the resource base available to the Treasury. Most importantly, the declared dividend of R1,6 billion by Petro SA is further proof of the prudence of our economic strategies and policies.
We made hard choices because it was the right thing to do and now we are reaping the fruits of the sacrifices we made. Our governance is sound, our economic fundamentals are solid. The tide is turning for the better. Thank you. [Applause.]
OPPOSITION ALTERNATIVE TO ANC
(Member's Statement)
Mnr W P DOMAN (DA): Mevrou die Speaker, ons sluit met groot oortuiging by die DA aan. Ons het tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die DA besig is met belangrike werk om ‘n ware alternatief vir die ANC te skep. Hoe groter die opposisie, hoe beter die regering. Die weg om die demokrasie in Suid-Afrika te versterk, is om die DA te versterk.
Ek is persoonlik beïndruk met die DA se vennootskap met die IVP, wat ‘n sterk swart ondersteuningsbasis het, en ook dat die DA, veral binne die opset van die Wes-Kaap en die Noord-Kaap, daarin slaag om sterk steun uit die bruin kieserskorps te trek. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Die verkiesing in Swellendam, waar 40% van die geregistreerde kiesers uit die bruin gemeenskap kom, het dit onteenseglik bewys. As die vorige LUR vir Plaaslike Regering in die Wes-Kaap, is ek ook beïndruk met die groot aantal en gehalte van die bruin raadslede wat met die oorlopery die DA gekies het. Die DA is werklik ‘n party vir almal, en die valse propaganda van die Nuwe NP en die ANC dat die DA net ‘n wit party is wat terughunker na die verlede, moet met minagting verwerp word.
Die vernietiging van die Nuwe NP en die versterking van die DA sal kiesers in die opposisiegeledere nuwe hoop gee, hulle hul apatie laat staan en volgende jaar in groot getalle vir die DA laat stem. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Ons bly getrou aan die oorweldigende kiesersmandaat van 2000 en daarna, bevestig met tussenverkiesing, dat daar eenheid in opposisiegeledere moet wees. Dankie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Mr W P DOMAN (DA): Madam Speaker, we join the DA with great conviction. We have come to the conclusion that the DA is busy with important work in creating a true alternative for the ANC. The greater the opposition, the better the government. The way in which to strengthen democracy in South Africa is to strengthen the DA.
I am personally impressed with the DA’s partnership with the IFP, which has a strong black support basis, and that the DA, especially within the setup of the Western Cape and the Northern Cape, has succeeded in drawing strong support from the coloured electorate. [Interjections.]
The election in Swellendam, where 40% of the registered voters come from the coloured community, has proved this beyond doubt. As the former MEC for Local Government in the Western Cape I am also impressed with the large number and quality of the coloured councillors who chose the DA during the floor-crossing. The DA is really a party for everyone and the false propaganda of the New NP and the ANC that the DA is only a white party that yearns for the past should be rejected with contempt.
The destruction of the New NP and the strengthening of the DA will give new hope to voters in the opposition ranks, move them away from their apathy and make them vote for the DA next year in large numbers. [Interjections.]
We remain committed to the overwhelming voters mandate of 2000 and after that, confirmed with the interim election, that there should be unity in the opposition ranks. Thank you. [Applause.]
CHILDREN KILLED IN CAPE FLATS VIOLENCE
(Member's Statement)
Mr E T FERREIRA (IFP): Madam Speaker, children are continuing to be killed by stray bullets, most likely linked to gang violence, in the Cape Town area. The latest victim is young Tamsanqwa Manitshane, a five-year-old boy from Khayelitsha. He was killed when gunfire erupted outside his home on Friday 21 March, which was also Human Rights Day, after six men opened fire on and killed a young man.
Tamsanqwa is the fifth Cape Town child to be killed by stray bullets this month. Four other children have died and another was injured by stray bullets resulting from gang warfare. It is a sad day and an indication of just how much society has degenerated morally when innocent, carefree children are no longer safe playing outdoors or in the street outside their homes.
They are being robbed of their childhood. It is our duty to take the necessary action to ensure that they can once again just be children and not fear for their lives. This slaughter of innocents has to stop. We must find a way of effectively controlling and eventually eliminating gangs and gang violence. If we do not, innocent children will continue to be murdered. [Applause.]
DEATH PENALTY POLICY
(Member's Statement)
Dr S J GOUS (New NP): Madam Speaker, the hon Mrs Camerer drafted the following member’s statement, but unfortunately she might not wish to make the statement today owing to her new position and the constraints now placed on her. So I will read it on her behalf. [Interjections.] I quote as follows:
The hon Mark Louw has called the leader of the New NP Hang 'em high''
van Schalkwyk'', because the New NP leader has advocated the
reintroduction of the death penalty for the most heinous murders and
rapes, even if this requires an amendment to the Constitution. The hon
Mark Louw should look around him. There he will see the hon Douglas
Hang ‘em high’’ Gibson, the hon Tony Hang 'em high'' Leon, the hon
DeneHang ‘em high’’ Smuts, judging by their various statements in
favour of the death penalty.
Part of the hon Mark Louw’s problem is that the DA has no clear policy on the death penalty. They only have a free vote, which means that in this Parliament they have 39 different policies, unlike the New NP. Although we also have a free vote - because we regard life and death issues like the death penalty and abortion as issues of conscience - we, nevertheless, have a party position which reflects the view of a large majority of our members in favour of the death penalty.
I thank you. [Applause.]
STATE HOSPITAL DISPENSARIES CLOSED ON WEEKENDS
(Member's Statement)
Ms N C NKABINDE (UDM): Madam Speaker, it has come to our notice that the dispensaries of some state hospitals are not open over weekends, that is Saturdays and Sundays. This causes a very serious problem for the communities being served by these institutions, especially the poorest of the poor who have to travel long distances to reach these institutions. Patients are seen and treated by medical practitioners, but the prescriptions are not obtainable until Monday. Some patients spend the whole weekend sleeping on benches, without any basic services such as water, food and medication.
Prince Mshiyeni Hospital in Umlazi, Durban, is a classic example of what I am talking about. This hospital is serving thousands of patients on a daily basis. Therefore we cannot allow such a situation to continue.
It seems as if one has to file for an application to get sick between Mondays and Fridays. The situation is worse at city day hospitals. Patients have to provide their own linen when they are admitted. Thank you. [Applause.]
EDUCATION KEY TO SUCCESS
(Member's Statement)
Dr S E M PHEKO (PAC): Madam Speaker, the PAC believes that education is key to the success of a nation in all its spheres of endeavour. Education is the fountain of knowledge. Education is a weapon. The PAC affirms that education is the only means by which all kinds of skills can be acquired. These skills enable a nation to advance technologically, exploit its resources and process its raw materials to increase its wealth.
Our country is one of the richest, but, because it does not provide enough education for its people, the majority are trampled on by all and sundry, especially economically and technologically.
To neglect the education of our children will destroy our nation and our future. The PAC demands free education. No child must be denied education merely because his or her parents cannot afford the school fees. That is why this past year the PAC supported the student boycott of 13 schools in Tsakana and Balfour. The students demanded the lowering of fees. Many poor parents could not afford the high fees. The PAC is also against the age limit for leaving school. African children learn under extremely difficult conditions. This delays their completing their studies in time.
The PAC also condemns age seven as the entry age to start school. Age six is reasonable. Last year 27 students aligned to the PAC were arrested and charged with criminal offences. I am happy, however, to announce in this House that they have now all been acquitted. The magistrate wisely ruled that they were not criminals, they were intelligent persons desiring that education be affordable to the children of the poorest parents in our country. I thank you. [Applause.] The SPEAKER: Order! Does any Minister wish to respond to a statement directed at him or her or concerning a Minister’s portfolio?
SCHOOL FEES
(Minister's response)
The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Speaker, the trouble with the hon Pheko is that he does not understand the fundamental point that you should not make cannon fodder of children, whether it his special conference in Umtata - where you busload children to a conference and invalidate your conference - or you exploit young people in Balfour to deprive them of education.
A fundamental point that this House has reiterated is that children must not be used for political purposes, whether by my party or any other party. It is vital for progress and development, as we have maintained over the last few years, that children should have stability and peace at school. The parents at Balfour themselves said: We would like to continue paying the fees, which are not more than R100 a year, because it is necessary to get additional benefits for the school.
As for other issues he raised, we have just published a very valuable report - which is presumably in the library and, presumably, when you take time off from exploiting children, you might read the report on the funding of schools. You will see that the primary recommendation we make is that 40% of our children at school should pay no fees whatsoever. If you abolish all fees - you wouldn’t understand that; the laws of economics are much more complicated than you think - you are then subsidising the middle class. This is because the Government will then be providing the amount of money the middle class pays for schooling to those schools. If you want to have the consequence of the provision of money to the middle class diminishing the amount of state investment in the working class, then you are a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
TUBERCULOSIS IN SOUTH AFRICA
(Minister's response)
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Madam Speaker, I stand to associate myself with the statement made by Mrs Tshwete on tuberculosis in this country and also to give additional information.
Yesterday we launched a campaign in Port Elizabeth on advocacy and social mobilisation, and I would like to invite all members of Parliament to assist us and be the ambassadors in the national campaign on TB control in our country. As you all know, of the 22 countries that bear the highest burden of TB, South Africa occupies the ninth place. The message that we would like the members of Parliament to assist us with is to begin to share information about the signs and symptoms of tuberculosis such as a cough for over two weeks, unexplained weight loss, and night sweats. Please come to our health institutions and facilities for examination and testing. You can be sure to always find caring nurses and doctors who will provide you with the medicine for free. Please join us in this campaign. Remember that if you do not complete your treatment, it will cost us R20 000, but if you do and the TB treatment is administered for six months, it only costs us R400, as opposed to R20 000, which is what it costs once you have multidrug- resistant TB. Please be our ambassadors in the national TB control programme.
The hon member of the UDM spoke about the Prince Msheni Hospital and patients going without medicine. May I invite the member to discuss this with me, because I am not aware of what she just said to the House. I would very happy to engage her about the hospital because, as far as we are concerned, it has a very capable CEO and I have never heard of patients in Prince Msheni Hospital going without medicine. Thank you. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Before the hon Minister of Defence speaks, may I alert you to my original comment, which is to respond to a statement directed at you or concerning your portfolio.
The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Madam Speaker, there was a statement that was made here relating to my party. May I not respond to that?
The SPEAKER: I am sorry, Minister. No, in terms of the Rules, it is required that you deal with your portfolio. It would have been open to your party to use the opportunity of ministerial statements to respond had they wished to do so.
The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: I will come back, Madam Speaker. [Interjections.]
PARTY RESPONSES TO MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY'S STATEMENT
ON 19 MARCH 2003
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move:
That, notwithstanding Rule 106, the following times be allocated for party responses to the statement on 19 March 2003 by the Minister of Trade and Industry.
African National Congress: 5 minutes; Democratic Party: 4 minutes;
Inkatha Freedom Party: 4 minutes; New National Party: 3 minutes; United
Democratic Movement: 2 minutes, and all other parties: 1 minute each.
Agreed to.
The SPEAKER: I think the question on the proportions of what is on the Order Paper.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: I would like to support the hon Chief Whip if he is moving that the proportions reflected on the Order Paper are the ones in terms of which we will speak.
BLACK ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT STRATEGY
(Responses by parties)
Mr C M LOWE: Madam Speaker, apartheid was monstrously evil. It systematically excluded the majority of South Africans from the mainstream of their country’s economic life. It deliberately prohibited black people from generating self-employment and prevented them selling their labour and applying their entrepreneurial skills where and as they pleased. It is perhaps wholly appropriate that today as the very party that introduced and systematically enforced that brutal and monstrous regime writhes in its death throes, we address the economic legacy that apartheid has left us. The DA strongly supports black economic empowerment as a means to growing our economy and ensuring all South Africans have access to employment and entrepreneurial opportunities. But we have to do more than that. Much more. It is deeply disturbing that, ten years from our first democratic election, in many respects nothing much has changed. While we have seen the massive enrichment of the elite few in the name of what has passed for black empowerment, for the vast majority of black South Africans, the promise of a better life has failed to materialise and they are just as excluded from the mainstream as ever they were. Political freedom has not in itself brought economic freedom. The RDP has come and gone and Gear is still not given the full support it requires to make it truly effective, while the debacle around the Mining Charter which saw R50 billion swept off the JSE in an instant was hopefully a sobering lesson to Government and one which they will not easily repeat.
You have got a big job ahead of you, Mr Minister, one which I believe you are up to. I must confess: With Government’s track record not being very good, the cynic in me sees that in this election year, Government is desperately casting around for something, anything, to deliver on election promises.
Be that as it may, can the strategy deliver? Frankly, I am concerned at the ability of your DTI to deliver the goods and run the administration required to make it happen. Is the DTI up to it? It is regularly criticised and, in my opinion, with some justification for leaving telephones unanswered, creating good-looking and good-sounding strategy documents but then not delivering on job creation and small business promotion. At the end of the day, it is all about jobs.
In recent weeks, the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry heard from a number of DTI and Government-funded organisations and asked them to account for the billions of rand of taxpayers’ money they have used to create investment opportunities and jobs. We have seen wonderful plans and programmes, clever strategies and first-rate brochures, none of which come cheap. Frankly, a lot less of hard evidence of the jobs created, individuals empowered and money well spent. Many did not even provide a financial statement. The Isibaya Fund, for example, cited in paragraph 252, has failed to perform at anywhere near the level it should have done. There are other examples too.
We support the definition of broad black economic empowerment in paragraph 322, and the four key principles in the strategy. It must be broad-based. It must be an inclusive process. It must be associated with good governance and it must be part of our growth strategy but not the only aspect of it.
Growth remains the key and it is essential that there be certainty and transparency in respect of all aspects of the strategy, otherwise suspicion will grow that inside information and personal contacts with key role- players are the most important requirements for being successful. Unemployment is the issue, combined with a critical skills shortage in certain sectors. You know the statistics. Jobs are the answer; growth is the means. Black economic empowerment is necessary - there is no doubt - but it cannot a panacea for everything. Growth levels at 6% so vitally needed if we are to succeed will only materialise on the backing of international investment, and investors require confidence. Confidence comes when the top leadership starts showing the way, when our President shows the way on Aids, on Zimbabwe. That inspires confidence and will bring in investment. You have a big job on your hands. [Time expired.]
Mrs L R MBUYAZI: Madam Speaker, there can be little doubt that nine years after the end of apartheid, South Africans of all walks of life enjoy some of the most comprehensive political freedoms. Yet political freedoms have been slow in being translated into true economic emancipation and, more accurately, economic participation for historically disadvantaged South Africans. Herein lies a great danger to our young democracy. It is almost inconceivable that a fragile democracy in the process of consolidation would be able to long withstand massive social upheaval caused by deep- seated poverty and the economic exclusion of those who had historically been virtually completely excluded.
The IFP therefore welcomed the approach taken by the Mining Charter, which went beyond just ownership participation for historically disadvantaged South Africans to including human resource development, employment equity, enterprise development, preferential procurement, skills development and transfer and management participation. Taken into consideration, these various aspects of a broad-based BEE strategy would, in our opinion, provide the best opportunities for success. It is therefore heartening to see virtually all these initiatives taken up in Government’s broad-based BEE strategy as announced by Minister Erwin on 19 March.
We also welcome the additional investment of R10 billion and the use of the balance scorecard approach to ensure compliance and progress. Furthermore, the IFP supports the creation of enabling legislation and the establishment of a BEE advisory council.
Private South African businesses are often accused of not doing enough to accelerate BEE. No doubt this is true in some instances where window- dressing, fronting and lip service are the order of the day. This is not a general trend. Surely business leaders recognise that a stable and democratic society and an inclusive economy present them with their best long-term opportunity to do what they do best, in other words, conducting business and making profits.
This realisation has been evident in the full participation of business in formulating the empowerment charters in the liquid fuel sector and in the mining sector. This participation in the charter approach would be encouraged in the other sectors of the economy. The IFP also welcomes the fact that the Minister’s announcement has brought more certainty to the business world about BEE intentions. There is nothing a business hates more than an unapparent and unpredictable and unstable operational environment. Such conditions stifle new enterprise development and new investments are often placed on hold in what is perceived to be a high-risk environment. The announcement and the forthcoming legislative and regulatory initiatives go a long way toward addressing business fears, uncertainties and concerns.
In conclusion, I would love to express the IFP’s hopes that the broad-based BEE strategy would indeed deliver meaningful and large-scale participation of historically disadvantaged South Africans in our economy. If it does not, our young democracy might face an unstable and unpredictable future. I thank you.
Dr R T RHODA: Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to respond and give support to the statement made by the hon Minister of Trade and Industry on 19 March 2003 on the Black Economic Empowerment Strategy. For as long as I can remember, structural barriers and influential obstacles, remnants of colonialism have deliberately prevented blacks from participating fully in the South African economy.
For too long, they have been kept out of the economic mainstream. These barriers and obstacles have now by and large been identified. If our economy remains unequal as it is, it simply will not grow. It is important that all citizens play a major role in our economy and assist in the full transformation of the black South African business sector. Blacks also need to feel that they are participating in the ownership and the true management of South African companies, a greater promotion I foresee in the partnership between the public sector and the private sector, and this must be encouraged.
Black economic empowerment will be an integrated and coherent socioeconomic process that will directly contribute to the economic transformation of South Africa. It will, I am certain, bring about significant increases in the number of ordinary black people who will truly manage, truly own, and truly control the South African economy in the future. A deracialisation of South Africa’s economy is essential for economic and political and social stability. The end result must be higher levels of black ownership, more entrepreneurs, more managers, more professionals and more skilled persons. Black economic empowerment goes beyond political and social obligations.
Finally, I want to say that successful implementation of the BEE will be a key factor towards growth and equity, towards the achievement of a South Africa characterised by rapid growth, export expansion, stable prices, full employment and a relatively equitable income distribution. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr C T FROLICK: Madam Speaker, and hon members, the long-awaited BEE strategy is strongly welcomed. We sincerely hope that this strategy will address two crucial challenges of black economic empowerment policies to date.
The first challenge is directed at the current BEE efforts, in that it operates from a small base. It is hoped that the new strategy will broaden the base of BEE and thus provide access to the economic mainstream for the millions of South Africans currently excluded. It is vital to see the strategy translated into extensive opportunities for emerging small businessmen and women with the necessary support structures to transform them into viable job-creating entities. If the strategy succeeds in this respect, we can expect a growing and equitable business sector, one that creates space for the current and the potential entrepreneurs of this country.
The second challenge deals with the general uncertainty regarding BEE aims and the mechanisms for achieving it. Such a climate of uncertainty in the business sector can cause market instability. A striking example of this occurred last year when the Mining Charter was leaked and sent mining stocks into a spiral.
It is necessary that we recognise the hard work that the BEE commission put into this subject. Their work has been translated into a new strategy and a draft Bill. It is now up to us to ensure that the broad intentions are honoured and that the final Bill processed by Parliament lives up to these intentions and does not become a watered-down product. [Applause.]
Adv Z L MADASA: The ACDP supports the Minister’s statement because of the broad nature of the BEE strategy announced. As a party we believe that all South Africans, irrespective of race, gender or class must share in the economic growth of the country.
We are particularly pleased by the fact that, prima facie, the strategy is not just an empowerment of the elite but goes further to ensure economic and social empowerment. It remains to be seen, though, as to how the Government will implement this broad strategy in the light of the present macroeconomic strategy, which is shedding jobs whilst increasing profits.
True economic empowerment will have to ensure job creation and retention of the existing jobs. The challenge is whether the newly empowered elite will carry this important task in the spirit of ubuntu. Government has a big responsibility to ensure that its industrial strategy, for example, supports labour-intensive industries, instead of too much focus on those industries which are capital intensive, in order to ensure the empowerment of the poorest. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr C P MULDER: Agb Mevrou die Speaker, die VF het kennis geneem van die Regering se strategie vir swart ekonomiese bemagtiging. Dit is korrek dat mense in Suid-Afrika bemagtig moet word en ons verstaan dit. Ons wil dit egter wel onder die Regering se aandag bring dat u ‘n fout sal maak as u aanvaar dat alle ander mense, blankes, maar ook Afrikaanssprekendes, outomaties reeds bemagtig is. Dit is nie noodwendig die geval nie. Die agb leier van die IVP het vroeër vanjaar tydens die begrotingspos gesê: (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Dr C P MULDER: Hon Madam Speaker, the FF has noted the Government’s strategy for black economic empowerment. It is true that people in South Africa have to be empowered and we understand that. However, we would like to bring to the Government’s attention that you would be making a mistake if you accept that all other people - whites, but also Afrikaans speakers - are automatically already empowered. This is not necessarily the case. The hon leader of the IFP said during the Vote earlier this year:]
A distinction should be drawn between what is called black enrichment and black empowerment.
We also feel very strongly about that. The strategy, and I quote from the Minister’s statement - … proposes that BEE should be broad-based and inclusive and result in both higher levels of black ownership as well as a reduction in income inequalities.
Dit is nie dat mens nie daarmee kan saamstem nie; ons verstaan dit. Wat wel waar is, is dat daar reeds ‘n nuwe swart elite geskep is. Ons weet dit almal en ek is seker hulle hoef nie verder bemagtig te word nie. As die doel is om werk te skep in Suid-Afrika en almal die geleentheid te gee, dan kan mens dit ondersteun, maar nie net swartmense nie. Ander wat ‘n behoefte het, moet ook bemagtig word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[It is not that one cannot agree with it; we understand it. What is true, however, is that a new black elite has already been created. We all know this and I am sure that they do not have to be empowered any further. If the aim is to create work in South Africa and give everybody an opportunity, then one can support it, but not only black people. Others who have a need should also be empowered.]
Mr I S MFUNDISI: Madam Speaker, when South Africa acquired political freedom some nine years ago, economic freedom was still wanting. The time has come that economic freedom can also be acquired. In much the same way as political emancipation was brought in through tough proactive means of settling deadlines, economic freedom also needs proactive, yet legal measures to be put in place. The UCDP hopes that the envisaged advisory council will be representative of all sectors so that all voices can be heard. All well-meaning South Africans should applaud this move, as no group of people should be viewed or kept as beggars into perpetuity.
Avenues of accessing wealth have to be opened to all in the same way and at the same time so that the haves amongst the blacks should not have more while the have-nots in their midst continue to have nothing.
According to the words of the Minister, the envisaged empowerment will expand beyond political and social obligations. We support the move. We shall watch the proceedings with great interest. We feel that the tide has to be taken on. Who knows? It might lead to fortune for the poor black masses of this country. Thank you.
Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Speaker, the PAC agrees with the principle of the BEE strategy, provided it is not confined to the black elite but to the economic advancement of all the African people as a whole. We know about their national dispossession and how they were deliberately impoverished, particularly beginning with the Native Land Act of 1913.
African businesses in the rural areas and in African townships have collapsed. African businesspeople are worse off now. Where African businesspeople once thrived, their business has now been taken over by non- Africans. If BEE means anything, it must assist the small African business, and look at bank laws which affect their borrowing. Everywhere we go in this country, many African businesspeople are on their knees. They have gone bankrupt. They are asking: Whom is BEE assisting? Who are they? Some of us have never met them. Thank you.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, the physical burden and social instabilities in the country are influenced by poverty and economic inequalities that also seriously limit the South African market. This certainly influences the need for and success of BEE.
The MF finds the strategies that BEE is set to adopt suitable and calls for the private and public sectors to work in unison to make it a success. However, the programme should be instituted proportionally to ensure that no persons are marginalised as a result of it and that all minorities have an equal chance, protection and representation in the South African economy.
Socioeconomic inequalities and structural deficiencies need to be overcome. However, to improve the quality of life of South Africans, the focus has to be set on small and medium enterprises as a key factor in doing so.
The MF supports the BEE initiatives. The hon President, in his state of the nation address, has set aside R10 billion for BEE initiatives over a period of five years, which is a very welcome gesture.
Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, first of all, I must congratulate Parliament, because within an hour after giving in my forms, the name of the new party is on your list. I am speaking on behalf of the National Action.
Die Nasionale Aksie staan nie afsydig teenoor swart bemagtiging nie. Dis ‘n realiteit. Ons glo dat die kloof tussen ryk en arm in Suid-Afrika verklein moet word, maar dan oor die hele spektrum en nie net volgens die rasselyn nie. Verder kan ons nie mense bemagtig deur pasellas en presente nie, maar deur toerusting, bekwaamheid en opleiding. Dit lyk vir my asof die Minister se voornemens wel hieraan voldoen.
Vereistes vir bemagtiging sluit die volgende in: Meriete moet altyd geld; tweedens moet gesonde ekonomiese beginsels gehandhaaf word en derdens, om die vergelyking met sport te tref, nie kwotas nie, maar ontwikkeling. Die Minister se veldtog lyk vir my of dit val binne die parameters van gesonde ekonomiese beginsels en die Nasionale Aksie kan hom positief daaroor uitspreek. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The National Action does not have a neutral stance with regard to black empowerment. It is a reality. We believe that the gap between rich and poor in South Africa should be reduced, but then it should happen across the whole spectrum and not only along racial lines. Furthermore, we cannot empower people with hand-outs and gifts, but we can - by means of equipment, skills and training. It seems to me that the Minister’s intentions do indeed meet these requirements. Prerequisites for empowerment include the following: Merit should always apply; secondly, sound economic principles should be maintained and thirdly, to draw a comparison with sport, not quotas, but development. It seems to me that the Minister’s campaign falls within the parameters of sound economic principles and the National Action can speak positively about it.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Mr Aucamp, I want to alert you and other parties that the name NA is usually used to mean National Assembly and I am not sure if this is a take-over bid or not. [Laughter.]
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Madam Speaker, the BEE strategy announced by the hon Minister as a full-scale programme to address access by blacks to economic activities that are meant to improve their quality of life is supported by Azapo. What remains to be seen is how the state will facilitate access to capital and collateral.
As we all know, this arena of struggle by black people, that is of access to finance and the concept of collateral, has always been a very thorny area indeed. Azapo would like to see the strengthening of financial systems that have been practised by black people over the ages. These are the stokvels and credit unions. We hope that this strategy will also address these financial systems so that they can be brought into the mainstream economic activities of black people. I thank you.
Ms B M NTULI: Madam Speaker, hon members, we in the ANC welcome the long- awaited announcement of the BEE strategy. The Minister informed the House on the progress made by Government in setting out a policy on BEE and the adoption of the strategy by Cabinet. This is a realisation of the objective of accelerating growth and development and also pushing back the frontiers of poverty in the spirit of Batho Pele.
This strategy will address issues around marginalisation of black businesses by apartheid policies that had many barriers to entry for blacks. It will also meet the challenges of job creation and small business development in the rural and urban areas. The Minister indicated that the strategy will outline policy objectives as well as instruments that Government will use. They include an Act that would allow for the formation of the guidelines and codes, and the establishment of advisory councils. This is very important because the department alone cannot and will not be able to do the job.
The advisory council, I hope, will be there to advise and also measure the success of the strategy and monitor progress and check whether our people are not just fronting, and ensuring that the implementation of the strategy impacts positively on the lives of all South Africans.
The formation of partnerships and charters with the private sector is also welcomed. When the Minister defined the strategy, he said that it should be broad-based and inclusive, and it should result in both higher levels of black ownership … ubunikazi bamabhizinisi into eyayingenzeki ngoba abantu abamnyama babengenabo ubunikazi bamabhizinisi [business ownership, something that was not happening before because black people never had such ownership].
As well as the reduction in the income inequality, it should result in effective black participation in the economy and increased participation in managerial and skilled occupations. This is important. That is why the process will include the element of human resource development because, in the past, education and skills were a privilege for blacks but a right for whites. We hope that Khula and Ntsika, IDC and other sister organisations and institutions will now participate fully in developing entrepreneurs, allowing people to control enterprises and to own economic assets. We also believe that the strategy will create an enabling environment for black businesspeople to have access to finance by developing a workable empowerment-financing institutional arrangement.
Finally, the participation of all the stakeholders should not stop here. Black business councils, black business working groups, big business, trade and industries, Nedlac and others - well done! I hope that there will be a monitoring system in place and that appropriate parastatals will also play an active role in the strategy. We must also look at how we integrate other strategies like the IMS, the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme and the Urban Renewal Strategy.
Once again, thank you for creating a platform for the rigorous development of the economy that will impact on the lives of all South Africans. We support the strategy. Those on my right today are saying that nothing has changed. They forget … [Interjections] … on my left … They are saying once again that nothing has changed. They forget that they always vote against all Bills that deal with transformation in this House, and nobody said that BEE will be a …
Mr K M ANDREW: Go and learn your basic facts and then come and talk to us.
Ms B M NTULI: Shut up! Shut up! [Interjections.]
We appreciate what you have done, Mr Minister. All in all … [Interjections.]
Mr K M ANDREW: On a point of order: Madam Speaker, I would have thought that ``shut up’’ was not exactly parliamentary. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: I am afraid members are using the word ``shut up’’. The actual word used may have been translated differently. We need to look at that.
Ms B M NTULI: That is the character of the overwhelming right-wing. All they do is vote against everything that intends pushing back the frontiers of poverty in the country. They do not care about the lives of people. They care about themselves and about the riches that will come into their own pockets, rather than the overwhelming poor majority in this country. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
APPROPRIATION BILL
Debate on Vote No 3 - Foreign Affairs:
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, hon members of the National Assembly, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, members of the diplomatic corps, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, before I start my speech I would like to acknowledge a known friend of our struggle, Helena Pastoors, who’s sitting in the gallery. [Applause.]
Let me extend my appreciation and gratitude to Dr Pallo Jordan, the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs, and to members of the committee for their co-operation and assistance. I also appreciate the understanding shown by members of Parliament for my absence from this House. I would like to assure the hon Boy Geldenhuys that this is not because I think absence makes the heart grow fonder. [Laughter.]
I also extend my gratitude to President Thabo Mbeki and Deputy President Jacob Zuma for their guidance and assistance. I also thank my Cabinet colleagues for their co-operation and support.
I would like to extend a special word of appreciation to Deputy Minister Aziz Pahad, to Acting Director-General Abdul Minty and to all the officials of the department for their hard work and for all their efforts. I also take this opportunity to thank my family for their love and unconditional support.
We are all relieved that the issue of taxation of our representatives abroad has been resolved. I am also pleased to inform the House that we will soon be building the departmental headquarters in Pretoria.
President Thabo Mbeki, in addressing the opening of the ANC National Policy Conference in September 2002, said:
… we can state, without any fear of contradiction, that in less than one decade we have transformed our country from being an international pariah, a negative force in favour of racism globally, reaction, destabilisation, aggression and war, to an important international player for democracy, social progress, national independence and equality, and peace.
I am sure that all of us here would acknowledge these truths. We made a conscious choice, as a people and as a nation, at a particular crossroads in our history. We chose peace and sustainable development instead of war, reconciliation instead of revenge, dialogue instead of confrontation.
We embraced nonracialism, nonsexism and democracy, and charted our path to be a humble and tolerant nation. As a consequence of these choices, we have come to learn to be at one with our geography and our history, and to be at home in the world.
Today all South Africans, both black and white, can travel anywhere in the world with pride. There is no longer any need for any of our people to deny their nationality because of the indefensible shame of apartheid.
Whilst, indeed, the tide has turned here at home, the world is at a crucial crossroads. Some would want us to choose a path where the world is premised on the law of survival of the fittest, which departs from the very essence and founding principles of the United Nations.
I would like to remind this House what those principles are. I quote:
We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, and for these ends to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed forces shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.
This is the world that the founders of the United Nations wanted - a world of peace, security, solidarity, dignity and equality of all human persons; a world of tolerance and good neighbourliness. The Charter of the United Nations clearly defines the world that we should be building. The United Nations, imperfect as it may be, is the only instrument that governs the international political system and gives legality and legitimacy to our actions.
The founders of the United Nations wanted us to build a world based on the centrality of multilateralism, which would be respected by all and which would make international governance predictable. But those who want us to depart from the principles of the charter want us to believe …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon Minister. Deputy Chief Whip, are you rising on a point of order?
Mr A C NEL: Chairperson, I know that the DP has turned its back on the principle of multilateralism. But does that mean the Leader of the Opposition has to turn his back on the Minister? [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Minister, please continue.
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Those who want us to depart … [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Please continue, hon Minister. [Interjections.]
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: I’m sorry you’re so badly served … [Inaudible.] … by your Whips.
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Okay, having said that, can we continue? [Interjections.] Thank you.
Those who want us to depart from the principles of the charter want us to believe that the powerful, the rich and the technologically advanced should rule the world using their economic and military might. They want us to build a world in which the rich and the powerful can impose their will on the poor and the weak, in which the powerful can change regimes at will, a world in which the lives of the innocent and weak are not protected, a world of the survival of the fittest. This will lead to a new world order outside the framework of the United Nations.
The multilateral system of global governance must remain our only response to all the challenges facing humanity today. We must have common rules shared and applied equally by all, without fear or favour.
Ben Okri, in his work Way of Being Free, writes:
They tell me that nature is the survival of the fittest. And yet look how many wondrous gold and yellow fishes prosper amongst the silent stones of the ocean beds, while sharks eternally prowl the waters in their impossible dreams of oceanic domination and while whales become extinct; … how many butterflies and iguanas thrive, while elephants turn into endangered species, and while even lions growl in their dwindling solitude.
There is no such thing as a powerless people. There are only those who have not seen and have not used their power and will. It would seem a miraculous feat, but it is possible for the undervalued ones to help create a beautiful new era in human history. New vision should come from those who suffer most and who love life the most.
As a country which voluntarily disarmed itself of weapons of mass destruction, South Africa strongly believes in a world free of all weapons of mass destruction. Ideally, no state should possess such weapons. We therefore made every effort to ensure the full implementation of all relevant UN Resolutions, including 1441. It is for this reason that we made every effort to ensure the peaceful disarmament of Iraq and agreed with the inspectors when they said that they needed more time. We still think that was the correct route to take. We must be encouraged, though, and be part of the peoples of the world who have expressed their opposition to war in solidarity with the ordinary people of Iraq, not because of their support for the regime, but because of their love of peace and for their understanding of the pain, suffering and destruction that war brings. The international community, through the United Nations, should do all it can to minimise the humanitarian crisis in Iraq.
We must reassert the centrality of the United Nations as the only legal and legitimate authority for our collective peace and security in the world. As South Africa we shall continue to make a humble contribution towards peace and stability in the world in general and on our continent in particular.
It is for these reasons that we are involved in Burundi, the DRC, the Comoros and Cote D’Ivoire, and we are about to participate in the Sudan. And it is for these very reasons that our armed forces and our Defence Force are involved in peacekeeping missions.
Recently we saw the worst forms of terrorism in Kenya, Tanzania, on September 11, and in Bali. Again, we have to continue to work together, through the United Nations, to rid the world of terrorism. We can only succeed if we do this collectively and comprehensively.
Racism is growing in the world, sometimes assuming more insidious forms. In trying to build a better world, we have to fight the scourge of racism.
A Bahá’í scholar wrote, and I quote:
Consider the flowers of a garden: though different in kind, colour, form and shape, yet, inasmuch as they are refreshed by the waters of one spring, revived by the breath of one wind, invigorated by the rays of one sun, this diversity increaseth their charm, and addeth unto their beauty.
How unpleasing to the eye if all flowers and plants, the leaves and blossoms, the fruits, the branches and the trees of that garden were all the same shape and colour! Diversity of hues, form and shape, enricheth and adorneth the garden, and heighteneth the effect thereof.
[Applause.] The implementation of the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action from the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance is all the more urgent. Seeking a better life and a better world for all must mean the rescue of the poor of the world and the globally marginalised from despair, misery and impoverishment, as well as the restoration of hope.
Lasting peace cannot be consolidated without addressing the growing global inequities of our time. We have sufficient resources globally to create a better life for the world and its people.
The people of the South need to reinforce their own ability and capacity for initiative, representation and negotiation in the multilateral fora of the world. We have started the revitalisation of the Non-Aligned Movement; and President Thabo Mbeki and other leaders of the South have collectively evolved a coherent agenda for the Non-Aligned Movement and G7 and China.
As Africans, and as sons and daughters of Africa, we have rejected the Afro- pessimism that condemns us to poverty and to the perpetual denial of our dignity, intellect and strength. In coming together to determine the correct route for our own development, we have launched the African Union, and we have given concrete meaning to the dream of the peoples of Africa that Africa must unite. Africa must take her rightful place as an equal in the affairs of the world.
The launch and inaugural meeting of the African Union reaffirmed the decision that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, Nepad, constitutes its programme for the socioeconomic regeneration of Africa. This enables us to tell the world that we, the Africans, have taken ownership of our own development as the architects of Nepad. We can make bold to say that Nepad is premised on African control of its programmes, with African leaders accepting openly and unequivocally that they will play their part in ending poverty and bringing about sustainable development.
We are forging a genuine partnership amongst ourselves and amongst countries of the South for the realisation of the African Renaissance and the African century. We are also engaging countries of the North and multilateral organisations as partners in our development. The socioeconomic upliftment of the lives of African people, especially African women, will ensure a better life for all of us who are part of this great family. We must recognise the critical role that women must play in our development. They need to be integrated into and be part of the decision-making strata of our society. Even in matters of security, women must play a central role.
As hon members would recall, in its endeavour to make a meaningful contribution to Africa, this House has offered to host the Pan-African Parliament. The Pan-African Parliament has to address itself to the issues of African peace and solidarity and to Africa’s sustained development. We express the hope that this House will also speed up the ratification of the protocol on peace and security.
As you are all aware, South Africa will be celebrating the 40th anniversary of the founding of the Organisation of African Unity on Africa Day, 25 May this year. This will enable us to thank the continent and its people for their long solidarity with our own liberation struggle, and to focus on the continued quest for unity, development and solidarity.
South Africa will be hosting an AU ministerial meeting that will discuss, among other things, co-operation between Africa and the African diaspora, and a common defence policy for the African continent.
In this context, the bicentennial celebration of the proclamation of the independence of the Republic of Haiti in January next year takes on special significance. The South African Government and, indeed, the AU have decided to link the 10th anniversary of democracy in South Africa to the 200th Haitian celebrations. These celebrations will bring together the oldest independent country in the African diaspora and the youngest democratic country on the African continent in a great statement of solidarity and strength.
As part of building a better world, a world of solidarity, peace and stability, we have a responsibility towards the peoples of Southern Africa who are gripped by a devastating drought which has resulted in famine. We have contributed maize and other forms of humanitarian assistance to Angola and other countries in the region.
Furthermore, in light of recent developments, we express our hope that the Zimbabwean people will choose the path of peaceful dialogue rather than the route of confrontation. We shall continue to work with the people of Zimbabwe to find a solution to these challenges. In this regard, the SADC foreign Ministers will be visiting Zimbabwe soon.
The millennium goals, together with the Johannesburg Declaration and Programme of Action of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, have provided humanity with concrete ways of advancing the development agenda. We shall ensure that a follow-up and implementation programme is in place.
In conclusion, I would like to say that the days that lie ahead are going to be very trying for the international community. We have to re-establish the unity of the international community and the centrality of the United Nations in dealing with the aftermath of the war.
Let the children of Iraq and the children of the world play as children and dream about the future. Save them from the nightmare of war. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr C W EGLIN: Mr Chairman, I would like to welcome the hon Minister back to Parliament. If I could just have her attention for just one moment. I want to assure you that in your long periods of absence from Parliament we do not think you are playing truant. We know you are very busy dealing with the affairs of your Ministry and department.
During the past year, more than in any other I can recall, international events have dominated South Africa’s domestic agenda and, in one way or another, are impacting on the future of our country and our people. During this hectic period of international activity the personnel of the department have worked under great pressure. They have achieved their main goals in spite of the fact that some of the problems relating to the corporate management of the department, which I identified in last year’s budget debate, still persist. I believe the personnel of the department deserve our thanks.
This debate takes place against the background of a war that has been dramatised for many South Africans by the scenes which television brings to them as they relax in their homes in the evening. I want to express a personal word about war against the background of my experiences as a 19- year-old South African in Italy, involved in the closing stages of the last world war.
There are occasions when countries or people are forced to take up arms. There could always be noble causes to defend and there could even be such a thing as a just war, but let me say that there is nothing glorious or noble about war itself. War is ugly. It is brutal. It is savage. War demonises opponents, it brutalises combatants, it dehumanises the humans who are targets for killing and it traumatises innocent civilians. In war, success depends on the ability to destroy and kill.
I fear for the generation of my children and grandchildren if we of this generation should be conditioned to accept war as an appropriate way of settling international disputes. War has unpredictable and unforeseen consequences. Who would have predicted in 1945 that little more than one generation after Germany’s military power had been crushed, its industrial infrastructure was destroyed and its cities flattened, Germany would emerge as the strongest economy in Europe; that Japan, beaten, battered and bombed, would emerge a generation later as one of the strongest economies in the world; or that Great Britain, victorious in war, in less than one generation would lose control of its mighty empire?
So too, the war on Iraq is bound to have unpredictable and unforeseen consequences. I ask if it will enhance the concept of democracy around the world; will it help to usher in an era free from dictatorship; will it help to make the people and nations of our world more united; will it strengthen the global coalition against terrorism; and will it truly make the world a safer place in which to live?
What will the impact be on the United Nations; on the Middle East; on Europe; on Nato and the transatlantic alliance; on Africa and the developing world; on relationships between the South and North; on the economy of the USA; and, may I ask, on the psyche of the American people? These are all imponderables today which, in due course, will be answered by the realities of tomorrow.
The events of the past 18 months have had a profound effect on the order by which international relations have been regulated. Firstly, 9/11 added to the existing multilateral organisations such as the United Nations, which are composed of nation-states, a new, discordant element of extrastatal and difficult to identify international terrorism, the activities of which span across nation-state boundaries in violation of the interstate agreements through which our international order is regulated. It was a new component of international affairs that we had to deal with.
Secondly, the attacks of 9/11 wounded the United States of America, the world’s only superpower, thus resulting in the United States’ own national security, which so many Americans had taken for granted, being promoted to the predominant objective of American foreign policy. Subsequently, the failure of the UN Security Council to deal effectively with the issue of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, combined with the decision of the US and UK to make war on Iraq without the approval of the UN, has dealt a blow both to the role of the UN and to multilateralism as a mechanism for regulating international relations.
Today, as a consequence, unless the nations of the world are simply going to accept that international relations will be dominated by a single superpower whose government will decide unilaterally if and when war is appropriate, they will have to unite to rebuild the UN as a multilateral body that is capable of playing an effective part in regulating the international order. While not closing our eyes to the existence of a superpower, the DA believes that multilateralism must be the prime mechanism for regulating international relations.
Where do we in South Africa start with the promotion of multilateralism in the international field? The Government has been engaged in activities on a multilateral basis in various institutions and places around the world. Yet right here in Southern Africa, the region in which it has the greatest interest, its approach to multilateralism and its use of multilateralism has been, quite frankly, pathetic. And this in spite of the fact that the Government says that ``the pre-eminence of multilateralism’’ is one of its priorities. Let me give a couple of examples.
Instead of driving the multilateral process of which it was part, the Government undermined it. That was in the case of Zimbabwe. South Africa was one of three countries which accepted the mandate to act on behalf of the multilateral Commonwealth. It was party to suspending Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth, subject to a review after a year and subject to it’s endeavouring to bring about reconciliation between Zanu-PF and the MDC. But before the year was up, before there was any substantial improvement in the Zimbabwean situation, and before they made any serious effort to bring about political reconciliation in Zimbabwe, South Africa and Nigeria, accepting assurances given by Mugabe at face value, walked away from their multilateral mandate and unilaterally declared that ``the time is auspicious to lift the sanctions on Zimbabwe’’.
When I think of the concerted effort South Africa made to try to bring about political reconciliation in Burundi, and the time, money and energy South Africa has spent in trying to bring about political unity in the DRC, I am appalled at the lack of political will the Government has displayed in respect of its multilateral mandate to try to bring about political reconciliation in Zimbabwe. In the light of the mandate that they had, based on the finding that the Zimbabwean election was not free and fair, for our Government as an implementing party to say that in order to let negotiations take place the onus was not on Mugabe, but ``on the MDC to withdraw its petition to the courts’’ simply boggles the mind. That is the only redress they have, as an opposition party, namely through the courts. No wonder millions of Zimbabweans who are suffering under Mugabe’s oppressive rule feel that South Africa has let them down.
However, if South Africa has failed to uphold multilateralism through the
Commonwealth, it has failed even more so in the SADC. SADC countries have a
legal obligation to behave in a manner which conforms with the principles
of the SADC. And yet, when pressed to act in respect of the Zimbabwean
government’s violations of the SADC Treaty, the South African Government
says: No, we can't take action. It is for SADC to decide.'' And yet, when
SADC has to decide, its Council, of which this Minister is a member, evades
the Zimbabwe issue by declaring:Our position is that this is an internal
matter and the SADC has no intention of interfering’’.
And so the SA Government says it won’t act because this is a matter which falls to the SADC, and through the SADC the SA Government says it won’t act in this matter because it is an internal matter. Thus, in spite of its commitment to multilateralism, to the objectives of the SADC, to the SADC as an institution for multilateral action, and in spite of the harm that Mugabe’s government is doing to the economy of the region, this Government is taking no persuasive action in respect of the Zimbabwe situation.
I have often wondered why, and at last the Minister has come out with the
answer. She said the other day: Condemnation of Zimbabwe? You will never
hear that. It is never going to happen as long as the ANC Government is in
power.'' That is the answer. [Interjections.] This is a far cry from what
Mandela said, namely that democracy and human rights were regional
concerns’’. He also said:
How can we continue to give comfort to member states whose actions are so diametrically opposed to the values and principles for which we struggled so long?
Nevertheless the cosy, historical and sisterly relationship between Zanu-PF and the ANC is more important than the wellbeing of the people of Zimbabwe, more important than the interests of South Africa and more important than the legal commitments to the SADC Treaty.
And so the situation in Zimbabwe is getting worse, not better.
Last week, hundreds of supporters of the MDC were brutalised in their homes
by uniformed members of the Zimbabwe military after Mugabe at a rally had
said of the MDC: We shall not treat them with soft gloves any more''.
Later on Mugabe warned: The MDC will be consumed by fire’’. This
morning’s media carry horrifying stories of arrests, beatings and tortures
at the hands of gangs, soldiers and police. The situation is getting out of
hand and I want to know when the Minister is going to speak up and start
condemning the atrocities that are taking place. When is she going to speak
out against the violations of human rights and the rule of law that are
taking place? [Applause.] And the violation of the SADC Treaty itself?
The thuggery that was displayed this past week shows that the situation is getting out of hand. [Interjections.] I quote from John Battersley on his return from Zimbabwe. He says:
Zimbabwe is crying out, but we in South Africa are not listening. Harare is reminiscent of the closing days of the apartheid era.
It is time the Minister woke up. [Applause.] Mr M RAMGOBIN: Chairperson, Madam Minister, ladies and gentlemen. The ANC supports the budget for foreign affairs. [Interjections.] Of course. There continue to be amongst us people pretentious, flatulent with a commercialised version of what I term “spiritual poise” … [Interjections] … who forget that this poise becomes meaningless when they refuse to shoulder the burden of a suffering humanity. The primary objective of the ANC-led South African Government, … shut up … is to initiate programmes and projects to make possible a better life for all citizens by generating goods and services with productive value and providing a climate for security.
Our foreign policy objectives are, therefore, essentially an outward projection of our country’s domestic imperatives: The promotion of democracy and respect for human rights, the prevention of conflicts and the promotion of peaceful resolutions and disputes and the advancement of sustainable development and the alleviation of poverty.
With the strength of our Constitution and inspired by the history of the ANC, our leadership roles in pursuance of our policy include chairing NAM, the Commonwealth and the AU. We hosted the WSSD and, without any pretentious spiritual poise, promoted and are promoting peace and stability in Africa and elsewhere. Those of you who were yesterday’s promoters of apartheid and today’s harbingers of doom must be yellow with envy when you see the ANC-led South Africa promoting the interests of developing nations with regard to poverty reduction, debt relief and the democratisation of international relations in high-level interaction with developed countries. [Applause.]
Given that tunnel vision of the opposition’s view on the hedonistic nature of the human condition, Mr Eglin, it is important for him and his ilk to note that all these efforts by the ANC-led Government are to ensure peace, security and stability.
The pillars of the AU, which you will not understand, Mr former imperialist, colonialist, are to be constituted by the promotion of peace, security and stability on the continent. Towards this objective, the AU will be responsible for the peaceful resolution of conflict among member states through means to be decided by the assembly of the AU, which may give directives to the executive council on the management of conflict, war, acts of terrorism, emergency situations and the restoration of peace. [Interjections.]
Delegates at the Durban summit of the AU, in recognition of the socio, economic and political problems, went beyond the scope of the assembly and the executive council, and agreed on the organs responsible for peace and security and stability. Among these are a central organ of the mechanism on conflict prevention, management and resolution and the protocol on the establishment of the Peace and Security Council, which will be the standing decision-making organ for the prevention, management and resolution of conflict. This council will be supported by the commission, a panel of the wise, a continental warning system, an African stand-by force and a special fund. These will make possible a common African defence and security policy.
It will not be far-fetched to declare that it is beyond the comprehension of the DA as to why the Durban summit entrusted the responsibility to South Africa in the person of President Mbeki to establish a group of experts to examine all aspects related to such a policy. But what all South Africans have to comprehend is the overwhelming fact, Mr Eglin, that none of these creative interventions will be meaningful in isolation from the socioeconomic development and integration of the continent.
Hon Minister, in keeping with the directive given to your department by the ANC-led Government, you have reported to us that the cluster priorities strongly emphasise the advancement of peace, stability and security in Africa, the Middle East and beyond, as well as fighting terrorism. In not wanting to repeat what you have said, I have got to say this: For decades, Africa was a theatre of proxy wars. The extent to which global interests and role-players, officially or unofficially, sought to entrench their mercurial interests with the connivance of local leaders reflects on the natural resources of our continent. The spectrum of our resources ranging from oil and copper, diamonds and gold, cocoa and cattle, uranium and asbestos, tin, steel and aluminium, almost all the ingredients necessary for our own sustainable development and self-sufficiency, have in fact contributed to the development and sufficiency of our former colonisers. And what is worse today is the existence of disorder with the connivance of greedy local leaders.
It is this disorder that compels us in South Africa to take proactive action such as the Inter-Congolese dialogue, the South Africa-Angola joint commission for co-operation, the Arusha peace and reconciliation agreement in respect of Burundi, the resourcing of South African expertise in seeking to resolve the problems in Sudan and several others. We are seized with the need to confront this disorder which is compounded by ethnic conflicts, dealing in conflict diamonds and violence and war as the new political instrument of economic control with the use of mercenaries - the unconventional military syndicates.
With regard to Southern Africa’s security architecture, we are facing immediate challenges and prospects. The Minister has said this but I will repeat it. SADC is the chief multilateral organ to co-ordinate regional economic and political integration and also peace and security. Our involvement in developing a coherent security architecture to manage conflicts in Angola, Zimbabwe, the DRC, Lesotho and Swaziland is indispensable. With the concurrence of all member states and the initiative of our Government, the issues of Zimbabwe, Mr Eglin, are being dealt with in a constructive manner to assist all Zimbabweans. Our attempts through dialogue in the interests of the region lend to the creation of an environment conducive to reconciliation.
It is my pride and honour, given the background that I come from, to be fortunate to participate in the historical processes that place Africa at the apex of the global agenda. We are engaged in a people-centred advancement of sustainable development based on democratic values towards peace, security and stability. In recognition of the abundance of our continent’s natural resources we need all Africans to be agents of change in order that, through a common platform, we do not only have a dynamic partnership but also the responsibility to engage the rest of the international community. I wish I could swear.
Notwithstanding the arrogant glibness of the DA and the backgrounds that they hail from, I ask them to share this pride and honour that Africa affords us. Each one of us in this House, in one way or another, has to be troubled. For a while we may carry on and give place to others and they will have to carry the burdens of their times. The question we have to ask ourselves is: How did we play our part when we were here? I am sure those succeeding us will judge us. In the ANC we do judge and measure success or failure in what we have done and do. We in the ANC did make mistakes; we do make mistakes, and because we engage in action, we may make mistakes. But, in spite of these political morons, blessed were we. We saved ourselves, and will continue to do so, from an inner shame and cowardice. It is especially in this context that I wish to relate peace, security and stability in relationship to revenge and terrorism.
The history of the ANC is an urge, in essence, rooted in the African Renaissance. If I have an urge to say something very unkindly to you, I shall do it outside. [Interjections.] I shall use you as a pillar and do to you what little dogs do to you. [Interjections.] Because you are. It is an urge commanding us that we must so live as not to be seared with the shame of apartheid, the cowardice, prejudices and trivialities of the years of apartheid and colonialism. As South Africans living in a global village, the ANC invites all so that we may not be tortured for the years ahead of us, because we have lived without a purpose, that our first and pre-eminent cause is the liberation of all, you and me.
How else do you construct the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? What meaning do you give to a Government of National Unity? How and why did the ANC present the gift of a hymn, Nkosi Sikelel’iAfrika? In the spirit of honesty, none here or elsewhere can deny that these are efforts with reverence for life without a vindictive spirit, without reprisals, to secure peace, security and stability in our country for all who live in it, black and white.
On the question of terrorism there is no dispute, at least in the ANC policy position, that the dynamics of both fundamentalist terror and its relation between religion and the state impacts negatively on the democratisation process, which is the cornerstone for peace, security and stability. Terrorists, indeed, create a state of fear in their victims. They are ruthless and do not conform to humanitarian norms. This abhorrent means of pursuing social, religious, political or economic ends is best described by our President when he says, amongst other things, that:
Whatever their cause, those responsible for these mass murders in Kenya, Tanzania and the Twin Towers, have demeaned their cause and placed themselves in a position in which they cannot be accepted as people who should be treated as genuine representatives of a just cause. Regardless of that cause and its future outcome, it can never be said that the end they pursue justifies the means they have used.
He goes on again, reflecting on the history of the ANC:
This is in keeping with the long-established tradition of our movement and people. As this movement, we inherited a particular morality of the masses for whose liberation from white minority rule the ANC was formed. Our people have always behaved in a manner that respected life and celebrated human diversity, the Bahá’i movement.
When our movement decided to take up arms for the defeat of the apartheid system, the decision was taken that all efforts should be made to avoid the loss of human lives. Even as our enemy and its friends denounced our movement as terrorist, we took strict measures to avoid the use of terror against the people. We were opposed to any attack on so-called soft targets. On the contrary, our enemy did not hesitate to resort to terrorism to defeat our struggle. Our movement insisted that to resort to terrorism would be to dishonour our struggle and to destroy its morality. We condemned the use of the “necklace” as a barbaric form of struggle.
The President goes on to say that:
Despite the unquestionable justice of our cause and despite the nobility of the end we sought, we remained steadfast in our conviction that not all means were permissible to bring about this result.
This history is the humble contribution of the ANC to the reconstruction of human society. To ensure that the human race remains the beneficiary of peace, security and stability, we are also saying that humans must be the instruments to secure peace, security and stability. This is the anchor of our foreign policy, given the history of wars, hunger, disease, racism, religious bigotry and so on. Humans did initiate programmes and projects to establish a world order based on peace, security and stability, like the UN with its different organs.
Whilst our Government engages the international community on the basis of rational persuasion on the moral authority of our own Constitution and the Charter of the UN, we unreservedly view with disgust the odious invasion of Iraq. The bellicose and merciless aggression of the US and the UK, the powers who helped create the UN, their blatant disregard for international law underpinned by their equally blatant avarice and greed is reminiscent of their cupidity when they aided and abetted also not only the Mabutus, Savimbis and the Tshombes of Africa, but the Bin Ladens, Sharons and Saddam Hussein himself.
While I support the budget for Foreign Affairs, I do have grave misgivings about whether it is adequate when our country is being propelled to take proactive measures to ensure the peace, security and stability of our global village. [Applause.]
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Hon Chairperson, the speech by Mr Ramgobin was indeed filled with arrogance and threats towards the opposition. I think it will be described as a flatulent one. [Laughter.] The best part of that speech was the end when he shut up.
On behalf of the IFP, I wish to associate ourselves with the words of appreciation expressed by previous speakers in respect of the hon Minister, the hon Deputy Minister, Mr Askies Pahad, and the officials of the department, and the chairperson, Dr Jordan and others. [Interjections.] We support the budget.
As far as international politics are concerned, …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Van der Merwe, can you give Mr Jordan an opportunity? I think he has a point of order.
Dr Z P JORDAN: Is it parliamentary for Mr Van der Merwe to make fun of another hon member’s name? It is not the first time this hon member behaves in this manner. I consider it racist. The man’s name is Abdul Aziz. It’s not Askies, and he knows it. I ask for your ruling on the matter. [Interjections.]
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Hon Chairperson, that point of order is utter and absolute balderdash and nonsense. [Interjections.] That hon member has racism on his brain. Whenever he sees anything, it’s racism.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, order! Hon Van der Merwe, the Chair is behind you and will rule accordingly. Please refer to hon members as ``hon’’ and by their correct names.
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Hon Chairperson, I have read in the newspapers that the hon Deputy Minister is called Mr Askies Pahad. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, will you please correct that?
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Aziz, then. Mr Aziz Pahad.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Please, Mr Van der Merwe, will you refer to the …
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: The hon Askies, ahem, Aziz Pahad. [Laughter.]
As far as international politics are concerned, we are today experiencing very dramatic and fundamental changes. The Minister also referred to it, saying that the world is at a crucial crossroads.
In fact, the Iraqi war has unbelievable implications for the international political order, and also for the future relations between states. Therefore, the IFP believes that South Africa should carefully watch developments and remember the golden rule, namely, to put South Africa and the interests of our people first.
The obvious serious implication of the war is the huge setback suffered by the United Nations, to which Mr Eglin has also referred. The simple fact for all to observe is that the UN, as an organisation, has failed. It has failed in its most fundamental and historic mission, namely, to prevent war. The UN failed to enforce its own resolutions passed after the Gulf War in 1991. The UN failed to take decisive action against President Saddam Hussein when he ignored disarmament resolutions. The UN has become a showroom of division instead of unity.
The question is: What is to become of the UN? This is one of the very interesting questions that can only be answered in the time to come. [Interjections.] But, in view of its apparent failure, one could rightly ask whether the UN is travelling the same death route as the League of Nations did after the First World War. Are there plans for a new world body? Time will tell.
If the UN is to continue as an organisation, one can rightfully ask what reforms are to be introduced. Surely the UN can no longer be tolerated as an extremely expensive talkshop or a forum where national interests override international interests and where wars cannot be prevented?
Serious back-to-the-drawing-board action is needed for the UN. We have to take a relook at the UN’s composition and its functions. Also, the role, function and composition of the Security Council and the veto system needs to be revisited.
The IFP believes that South Africa should be proactive in the future reform of the UN with creative inputs and with workable solutions so that a powerful world organisation could be created that can effectively prevent war and secure world peace.
In defence of the UN, one must rightly refer to the sterling humanitarian work for decades …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon member, there is a point of order.
Hon Gogotya, you are rising on a point of order?
Mr N J GOGOTYA: On a point of order, Chairperson. Is the hon member Mr Van der Merwe able to shed some light on the rumour that President George W Bush is being advised by the hon Mtshali to take up weapons of war? [Interjections.] Can he substantiate that?
There is a rumour that George W Bush is being advised by Premier Mtshali to take …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon Gogotya.
Mr N J GOGOTYA: Can he shed some light on that? [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Gogotya, you said you were rising on a point of order. You were supposed to ask the Chair if you could pose a question. You did not do so. I am going to allow Mr Van der Merwe to continue.
Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: As far as I know, President Bush phoned Mr Mtshali, and he congratulated him on the excellent way in which he is governing the province of KwaZulu-Natal! [Interjections.]
In defence of the UN, one must rightly refer to the sterling humanitarian work for decades, dealing with diseases, natural disasters, ignorance, racism, illiteracy, refugees and so forth. However, in its most important mission, namely to prevent war, the UN failed dismally.
The same failure applies to regional bodies, and the question that we have to pose is whether the regional bodies that we have are not going the same route.
The IFP believes that the next extremely serious implication of the war is the ghastly effects on innocent people - effects that will soon surface for all to observe; effects that are unfortunately the normal results of war. Therefore, great humanitarian challenges will soon face the world. We believe that if one is sensitive to the humanitarian challenges ahead, that does not mean that one takes sides. In offering a helping hand, one does not say the Americans were right or wrong, neither does one say that the Iraqis were right or wrong. When after the war, which is hopefully very soon, we are confronted with the awful suffering, the loss of lives and the destruction of infrastructure, we only see hungry people, we see people without roofs over their heads, and we see that there is no medicine, no food and no blankets. One does not see or care whether these people are Iraqis or Americans. They are human beings in suffering.
Therefore, the IFP pleads, even at this early stage, for South Africa to be in the frontlines to assist with humanitarian aid, to devise and have an effective contingency plan in place well ahead of time so that South Africa can lend a helping hand to those in suffering, no matter on which side they fought in the war.
South Africa’s own role in the after-war era must also timeously come under scrutiny. In the pre-1994 South Africa, we leaned over to the Western countries, and stood by the USA and others. We were not on good footing with the Gaddafis, the Yasser Arafats and the Saddam Husseins, but after 1994, the scenario changed. We are now closer to the Gaddafis, the Arafats and the Husseins, and we appear to be moving away from the USA and its allies. What will our position be in the future?
In conclusion, I want to say that if you think about the awful effects of post-war Iraq, you shudder to think of some possible after effects; would terrorism once again raise its ugly head? Is religious fundamentalism to become a critical factor in future? [Interjections.] Are we entering an era of nuclear proliferation? Is international crime to become a greater danger than it is presently in the form of drug and human trafficking, arms smuggling and money laundering? [Interjections.] Why don’t you ask for an opportunity to speak? You know, it happens so often that people sit there and are never trusted by their Whips to come and stand here. [Interjections.] They just sit there and shout and shout. The reason why you shout is that you are too stupid to come and stand here and talk. [Interjections.]
What we should do, to be serious for a moment, is realise that the Iraqi war is an extremely serious thing, and that the after effects of that war will affect all of us. What we should do as a nation is that we should pray for our leaders. We should pray for the hon Minister and the hon Deputy Minister and the department. We should also pray for the Government to do the right things in the interests of South Africa and its people. We wish you well, Madam Minister. [Interjections.]
Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Chairperson, the hon Koos van der Merwe referred to the possible failure of the UN and I will come back to that point in my speech.
Our diplomats are doing an excellent job in marketing South Africa abroad and we thank them for a job well done. [Applause.] Allow me to recognise our Ambassador to Algeria in the benches behind me, Mr Mo Shaik.
Ons is altwee kaalkop en die hare het behoorlik gewaai toe ons mekaar die eerste keer by Codesa ontmoet het en gestry het oor die beveiliging van die World Trade Centre. [We are both bald-headed, and the sparks were really flying when we first met at Codesa and argued about the security of the World Trade Centre.]
Although understaffed and overworked, there are currently 856 vacancies at head office, which is totally unacceptable, because our staff there are also doing outstanding work. They should especially be commended for their part in the successful organisation of international conferences for which South Africa has become a popular venue.
The acting Director-General excels in his post and deserves a permanent appointment. It is an honour to serve on a committee chaired by the hon Pallo Jordan. He acts totally unbiased and always brings a fresh, if not sometimes controversial, angle to the debate. The hon Deputy Minister’s regular interaction with the committee as well as his balanced approach to sensitive international issues are highly appreciated. [Applause.]
We have a no-nonsense Minister of Foreign Affairs, who is tipped in certain circles to become a future president of South Africa. [Interjections.] Two good things will emanate from such a possibility. Firstly, it will force Winnie Mandela into exile because she will no longer be entitled to be called “the Mother of the Nation”, that is, of course, if she survives as a human shield in Baghdad! [Laughter.] Secondly, it will send shivers down the spine of those African leaders who must yet come to terms with the idea of including women in their delegation to the African Parliament. Brother Leader is a case in point. [Laughter.]
The R2 billion allocated to Foreign Affairs is hardly enough to keep the department operational. Foreign Affairs is the only department besides Revenue Services which actually generates income by facilitating foreign investment and should therefore get a bigger slice of the cake. The post of Director-General is now vacant for nearly two years and, Chairperson, it cannot go on like this. The hon Minister owes an explanation to the House as to why the post of Director-General has not been filled.
Voorsitter, ek wil ‘n ander sensitiewe kwessie opper, naamlik dié van regstellende aksie in die departement. Die Nuwe NP se standpunt van die begin af was dat die Departement van Buitelandse Sake die bevolkingsamestelling van Suid-Afrika moet weerspieël. Regstellende aksie was gevolglik onvermydelik en dit was goed dat dit plaasgevind het. Met buitelandse poste as voorbeeld kan daar ook nog steeds met reg geredeneer word dat die proses van regstellende aksie nog nie voltooi is nie. Daar is 880 swartmense, 77 Asiërs, 78 bruinmense, in totaal 1035 in buitelandse poste, teenoor 622 witmense. In verhouding tot die bevolkingsamestelling lyk dit my nog steeds asof daar nog te veel witmense in buitelandse poste is. Die Nuwe NP het van die begin af gesê die beste manier om die getalsverhouding reg te kry, is deur die toelatingsproses en deur die vul van vakante poste. Dit sou voorkom dat daar nou gediskrimineer word teen witmense wat tans in diens van die departement is. Baie van hulle bly vassteek op een posvlak en word ten spyte van hulle ervaring en kundigheid nie eers genooi vir onderhoude vir bevorderingsposte nie. Al wat hierdie mense wat tans werksaam is in die departement vra, is om ‘n kans gegun te word om op meriete hulle land te dien. Geen departement kan dit bekostig om gedemotiveerde mense op sy balansstaat te hê nie en hopelik sal mense wat tans in die departement dien ‘n gelyke kans gegun word vir bevordering en oorsese plasings. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Chairperson, I want to raise another sensitive issue, namely that of affirmative action in the department. From the very outset the position of the New NP has been that the Department of Foreign Affairs should reflect the composition of the population of South Africa. Consequently, affirmative action has been inevitable, and it is good that it has happened. With foreign posts as an example it can also still rightly be argued that the process of affirmative action has not yet been completed. There are 880 blacks, 77 Indians and 78 coloureds - in total 1035 - in foreign posts, compared to 622 whites. In relation to the composition of the population it appears to me as if there are still too many whites in foreign posts. The New NP has said from the beginning that the best way to sort out the numbers proportionally is through the admission process and the filling of vacant posts. It would appear that whites currently employed by the department are now being discriminated against. Many of them remain stuck at one post level and, despite their experience and expertise, they are not even invited to interviews for promotion posts. All that these people, who currently work in the department, are asking for is to be given a chance to serve their country on merit. No department can afford to have people who are demotivated on its balance sheet, and hopefully people who are currently serving in the department will be given an equal chance at promotion and overseas placements.]
Chairperson, it seems as if the Zimbabwean issue will haunt us forever, although for the first time it seems as if there is light at the end of the tunnel. Despite the fact that the hon Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that South Africa would never criticise Zimbabwe, the hon President did just that. He criticised Zimbabwe in no uncertain terms. He openly said the land reform programme in Zimbabwe was conducted in the wrong manner. President Mbeki’s criticism of the land reform programme in Zimbabwe is good news for Nepad. The Nepad process was in danger of becoming derailed because African leaders, with their refusal to criticise fellow heads of state, created a perception that they were not really committed to democratic principles and sound government.
President Mbeki’s criticism of Mugabe will restore confidence in the Nepad programme and will, for the very first time, put real pressure on Mugabe to reform. Until now, President Mugabe has dismissed criticism from Western countries as a colonial plot against him. Criticism, however, from a prominent African leader cannot be simply swept under the carpet.
In a letter to the New NP last year, the hon Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated that a bilateral agreement on the protection of investment between South Africa and Zimbabwe will be considered. This was confirmed by the hon President when he replied to a question by the New NP in his state of the nation address. It would be appreciated if the hon Minister could indicate to the House whether any progress in this regard has been made, especially in the light of the fact that South Africa and Angola have just signed a protocol on investment protection.
The war against Iraq is in full swing. Allow me to deal with some of the arguments raised and statements made during the three debates on Iraq we have had in the House thus far. The hon President went out of his way to say South Africa is not anti-America, yet certain statements and actions by the ANC as well as the Government sent out messages to the contrary.
The Secretary-General of the ANC said South Africa could become the next target of the US due to its vast mineral resources. The fact that nobody repudiated him could be interpreted as being anti-American. The notorious letter handed over to Saddam Hussein by the hon Deputy Minister in which Saddam Hussein was allegedly encouraged to stand firm could also be interpreted as being anti-American.
When the New NP urged the Government not to come out on the side of Saddam Hussein due to economic and trade considerations but rather to stay neutral, the hon President slated this position as highly unprincipled. This could also be interpreted as being anti-American.
I am not pleading that we should openly side with the US. Their wars are not necessarily our wars. I am pleading that we should stay neutral, because it is in our national interest to do so. We should however render humanitarian aid to the people of Iraq and if possible we should get involved in rebuilding Iraq after the war.
The hon Minister of Finance said South Africa is not pro-Saddam Hussein; South Africa is pro-multilateralism. Of course, multilateralism is the correct way to go, but unfortunately, multilateralism is going to become one of the first casualties of this war. Failure to establish consensus on the Iraq issue will force the USA, the only superpower left, to circumvent the UN in future, relating to all issues of safety and security. Lack of US support before World War II was one of the reasons for the ultimate disbanding of the League of Nations and the writing may be on the wall for the UN for that very same reason. To talk about unilateral attack by the USA also does not quite hold water. The so-called “Coalition of the Willing” consists of 40 nations that are actively supporting the USA in its war effort. The USA is, in other words, not acting entirely on its own.
In conclusion, regime change should not be the goal of any war. Regime change is the responsibility of the people of a country themselves. Eastern Europe, and especially Eastern Germany, serves as a good example. Communist regimes were thrown out of the window when millions of people simply took to the streets, and this is what should happen in Iraq. The people themselves should get rid of the tyrant, however difficult that may be.
The protest marches in the streets of Harare indicate that the people of Zimbabwe are also finally prepared to take on the responsibility of regime change and it is obvious that Mugabe’s days are numbered.
Hopefully the war in Iraq will end soon, with as few civilian casualties as possible, and hopefully the US will not make the same mistake the British made during the Anglo-Boer War. They thought the war would be over within weeks. Instead, it lasted for three years. Hopefully the war against Iraq will not also derail the global coalition against terrorism because, in the final analysis, Osama Bin Laden poses a bigger threat to world peace than Saddam Hussein could ever manage.
The New NP supports the Budget Vote.
Miss M N MAGAZI: Chairperson, the African National Congress supports the budget and calls upon all like-minded South Africans to do the same.
Today we are debating the Department of Foreign Affairs’ Budget Vote in a situation where two countries who are founder members of the United Nations Security Council have decided unilaterally to attack Iraq, disregarding efforts of the UN Security Council to seek peaceful solutions to the crisis.
Our foreign policy since 1994 has been underpinned by the African Renaissance through the African Union and its programme for Africa’s development, namely the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. These policy guidelines are commitment to global equity, justice and international law in the conduct of international relations; promotion of human rights and democracy; promotion of international peace, security and stability through the United Nations as the pre-eminent global security body, the Non-Aligned Movement, the African Union, the Southern African Development Community and the Commonwealth.
Since the ANC Government was voted into power, we have been called to act and help people affected by conflict to find peaceful solutions to their problems. We have hosted Palestinians and Israelis to help them find solutions to their problem. Over the last four years, we have been seized with efforts to find peaceful resolutions to the problems of the Great Lakes region, especially those of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi. The resolution of the conflict in Angola is another great achievement for the Africans.
Our effort to help the people of Iraq to comply with the resolution of the United Nations Security Council is known, as are all other efforts to put the agenda of the countries of the South on the agenda of the multilateral institutions. Over the last three years, we have hosted at least three major international events. The first was the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. The second was the World Summit on Sustainable Development which we hosted in 2002 in Johannesburg. The third and last one was the ICC Cricket World Cup. The level of success of these three events has enhanced our international standing, and this comes with much heavier international responsibilities.
We have noted with great enthusiasm the increment the Department of Foreign Affairs has received in the current financial year. The increment is from R2, 079 billion in the year 2002-03 to R2,243 billion for the year 2003-04. This has indicated growth in the budget, however insufficient it may be. It is insufficient because of the nature of our work, ie working in foreign countries most of the time, where the currency fluctuation affects us all the time.
Over the last nine years, we have opened more missions in foreign countries than any other government in the history of this country. In the next few months, we will be opening six new missions. This will mean added responsibilities. Therefore, this places upon us a task to ensure that we have an effectively and efficiently run Department of Foreign Affairs. I must take this opportunity to thank the staff of the Department who have defied the odds and made it a point to ensure that the image of our country is not tainted and has remained intact. [Applause.] This has been happening despite the fact that, over the last year, no director-general has been appointed yet. I, therefore, make a special plea to the hon Minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, in her busy schedule to pay special attention to the appointment of a director-general and other senior officials in the department.
Another important issue is the appointment of ambassadors in all areas that are vacant. I am raising this point as a concern in that in some strategic areas in the world we do not have a senior political representative. I am making a special plea to the Minister to give this matter the urgent attention it deserves.
The issue of gender equality is at the centre of our reconstruction and development. It is not a by-the-way issue that we thought about overnight and decided on in the morning. It has been part of our thinking from the inception of the ANC in 1912. Over the years, women have played a very significant role. When you think of the role of women, names like Charlotte Maxeke, Lillian Ngoyi, Ellen Khuzwayo, Albertina Sisulu, Gertrude Shope, to mention but a few, come to mind.
I raise this issue not because I am a woman, but because it is the stated objective of this Government to affirm women in all areas of their lives. I also raise this issue because, in the last budget briefing by the Department of Foreign Affairs, the officials who came down could not provide us as members of this portfolio committee with relevant figures. The number of women who are in senior positions in the department leaves much to be desired. It is our belief as the ANC that we should enhance the role of women in all areas of our lives. I believe that if women were in positions of responsibility, we would not have war in Iraq today.
The restructuring of the Foreign Services Institute is critical. The restructuring of that institute cannot be emphasised enough. We need to recruit the best young men and women to go and serve in our foreign missions. Our foreign missions must reflect the gender composition and demographics of our country. We will continue to support the efforts undertaken by the department to transform that institute to be better able to meet the challenges or to produce cadres who will be better able to market our country abroad.
We, as the ANC, support the budget and therefore we call upon all like- minded South Africans to support it. [Applause.]]
Mr W G MAKANDA: Mr Chairperson, hon members, we have noted the roughly 10% annual increase in the budget estimates for 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. Indeed we believe that the department needs much more than that.
It is common knowledge and understandable that the reintegration of South Africa into the global community has placed the country in a new and wider world order, with equally challenging relationships and responsibilities. The Department of Foreign Affairs, together with the Presidency, hit the ground running when, in the early formative years of our freedom, they were plunged into the centre of conflict resolution in the DRC and Burundi, whose wars involved some SADC states and therefore impacted directly on the stability of the region. These conflicts have had dire social, political and economic consequences for the region. The imperatives of peace, regional stability and sustainable development of Southern Africa and the continent as a whole have thrown South Africa into the deep end by positioning her as a key player in the struggle for the realisation of these objectives.
One of the key national objectives entrusted to the Department of Foreign Affairs is to promote the sustainable, social and economic development of South Africa. Regional interdependence in a globalising world economic order inextricably links the development of our national economy to that of the Southern African region as a whole. This region can best promote its collective interest through co-operation with other regions on the African continent. This is the sine qua non for the development of a viable African economic bloc with any chance of extracting economic advantage in its dealings with the developed First World of the North.
In this crucial era of international relations, when one superpower is embarking on a new brand of aggressive imperialism, reinforced by a staggering advance in technology, overwhelming superiority in all weapons of mass destruction and military capability, the development of viable economic blocs among the communities of the developing world has become very urgent. This is the only way to ensure that multilateralism survives as a principle and a route to take in conflict resolution. The UN as an institution that was established to maintain world peace is seriously undermined by the current war which is being waged by the US and its satellites in defiance of UN resolutions and world public opinion.
It is clear therefore that the Department of Foreign Affairs has to steel itself and be empowered to play a crucial role in strengthening international peace initiatives. After Iraq, no country, no region, no continent can sleep in peace and be secure in its sovereignty and integrity.
It is important to acknowledge that the African Union and its Nepad programme cannot take the partnership with the G8 for granted. The priorities of the North are predicated on self-interest and therefore do not always coincide with our own. It is becoming increasingly evident that Africa must think and act creatively. We have vast resources on this continent still lying dormant, untapped. With insight, hard work and resolution, using available global technology and know-how, on our terms, we can wake this sleeping giant and be a force to be reckoned with.
In order to succeed, we must indulge in self-criticism, open and honest discourse and mutual appraisal of our strengths and weaknesses. Pan-African solidarity should not preclude objective criticism of one another. This constructive evaluation of our policies, strategies and practices, however uncomfortable it may be, is the essence of the peer review mechanism in Nepad. The Department of Foreign Affairs has a responsibility to urge, persuade and engage in every way possible African governments and members of the non-aligned developing world to promote and nurture good governance based on democratic principles in political institutions which would be shaped in accordance with the peculiar social and cultural circumstances of their environment. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Adv Z L MADASA: Chairperson, the Department of Foreign Affairs is in the forefront to ensure the success of the African Union and Nepad. The department has to co-ordinate all the activities of the African Union from the South African perspective. Capacity in terms of human resources and finance is still a big challenge. The nonfilling of the position of permanent director-general and other positions does not help the Nepad cause either.
Although we welcome the President’s announcement of a budget for the Nepad programme, clearly more resources are needed. It goes without saying that, in view of the Iraq war, it is unlikely that external resources will be forthcoming for African development. The coming G8 meeting, though chaired by France, will in all likelihood not result in tangible results beyond pledges of support. The European economy is in dire straits, the US needs more funds for the war, and the global economic picture looks gloomy.
African leaders, therefore, are going to have to rethink their strategy of funding the development of the continent. We have to look no further than ourselves. We must start at the beginning and patiently work on unity in respect of ideological differences. We must be united by one goal only - the socioeconomic development of our people. If you adopt an all-inclusive approach at a political level, then we will build confidence among all the states, big and small. Once united, Africa will be able, together, to devise and agree on common economic policies at the national and regional level that will eventually ensure the development of the whole continent. We will all be able to underwrite the common principles of democracy, good governance and human rights in a meaningful manner, not just on paper.
It is in this regard that the new endeavours by the President to sign bilateral agreements with the states in the SADC is to be welcomed. We have to build the African Union step by step and very patiently. The so-called strategy of building alliances among the progressive forces will not work. What is needed is the promotion of an all-inclusive democracy throughout the continent, as evidenced in the DRC and Ivory Coast resolutions of war.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Chairperson, Minister Zuma said, and I quote:
Seeking a better world for all must mean the rescue of the poor of our world and the globally marginalised from despair, misery and impoverishment and the restoration of peace.
For us in Africa the reality is that nearly half the world’s population still has to make do on less than two dollars a day. Approximately 1,2 billion people - 500 million in South Asia and 300 million in Africa - struggle on less than one dollar a day. Indeed, people who live in Africa, south of the Sahara, are almost as poor today as they were 20 years ago. Africa’s share of the world’s absolute poor increased from 25% to 30% in the 1990s.
According to a New York council of foreign affairs task force, the assets of three top billionaires are more than the combined GDP of all the least- developed countries and their 600 million people. According to the 1999 UN Human Development Report, more than 80 countries have per capita incomes that are lower than they were a decade or more ago. A recent transnational communications takeover in the United States created a company whose market value exceeds the GDP of nearly half of all UN members, though it is only the world’s fourth richest company.
In recognition of this sad reality, the recent NAM summit declared, and I quote:
With increased globalisation and the rapid advance of science and technology, the world has changed dramatically. The rich and powerful countries exercise an inordinate influence in determining the nature and direction of international relations including economic and trade relations as well as the rules governing these relations. Many of these are at the expense of developing countries.
It goes on to say:
Globalisation should lead to the prospering and empowering of developing countries, not their continued impoverishment and dependence on the wealthy and developed world.
The war in Iraq, with all its expected negative consequences for the region and the world, will lead to Africa’s further impoverishment and underdevelopment. I am a bit disappointed that some hon members on my left seem to be suffering from schizophrenia and confusion. They said that they are against the war, that the war brings a lot of suffering, and that the war is not about regime change. But, on the other hand, they seemed to condemn us because they said we are antiwar. [Interjections.] They have some vague understanding of national interest and anti-Americanism. Let me remind them that antiwar is not anti-Americanism. Millions of Americans are also opposed to the war. [Applause.]
We are being subjected to 24-hour media coverage. But the question that we
must ask ourselves is, Are we getting the truth?'' According to a
Business Day article today, new terminology has emerged: the embedded
journalists have given information controllers the right and power on what
to say and when to say it. The global television network is bringing to the
homes of millions of people the values that the West is trying to bring to
the rest of the world - values defined by catchy phrases like the free
Iraq campaign’’. That article asks: ``How and when did basic journalism
slip through the cracks?’’ I believe that only the journalists can answer
that.
Under the strategy of shock and awe we are witnessing an awesome storm of firepower being unleashed against Iraq. A USA military source said, and I quote: ``It will be the most serious aerial bombardment in history.’’ I once again want to reiterate that the coalition’s decision to resort to force outside the framework of the UN Security Council is a tragic failure of negotiations and diplomacy. The world remains sharply divided on this issue.
I am sure that even the members on my left will agree that war is not a solution to world problems. The vast majority of countries and billions of people throughout the world support this position. That includes the Vatican and all the major religious leaders in the world. At what cost can we ignore the millions of people throughout the world who continue to demonstrate against the war? As the Minister said, the war must not set a precedent which further undermines multilateralism and especially the authority of the United Nations and the UN Security Council.
The Government remains fully committed to the position that the world should be free of weapons of mass destruction. In this context, we supported the UN Security Council Resolution 1441 which peacefully sought to ensure that Iraq was free of weapons of mass destruction. We therefore spared no effort to ensure that the resolution was implemented fully and successfully within a reasonable period of time. In that respect, we interacted with many countries and consistently urged the Iraq government to fully and transparently co-operate with the inspectors. I can’t understand why hon Geldenhuys says that we went to Iraq and gave President Saddam Hussein a letter asking him to stand firm. Maybe he has more information than I have. He had better share it with us.
In the last few weeks, as the inspectors’ report shows, the Iraqi authorities intensified their co-operation and substantial progress was made. A day after the war started, Dr Blix briefed the UN Security Council on their work plan which, inter alia, identified all outstanding disarmament issues and included benchmarks and timeframes to resolve those outstanding issues. He went on to say that the work of the inspectors would have been completed within months. Now, all of that is academic. The war has started.
We note the comments of the Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, that the legitimacy of the war without the UN Security Council mandate would be questioned. He urged the coalition to respect international law and humanitarian law. The urgent challenge now is to prepare for the possible negative consequences of the war. The critical challenge is to restore confidence in the United Nations. Other challenges include, inter alia, increased terrorism, instability in the region - which can impact on international peace and security, clash of civilisations, increased religious hatred and intolerance, tragic loss of lives of ordinary Iraqis and others involved in the war, the humanitarian tragedy, further delays in pursuing the Middle East peace process, a global economic slowdown and the volatility in the oil market.
I want to believe that the most immediate and urgent challenge that faces the international community is the humanitarian tragedy. Today there are reports of a humanitarian disaster which is unfolding in the Basra area because there is no electricity or clean water. We seriously regret that the food-for-oil programme has been suspended. We hope that the sharp divisions that have emerged in the UN and Security Council, the EU and Nato and other multilateral institutions can be resolved very soon because without unity the world will not be able to tackle the many challenges facing humanity.
The coalition will undoubtedly win the war. Can they win the peace? Only time will tell. The Iraqi war also brings into sharp focus the Palestinian issue. Rachel Corrie, a young American who was in the prime of her life, was crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer on March 16. In her last letter to her parents she wrote, and I quote:
I don’t know if many of the children here have ever existed without tank shell holes in their walls and the towers of an occupying army surveying them constantly. I think that even the smallest children understand that life is not like this anywhere.
She went on in her letter:
I wonder if you can forgive the world for all the years of your childhood existing, just existing in resistance to the constant stranglehold of the world’s fourth largest military backed by the world’s only superpower in its attempt to erase you from your home.
She then said:
I think we need to use some of our privileges to get these voices heard directly in the United States.
She ended by saying:
I am just beginning to learn about the ability of people to organise against all odds and to resist against all odds.
The tragic murder of this young idealist must drive us all to work harder to find a solution to the Middle East crisis. It is absolutely vital that a road map which was produced by the United States, the EU and Russia is made public and implemented immediately and without any attempted changes by the Israeli government. That road map is the only way forward to take us to a peaceful two-state solution.
We welcome the Palestinian initiatives to start implementing the road map as reflected by the election of a Prime Minister and the writing of a new constitution. As part of the presidential Spier project, we recently hosted a Palestinian constitutional committee to come and study our experiences. We are happy to report that it was a very successful visit. Minister Sha’ath, who led the delegation, wrote to the President and said, I quote:
The committee has never had an opportunity to meet with so many distinguished activists, academics and state persons at one time, all of whom have so much directly relevant experience to the process of constitution-making within the framework of attaining independence and freedom. We are taking your experiences and the lessons we have learnt to heart as we continue in our efforts to create a truly legitimate and visionary constitution with the Palestinian people.
We also hosted an Israeli security and intelligence group in February. That visit too was very successful. The leader of the Israeli delegation, in a letter to the South African Government, said and I quote:
In the week that has passed since our return we have had some time to digest the discussions and the valuable lessons that we learnt. Naturally, each of us will come away with a particular experience but overall we all share a strong conviction that South Africa’s experience has much to offer us Israelis and Palestinians. I hope that we can indeed address the perceptions regarding South Africa’s disposition in order to expose a wider circle of Israelis to these insights that we experienced while we were in Cape Town.
Clearly, the South African Government, in the totality of its foreign policy activities, is attempting to bring about peace and stability not only on our continent - as the Minister reflected - but also in two major conflict situations: the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the Iraqi conflict because those are the two fundamental issues that impact on world peace, security and stability.
I want to stress that if we do not solve those two issues quickly, the Pandora’s box of terrorism that everybody has referred to will be opened and we will all be living in a very grossly unstable and insecure world. I don’t think that this is what Rachel Corrie died for. I think that if we want to pay tribute to her sacrifice we must, as I said earlier, intensify our efforts both to bring about peace between the Palestinians and Israelis and indeed to ensure that the war against Iraq is ended soon.
Walt Whitman, 130 years ago, in his poem Passage to India wrote and I quote:
Year at whose wide-flung door I sing! Year of the purpose accomplish’d! Year of the marriage of continents, climates and oceans! I see O year in you the vast terraqueous globe and giving all. Europe to Asia, Africa join’d, and they to the New World, The lands, geographies, dancing before you, holding a festival garland, As brides and bridegrooms hand in hand.
This is humanity’s challenge. I hope that we can as a nation respond to it. Thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, there are a number of you who are holding conversations loud enough for me to hear in the Chair. You are going to disturb the speaker. May I please ask you to keep order in the House.
Dr P W A MULDER: Mr Chairman, during the period of the so-called Cold War the countries of the world were divided into the Eastern bloc countries, the Western bloc countries, and the Non-Aligned Movement. The United Nations, the Non-Aligned Movement and the African countries played an important part in a balancing act between the Eastern and the Western blocs.
That gave Africa international political power, far above our real strength and our real ability to influence international events. The Cold War era ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union. In the past 10 years, the international world has been busy with the realignment of nations and with a re-evaluation of international instruments like the UN.
South Africa and the Department of Foreign Affairs must not make the mistake of trying to understand the world of the 21st century in Cold War terms. That period, with an East and West bloc, is forever gone. In the new world, or the so-called new world, there is only one superpower, namely the United States of America.
When I listened to some of the speeches in this House, it seemed the speakers still think we are in the Cold War period, that Africa still plays an important role and that we can force or blackmail the United States into doing what we think is best for the world. As a small country, we cannot change these new realities. Whether I like it nor not, that is the reality. We must accept it and start playing according to the new rules for the benefit of South Africa. President Mbeki is more realistic than most of the previous speakers with his Nepad proposals. This new world is economically divided into three economic power blocs. The European Union is on the one side, the Americas are on the other and the far Eastern countries are a third grouping, with Japan and China playing a major role. Africa is not mentioned as a role- player in this league of super-economic blocs.
President Mbeki’s Nepad proposals consider this, take it into account and are the only way that South Africa and Africa can prevent our continent from being left behind forever and start playing a role. But then Nepad must succeed. I’m afraid that this Government, because it still sometimes thinks in Cold War terms, is making mistakes internationally that endanger the Nepad proposals.
An American senator recently said that South Africa asks for money from Western countries, and specifically from the G8 countries, but the South African Government is friendly with all the enemies of the West. That is correct. This is not a pro-Western or an anti-African point of view. This is a common-sense point of view. And I speak as an African. I repeat: As a small country, we cannot change these new realities. We must accept it and start playing according to these new rules. Place the best interests of Africa first, and of all of us as we sit here.
Meneer, in Afrikaans is daar die gesegde dat jy nie jou brood aan albei kante gebotter kan hê nie. As Minister Zuma op 3 Maart vanjaar vir die Pretoria se persklub sê dat Suid-Afrika nooit Zimbabwe sal veroordeel solank die ANC aan die bewind is nie, klink dit na Koue Oorlog-denke. Dis ‘n ernstige fout en dis sleg vir Nepad.
Tien dae later veroordeel President Mbeki Zimbabwe as hy in Gaborone sê, ons sien al geruime tyd die aangeleentheid in Zimbabwe word nie reg benader nie. Minister Zuma se “nooit” het toe tien dae geword voordat die ANC wel Zimbabwe veroordeel het.
Meneer, niemand durf die gevolge van die oorlog in Irak onderskat nie. Wat veral belangrik gaan wees, is hoe die internasionale politiek ná die oorlog gaan verander. President Bush het die Verenigde Nasies en sy tradisionele bondgenote soos Frankryk en Duitsland geïgnoreer in sy besluit om Irak aan te val. Dit gaan die rol en die plek van die Verenigde Nasies ná die oorlog ingrypend verander, is my voorspelling.
Hierdie Parlement se Buitelandse Sake Komitee het die Verenigde Nasies in 1999 besoek. Die spanning tussen Amerika en die Verenigde Nasies was toe reeds duidelik. In belang van Suid-Afrika moet ons hierdie nuwe situasie koelkop benader. Koue Oorlog-denke gaan tot die verkeerde besluite lei. Ons enigste riglyn, of dit nou oor Zimbabwe gaan of oor die toekomstige rol van die Verenigde Nasies, of oor Amerika, moet wees wat is in belang van Suid- Afrika en Afrika. Niks anders speel ‘n rol daar nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[There is a saying to the effect that you can’t have your cake and eat it. When Minister Zuma told the Pretoria Press Club on 3 March this year that South Africa would never condemn Zimbabwe as long as the ANC was in power, it sounded like Cold War thinking. This is a serious mistake and it is bad for Nepad.
Ten days later President Mbeki condemned Zimbabwe when he said in Gaborone that we have been able to see for some time now that the matter in Zimbabwe was never approached correctly. Minister Zuma’s “never” became 10 days before the ANC did indeed condemn Zimbabwe.
No one dares underestimate the consequences of the war in Iraq. What is going to be important is how international politics will change after the war. President Bush ignored the United Nations and his traditional allies like France and Germany in his decision to attack Iraq. My prediction is that this will dramatically change the role and the position of the United Nations after the war.
This Parliament’s foreign affairs committee visited the United Nations in
- The tension between America and the United Nations was already clear at that stage. In the interests of South Africa we must approach this new situation calmly. Cold War thinking will lead to the wrong decisions. Our only guideline, whether the issue is Zimbabwe, or the future role of the United Nations, or America, must be what is in the interests of South Africa and Africa. Nothing else plays a role there.]
I had planned on complimenting Dr Pallo Jordan on his role as chairman, but I think he is worried that it might be a kiss of death so I won’t compliment him at all. I will maybe build his image and say he’s a very dangerous ANC man. [Laughter.] Thank you, Sir.
Mr P H K DITSHETELO: Deputy Chairperson, as we are about to discuss the financial matters of the budget on foreign affairs, we are confronted and reminded once again by the sound of bombs raining down on Iraq. It is sad that innocent civilians are caught in the crossfire in a war that is not of their own making.
As South Africans, and in particular the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we have to ask again and again: Is there a chance that we can stop this war at this stage? Have we done enough to prevent the outbreak of this unjust war in the first place? Are our missions abroad effective in promoting and communicating our foreign policy in a manner that advances our interest and contributes to the efforts by our counterparts elsewhere in pursuing peaceful settlement in dealing with global issues affecting us all, negatively or positively?
These are the challenges that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should address in justifying the resources that this department is requesting. The department has put it to us that at least an amount of R29,9 million would be raised through the sale of properties that it does not need in accordance with its policy objectives. We need to know which foreign properties would be sold and the reasons for their disposal. If we sell these assets for the sake of selling in order to raise funds in the short term, are we not running the risk of having to rent offices and accommodation in the near future for our needs? Have we investigated other options of turning these identified assets into income generation for the department?
The danger is that we will do so at the …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, would you just take your seat? Thank you. Hon member, you may now carry on.
Mr P H K DITSHETELO: The danger is that we will do so at a higher cost in terms of paying in foreign currency to compensate for short-term gains. We should really apply our minds with regard to the proposed disposal of these assets. In addition, we need to establish the true value of these properties earmarked for sale if we indeed proceed with this plan. There have been cases where some of Government’s assets were alleged to have been sold below their actual market value. Has the department identified a specific property management company to handle the proposed sale? We should not sell if the market conditions are not favourable, even though we are going to earn in foreign currency. We hope this is not the case with the department to balance their books.
It has to be emphasised that the revenue raised as a result of this exercise should not be used to fund staff salaries, but sustainable and development programmes of the department, in particular training of more diplomatic foreign corps … [Time expired.]
Mrs F MAHOMED: In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Deputy Chair, Minister, Deputy Minister, colleagues and friends, our charismatic leadership assert themselves on all matters promoting good governance and respect for human rights. We thank you. Clearly, our foreign policy objectives are reiterated in all our efforts bilaterally and multilaterally to ensure that the interests of the developing countries are taken on board.
We support this Budget Vote and I am happy to say the DFA’s budget increase for international organisation of 79,5% caters mainly for a R170 million transfer to the World Food Programme. This was a transfer payment to donate 100 000 metric tons of maize to countries in the SADC region which are most seriously affected by food shortages.
Since the 1940s, multilateral organs have continued to advocate the interest of a few in the world. Tactical marginalisation and the poor global community ensure that the rich become richer and the poor remain poor. The greatest challenge for multilateral institutions is to meet the global challenges of humanity as a whole. True democratisation is imperative so that inclusion and transparency are realised.
The UN’s mandate is to save humanity from the scourge of war. Its responsibility demands that it seek peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world. If some members of the UN Security Council flagrantly defy the multilateral organs, their actions question the very existence of these organs. The naked aggression of the US military forces invading the sovereignty, integrity and dignity of the Iraqi people is blatant defiance of multilateralism. It is rather disturbing that the UN Security Council is unable to deal with member states who continuously flout UN resolutions. Such acts of terror lead to catastrophic consequences in terms of crime against humanity. The unjust Iraqi war unilaterally imposed by the US and its allies has thrown the whole world into uncertainty and despair. Most nations are vehemently protesting the arbitrary action, which shows a clear violation of international humanitarian law. The hopelessness of war and the loss of innocent lives of women and children is catastrophic. Peace and security globally is threatened for all.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is predicted by many to worsen, and more innocent lives will be lost. Let us hope it will not happen. Again, the UN resolutions are flagrantly defied. The single most important instrument for creating a conducive place for good governance is peace and security, and if that is threatened, the ripple effect of any developmental agenda of any country is hampered.
It is disconcerting that since the 1940s continuous debates about restructuring and reform of the UN only end up in the so-called open-ended working group which in reality means nothing but illustrates the hopelessness of empty rhetoric. Multilateralism seems to be a macho organ of men only. It is about time that more women served on the important multilateral organs so that true transformation of the global community is realised.
President Mbeki called on member states, at the 57th session of the general assembly, to work together and strengthen the multilateral system to ensure that global problems are addressed in the interest of the global community.
It is a proud moment for South Africans as we are currently not only making a difference in the lives of our own people, but our Government is playing an important role in the global community. We are currently serving on the Economic and Social Council, the Commission on Human Rights, the Commission on the Status of Women, the Commission for Programme and Co-ordination, and the UN Statistical Commission. That is really commendable. We are also members of the International Seabed Authority and Chair the UN Commission on Sustainable Development.
We need to honour and commend our own Justice Navanethem Pillay who is now one of the eighteen judges in the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Kumi Naidoo was appointed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the UN panel responsible for examining the links between the UN and civil society.
In terms of disarmament and arms proliferation, we have continued active participation in the international debate on disarmament, nonproliferation and arms control. Our Government has utilised multilateral forums to ensure that a regulatory mechanism does not limit the access of developing countries to technology and material required for peaceful socioeconomic development.
Many debates continue to question the very existence of the WTO. Some claim that it was not necessary to increase the World Trade Organisation seventeenfold. Others say that this increase was attributed to the flexibility of the GATT trade regime. The birth of the WTO in 1995 was not due to the collapse of world trade, as was experienced in the 1930s. Others argue that its very existence was not justified to maintain global peace as is evident in the 5 inter-state wars, that is, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Arab-Israeli War, the Falklands and the Gulf War.
It is evident that armed conflict was no reason for the existence of the WTO. However, following the Uruguay rounds in 1986-94, the initial seeds for the WTO were planted.
It is believed that the WTO serves primarily the interest of the developed countries which have taken this opportunity to extend it to the TRIMs and the TRIPS, which refer to a Trade-Related Investment Measures and the Trade- Related Intellectual Property Rights, for their own benefit.
Our Government actively participated in the WTO negotiations in Geneva. Many problems were encountered during the agricultural negotiations due to the reluctance of developed countries to reduce the export subsidies of domestic support. Other areas of contention were trade-related aspects of international property rights and public health. No agreement has been reached with regard to timeframes or deadlines and this is a grave concern for tangible and real development to take place in our country. There is a fear that if these concerns are not addressed and resolved, then the WTO ministerial meeting in Cancun, Mexico in September 2003 could be futile.
If the international agenda is committed to halving the number of people living in poverty by 2015, then fundamental change will have to take place in terms of nondiscrimination and a serious effort to level the playing fields globally. A concrete plan of action must effectively implement sustainable developmental objectives on a global level.
With this in mind, we have many challenges ahead of us. Therefore, our vigilance and resourcefulness will allow us to face up to the huge complexities to realise our own developmental agenda and then embrace it to compete on the global level.
The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund must and should be reformed so that the global financial architecture is able to prioritise the needs of developing countries. Marginalisation, discrimination and indifference are not characteristic traits of democratic institutions. It also needs to be noted that the World Bank and the IMF are not research institutions which churn out written reports only, but should play a pivotal role in changing the lives of ordinary human beings who are really the end users. Unjust control of access to credit for the developing world will exacerbate poverty and underdevelopment.
Reform of the Bretton Woods institutions is imperative so that a holistic approach is taken to achieve sound financial governance. Developing countries should be relieved of their huge debt burden, which has negative consequences for improving the lives of our people.
Renewed and accelerated efforts should be made to promote our South-South relations. Missions need to be resourced and capacitated to achieve success in this area.
The world agenda in helping developing countries will be negligible as the World Bank and the multilateral finance institutions will redefine and reprioritise their spending by earmarking more money for the reconstruction of Iraq rather than developmental issues. It is about destruction and reconstruction. All else is irrelevant for the developed world.
While we are aware that there are a handful of people who are architects of a master plan of world domination, it is disconcerting that this plan seeks to illegally exploit the natural resources and other forms of wealth in developing countries in the name of trade or other related jargon. Our region is being raped of our mineral resources, timber, forestry, fauna, flora and endangered species.
If good governance and respect for the rule of law is to be upheld, the implementation of international humanitarian law and cultural heritage law is crucial. The present crisis in Iraq poses many challenges in this regard. I am happy to say a number of SADC states have established a national plan for international humanitarian law.
Issues of good governance, democracy and transparency are paramount to world peace. The governments of major industrial powers dominate the agenda of the World Bank, IMF and WTO. The buzz words, namely globalisation and trade liberalisation, need to make fundamental shifts in the lives of people. We need to become aware that the sponsored structural adjustment programmes almost imposed by the World Bank and IMF limit the sovereignty of nation states to a great extent.
Hunger and abject poverty in many countries is a stark reality today. We must call for an end to the dominance of rich countries. It is also encouraging that our ACP-EU partnership supports our Nepad objectives. As for the Commonwealth, our President as the chairperson oversaw the successful conclusion of the high-level review group on the review of the Commonwealth and its governance. Our Government’s contribution to NAM is also phenomenal and we hope that our commitment to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries in the world is upheld.
In conclusion, the catastrophic crises in the world, for example, the horrific and pre-emptive war in Iraq, leave us with many global challenges. Many concerns arise: Who will draw the new boundaries around the world? Who will hold the balance of power in the world? How will the global community reconstitute itself? Are globalisation and liberalisation other names for recolonisation? Is the acquisition of greasy oil more valuable than the spilling of blood of humankind?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! May I request the Whips to assist the Chair. I think some of the Whips themselves are out of order, so would they please bring themselves to order and help to keep their members in order. [Interjections.]
I think, hon members, it is objectionable for you to continue, on a repeated basis, to speak in a manner that is disruptive. You are not conversing in a manner that is quiet and allows for the main debate to proceed. It is disturbing and of the type of volume that I think is unacceptable in Parliament. May I please ask you and the Whips to assist.
Dr S E M PHEKO: The PAC supports the Budget Vote on Foreign Affairs. We think that the money allocated to this department is inadequate in the light of the fluid situation in the world. Because of the limited time at my disposal, I will deal with a few issues which the Minister of Foreign Affairs must take cognisance of. At any rate, I am sure her department has already done so.
The war in Iraq will affect this budget but, above all, our country and continent and the rest of the world must rise to the occasion and rally the world for peace and justice in international relations. It is therefore an illegal war. For the first time since the League of Nations, the predecessor of the UN, the world has a war which has not been sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council. This makes this war an illegal war.
Britain and the United States of America are bombing and killing women and children in Iraq. Their reason is that they are destroying weapons of mass destruction whilst, back in their own countries, they have weapons of mass destruction which are 100 times more powerful. South Africa’s foreign policy must be based on justice and on the legal obligation that all member states of the United Nations must abide by the charter of this world body. The present world situation gives us a golden opportunity to reform the United Nations. Our foreign policy must contribute to this. The African Union must speak with one voice.
Back on our continent, the DRC political formations must approve and sign the constitution and security agreement which will move the peace process forward.
Current world events will affect the new partnership for development which depends on G8 countries, including the USA. Events in the world call for a foreign policy which, though seeking assistance from others, is based on self-reliance.
Let us have a foreign policy that flows from the logic of the African situation. Let us remember even in our darkest hour that our martyrs of ancient times, in bracing their minds to outward calamities, acquired the loftiness of purpose and moral heroism with a lifetime of security and prosperity. Let us defend justice in the world and pursue a foreign policy which promotes equality and respect of all nations. Let us resist imperialist domination in all its forms. Let us oppose selective morality in international affairs. [Applause.]
Mr O BAPELA: Deputy Chairperson, the ANC fully supports the budget for the year 2003-04, including programmes as stipulated by the Department of Foreign Affairs. Important in the programmes are the strategic and key political aspects which have put South Africa as an important player in international politics and global affairs. The successes in holding the World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance and the launch of the African Union last year in 2002 are some of the highlights of our role which received acknowledgement by the world.
We continue to strengthen solidarity with the developing world, building partnerships with the developed world to foster sustainable development. We are also promoting good governance, sustainable socioeconomic development and poverty eradication in Africa, and participating in international efforts to seek everlasting peace and stability in conflict-ridden areas.
Again South Africa was chairperson of the Non-Aligned Movement and is currently chairperson of the African Union and is participating in SADC, the Commonwealth committee, Sacu, the United Nations and all its bodies and in all the Bretton Woods institutions.
The world has integrated and become a village but the gap between the rich and poor countries is huge. If we are to succeed in playing a role, championing our values and strategic goals for a better world for humankind, we must be active players and lead when appointed to positions of importance. We also should educate our people to know and understand that the world has changed and is changing. While domestic issues are of critical importance and indeed they are a priority to our Government and our movement - and we should address them - we need the world bodies, bilateral agreements, multilateral institutions, fair trade relations, etc, for us to be able to narrow the gap between the developed and the developing countries.
Our people must know that when the leadership of our country attends meetings, it is about engaging on these challenges. It is about the narrowing of the widened gap between the rich and the poor and it is also about championing or advancing the aspirations of the Third World countries. Therefore they should reject and denounce the so-called prophetic verses of the doom prophets who say that we care less about the domestic challenges. The doom prophets lack vision and behave as if South Africa is not an African country and act as if South Africa is not part of the poor countries of the South. Refuse to be fooled and they will come amongst you and tell lies about this Government not caring, as if they cared. Let them not mislead you with their smooth talk, and beware - they will even come to you and claim easy victories. This reminds me of a quotation by one of the great African leaders, Amilca Cabral, when he said: ``Tell no lies and claim no easy victories.’’
From now on, our people should know that when the President or the Deputy President or the Ministers and Deputy Ministers travel, they are engaging with issues of the world. It is because they care about you. They are engaging the world to create a better one, are raising issues of the poor countries which South Africa is part of, and they are involved on your behalf in levelling the playing field in matters of trade and investment to push back the frontiers of poverty in our country and in the developing countries.
The Foreign Affairs Budget Vote is taking place, unfortunately, at a time when the world and the international situation is in crisis as a result of the war in Iraq. We have witnessed, for the past five days, the raining down of heavy bombs on Iraq in an operation called ``shock and awe’’. We see and hear sounds of explosions and thunder, sirens wailing, smoke going up in some cities of Iraq, soldiers under cover of tanks, and gun planes and helicopters moving into Iraq as if we were watching a Hollywood movies. Millions of people in the United States, Europe, Asia and Africa, including here at home and all over the world, are shocked, terrified, angry, dismayed, horrified and continue to oppose the war as the means to resolve our problems.
Repeatedly the ANC and our Government have stated in statements and speeches that any war on Iraq must be a UN-sanctioned war. We have stated that we do not hold a brief for Saddam Hussein and we do not support nor did we support the regime of Saddam Hussein. The ANC is also not supporting any unilateral position taken by the most powerful nations whose actions undermine the very important institutions that were created to be platforms for settling disputes and for creating a better world. We as the ANC are not on any side in this war and merely are opposed to it to protect the principle of multilateral politics, and call for respect of the United Nations and the international laws.
South Africa contributed immensely to the debate in the world in arguing for the UN resolution to be fully implemented. We also sent a delegation to meet with Iraqi authorities to urge them to comply fully and co-operate with the UN for Iraq to fully implement the UN resolution. We also offered help by sending our scientists to Iraq. Unfortunately, as the offer was being considered, the war started.
However, some in the House continuously and deliberately distort positions of the Government and those of the ANC. They either tell lies to deceive the nation or for political point-scoring, even on matters of such magnitude for the wellbeing of the world.
I do not think the ANC is speaking in parables in this House. To quote from Scripture, reading in Matthew, Chapter 13:13:
Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not understand.
And it continues to say:
`You will be ever-hearing but never understanding; you will be ever-seeing but never perceiving. For these people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes.
It would seem some in the House have genetically modified brains or genetically modified minds. They can’t think straight; their thinking is skewed. For example, they are the ones who were pushing everybody to the extent of calling the ANC cowards about the legislation on crossing of the floor. When it happened last in the local government elections, they screamed that the ANC wanted to create a one-party state and that this spelled the end of multiparty democracy. So they claimed. Today, they are the ones smiling for getting new members who joined them from the New NP. [Interjections.]
Today we see the most powerful and strong saying they are right in acting unilaterally; the strong and powerful saying they have all the rights in the world, and the strong and powerful who say they have no constraints. We see the strong and powerful bullying everybody and cajoling the weak nations and undermining the very multilateral institutions we set up to resolve political disputes.
Our focus as a country is to ensure that bodies such as the UN are transformed and strengthened to meet the challenges of the 21st century and our major challenge, post-war, is to bring back the respect and confidence to such bodies. We dare not fail.
Africa’s programme, Nepad, will suffer a setback as the world is now focusing on Iraq and the programme is off the agenda of world bodies. Instead of focusing on peace, development and the creation of a better world, the main focus is on the war in Iraq and, thereafter, it will be on post-war Iraq. Many see war on Iraq as annexation; others say it is the colonisation of that country, and yet other views say the powerful and strong will change governments elected by people in countries that opposed war and those regarded as part of the axis of evil. Many more will be worried about loyalties and will lose their focus on the fundamental issues of development in the Third World countries.
South Africa continues to play a role in the global community and particularly in Africa. There is a wider acceptance and acknowledgement of the role South Africa is playing in global affairs, as described by the Department of Foreign Affairs.
My focus in this Budget Vote debate is mainly on Africa and its continued challenges, which are underdevelopment; nongrowing economies; diseases such as malaria, TB, HIV/Aids, malnutrition; conflicts; coups d’état; human rights violations; lack of access to land; illiteracy and innumeracy; wars; exploitation of its natural resources; and refugees fleeing from their homes and wars or conflicts in their own countries. As we meet in this august House, another coup d’état took place two weeks ago in the Central African Republic. No one has spoken about the coup d’état except the ANC. Not even the so-called proponents of good governance and human rights, as they anointed the title to themselves during the debate on the Nepad peer review mechanism last year in November, have said anything. They are quiet. To them, Africa is Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe is Africa.
It is unfortunate that even in this era where African leaders have pledged and committed themselves to ridding the country of the bad image of coups d’état, there are still amongst us those who are bent on continuing with their greedy motives for power at all cost. A week before the coup d’état in the Central African Republic, the ANC assigned me to meet with the delegation, led by the special presidential envoy and accompanied by one of the leaders of the opposition parties, who were in the country to study and share our experience of negotiations, in particular on reconciliation and nation-building. Their country was already preparing itself to dialogue on problems facing their nation. I spent seven hours in their meeting due to interpretations of English and French, and they were fascinated by the way South Africa handled its internal problems and transition. They had also, during their stay, met with the Department of Foreign Affairs, the SA Human Rights Commission, and the commissioners from the now wrapped-up Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We are shocked as the ANC to learn about the coup d’état.
The Department of Foreign Affairs continues to play an admirable role in ensuring that all disputes and conflicts in the continent are resolved speedily, and is raising the flag of our country and its leadership in acting with the people of Africa to resolve our problems and face the challenges. You are indeed implementing the programme of the African Renaissance and must be commended for the good work, Minister.
We read the report presented to Parliament that spells out some of the key challenges facing the continent, amongst which are: problems in the Côte d’Ivoire, the Inter-Congolese dialogue, Angola, Burundi and also Rwanda and Uganda relations, Somalia, Comoros Islands and Sudan. On the issue of Zimbabwe, the ANC supports the Government process of engagement with all stakeholders, including the government of Zimbabwe, the ruling party, Zanu- PF, the opposition MDC and the civil society groupings, for them to dialogue and find solutions which will bring stability and an end to the political problems and economic crisis facing Zimbabwe. Shouting or making a noise and ventilating amount to hot air.
Condemning Zimbabwe, as the opposition parties want us to do, will not help in the resolution of the problem. Quiet diplomacy, by its very nature, is a dialogue between states. The attempt in any quiet diplomacy is to influence another state that is sovereign to assist it in achieving the desired objective.
On the question of Swaziland, as the ANC, we request the Government to include it in its programme and use quiet diplomacy by engaging with the Kingdom of Swaziland and the government for constitutional reforms. In Swaziland, the constitution was suspended in 1973. All political parties are banned. There are still detentions and torture and the king is ruling by decree. Recently, there were reports by Amnesty International which indicate violations of human rights and we should assist the people of Swaziland as we do those of other countries on the continent, through quiet diplomacy, to resolve their problems.
The problem of poverty remains the biggest challenge for Africa. Currently, the Southern Africa region is afflicted by famine. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development is not only the newest and most fashionable game on the African continent, but also the latest in the efforts by African political leaders to deal collectively with the countless national, regional and continental political and socioeconomic problems and development challenges facing Africa. The challenge with the focus on war in Iraq, as the President put it yesterday at the All Africa Council of Churches in Johannesburg, is:
Although Nepad and the AU are on track, the war will affect Nepad and African programmes. It will hamper development in Africa. Africa will go back in terms of attention given. We have to rely on our resources, we have to rely on our efforts and on our resources to the many challenges facing the continent.
It has been the critics’ view that we should not rely too much on foreign funding for Nepad and, at the time, they said Nepad would turn into a leopard and devour all of us. We must mobilise our domestic resources as the continent in addition to foreign funding and advance the objectives of Nepad. Also, we must create for ourselves markets and increased trade amongst ourselves as the nations in Africa if we are to conquer our challenges.
In conclusion, we must, with urgency, as a country and the continent, implement the resolutions of the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, and also those resolutions of the WSSD. The ANC joins the people here and the world over in the condemnation of the war. The ANC also recommits itself, as it did at the Stellenbosch national conference, to the creation of a better Africa and world. I thank you.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. The Minority Front notes the hefty task the department is challenged with.
Politics in the country is tedious to contend with, let alone global politics and pressure where each step has to be counted a number of times before being taken. In view of this, the MF applauds the department and hopes that the budget allocated for the financial period 2003-4 will be beneficially utilised to the advancement of South Africa in foreign relations.
Global diversities and tensions certainly challenge the department in building relations with foreign countries, and the MF congratulates them on the positive reception thus far. Our eager participation and adherence to the international organisations and institutions also serve to gain us better access to these intended relations.
The measurable objectives of foreign relations appear to be successful thus far. However, being swung into situations such as Zimbabwe, the Israeli- Palestinian conflict and now the Iraqi-American war, where we are pressurised into siding and playing a part, poses much difficulty for the department. It is not always easy to maintain neutral ground and the South African people whom we serve are certainly watching our movements, contributions and effects in that respect. Thus, the positive image that the department is trying to paint through their programme of public diplomacy and protocol plays its part here, whereby this positive image is to be conveyed both domestically and internationally.
The department’s increased involvement internationally is expected to be costly. Noting that a large percentage of the budget is allocated for payment to those employed internationally, it would have to be asked whether a reduction in persons accompanying those employed could be implemented by a certain percentage to further accommodate escalating departmental costs.
The MF is, however, impressed by the good work and neutrality that the department has maintained globally, and wishes the department well in the forthcoming year in all endeavours and missions. The MF supports Budget Vote No 3 on Foreign Affairs. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr C AUCAMP: Hon Chairperson, it seems as if foreign issues frequently are more explosive than the many internal issues and problems with which South Africans have to cope. I ask myself the question why. Surely issues on labour, crime, poverty, and even racism should raise more emotion than these often remote problems. Why are foreign issues such a dividing force in our politics; sometimes much more so than in the sphere of civil life? Is it because foreign issues often serve as the battlefield for our deepest own unresolved differences and our divided past and backgrounds?
In some way, we have reached the maturity to address internal problems in a practical way and to find solutions - not always satisfactorily, but at least we have opened debate with issues and particularities and practicalities - a deciding factor. The moment, however, we address foreign issues, it’s more than often as if different worlds and different backgrounds meet each other on the battlefield.
Dikwels kry ‘n mens dan ook die gevoel asof die Regering se buitelandse beleid self gekenmerk word deur ‘n polariserende tweeslagtigheid. Aan die een kant is daar die besef dat die heil van Suid-Afrika en Afrika lê by die lande van die vrye wêreld; lande met ‘n vrye ekonomie en gesonde en gevestigde demokratiese beginsels. Hierdie is lande van wie ons afhanklik is vir handel en beleggings. Aan die ander kant heers die ou ‘‘struggle’’- sentimente en word die finale lojaliteit bewys aan oud-strydgenote. Dit lei tot eensydige en weifelende optrede in ons buitelandse verhoudinge, byvoorbeeld Irak.
Die Nasionale Aksie is verlig dat president Mbeki sedert die uitbreek van die tweede Golfoorlog die ANC se anti-Amerikaanse retoriek aansienlik afgeskaal het. Ons is bly daaroor. Sekere uitsprake wat selfs as pro-Saddam vertolk kon word, het ons land op groot risiko gestel. Hier dink ons veral aan die vrese van die ANC se Sekretaris-generaal toe die VSA Suid-Afrika aanval vir ons minerale of die Minister van Gesondheid wat eerder duikbote wil koop as antiretrovirale middels omdat die VSA blykbaar ‘n groter gevaar vir Suid-Afrika is as Vigs. Ja, selfs oudpresident Mandela se neerhalende verwysings na president Bush se begripsvermoë en president Bush en mnr Blair se rassisme omdat hulle die vent kwansuis ignoreer vanweë Kofi Annan se velkleur, wil jy nou meer.
Hierdie uitsprake doen Suid-Afrika nie goed nie. Die AEB se standpunt is dat as daar nou een stryd is waar ons ons moet uithou, is dit hierdie een - in Irak. Die groot aanklag van uni-terrorisme van VSA se kant raak ook relatief as ons dink dat sy bondgenote nou al by die vyftig tel.
My laaste punt is die inkonsekwentheid wat die meeste pla. Ons het ‘n inkonsekwente buitelandse beleid. Dit gaan die verstand te bowe dat Suid- Afrika so heilig geroepe voel om Amerika te wys op multilateralisme, op die lyding en ontwrigting van oorlog, op internasionale reg, maar in Zimbabwe verbreek Suid-Afrika alle reëls van ware multilateralisme as ons deur ons troika, waarvan ons President deel is, die Statebond tandeloos maak teen Mugabe. Die lyding van vroue en kinders, die ontwrigting van normale lewens in Zimbabwe tel vir die mindere, soverre Irak. In die oordeel op die VSA beroep u op internasionale reg, maar as die regstaat in sy wese aangetas word, dan swyg ons regering. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Often one gets the feeling that the Government’s foreign policy itself is characterised by a polarising ambivalence. On the one hand there is the realisation that South Africa’s welfare, and that of Africa, depends on the countries of the free world; countries with a free economy and sound and established democratic principles. These are countries on which we depend for trade and investments. On the other hand we find the old ``struggle’’ sentiments and the final loyalty is shown to those who used to struggle by our side. This results in unilateral and vacillating action in our foreign relations, for example Iraq.
The National Action is relieved that President Mbeki has scaled down the ANC’s anti-American rhetoric considerably since the outbreak of the second Gulf War. We are pleased about that. Certain statements which could even have been interpreted as pro-Saddam have put our country at great risk. Here we think especially of the fears of the ANC’s secretary-general about the USA attacking South Africa for our minerals, or the Minister of Health, who would rather buy submarines than antiretrovirals because the USA apparently poses a greater danger to South Africa than Aids. Yes, even former President Mandela’s derogatory references to President Bush’s powers of comprehension and President Bush and Mr Blair’s racism because they were apparently ignoring Kofi Annan because of the colour of his skin, would you believe it.
These statements are detrimental to South Africa. The AEB’s standpoint is that if there is one struggle that we must steer clear of, this is it - in Iraq. The accusation of uni-terrorism on the part of the USA also becomes relative when we think of the fact that its allies now amount to almost fifty.
The last point is the inconsistency, which is the greatest concern. We have an inconsistent foreign policy. We cannot understand why South Africa feels called upon to make America aware of multilateralism, of the suffering and disruption of war, of international law, but in Zimbabwe South Africa breaks all the rules of true multilateralism when, by means of our troika to which our President is a party, we make the Commonwealth toothless against Mugabe. The suffering of women and children, the disruption of normal lives in Zimbabwe, is not deemed to be important as far as Iraq is concerned. In condemning the USA, international law is invoked, but when the constitutional state is essentially affected, our Government remains silent.]
The ANC, when commenting on the United States and Iraq, declares in a holier-than-thou manner that no country has the right to impose a regime change on another. But when one dictator, Robert Mugabe, illegally and through clearly witnessed election fraud prevents his own people from effecting a regime change, the poor MDC is blamed for the failure of reconciliation talks because they had the audacity to challenge these fraudulent elections in court.
It is time that the realities of today and not the loyalties of yesterday determine our international relations. South Africa is regarded as a respected member of the world community, as our popularity at very full international events clearly shows. Let us wear that crown with distinction, with integrity, with a sense of what is the right thing to do. [Interjections.]
Lastly, hon Minister, surely not the right thing to do was the way in which you treated the media at the recent meeting of the Pretoria Press Club. You are South Africa’s chief diplomat but I must say that, from what we could see on television of your conduct, that was not silent diplomacy but loud animosity. Thank you. [Time expired.]
Dr Z P JORDAN: Deputy Chairperson, Comrade Minister, hon members and comrades, I rise to speak in support of this Vote. I also want to thank the members of my committee and the hon Minister for the kind words spoken about me from this podium during the course of this debate.
On Thursday, 20 March, I was among a group of guests who attended a parade of the 19th Infantry Regiment of the SA National Defence Force at its base just outside Khayelitsha. Six soldiers from that regiment received medals on that day, which marked the homecoming of SANDF personnel who had served in the SA Protection Service detachment deployed in Burundi as one of many confidence-building measures taken to restore peace and stability to that troubled land. Only one amongst the troops that had been deployed in Burundi did not come home. He had lost his life in an unfortunate bathing accident. But, thankfully, not as a result of military engagement.
The safe return of our troops who had been sent to a sister African country, not as destabilising invaders, but as friends intent on assisting our fellow Africans to re-establish the institutions of government, bears testimony to the changed role South Africa has assumed both in Africa and in international affairs. After nine years of democracy South Africa has earned an honoured place among the nations of the world as a small developing country, but one that punches way above its weight division.
During the past nine years this country, under the leadership of the ANC- led Government, has been accorded the honour of election as head of the Non- Aligned Movement, has served as Chair of the Commonwealth and is currently Chair of the African Union. Only the churlish would deny that South Africa’s democratic Government has raised our country out of the pariah status it had earned under apartheid and won recognition as a valuable member of the international community, capable of offering much sought- after advice to others, and blessed with leaders whose opinions are highly considered in the corridors of power in every part of the world.
Since 1999, South Africa has played host to two important world conferences: the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001, followed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002. On both these occasions, the role played by our Department of Foreign Affairs, under the able stewardship of Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, contributed to their success.
South Africa has used what influence it has to help transform the international bodies it has been ordered to lead. With the end of the Cold War, many thought that the Non-Aligned Movement, which had come into existence in the context of the Cold War, had lost its relevance and would either collapse or slowly fade into oblivion. Because we recognised that the Non-Aligned Movement was essentially an international body that brought together the developing nations of the world, instead of allowing that movement to die, acting together with others, we helped to make it relevant to the issues of the 21st century.
Our chairmanship of the Commonwealth offered South Africa yet another opportunity to act together with others to use this unique forum, where countries of the developed North sit side by side as equals with countries of the South to collectively strategise about solutions to the modern world’s most pressing problems. The opportunities for dialogue created by the Commonwealth had been of great assistance in devising the measures that are required to turn the promise of the growing mutual interdependence of nations into sustainable solutions. Acting through the Commonwealth, the countries of the South and the North have been able to adopt mutually acceptable standards of good governance and sustainable development and have agreed on shared goals of economic growth.
It is these experiences that convince us that in the world that has emerged from the long winter of the Cold War multilateralism, which entails translating our mutual dependence into shared responsibility for our collective security and world peace, is the only viable way forward.
No one doubts that the nations of the world are differentially endowed in terms of wealth, military power and, consequently, influence and esteem. But I would submit that the history of the past two centuries, which witnessed bloodletting and killing on a scale our ancestors would have thought unimaginable, should serve as a warning that it would be wiser to employ humanity’s present-day productive capacity for our mutual upliftment rather than for our mutual destruction. At no other time in human history has humanity’s ingenuity developed the capacity to produce enough food to feed the hungry and banish the threat of starvation that has haunted past generations. At no other time in human history has human ingenuity evolved the capacity to produce the plenty that could eradicate poverty and want from the planet. At no other time in human history has humanity’s capacity for invention made possible the realisation of the age-old dream of a society in which every human being is properly housed and clothed. Yet, at this very time, millions, not only in sub- Saharan Africa, but in many parts of the world, go to bed hungry, their bodies ravaged by preventable diseases, in pitiable hovels that are incapable of protecting them against the elements.
The World Summit on Sustainable Development, which South Africa hosted in 2002, quite correctly identified the struggle to eradicate poverty and want as one of the key elements of a platform of truly sustainable development. That Johannesburg summit was notable not only for the breadth of participation, but also for the programme it had adopted, with specific targets and timeframes for their realisation.
It is a matter of record that South Africa was among the countries that led the charge for the adoption of that programme. The contribution this country is making for the realisation of a better world may strike some as undue attention to matters far from home. But in a world in which the smoke stacks in the state of Indiana in the USA, in the Ruhr valley of Germany, in the Ukraine, in Tientsin in China and in the industrial heartland of Japan can result in global warming, it is only the wilfully blind who would insist that these matters have no place on our national agenda.
The World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance was ridiculed as an extravagant waste of taxpayers’ money by some in this very House. These ill-considered words had barely left their mouths when the terrible and ugly face of intolerance showed itself in the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers of New York. It is an indictment of the puerile myopia of some of the political leaders in our country that it requires such terrifying events to sharpen their vision.
It is equally saddening that so many of our world’s leaders appear to have derived purely negative lessons from that experience. It is a matter of profound regret that a sense of siege appears to have taken hold amongst many of the developed countries of the North. Even the United States of America, a country that owes its prosperity and power to successive waves of immigrants from various parts of the world, has turned inward and is adopting a fortress mentality that spurns the apparent outsider. Worse yet is the attitude that has taken root in a number of European countries, where some immigrant groups are not merely rejected but even characterised as unassimilable by their host countries.
The phenomenal rise of xenophobia affects South Africa in equal measure. This hostility towards foreigners is doubly regrettable in our country because it targets immigrants from the African continent more than any other group. Amongst the responsibilities our Government must assume is that of educating the South African public about the sterling contribution African immigrants are making to this country.
One will find many African immigrants staffing faculties in our leading universities. One will also find them in vital scientific and industrial research institutions and amongst other professions. South Africans must be taught to shed the negative image of African immigrants as problematic druglords and fraudsters or as sources of cheap labour who are taking food out of the mouths of deserving South Africans.
Globalisation, like so many new developments in the lives of nations, has a dual character. On the one hand, it has made the world a much smaller place by linking its far-flung quarters through means of near-instantaneous communication and trade. But its bounty has not been distributed equally among the nations of the world. Far too many people are experiencing globalisation as yet another instance of the strong acquiring power over the weak. Yet, if differently managed and controlled, globalisation could be turned to great advantage precisely by the weak and the poor. The revolution in telecommunications could make it possible for a developing country lacking medical and health expertise to access the skills of the best-trained physicians and surgeons of another country that is better endowed.
A rational division of labour could make it possible for a developing country to produce components for industrial processing in another country, to their mutual benefit, and vice versa. Mutually beneficial synergies between developed countries and developing countries that do not entail the exploitation of the labour force of the latter are now possible, as are synergies amongst developing countries themselves. In the World Trade Organisation and UN Commission on Trade and Development, South Africa has sought to galvanise developing countries for collective action in order to turn globalisation to our advantage.
The international political environment created by the US-UK invasion of Iraq underscores the urgency of the challenges facing Africa. As Comrade President Thabo Mbeki has remarked, this invasion has pushed Nepad and indeed all other programmes for the upliftment of the peoples of the developing countries further down on the international agenda. This increases the likelihood that Africa will have to fall back on its own resources to translate Nepad into a meaningful programme.
As the powerhouse of African economic growth, an unequal burden will fall on South Africa in such an eventuality. I remain confident that our Government will win the support of all parties represented in this august House when South Africa is called upon to assume such responsibilities.
We have often said that peace and stability on the African continent are essential for economic growth and the upliftment of her peoples. Our Department of Foreign Affairs is playing a role second to none in striving for peace. It is going to be important for South Africa to persuade all the major political players on the continent that politics is not a zero-sum game in which one winner can only win if the other loses.
The peer review mechanism of the AU and Nepad will be an important instrument to win acceptance of this principle amongst African countries. Like peace and stability, democracy and good governance are developmental issues. Africa waged a century-long struggle against colonialism and apartheid precisely to establish the principle …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I’m trying to help you because some of the colleagues are continuing with their own debates. Carry on, hon member.
Dr Z P JORDAN: Good governance and democracy are developmental issues. Africa waged a century-long struggle against colonialism and apartheid precisely to establish the principle that governments should derive legitimacy through the consent of the government. Democratic institutions are therefore not privileges that may be extended or withheld at the discretion of those who wield power. They are an entitlement, a right that the people of this continent waged struggles to attain and won at great cost.
In the ANC’s continued interaction with the political parties in Zimbabwe, we have warned against the subversion of the rule of law, as we have about the heightening of political tension. We have warned also against the temptations of recklessness that could easily precipitate armed conflict.
It is a matter of public record that the ANC and the Government it leads have done these things. Yet the opposition prefers pretending that we have not. It is important to emphasise, once again, that diplomacy entails a dialogue with the sovereign government of another country. Its purpose is to persuade, not to coerce one’s interlocutor to change his behaviour.
The manner in which one conducts that dialogue is determined by the results one hopes to achieve. If one’s purpose is persuasion, it serves no useful purpose to adopt a hectoring and bullying tone. If one’s purpose is to achieve communication, shouting and extravagant posturing could well undermine that purpose. It is a patent absurdity to accuse the South African Government of quiet diplomacy because diplomacy is, by its very nature, quiet. If, however, one’s purpose is to intimidate and browbeat, that too will determine one’s conduct.
While we were admiring the brave men and women of the SANDF’s 19th Regiment, in another part of the world other soldiers were being sent into battle. Unlike the soldiers of our 19th Regiment, quite a number of those will never see their homes again. South Africa was among the member states of the United Nations who sought to achieve the disarmament of Iraq by peaceful means. Mr Dumisani Khumalo, our ambassador to the United Nations, acting on behalf of both the AU and the Non-Aligned Movement, played a distinguished role in that effort. But as matters progressed, after the first report made by Dr Hans Blix and his team in December 2002, it became increasingly clear that the United States and Britain were intent on military action.
The United States made its intention clear from the onset. If it did not
receive a UN mandate, it would proceed with those countries willing to
follow its lead. The question we have to ask is: Is the United States
administration’s attitude to the United Nations captured in the remarks of
Mr Richard Perle, one of Vice President Cheney’s principal advisers, who
recently called it, I quote: That chatterbox on the Hudson''? He went on
to say:What will die is the fantasy of the UN as a foundation of a new
world order, the liberal conceit of safety through international law
administered by international institutions.’’
Britain had striven hard to win a UN mandate, but having failed to convince the majority of members of the United Nations Security Council, Britain deceitfully chose to reinterpret United Nations Security Council Resolution
- The Charter of the United Nations is unambiguous on this matter.
The United States’ claims that Iraq poses an imminent threat to that country are unconvincing. The British foreign Minister even stooped to plagiarism to find justification for this dangerous course of action. The actions of these two countries amount to an abrogation of multilateralism, a subversion of the United Nations and could well be a breach of international will.
As one has warned on previous occasions …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, your speaking time has expired. [Applause.]
Dr Z P JORDAN: This is 20 minutes.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: It’s 18 minutes.
Dr Z P JORDAN: No, 20 minutes! Definitely 20!
Hon MEMBERS: Twenty!
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Let me just check with the Table. Is it 20 minutes? … [Interjections.] … Eighteen minutes? [Interjections.] Dr Z P JORDAN: Eighteen minutes? [Inaudible.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon member.
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Thank you, Deputy Chair. I would like to thank all the hon members who have participated in the debate and those who have listened to the debate.
I’ll just say a few words in response, probably starting with the hon member Colin Eglin. Indeed, I agree with him on what he said about the war and its unpredictability and the centrality of multilateralism. Unfortunately, he went on to say that President Mbeki has failed to play his multilateral role within the Commonwealth.
Let me just explain that the mandate given to the troika was very clear. The troika was given a mandate to look at Zimbabwe in relation to those elections in relation to the Commonwealth report, to assist Zimbabwe in resolving the problems in the country. After their first meeting they had to review, after a year. They met in London; they agreed on the suspension of Zimbabwe from the councils and they agreed on the other areas of work.
And then after six months, suddenly, the chair of the troika calls them to review the situation in Zimbabwe. The mandate was to review after a year. Of course, because South Africa and Nigeria wanted to act in good faith, they went to the meeting held after six months. They held discussions and two of them said, ``We must continue with the efforts in Zimbabwe and review after a year as we were mandated.’’ One, the chair, did not agree. And the chair of the troika took it upon himself to go to a press conference and say that this is his position and the others must explain their position.
Now, who is failing to keep the multilateralism and democracy in that troika? Who is failing? But, of course, unfortunately, hon member Colin Eglin, probably acting on behalf of his party, is unable to criticise Prime Minister Howard for failing, because it is very clear who failed that effort of the troika. [Applause.]
Now I don’t know whether it’s his ability not to understand - and I’m quite sure it’s not, because Colin Eglin, we know, is a bright person. Maybe it is a problem of not being able to criticise another white person. It’s possible. [Interjections.] It’s possible. But, Mr Colin Eglin must explain to us why he is unable to say it was wrong for the chairman of the troika to take that position. No person who chairs any committee and behaves in that way will have it considered acceptable. So he must explain to us why, instead of saying it’s President Mbeki who failed to behave within the troika.
So, let’s come to Zimbabwe. We’ve always said that when we don’t agree with Zimbabwe we tell them, and we’ve said it in public. What we have not done is to condemn. As a Foreign Minister my duty is not to condemn; my duty is to build bridges, to dialogue, to persuade. It’s not to condemn. Criticising and condemning are two different things. I’ve not condemned a single country. I talk, I dialogue, I persuade, I negotiate. That is my duty and it’s going to remain like that as long as I am the Foreign Minister of this country. [Applause.]
And it is for that reason that South Africa is actually enjoying good relations with all the countries in the North and in the South; poor and rich. It is because we don’t go around condemning. And that is why South Africa is not about to go to war with anyone; because when you go war you’ve failed in terms of diplomacy. [Applause.]
But, there are lots of situations in the world. If the opposition decides that they want to go around condemning, it’s fine. They are in the opposition, they have that luxury. But it’s a pity that they only can see as far as Zimbabwe. We’ve got so much suffering in the world. I’ve never heard him say one word about the Palestinians. [Applause.] I haven’t even heard him say anything about the coup that happened two weeks ago. I haven’t heard anything said about the suffering of the Palestinian children. I haven’t heard one word. Maybe he can only see up to Zimbabwe and his horizons are not broad enough. I don’t know.
But, I think, unfortunately, for many members in the opposition, their feared nightmare is the resolution of the Zimbabwean problem, because they’ll have nothing to say. [Interjections.]
Mr M J ELLIS: You know us better than that, Dr Zuma. You know us better than that. The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: I know. I know you better than anybody else and I can talk with authority because I know you. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order! Hon members, we can’t have a running commentary. You can make an interjection, but no more than that. Hon Minister, carry on.
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Hon Koos apologised as he has had to leave, so maybe I will answer him when I do meet him at some stage.
Coming to some of the comments made by hon Geldenhuys, of course I agree with a lot of what he has said, just like I agree with a lot of what hon Colin Eglin said. But of course I must say that, as I have said, we are not anti any country. We are not anti-America. We are not pro-Saddam Hussein in this conflict. But we have to uphold the principles of the United Nations. We have to uphold the principle of solving problems through dialogue. We have to uphold the principle of trying, as much as we can, to protect the present and future generations from the scourge of war. So, it is not an anti-American stance. It’s a stance for peace, for peaceful negotiations and for peaceful disarmament. We agree completely with the Americans, just as we agree with everybody else and as the UN Security Council has said, there must be disarmament. But indeed we did not agree that there was a need for war in pursuit of that disarmament. And therefore I would just like to assure you that we are not anti-American at all. But of course, where we differ with America, we will differ. There are no two countries that will always agree. We have our own principles, we have our own philosophy and we have our own respect for international law and therefore at times we will differ with any country.
Coming to the other speakers from the UDM and so on, a lot of what they have said, really, I agree with, about Nepad. Hon Mulder, what you said about Nepad we agree with. We don’t agree that we are in a Cold War mode. We are not, but we don’t follow any country blindly. We have our own independent thinking and we follow our own independent principles. [Applause.]
On the question that Nepad will depend on us, as Africans, I couldn’t agree more. Indeed it will depend on us and everybody else will come in if they think we are serious and we will succeed.
On the sale of property, the property that’s being sold is not property that is being sold to augment our budget. In any case, whatever we sell goes to the Treasury; it doesn’t come to us. So we are not trying to balance the books. Just to give you two examples: One of the houses that needs to be sold used to be a residence in the Bophuthatswana homeland when we were pretending in South Africa that Bophuthatswana was a country. We had a mission there representing Bophuthatswana and there is an ambassadorial residence there and we think it needs to be sold so that we can be able to buy other residences.
The other residence, for instance, is our residence in Bonn. As you know, the capital moved from Bonn to Berlin, so we had to have a new residence in Berlin. The one in Bonn is no longer necessary. So those are the type of properties that we are trying to sell. And we are hoping that we can persuade the Treasury to give us money in lieu also to buy properties. So, I just wanted to assure hon members on that.
And then on the question of what hon Geldenhuys raised about whites in the department, it is not altogether true that whites can no longer move to any higher position than they were in before. Of course, there is lots more competition now because it is open to everybody, whereas in the past it was just them. But it is not true. We have had promotions of white people which we can give you to show you that they do move up. But it’s true that they won’t move as easily as they did before and it’s only to be expected, not because they are white - why should it be because they are white? It’s because there is more competition. There are people who were not allowed to compete for those posts who are now allowed to compete. [Applause.]
And then on the question of the vacancies, it is true that there are some vacancies that are not filled. There are a number of reasons for that. Firstly, there is a process that’s taking place within Government, in which there’s a moratorium on filling posts, which is supposed to go on until June, after which, hopefully, that process will be over and the moratorium will be lifted.
Secondly, even when the moratorium is lifted, we probably won’t be able to fill all the posts, simply because we don’t have enough in the budget to fill all those posts. So we will fill some, but we’ll still not be able to fill all of them because, as you have all said, hon members, if we were to fill all 800 posts we would not be able to have an operational budget. We would just be paying salaries and with all the work that we have to do, that won’t be possible.
So I thought I would just respond and say thank you very much once more. I enjoyed the debate and I regret that I’m not able to be at home more often to engage in the debate …
Mr M J ELLIS: Hear, hear!
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: … including talking to you.
Mr M J ELLIS: The good old days!
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Thank you very much. [Applause.] Debate concluded.
FOOD RELIEF ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(First Reading debate)
Mrs R R JOEMAT: Madam Speaker and hon members. Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to put on a record that all the members and the parties in the committee agreed it was not necessary to debate this Bill. But I suppose the hon member Taljaard must be confused again.
The ANC supports the Bill before us. The Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill is a special adjustment to appropriate additional funds for the requirements of the Department of Social Development and the Department of Foreign Affairs, in respect of the 2002-03 financial year.
The Department of Social Development will receive an amount of R230 million to fund the implementation of domestic food relief in the form of food parcels. The Department of Foreign Affairs will receive an amount of R170 million. These funds will be transferred to the World Food Programme. This will honour the commitment made by our Government to donate a 100 000 metric tons of maize to countries in the SADC region. The World Food Programme will set up the delivery mechanisms and the necessary criteria to identify the SADC countries that will benefit from these funds.
The rich can afford to leave a country when conditions in a country are not favourable, but it is the poor that remain behind and bear the brunt of poverty. We, the ANC-led Government, will reach out a helping hand to our brothers and sisters in Africa. South Africa will continue to act as part of the international collective to encourage dialogue amongst all the political and other role-players in Africa in an effort to create an environment conducive to reconciliation and reconstruction and development.
Development and co-operation with countries in Africa forms an integral part of South Africa’s foreign policy. Technical and financial assistance, especially to SADC countries, is regarded as a major instrument for promoting economic development, peace and stability on a regional basis. It is within this context that the Department of Foreign Affairs offers development, co-operation and assistance to SADC countries. We live in a world driven by science and technology. To enhance our development capacity, we need to increase investment in research and development within the SADC regions. This will assist us to achieve high productivity levels and make us competitive in the international marketplace. We should also spend more on research and development. But, for some SADC countries, this is a luxury to have on their budget. There is very little money that is spent on research and development. More resources need to be mobilised from Government and the private sector to fund research and development. We are more fortunate than some of the SADC countries and, therefore, we do not turn our heads. We will reach out and help.
The birth of the ANC started in the hearts and minds of the poor and the oppressed. The Freedom Charter says, “The people shall share in the country’s wealth”. So, we come from poverty, and we know what it is to be poor. Our major constituencies represent the poor. To the DA/DP elite: You analyse, romanticise, become experts on the poor, even speak on behalf of the poor, and write papers on poverty, but where is your action?
In the Bible, there is a saying, “If someone has nothing in his or her stomach, how can you say, -`go in peace’?” I want to invite the DA and DP elite to come and experience poverty, where it is normal for a neighbour to borrow a cup of sugar, or six slices of bread until Friday, hoping that the father will bring some wages home, or when there is a knock on your door, and a woman asks you for chicken giblets, or chicken skins, so that she can make some food for her children.
In the early 1970s, the Christian Institute under Comrade Beyers Naudé had a community awareness project to develop an understanding of and to be sensitive to the plight of the poor. As comrades and volunteers, we received R5,00 for the weekend to survive. We were then dropped in poverty- stricken areas, and had to make contact and communicate with the community, and find shelter with families for the weekend. The comrades would then be picked up on Sunday afternoon to relate their experiences.
In consultation with the community, we had to identify projects to assist these communities. Most of our experiences amounted to the fact that we never knew how hard it is to be poor. But we also discovered that those who have little still share the little that they have. I recommend to the DA and the DP to go into such programmes.
As the Minister stated, these amounts appropriated in this Bill were not allocated to a particular department at the time of the adjustment budget, because the relevant departments were still investigating appropriate interventions through interdepartmental technical committees. The findings of these committees were taken into account, and the domestic food needs will be in the form of food parcels, and will be distributed through nongovernmental organisations and community-based organisations. The food parcels will provide direct assistance to the most destitute and vulnerable groups within our communities.
These additional funds will enhance and add to the existing social assistance provided by the Department of Social Development that manages the poverty relief programmes for the provinces. The poverty relief programmes target vulnerable groups, namely women, children, youth, the elderly, and people with disabilities.
As our President stated in his speech on the opening of Parliament this year:
… the Government must act to ensure that we reduce the number of people dependent on social welfare, increasing the numbers that rely for their livelihood on normal participation in the economy. This is especially relevant to the accomplishment of the goal of enhancing the dignity of every South African.
Therefore, it is important to integrate the capacities of the people dependent on these grants, and to integrate them into the poverty relief programmes and ensure that these projects generate an income.
Poverty strips our people of their dignity. No family should live on hand- outs and hope it will be there tomorrow again. Parents must be able to provide for the basic needs of the family, and do it with pride, integrity and dignity. The ANC will continue to ensure a better life for all. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms R TALJAARD: Deputy Speaker and colleagues, I can assure the hon Joemat that the DA does visit the poor, and they certainly do not go there in their 4x4s or wearing their Gucci suits, like the hon Tony Yengeni did. [Interjections.]
The DA supports this Bill. However, there are areas in which we have a number of difficulties. Firstly, in respect of the R230 million to be distributed domestically, there is a great degree of concern that despite the decision to make food relief available, there was not greater clarity about the lead department, the distribution mechanism or criteria for eligibility to be applied in administering this programme.
This was clear in the deliberations of the Joint Budget Committee last year, when the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement was tabled. The fact is that such detail has not been forthcoming since November last year and there has been, therefore, a hold-up in the distribution of much-needed relief. This is unacceptable.
When policy decisions are made by Cabinet, even in cases of emergency, the systems and structures for something as material as food assistance must be worked out at the same time. Lags of months are unacceptable, as every day that ticks by is a day of relief foregone. This while private sector players and retailers have announced and implemented, with immediate effect, a degree of subsidisation on basic foodstuffs and cut prices.
The answers by National Treasury, before the portfolio committee this morning, that areas hardest hit by drought and the price hikes in food will be targeted based on a poverty map still to be developed by Statistics South Africa are unacceptable. We trust that details on the eligibility criteria and distribution mechanism for these food relief parcels will be provided to Parliament’s finance, social development and Joint Budget Committees forthwith.
We cannot merely appropriate money and not be provided with details of how the programmes are to function on the ground. Secondly, in relation to the R170 million destined for SADC, via the World Food Programme, one cannot ignore the fact that many of the food crises are not merely the result of bad weather, climate change and drought. Bad policies, bad people and bad politics all play their part.
As Mr James T Morris, director of the UN World Food Programme said in his testimony before the US Congress in February, and I quote:
… there are four immediate triggers for large-scale food emergencies. Most recent crises have been fuelled by a combination of these factors: failing economic policies, political and ethnic violence, Aids and a sharp rise in natural disasters.
The World Food Programme is currently projecting that up to 14,4 million people are likely to be affected by the food crisis in Southern Africa, with nearly half of the population of Zimbabwe at risk of starvation. While Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland and Zambia are all affected, there is no doubt that Zimbabwe is the worst afflicted.
While we support the humanitarian aid in this Bill, South Africa’s Government has much to account for in respect of its policy in Zimbabwe, where 6,7 million people face starvation, consumed by the fire and ire of the tyrant. [Interjections.]
In referring to Zimbabwe … [Interjections.] Of course, we do. If you doubt that, you are mad. In referring to Zimbabwe, as the greatest source of alarm in the region, Mr Morris said,
It is not our place to judge the merits of land redistribution in Zimbabwe or elsewhere. But the scheme now operating in Zimbabwe is damaging. Thousands of productive farms have been put out of commission and food output will be a mere 40% of normal levels this year.
This scheme, along with restrictions on private sector food marketing and a monopoly on food imports by the Government’s Grain Marketing Board are turning a drought that might have been managed into a humanitarian nightmare. More than half of Zimbabwe’s 12 million people are now living with the threat of starvation.
In March, the IMF stated that concerns over governance issues, pervasive price controls, chaotic land reforms and the grain marketing monopoly have contributed to Zimbabwe’s crisis, and there is no doubt that our policy has contributed as well.
It is clear from events in Zimbabwe that food is being used as a weapon in domestic politics, and the World Food Programme has had to suspend local food distribution in Zimbabwe twice due to political interference. This is a further crime being perpetrated against the people of Zimbabwe.
While it is true that a post-Iraq reconstruction will pose yet further possible demands on the prospective food and famine fund which will be established with US and G8 money in Evian in France in June, it is quite clear that it will take concerted efforts for Africa to show how, through Nepad and the AU, it will seek to address the four triggers for food crises, highlighted above by Mr Morris before Congress.
Dealing decisively with food security issues will take a far more concerted effort, requiring political will and not only R170 million. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Dr G G WOODS: Madam Deputy Speaker, when the R400 million was announced last year, my party, firstly through our Ministers who are in the Cabinet, agreed, and when it was announced through the MTEF, the party as a whole supported the food distributions as a wholly and totally appropriate humanitarian response to people both within the country and people in our neighbouring states who are suffering and who are without food.
We do see the situation as largely situational, that it’s not something that will happen every year, but it’s very much largely due to weather conditions and, as I say, the response was entirely the correct response.
Moving to today’s Bill, seeing as this is to simply formalise the decision and give effect to the adjustment to the budget, we have no problem. We support the Bill. Going forward, we are aware that some of these programmes are fairly advanced in their distribution.
We would then state our expectations of the two departments concerned, the Departments of Foreign Affairs and of Social Development, to continue monitoring the distributions and to ensure that they do, indeed, reach the target constituencies. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr G W KOORNHOF: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement of 2002 announced the intention of the Minister of Finance to make available R400 million per year, over the next three years, for food relief programmes.
Since then, the Department of Social Development has been identified as a line-function authority to implement these programmes in co-operation with other Government departments. An interdepartmental technical committee was set up to make proposals regarding the distribution of food parcels.
In May 2002, the UDM had already proposed a food parcel system for targeted groups in our communities. It had also proposed utilising major food retailers and other retail outlets in the rural areas to assist in the distribution of food parcels, using a contact list smart card system. Such a card would contain basic centralised data to control the issuing of all food parcels to targeted individuals and would also eliminate all possible forms of fraud, corruption and duplication.
What is therefore needed to successfully implement a food parcel distribution programme in South Africa, is a well-thought-through system with identified target groups and effective card distribution mechanism, and the active involvement of both the private sector as well as the Government.
We will support the funding of the implementation of food relief programmes and we would urge the Minister responsible for the line function, namely the Minister of Social Development, to develop an effective distribution system, including criteria, role-players and a workable implementation master plan.
The UDM supports the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill. I thank you.
Mrs R M SOUTHGATE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The ACDP supports the additional allocations. However, we hope that the families, at the end of the day, will enjoy the primary focus of these particular allocations.
We just would like to say that the social problem, obviously, is plaguing our communities; and that is the problem of unemployment. Definitely, the violence is adding to this and aggravating the situation, and we feel that because of the gang violence, also, it is putting a lot of hardships, I believe, on the family. [Interjections.] Danny, let me please complete my debate.
The food relief of approximately R400 million is only a direct short-term plan to address issues of severe hunger and deprivation in our communities. However, we do acknowledge that the chief challenge that faces our communities is definitely sustainability and, obviously, the fact that there is no employment. That makes it very difficult.
One concern that we do have is that food parcels must reach their legitimate beneficiaries. What we do know and what we have seen in our community is that prominent Ministers are actually handing out these food parcels, and we are gravely concerned because it seems they are politicising this particular event. [Interjections.]
Yes, Madam Speaker. It seems that the ANC is grandstanding in this particular event, and I would caution the ANC against that because we have seen that it creates a lot of mayhem in the communities and you are not able to control it. What we are saying is that the bodies which are able to do that are the NGOs and the church organisations. [Interjections.]
So, I just hope that the ANC will heed this caution. Thank you.
Mr I S MFUNDISI: Deputy Speaker, we in the UCDP know that no man can be a patriot on an empty stomach. With poverty so rife and people finding it difficult to eke out a living, the legitimacy of the Government has to be proven by each doing whatever the communities need to have done; in this case, the provision of food relief.
We maintain that the measure should be only for relief, while other efforts are made to ensure that the dignity of the people is restored, by creating a conducive climate for more jobs. People need to earn a living and not depend on hand-outs, regardless of who offers them.
The UCDP believes that true freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. People should not be dependent on Government for their daily livelihood. The NGOs so selected should be broad-based and nonpartisan. As matters stand now, most NGOs are not as independent as they should be, and tend to further the interests of the party that holds the purse strings and, invariably, there will be a tendency to cater for some and not others.
We propose that a greater portion of the food relief be allocated to churches because they minister to all people, regardless of their standing in the community.
We, in the UCDP, call on the Government to assist in creating a wholesome atmosphere for investments, and thus have more job opportunities where people can earn their living without necessarily being given these things. I thank you.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Poverty is the root cause of our socioeconomic instability. Statistics show that a large percentage of our people live below the poverty line, and it is surprising how they survive.
Minimal resources hinder improving conditions, but improvements have been made. Starvation is by no means the way to die. The biggest problem is that the reality of the situation is not only an epidemic for the Republic of South Africa, but for Africa as a whole. We have to, within our means, assist the overcoming of this situation.
The appropriation of R230 million to the Department of Social Development, in respect of the 2003-04 financial year, to fund domestic food relief intervention is supported by the MF.
We cannot watch our nation starve and suffer. We must do what we can to overcome poverty and attain sustainable development. The work of the Department of Foreign Affairs, in the light of the SADC region, has been extremely crucial.
South Africa has a larger responsibility to the larger entity of Africa. The efforts in assisting in food relief for countries within these regions are supported by the MF. Thus, the appropriated amount of R170 million to the department in this respect is understood.
The MF supports the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Speaker, there is actually very little to say because I think the debate is misplaced. The issues were dealt with in the committee and it was supported. I am not quite sure why we are debating this, save that some individual opted to use the time to demonstrate that she is too clever by half. But, it is by half because I think she fails to understand that the R170 million will be distributed to the World Food Programme and they will undertake responsibility. It is not the Government that gets involved in this. The stories that are told and retold, I think people found from some funny website, because the World Food Programme’s approach to food distribution and their own role is quite different from what the hon Taljaard told us here. [Interjections.]
Sorry. You Rhodesians must stop whingeing in this House, you know. [Laughter.] You must stop whingeing because Rhodesia will never come back, so listen. [Interjections.]
In respect of the distribution, it is being done in partnership with NGOs. The launch happened in Bekkersdal on the West Rand, but essentially this programme is being undertaken by the provinces in partnership with NGOs. Those NGOs are wellknown, and Government is not directly involved in the distribution itself.
In respect of what the hon Rajbally said, it is not for the new fiscal year. It is for the fiscal year which ends on 31 March.
Let me express appreciation again to all those who contributed to the discussion in the committee this morning. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a first time.
FOOD RELIEF ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(Second Reading debate)
Mr K A MOLOTO: Madam Speaker, I will be very short in this debate. There was consensus, actually. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: I think, for the record, we are dealing with the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Bill.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I think the Minister is correct. In fact, there is no list of speakers for the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill.
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
GOLD AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTINGENCY RESERVE ACCOUNT DEFRAYAL BILL
(First Reading debate)
Mr K A MOLOTO: Madam Speaker, as I have indicated, I will be very short in this debate. There was actually consensus among most political parties not to debate this Bill.
There is just so much going well for this country. We have made tremendous progress within just nine years under the leadership of the popular liberation movement of our people, the ANC. These achievements are unheard of and unparalleled. Most developing countries are still struggling to build the sound economic fundamentals we have in this country. We always believe that these sound economic fundamentals will impact positively on the performance of the rand, and therefore it is very important that everybody in this House, irrespective of political affiliation, should be proud of these achievements.
This Bill should therefore be understood within the context of Government’s efforts to close down the forward book and let commercial banks play their rightful or traditional role of offering risk management tools to their clients in conducting businesses.
Members would ask what these forward contracts are. A forward or future contract is simply an agreement in which a buyer and a seller agree to conclude a transaction at a predetermined time in the future at a price agreed upon today. Commercial banks normally facilitate the inclusion of these contracts. Losses and gains are either suffered or realised by the seller or buyer in the process.
The other question would be: How does the South African Reserve Bank fit into this picture? The South African Reserve Bank got involved in these contracts around the early 1970s. Truly, the issue of the forward book is a relic of the past which forms part of the previous government’s exchange rate management strategies, and this present Government is committed to closing down this relic of the past.
It is important, however, to know that the losses and gains arising from currency depreciation or appreciation are recorded in this account. The losses on this account have to be settled by Government. Equally, any profits realised from these accounts have to be transferred to the National Revenue Fund. The balance of this account on 31 March 2000 was a debit amount of $28 billion. However, I need to be quick to point out that the net open forward position declined from a high of $23 billion in 1998 to $1,5 billion in January 2003.
Government has committed itself to paying this $28 billion in four equal amounts of $7 billion spread through the coming years. We are confident that the ANC Government will close this relic of the past. [Applause.] Ms R TALJAARD: It is truly alarming, hon Minister, to see what voodoo does to the mind. We trust you will soon recover.
Owing to the depreciation of the rand, the SA Reserve Bank made significant losses in settling its forward book obligations. While subsequent currency strength may ameliorate these losses, they are being settled in accordance with the payment amounts for the 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 financial years provided for in the Bill before the House today as a direct charge against the National Revenue Fund.
The fiscal framework makes provision for an amount of R28 billion in payments spread over four years, pending a final audit of the total amount that is for the account of the fiscus in accordance with the explanatory memorandum of the Bill. Paragraph 4 of the explanatory memorandum states:
Although the total liability has yet to be finalised, the loss reflected in the GFECRA balance is of such a magnitude that a partial settlement had to be made during the 2002-03 year. This necessity arises from the impact over time of forward losses on liquidity in the South African money market, and the need to provide the Bank with resources that in turn are required for the effective conduct of its monetary policy responsibilities.
It is regrettable that this Bill is being rushed through Parliament with such haste. Though, with the end of the financial year looming, it is probably understandable. However, it would have been desirable to hear from the SA Reserve Bank on how the account balance hinders the effective conduct of monetary policy, to hear further detail on the impact of this account on liquidity in the money market and to hear expert opinion on whether the route chosen to defray this account liability is indeed the best route out of available alternatives. This, Minister, although you may not like it, is the interrogative role Parliament should play and the role that it has been denied in processing this matter.
The procedure followed in respect of the processing of this Bill is wholly insufficient and, with due respect, deficient. The Minister of Finance introduced this Bill in the House on Wednesday last week. This morning the Portfolio Committee on Finance held brief deliberations on its content and this afternoon we are debating it. We do not believe that this is sound parliamentary practice. We believe that the Bill is being processed with undue haste, even though the matter was raised, in principle only, in the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement last year, with insufficient input and other views expressed before the committee. We do not believe that the matter has been sufficiently dealt with and will therefore abstain from voting on this Bill.
Furthermore, there are questions that have to be asked about recent statements and reports that suggest the SA Reserve Bank has intervened in the currency market. Last year’s Medium Term Budget Policy Statement stated:
The Reserve Bank’s approach has been to not intervene in the foreign exchange market in order to build up foreign reserves or contract the net open forward position. Only proceeds from Government’s foreign borrowing and privatisation were used to reduce the NOFP.
While one can understand anxiety at the slow rate of privatisation proceed inflows and the desire to wind down the remaining net open forward position, there are questions that arise from recent reports about the actions of the Reserve Bank that will be pursued when the Governor of the Reserve Bank appears before the committee on Friday.
These questions must be cleared up in order to gain clear answers on the policy pursued by the Bank in respect of the foreign exchange market. These are important questions. The Governor has indicated on previous occasions before the committee that he would like to have an opportunity to discuss fully with the committee the impact of the wording of his constitutional mandate in terms of section 224 of the Constitution. Perhaps the time has come for that discussion on Friday. I thank you.
Dr G G WOODS: Madam Deputy Speaker, the highly competent acting chair of the Portfolio Committee on Finance gave a very lucid lecture on the technicalities of the Bill a moment ago, which doesn’t leave the rest of us with much to say.
Yes, I think the situation we’re looking at has been many years in the making. We all know what it’s about and we’ve all followed it over time. I think the important point that the hon Moloto raises concerns the forward book and the contracts, and we are aware that there have been policy changes there and that that situation is unlikely to repeat itself, and that is the situation that accounts for most of the losses we’re talking about.
With regard to the remainder of the losses from the gold price and the value of the rand, we’re fully aware of what happened in recent times, especially last year and the year before. But there again, the rand has stabilised, as has the gold price, so hopefully we won’t expect a repetition of these losses. Indeed, there is every possibility that there could be some profits flowing back into the National Revenue Fund in the years ahead. With that we support the Bill.
Dr G W KOORNHOF: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, in the 2003 Budget Review the National Treasury proposed to settle the outstanding balance on the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account over the next three years. The review states:
Government is to issue nil coupons to an amount of R7 billion per year over the next three years to the SA Reserve Bank. It is noteworthy to note that the net open forward position of the Reserve Bank has declined dramatically from $23,3 billion in 1998 to only $1,5 billion in January of this year. It is known that the Reserve Bank intends to reduce this outstanding amount to zero and we will support the Reserve Bank in its aim to eliminate the net open forward position.
It’s a known fact that the depreciation in the rand results in losses on this account and appreciation results in profits in this account. Owing to this volatility in the value of the rand and the gold price, it remains a difficult task to manage the balance on this account. Neither the SA Reserve Bank nor Treasury have control over these events. Subject to the findings of the current audit investigation, the UDM supports the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Bill. I thank you.
Miss S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The MF notes that foreign debt has been a major burden on our economy. Further, the hammering of the rand has contributed to this greatly as we see that the Bank’s forward exchange cover has often exceeded its foreign assets as a result of this.
The MF is, however, pleased with the substantial decrease of the net open forward position from $23,2 billion in 1998 to $1,5 billion in January 2003, and supports a decision taken by the Bank and Treasury to settle the outstanding balance on the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account, the GFECRA, subject to the finding of the current audit investigation, over a four-year period. The MF understands the necessity of payment made to the liabilities of the GFECRA over the past financial year, and further supports the annual payment of R7 billion for three years, as proposed by the Treasury.
However, concern is expressed as to what impact the current war in Iraq may have on our currency and how it will affect the above. Noting that it is Government’s responsibility to settle the debt and the decision has been made, timing of payment as decided upon by the Bank and Treasury have defrayed the direct charges in support. The MF supports the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Bill. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Let’s just remind ourselves that what we’re dealing with here is a statutory obligation, defined, not in the defrayal Bill before us, but in the South African Reserve Bank Act in sections 25 to 27, and section 28; 28(3) in particular, is very specific about what’s required of Government, so I don’t know why we want to debate the issue if there’s a statutory obligation.
That statutory obligation must be met and all that we’re doing is saying to Parliament we need to do this in a measured way. The measured period we’re suggesting is four years. As a number of speakers have said in their contributions, it’s subject to an audit, because the Auditor-General must confirm what the amount is and that the amount was, in fact, built up in terms of the powers vested in the Reserve Bank by its own legislation.
Now, I’m sure in the discussion with the Governor all manner of things are possible, but that is about recognising the independence of the central bank. This is not about the independence, this is about a statutory obligation. Let me remind the hon Taljaard that Business Day has apologised for the confusion that they’ve created in the minds of some, but clearly that confusion still reigns in yours. I thank you, Deputy Speaker.
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Bill be read a first time.
Agreed to (Democratic Party abstaining).
Bill read a first time.
GOLD AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTINGENCY RESERVE ACCOUNT DEFRAYAL BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
PENSIONS (SUPPLEMENTARY) BILL
(First Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a first time.
PENSIONS (SUPPLEMENTARY) BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
The House adjourned at 18:50. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
THURSDAY, 20 MARCH 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
-
Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism: (1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 19 March 2003 in terms of Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bills as section 75 Bills:
(i) Compulsory HIV Testing of Alleged Sexual Offenders Bill [B 10 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).
(ii) Anti-Terrorism Bill [B 12 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
-
The Minister of Finance:
Explanatory Memorandum on the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill, 2003.
-
The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism:
(a) Southern African Development Community Protocol on Fisheries,
tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Explanatory Memorandum on the Protocol.
National Assembly:
Papers:
- The Acting Minister of Transport:
Response to a resolution passed by the House on 23 October 2002 in
respect of the safety of passengers travelling on Metrorail, with
specific reference to an incident on a train to Khayelitsha:
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION OF 23 OCTOBER
REQUEST FOR ACTION DATED 1 NOVEMBER 2002
Passenger security in the Western Cape - Four passengers were robbed
and thrown to their deaths by thugs on a train to Khayelitsha.
SARCC RESPONSE
Report of the incident: On 21 October 2002, at 21:00, it was reported
that four persons between the ages of 13-21 years old were found next
to the railway line between Esplanade and Bay Junction stations in the
Western Cape. Two were fatally injured and the other two injured were
taken to hospital. It is alleged, as was also reported in the media,
that they were thrown from a train during a robbery.
It could not be ascertained whether they were robbed, or whether they
were the perpetrators in a robbery.
The case was handed over to the SAPS who opened murder and attempted
murder dossiers. The SAPS is currently investigating the case.
SARCC SAFETY AND SECURITY STRATEGY IN THE WESTERN CAPE
The SARCC has been investigating the increase in crime-related
incidents on the total commuter rail system since March 2002. Apart
from human loss and injuries, insurance-related incidents of cable
theft, fires and vandalism have also increased the costs of providing
services.
A total safety and security strategy has been developed and tested, as
a feasibility study, with Metrorail on a section of the Western Cape
rail system. The feasibility project delivered very positive results
and were implemented on the entire Western Cape network since October
2002.
The project involves alarms on cables, helicopter surveillance and
dedicated armed security response teams. Operations are co-ordinated
with Metrorail and SAPS security and safety strategies.
The dedicated security teams also provide:
- Medical assistance to injured commuters.
- Armed response on SARCC infrastructure.
- Removing trespassers from SARCC property.
- Reporting and intervention in terms of acts of sabotage and violence.
- General crime prevention patrols on stations.
- Development of intelligence capability.
RESULTS FROM THE FEASIBILITY STUDY
- Arrested cable theft syndicates with SAPS. (Syndicates also involved
in other criminal activities such as drug trafficking, etc.)
- 28 perpetrators arrested.
- Recovered stolen property.
- Cable theft decreased in the study area from an average of 4/5
incidents per month, to zero incidents for three consecutive
months.
RESULTS AFTER FULL IMPLEMENTATION ON THE ENTIRE WESTERN CAPE NETWORK -
OCTOBER 2002
The following is the result of the abovementioned implementation:
OCTOBER 2002 - DECEMBER 2002
- Serious crime-related incidents - Decreased 63%.
- Serious liability incidents - Decreased 60%.
- Murder - Decreased 63%.
- Attempted murder - Decreased 63%.
- Assault - Decreased 58%.
- Robbery - Decreased 53%.
- Asset damage - Decreased 20%.
IMPROVEMENT OF SAFETY AND SECURITY STRATEGY
Metrorail and SARCC are currently investigating and implementing a
number of additional operational actions to further augment the overall
safety and security strategy in the Western Cape:
- Ensure doors are closed before trains depart.
- Replace windows with vandal proof composite materials to decrease
theft of windows.
- Investigating the testing of an alarm panic button on trains.
- Re-deployment of security guards.
Mr J Radebe, MP
ACTING MINISTER OF TRANSPORT
MONDAY, 24 MARCH 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly:
-
Membership of Portfolio and House Committees:
Mr J F van Wyk has been elected as chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Water Affairs and Forestry with effect from 19 March 2003.
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister of Home Affairs:
General Notice No 487 published in Government Gazette No 24952 dated 21
February 2003: Regulations for public comment in terms of section 7 of
the Immigration Act, 2002 (Act No 13 of 2002). 1. The Minister of Foreign Affairs:
(a) Report on South Africa's International Relations for 2002-2003.
(b) Strategic Plan of the Department of Foreign Affairs for 2003-
2004.
- The Minister of Defence:
The Strategic Business Plan of the Department of Defence for 2003-2004
[RP 25-2003].
- The Minister of Housing:
Strategic Plan of the Department of Housing for 2003-2006.
- The Minister of Trade and Industry:
The Medium-Term Strategy Framework of the Department of Trade and
Industry for 2003-2006.
-
The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs: The Medium-Term Strategic and Operational Plan of the Department of Land Affairs for 2003-2007.
-
The Minister in the Presidency:
Strategic Plan of the Government Communication and Information System
for 2002-2005.
TUESDAY, 25 MARCH 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 March 2003 in terms of
Joint Rule 160(3), classified the following Bills as section 75
Bills:
(i) Bophuthatswana National Provident Fund Act Repeal Bill [B
13 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).
(ii) Sefalana Employee Benefits Organisation Act Repeal Bill [B
14 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).
(2) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 25 March 2003 in terms of
Joint Rule 161, classified the following Bills as money Bills:
(i) Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 16 - 2003]
(National Assembly - sec 77).
(ii) Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account
Defrayal Bill [B 17 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77).
- Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent:
(1) Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 25 March 2003:
(i) Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Third
Amendment Bill [B 33B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 74).
NOTE: If the Bill is assented to by the President, the name of the
Act will be Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Second
Amendment Act, 2003.
National Assembly:
- Messages from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly in respect of Bills passed by Council and transmitted to Assembly:
(1) Message from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly:
Bill, subject to proposed amendments, passed by Council on 25
March 2003 and transmitted for consideration of Council's proposed
amendments:
(i) Explosives Bill [B 43B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec
75) (for proposed amendments, see Announcements, Tablings and
Committee Reports, 27 February 2003, p 102).
The Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Safety
and Security of the National Assembly for a report on the
amendments proposed by the Council.
- Referrals to committees of papers tabled:
(1) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Agriculture and Land Affairs:
(a) Strategic Plan for the Department of Agriculture for 2003-
2006.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Perishable Products
Export Control Board for the year ended 31 December 2001.
(2) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Transport and to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for
consideration:
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 annual reports.
(3) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Transport:
Report to the National Assembly on the National Land Transport
Transition Act, 2000 (NLTTA).
(4) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Arts, Culture, Science and Technology. The Reports of the Auditor-
General is referred to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts
for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the National Research
Foundation for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements for 2001-2002.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Foundation for
Education, Science and Technology for 2001-2002, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for
2001-2002 [RP 131-2002].
(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 and Financial Statements of the Office of the Auditor-
General for 2001-2002 [RP 221-2002].
(6) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Social Development:
Strategic Plan of the Department of Social Development for 2003-
2006 [RP 28-2003].
(7) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Housing:
Report and Financial Statements of the People's Housing
Partnership Trust for 2000-2001.
(8) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Water Affairs and Forestry:
Government Notice No 193 published in Government Gazette No 24363
dated 7 February 2003: Extension of time for general authorisation
in terms of section 36 of the National Water Act, 1998 (Act No 36
of 1998).
(9) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Foreign Affairs for consideration and report:
(a) Southern African Development Community Protocol on
Politics, Defence and Security Co-operation, tabled in terms
of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Explanatory Memorandum on the Protocol.
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Acting Minister of Transport:
Report and Financial Statements of the Department of Transport for 2001-
2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 167-2002].
- The Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry:
Strategic Plan of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry for 2003-
2006.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Bophuthatswana National Provident Fund Act Repeal Bill [B 13 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 25 March 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Bophuthatswana National Provident Fund Act Repeal Bill [B 13 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendment.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Sefalana Employee Benefits Organisation Act Repeal Bill [B 14 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 25 March 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Sefalana Employee Benefits Organisation Act Repeal Bill [B 14 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendment.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 16 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 25 March 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Food Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 16 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a Money Bill, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Bill [B 17 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), dated 25 March 2003:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Bill [B 17 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 77), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a Money Bill, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.