National Council of Provinces - 28 August 2003
THURSDAY, 28 AUGUST 2003 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
____
The Council met at 14:12.
The Chairperson took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
QUORUM IN THE CHAMBER
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon members, I find it extremely unacceptable, both to our nation and to ourselves as elected public representatives, that we cannot begin our sessions because we do not have a quorum. I think this is absolutely unacceptable behaviour on the part of members of Parliament. As elected representatives, our duty is to ensure that we pass and enact the laws of our land, so that they may become part of that which guides our nation. I am absolutely horrified that we had to hold back starting at the agreed time because we did not have a quorum.
I am asking the Table to provide me with the names of the members who are not in the House, so that those names may be forwarded to the provinces to indicate to the legislatures how the representatives designated by provinces are conducting themselves in terms of their responsibility, because we are not keeping up with the work that we should be doing.
The commentator on the SABC, who was waiting for this session to begin, said that even the Minister was on time and the House was not quorate. So, we are pleased that the Minister is here, but I think it is really unacceptable that our House was not able to meet on time, merely because of the quorum. There are no committee meetings, so there are no reasons for members not to be here. I really think it is unacceptable and I hope we will get an explanation from the Whips as to exactly what occurred.
We will proceed then. Is there any member who wishes to give notice of a motion?
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: Chair, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the House I will propose:
That the Council -
(1) notes that no matter how much spin is employed and no matter how many speeches and notices of motion politicians make, in elections the voters will always have the final say;
(2) in the by-elections of Beacon Bay, Pietermaritzburg and Nelspruit that took place on yesterday on 27 August, the voters have spoken decisively and finally; (3) in Beacon Bay, the DA held the seat in a tough election battle against the ANC by 1 964 votes to 1 852 in a remarkably high poll of 44%. The New NP could not field a candidate;
(4) in Nelspruit, in a ward held by the New NP as recently as 1998, the DA took 88% of the vote compared to the New NP’s 5,8% of the vote;
(5) similarly, in Pietermaritzburg South the DA polled 77% of the vote compared to the New NP’s 4%; and
(6) these results prove yet again that the election in 2004 will be a two- horse race between the ANC on the one hand, and the DA and its allies on the other, with all other parties now reduced to irrelevancy.
[Interjections.]
Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, ek sal by die volgende sitting van die Raad voorstel: Dat die Raad -
(1) kennis neem van die DA se woordvoerder oor grondsake, mnr Dan Maluleke, se voorstel dat die restitusieproses heropen moet word;
(2) daarvan bewus is dat die President van Suid-Afrika die proses, wat die DA nou wil uitrek, teen 2005 afgehandel wil hê sodat onsekerheid uit die weg geruim kan word;
(3) voorts daarvan kennis neem dat die voorstel begrotingsrealiteite ignoreer en onhaalbare verwagtinge skep;
(4) van mening is dat dit uit mnr Maluleke se voorstel blyk dat die DA nie omgee dat ‘n Zimbabwe-situasie in Suid-Afrika bevorder word nie; en
(5) ‘n ernstige beroep op die DA doen om te besin oor hierdie benadering en daarvan af te sien, aangesien Suid-Afrika nie die gevolge verdien wat dit inhou nie. (Translation of Afrikaans draft resolution follows.)
[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, I shall move at the next sitting of the House:
That the Council -
(1) takes note of the proposal made by the DA spokesperson on Land Affairs, Mr Dan Maluleke, that the restitution process be reopened;
(2) is aware that the President of South Africa wants the process, which the DA now wants to be extended, to be finalised by 2005 so that all uncertainty can be removed;
(3) further takes note that this proposal ignores budgetary realities and creates unattainable expectations;
(4) is of the opinion that it appears from Mr Maluleke’s proposal that the DA does not care that a Zimbabwe situation is being promoted in South Africa; and
(5) makes an earnest appeal to the DA to reflect on this approach and to relinquish it, since South Africa does not deserve the consequences of this.]
EU GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) given the severe caution with which countries in the EU have treated the possible use of genetically modified (GM) foods, and the many scientific question marks that go unanswered, calls upon the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs to place a moratorium on the further use of GM crops and foods produced from GM raw materials; (2) notes that the EU is South Africa’s most important market for agricultural produce and goods, and that we need to be very careful not to find our products fenced off from the EU market by regulations in the future - we need to be in step and not out of step with that market;
(3) further notes our limited research capacity and the fact that we are a mega diverse country with a host of botanical species and many botanical hot spots, and we need to be very clear as to the possible knock-on effects of GM plants on our eco-system;
(4) also notes the fact that some of our neighbours, like Zambia, have banned the use of GM grains; and
(5) calls upon the Government to proceed with caution in the field of GM foods.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Is there any objection to the motion? There is an objection. The motion will therefore become notice of a motion.
NEVIRAPINE IN KWAZULU-NATAL
(Draft Resolution)
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) notes the newspaper reports that Nevirapine is being distributed to all 49 hospitals which offer maternity services in KwaZulu-Natal;
(2) further notes that this was announced by the Health MEC, Dr Zweli Mkhize, in his report on women-related issues tabled in the legislature in Pietermaritzburg on Tuesday, 26 August 2003;
(3) believes that this Nevirapine roll-out programme is also now available in seven of the 10 community health centres and 228 of the 425 primary health care clinics; and
(4) therefore commends the Health MEC for the part he has played in ensuring the distribution of Nevirapine in these hospitals.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
ZIMBABWE SECURITY OFFICIALS TO STAFF POLLING STATIONS
(Draft Resolution)
Ms C BOTHA: Madam Chair, I move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) takes note of the Zimbabwean High Court decision to allow the use of soldiers, policemen and other armed security officials to staff polling stations in the coming elections;
(2) observes the position during the recent Rwandan presidential election, in which security personnel operated in a noticeably low- keyed fashion to secure voting stations, while polling stations were staffed by volunteer officials;
(3) notes that the counting of the votes took place in full view of the public and in the same locale where the voting took place;
(4) commends the remarkable achievement of national unity in Rwanda, where a member of the minority group was overwhelmingly elected as president, only 9 years after the much publicised genocide that took place in that country; and
(5) requests the Government to put pressure on Zimbabwe to follow this admirable example of African democracy in action.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Is there an objection to that motion? There is an objection, so the motion will become notice of a motion.
SUCCESSFUL RWANDAN ELECTIONS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr B J TOLO: Chair, I want to move without notice:
That the Council -
(1) notes with satisfaction the successful Rwandan elections which were held over the past two days;
(2) congratulates and thanks the Rwandans for successfully holding their elections without incidents of violence;
(3) also notes that voters demonstrated their determination to transcend the political and artificial ethnic divide in order to usher in a long-lasting peace in their country;
(4) calls upon those who could not secure more votes to accept the outcome of the elections and to support the new government in its efforts of rebuilding the country; and
(5) further notes with satisfaction the role that South Africa played and is still playing in brokering peace in that country and other African states.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
TABLING OF WHITE PAPER ON TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP
(Draft Resolution)
Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, I want to move without notice: That the Council -
(1) thanks and congratulates the Minister for Provincial and Local Government and his department for finally tabling the White Paper on Traditional Leadership that outlines the function and role of traditional leaders;
(2) is of the view that this will go a long way in reducing the unnecessary tension between the Government and traditional leaders and will enable delivery of social services to be expedited in rural areas where delivery was not possible because of these tensions;
(3) notes that all stakeholders are negotiating in good faith; and
(4) calls upon all those who have developed an interest in this institution, and those custodians of our rich culture, to give this process a chance.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: A go na le yo o sa dumalaneng le se se builweng ke Kgosi Mokoena? [Is there anyone who does not agree with what Kgoshi Mokoena has said?]
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY BILL
(Consideration of Bills and of Reports thereon)
The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Chairperson and hon members, it gives me great pleasure to introduce the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill in this House.
Both these Bills have travelled quite a long path before being considered by the National Council of Provinces. You would be interested to know that these Bills have had a particularly long gestation period, and part of the reason for that is the impact this Bill has on both national and provincial Governments and on the environment departments in provincial governments.
It is far-reaching, indeed, and in many ways it is revolutionary. I have had numerous discussions in Minmec with the provincial MECs on this Bill. There has also been a great deal of consultation and meetings and to-ing and fro-ing between the officials of provincial and national Government departments, and local government has also been consulted in this matter.
Perhaps, before I speak about the Bills themselves, I should put these Bills in the context of the democracy that we are experiencing in South Africa at present. The environmental right in our Constitution, as stated in section 24, enjoins the Government to ensure a healthy and decent environment, conducive to the well-being of all South Africans, and to ensure that there is legislation in place to achieve this objective. Therefore, after extensive consultation, way back in 1997 already, Government published the White Paper on Environmental Management which acknowledged the need for the fundamental reform of the environmental management legislation in this country. In pursuance of this objective, the Government at the time embarked on a law reform programme which continues up to today. One of the most important products of the law reform programme has been the passing of the 1998 National Environmental Management Act, which is a seminal piece of legislation. Apart from setting a framework for environmental legislation, it lays down a set of core national environmental management principles which all other legislation must adhere to.
I am saying that because, as you will notice even from the title of the Bill, it starts off by saying that National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill. It is part of a larger group of legislation, all of which is derived from the 1998 fundamental legislation on the environment passed by Parliament at the time. The National Environmental Management Act sets the overall tone for all Government departments to adhere to, and it provides a framework for sectoral legislation. The two Bills that we have before us here must accordingly be seen against this background and, therefore, should be read within the framework of the National Environmental Management Act.
I can mention that, in embarking on this environmental law reform programme, we have to constantly be vigilant and ensure that while we protect the environment we must, at the same time, not lose sight of the other two pillars of sustainable development; namely, economic growth and social development. This country has embraced the globally accepted concept of sustainable development; one which was again endorsed by heads of state at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. This concept says that sustainable development has three pillars to it. The protection of the environment cannot happen in isolation of the needs of people. That is basically what it says, and that is why social development and economic growth are always tied in to everything we do when it comes to the protection of the environment.
The motivation for the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill has its origins in the Convention on Biological Diversity which is one of the outcomes of the Rio Earth Summit, the predecessor to the WSSD. South Africa has subsequently ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity and thus has an international obligation to give it domestic effect.
The philosophy behind the convention is very much in line with the ideals of our young democracy. Its stated objective is to provide for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
It must be stated here that all this happens within the context of South Africa’s unique biodiversity. Even now, very few South Africans realise that South Africa is considered to have the third highest level of biological diversity in the world. We are one of the most biodiverse countries to be found anywhere in the world. So, one of our greatest natural assets is the extreme richness of our plant, animal and insect life. We are extremely fortunate in that regard. This places, in a sense, more of a responsibility on us to ensure that we deal with this adequately.
The old orthodox thinking of biodiversity conservation has been that of creating parks. Now, parks are something that we are very much in favour of, but it was always thought that when you have an important ecosystem, a fragile ecosystem, or one with a high level of biodiversity, that you should put a fence around it and create a park and protect the natural environment within the park.
The modern thinking, which is very much what this Bill is trying to do, is that biodiversity does not only exist within the confines of a park. You cannot place a neat fence or boundary around an ecosystem. The richness of our biological diversity extends well beyond national and provincial parks.
Therefore, you will find that this Bill talks about what is referred to a bioregional approach to conservation, so that the national parks themselves are seen as the core of what is a much wider bioregion as such. This Bill, for the first time, requires that a national bioregional plan has to be developed and tabled. If this Bill is approved by Parliament, and once it is enacted, it will require that within three years, Government would have to table a bioregional plan, taking into account the whole complex mix of ecosystems that we have in this country.
The Bill also goes into a number of specifics, one of which is that it deals with threatened ecosystems and what to do about them. It empowers Government, firstly, to identify threatened ecosystems, and to list all of the threatened and protected ecosystems that we have in the country, and then to take measures to ensure the protection of these threatened ecosystems.
It does the same as far as threatened species are concerned. There are a number of plant and animal species in our country which are under threat. Government is required to make a list of these so that everybody would know which these are, and then to develop a strategy around each of the threatened species that we have in this country.
It also deals with the management and the strategy to deal with alien invasive species. One of the biggest challenges that a country with a high biodiversity faces, as is the case in South Africa, is the impact of alien invasive species. Not only does it destroy or threaten our biodiversity, but it also impacts very directly on the livelihoods of people.
We have seen, I think over the past seven or eight years, that the Working for Water Programme has been able to show that the proliferation of alien invasive species, in fact, depletes the country’s very rare and scarce water resources. So, again, this Bill gives a comprehensive legislative framework in order to deal with alien invasive species. This Bill also deals with another important matter which has for a very long time been ignored, not only at national level, but also at international level, and that is bioprospecting and the exploitation of indigenous genetic material, plant material and animal material.
We have had a situation for a very long time, probably since the beginning of colonialism in South Africa, where indigenous South African genetic resources have been exploited and patented by companies in the United States and elsewhere in the world. Other people have been making lots of money out of South Africa’s indigenous genetic material without any benefit- sharing or without any benefit accruing, either to South Africa or to local communities.
This Bill, for the first time, seeks to regulate this. I must say that it’s a matter which also came up very sharply at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. One of the decisions of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, which everybody agreed to, was that a process should begin to negotiate an international instrument, probably a convention, to regulate the exploitation of indigenous genetic material.
Then, the Bill is also aimed at modernising and upgrading the SA National Botanical Institute. As you know, the National Botanical Institute has done a great deal of work in categorising the botanical diversity of South Africa. It also does scientific research which underpins all of the protection work we do. It is an institution that is globally recognised.
The aim of this Bill now is to transform the National Botanical Institute into what is referred to as the SA National Biodiversity Institute, Sanbi, so that it should deal not only with the botanical aspect of biodiversity, but also with the zoological aspect of biodiversity and the whole range of biodiversity as such, because when one talks about an ecosystem approach, one cannot separate species within an ecosystem in the manner in which they impact on each other. This is a great advance, and I must say that everybody concerned is extremely excited about the possible establishment of the SA National Botanical Institute.
We are also considering here today the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill. It has been said that we have a comprehensive and excellent set of environmental laws on our Statute Book, but there has often been a concern that there is not sufficient teeth for enforcement of the legislation that we have.
You would know that I have begun a process of dealing with enforcement issues, for example, together with the Department of Justice, for the first time establishing an environmental court in Hermanus. This is new, it’s path-breaking and it’s already beginning to deliver some very important results. The intention is that this must be expanded to other geographic areas and to other domains also, such as in areas where pollution control is a problem.
The amending Bill, accordingly, greatly beefs up the enforcement arm of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism and other departments, particularly the sister departments in the provinces by providing, among other matters, for environmental management inspectors, with powers similar to other inspectors in other departments.
As I’ve said, these two Bills represent a very important stage in the modernisation of the legislative framework as far as the environment in South Africa is concerned. It is not the last piece of legislation. It is a staging post to take us to new heights, and I’m sure that we will have an opportunity to bring you further pieces of legislation dealing with other aspects of environmental management. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Rev P MOATSHE: Hon Chair, hon Minister and members of your department, hon members in this House, the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill of 2003 and the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill of 2003 were introduced in the NCOP, where they were referred to the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs, and we appreciated this arrangement.
Firstly, the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill establishes controls on the management and utilisation of species. It provides for the management and conservation of the biological diversity of South Africa and the long-term sustainable use of our biological resources.
The term ``biodiversity’’ refers to the natural wealth of the earth, that is, the earth’s web of life, consisting of millions of species of animals, plants, insects and minute organisms such as bacteria. The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill of 2003 was introduced to provide for the establishment of a National Biodiversity Institute to replace the current National Botanical Institute. The Bill also sets out an enabling regulatory framework for the integrated management of South Africa’s biodiversity.
The principle behind the Bill was, firstly, to provide, within the framework of the National Environmental Management Act, for the management and conservation of biological diversity within the Republic. Secondly, the aim was to provide for the use of indigenous biological resources in a sustainable manner. Thirdly, it was to give effect to international agreements relating to biodiversity which are binding on South Africa, as well as providing a regulatory framework for a co-operative governance in biodiversity management and conservation.
In fulfilling the rights contained in section 24 of the Constitution, the state, through its organs, is required to act as the public trustee of South Africa’s biological diversity and its genetic resources.
Concerning its scope and application, this Bill applies in the whole of the Republic, including its territorial waters, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, as described in the Maritime Zone Act of 1994. It further binds all the organs of state in the national, provincial and local spheres, subject to section 146 of the Constitution.
In ensuring that there is equitable sharing of benefits arising from commercialisation through the bioprospecting of traditional uses, the Bill provides that no holder of a permit may, for the purpose of bioprospecting, apply or exploit any traditional uses or knowledge of any specific indigenous biological resource, unless that permit holder has entered into a benefit-sharing agreement with the person or community practising that traditional use or knowledge.
The Bill also intends to repeal the Forest Act of 1984 and, as from the date of repeal, all assets and liabilities, and all rights and obligations of the National Botanical Institute will be vested in the proposed National Biodiversity Institute.
South Africa is the third most biologically diverse country in the world, as the Minister has rightly said, and as such, is fully cognisant of its responsibilities in ensuring that its valuable natural resources are protected and used sustainably. The Biodiversity Bill is a mechanism to ensure the management and conservation of biological diversity in South Africa.
It is evident, however, that the Bill has triggered many concerns among civil society. These concerns would best be elicited in the context of a forum offered by public hearings. The provincial hearings that are to be held in the future are therefore to be welcomed, as these will enable the provisions of the Bill to be widely discussed and also enable interest groups to put forward their concerns and suggestions.
The National Environmental Management Amendment Bill of 2003 seeks to provide for co-operative environment governance by establishing principles for decision-making on matters affecting the environment, institutions that will promote co-operative governance and procedures for co-ordinating environmental functions exercised by organs.
It further seeks to provide for national and provincial supervision of environmental management functions, as well as creating a framework for the delegation of power by the Minister, the MECs for environmental affairs and municipalities. It also provides for the designation of environmental management inspectors by the Director-General or the provincial HOD, as well as for judicial matters of compliance enforcement.
Reference can be made to clause 47(b)(1) which provides that when any provincial organ of state cannot or does not fulfil an obligation in terms of a specific section of the National Environmental Management Act, the Minister may, in terms of section 100 of the Constitution, intervene by taking any appropriate steps to ensure fulfilment of that obligation.
The insertion of a new chapter 9(a) provides for the administration and enforcement of specific environmental acts, and to enable the Director- General or a provincial HOD to designate environmental management inspectors to implement this function. The powers of these inspectors, inter alia, include the power to arrest, to enter and search premises, land, waters and other places, and to seize certain articles that are suspected of being the proceeds of an offence.
Judicial matters, such as offences relating to environmental management inspectors, the cancellation of permits, the forfeiture of items and the issuing of infringement notices are dealt with in part four of the Bill.
Finally, the Bill exempts the state of liability for any damage or loss caused by the exercise of any power or performance of any duty under this Act or any specific Environmental Management Act, unless exercising that power was unlawful, negligent or in bad faith.
We support these two pieces of legislation. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Agb Voorsitter, toe die aarde geskape is, is Adam en Eva aangestel as die eerste bestuurders van die omgewing, en selfs daar is sekere voorskrifte al oortree. Die omgewing, met al sy diversiteit en sensitiwiteit, is iets wat ons van ons voorouers geërf het, maar eintlik is dit iets wat ons aan ons kinders gaan nalaat. Ons het dit net van hulle geleen. Wanneer ‘n mens iets erf, kan jy daarmee maak wat jy wil as jy nie respek het vir die persoon by wie jy dit geërf het nie, maar as ‘n mens iets leen, dan gee jy dit gewoonlik in ‘n beter toestand terug as wat jy dit gekry het. En dit is presies wat hierdie twee wetsontwerpe in wese ook met ons omgewing wil bereik.
Dit is egter jammer dat daar nog steeds soveel roekeloosheid bestaan oor die instandhouding van ons omgewing, maar die Nuwe NP wil egter die agb Minister en sy departement bedank vir hul volharding met die nodige beleid, wetgewing en die implementering van wetgewing, maar ook die opvoeding en bemagtiging van ons mense wat onverskillig hierteenoor staan. Die Nuwe NP ondersteun die wetsontwerpe.
Dit is egter jammer, Voorsitter, dat ons in hierdie Parlement mense het wat die emosie en nood van ander mense vir eie aansien en ‘n paar stemme in ‘n volgende verkiesing misbruik. Ek het in verlede Vrydag se Die Burger hierdie foto gesien. En dié van u wat dit nie kan sien nie, ek wil dit net aan u verduidelik. Hier op ‘n boot staan die leier van die DA saam met ‘n klompie vissers. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Mnr C ACKERMANN: Dit is die eerste keer in sy lewe op ‘n boot.
Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: U sal ook sien, hy staan daar op ‘n boot waarvan die ankertou nie eens opgelig is nie. Hy is veilig in die hawe, maar wat doen hy? Hy kritiseer die agb Minister wat ‘n beleid en die implementering van ‘n beleid by mekaar wil laat uitkom. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek wonder tog: Hoekom het die agb Tony Leon, die leier van die DA, nou toegetree tot die debat oor die vissers en die kwotas? Hier is tog ‘n woordvoerder in hierdie Raad, naamlik die agb Versfeld - en ek is jammer sy is afwesig vandag. Volgens hul standaarde word hul sukses gemeet aan publisiteit, en sy doen baie goeie werk met haar harde werk en trane. [Tussenwerpsels.] Of is dit nou omdat die DA die vissers se stemme nodig het? Of is hier iets diepliggends? Gaan dit moontlik oor die klag wat mnr Albert van den Berg, ‘n visser, teen agb Versfeld gaan lê het oor aansoeke en geld wat sy vermoedelik nie ingedien het nie, en daardeur vissers te na gekom en van ‘n bestaansloon beroof het? Die tyd sal moet leer. [Tussenwerpsels.]
‘n Visserskuit is tog gebou om op die oop see te wees, maar die leier van
die DA staan in die hawe, lekker vasgeanker. Hierdie foto is ‘n posed''
foto, net om in die koerant te kom - waarmee hulle dan ook geslaag het. Dit
is net so vals soos die beloftes wat hulle aan die vissers van hierdie land
maak. Die DA is nie in staat om een visserskwota, een permit of een reg aan
enige mense toe te ken nie. Hulle is geïsoleerd. Hulle het geen inspraak by
die agb Minister nie. Hulle is in 'n hoekie saam met die media in die
koerante. Dis al. Hulle gaan heel waarskynlik dreig met hofsake. Dit is
hulle styl, of met kommissies wat aangestel moet word, maar, so what’’.
Dit spreek kiesers se emosie aan, maar die probleem word nie aangespreek
nie. Dit word in baie gevalle net vererger.
Wil die DA hierdie probleem rêrig opgelos hê? Ek dink nie so nie. Voorsitter, u moet onthou dat hulle mos gesê het: Hoe slegter dit met Suid- Afrika gaan, hoe beter gaan dit met die DA. En die vissers moet dit ook weet. Hoe slegter dit met die vissers gaan, hoe beter gaan dit met die DA! Want dan kan hulle raas en blaas en ``pose’’ op bote om die koerante te haal.
Die agb Minister het vandag ingrypende aankondigings gemaak oor langlynregte en permitte. Ons verwelkom dit en ons sê baie dankie. En ons, die Nuwe NP en sy strukture, is beskikbaar om die 965 bona fide-vissers aan wie die Minister regte wil toeken, te help identifiseer. Die Minister moet net onthou: Die DA gaan hierdie aankondigings nou opeis as hulle sukses deur hul leier wat op ‘n boot gestaan het, en die ander druk wat hulle op u toegepas het totdat u geswig het. Ons weet dit is ‘n klomp snert, maar die vissers moet dit ook nou weet.
Daar is sakelui wat besig is om die African Aqua and Mariculture Development Corporation op die been te bring, wat gaan help met die ontwikkeling van hierdie industrie in Suid-Afrika en in Afrika. Dit gaan die tekorte van die marine voorraad help aanvul, en van die werkgeleenthede wat verlore mag gaan oor die krimpende marinebronne, kan vervang. Hierdie inisiatief word wyd ondersteun, en ek sal dit graag met u en u departement wil deel en bespreek. Ek dank u. [Applous.] [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Hon Chairperson, when the earth was created, Adam and Eve were appointed as the first managers of the environment, and even then certain prescriptions were transgressed. The environment with all its diversity and sensitivity is something that we inherited from our forefathers, but it is actually something that we are going to leave to our children. We only borrowed it from them. When one inherits something, one can do with it what one wants to if one does not respect the person from whom one had inherited it. However, when one borrows something, one usually returns it in a better condition than when one received it. And this is precisely what these two Bills essentially aim to achieve with our environment.
It is a pity, however, that there is still such recklessness with regard to maintaining our environment, but the New NP, however, wants to thank the Minister and his department for not only persisting with essential policy, legislation and the implementation of legislation, but also for the education and empowerment of our people who are indifferent to this. The new NP supports the Bills.
It is regrettable, however, Chairperson, that there are people in this Parliament who abuse the emotion and need of other people for their own esteem and for a few votes in the next election. I recently saw this photograph that was published in Die Burger of last Friday. And those of you who cannot see it, I just want to explain it to you. Here on a boat the leader of the DA is standing with a few fishers. [Interjections.]
Mr C ACKERMANN: It is probably his first time on a boat in his life.
Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: You will also see, he is standing there on a boat of which the anchor rope has not even been lifted. He is safely in the harbour, but what does he do? He criticises the hon Minister who desires to allow policy and its implementation to link up with one another. [Interjections.] I nevertheless wonder: Why has the hon Tony Leon, the leader of the DA, entered the debate about the fishers and the quotas now? There is a spokesperson here in this House, namely the hon Versfeld - and I am sorry that she is absent today. According to their standards, their success is measured in terms of publicity, and she does very good work through her hard work and tears. [Interjections.] Or is it now because the DA need the fishers’ votes? Or is there something more deep-seated here? Is it possibly about the charge that Mr Albert van den Berg, a fisherman, had laid against Mrs Versfeld about applications and money that she presumably did not submit and, in so doing, offended the fishers and robbed them of a subsistence wage? Time will have to tell. [Interjections.]
A fishing boat is surely built to be on the open sea, but the leader of the DA is standing in the harbour, nicely anchored. This photograph is a posed photo, just to get into the newspaper - in which they also succeeded. It is just as false as the promises they make to the fishers of this country. The DA is unable to allocate a single fishing quota, permit or right to anyone. They are isolated. They have no say with the hon Minister. They are in a corner with the media in the newspapers. That is all. They are most probably going to threaten with court cases. It is their style, or with commissions that must be appointed, but so what? It addresses the emotions of voters, but the problem is not addressed. In many cases it is only made worse.
Does the DA really want to have this problem resolved? I do not think so. Chairperson, you must remember that they have said: The worse off South Africa is, the better off the DA is. And the fishers must also know this. The worse off the fishers are, the better off the DA is! Because then they can huff and puff and pose on boats to make the newspapers.
The hon Minister today made far-reaching announcements about longline rights and permits. We welcome this and say thank you very much. And we, the New NP and its structures, are available to help to identify the 965 bone fide fishers to whom the Minister wishes to allocate rights. The Minister should just remember: The DA is going to claim these announcements as being their success through their leader who had stood on a boat and the pressure that they applied to you until you gave in. We know it is a load of rubbish, but the fishers should also know this now.
There are businesspeople who are busy launching the African Aqua and Mariculture Development Corporation which is going to assist with the development of this industry in South Africa and Africa. It is going to assist with augmenting the shortfalls in marine stocks, and may be able to replace some of the job opportunities that may be lost owing to dwindling marine resources. This initiative is widely supported and I should like to share and discuss this with you and your department. I thank you. [Applause.] [Time expired.]]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Agb lede, ek is baie bly dat agb lede ook gebruik maak van ander tale. [Hon members, I am very glad that hon members also speak other languages.] It is very important. Well done. [Applause.]
Ms B N DLULANE: Mhlalingaphambili, Mphathiswa ohloniphekileyo, silapha kule ngxoxo namhlanje, kwaye siyavuyiswa bubukho bakho. [Chairperson and hon Minister, we are here taking part in this debate today and your presence makes us happy.]
The two Bills that are currently before us seek to strengthen the commitment we have made in terms of the National Environmental Management Act. In the words of our Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Comrade Valli Moosa, I quote:
It will take the country into a modern period of environmental management and regulation.
Our environment plays an important role in meeting the development needs of our people in the new democratic South Africa. Our country is currently undergoing a major process of socioeconomic transformation as it attempts to correct the negative impact of the previous political regimes. The environmental damage in our country, which is a result of years of neglect, is massive. As we set on the course of bettering the lives of people, we need to find ways to harness the positive links between development and the environment so that each objective promotes the other.
Utshilo apha uMphathiswa okokuba ngoko ibikade ingenamazinyo. Yiyo le nto sisenza le ntetho namhlanje, sizama ukufakelela amazinyo. [The Minister said here that it had no teeth then. That is why we are having this debate today; we are trying to give it teeth.]
Section 24 of the Constitution states that:
Everyone has the right -
(a) to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; and
(b) to have the environment protected for the benefit of the present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that -
(i) prevent pollution and ecological degradation,
(ii) promote conservation; and
(iii) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of
natural resources, while promoting justifiable economic and
social development.
The ANC-led Government’s commitment to giving effect to the environmental rights enshrined in the Constitution is evident from the enactment of various pieces of environmental legislation since 1996, the most important of which is the National Environmental Management Act.
NEMA’s primary purpose is to provide for co-operative environmental governance by establishing principles for decision-making on all matters affecting the environment. In the past, responsibility for the environment was divided between many different Government departments, including the relevant provincial authorities. As a result, the enforcement of environmental laws in South Africa has been unco-ordinated.
Yiyo loo nto ke sisithi abaphathiswa kumaphondo mabangoyiki, mabangangcangcazeli xa uMphathiswa okundlunkulu efaka esi sihlomelo. [That is why we are saying that provincial MECs should not be afraid; they shouldn’t shiver when the national Minister makes this amendment.]
The following national departments administer and enforce environmental laws in South Africa: The Departments of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Water Affairs and Forestry, Minerals and Energy, Transport, Health, Land Affairs and Agriculture.
The key objective of NEMA is, therefore, to promote an integrated and co- ordinated approach to environmental concerns in the policy processes of all national departments. This is to address the fragmentation which characterised the administration of environmental laws in South Africa in the past.
Moving on to the National Environmental Management Biodiversity Bill, it provides, in essence, for the regulation of biological resources and activities to ensure the long-term sustainability of biological resources and the equitable sharing of benefits derived from them.
The Bill provides for implementation, by the Minister, of a national biodiversity framework to provide for an integrated, co-ordinated and a uniform approach to biodiversity management and conservation by all spheres of government, NGOs, the private sector, local communities, other stakeholders and the public.
The purpose is to monitor the conservation status of various components of South Africa’s biodiversity and to promote biodiversity research. It also deals with the endangered or protected species, with the aim to protect them so as to ensure their survival in the world, to give effect to international agreements relating to international trade in endangered species. This is to ensure that the commercial utilisation of biological diversity is managed in an ecologically sustainable way.
In addition, the Bill also regulates bioprospecting involving indigenous biological resources. Our people have been very resourceful in terms of identifying the usefulness of certain indigenous biological resources. Ndithetha ngamaxhwele akowethu. [I am talking about our traditional healers.]
Their knowledge must be protected by allowing them to share equally in the benefits arising from the commercialisation of indigenous biological resources.
Yiyo ke loo nto uMphathiswa eye wagqiba ekubeni kubekho ulawulo ngokubhekisele kulo mba, kungasuke kungene abantu bamanye amazwe beze kuthabatha, mhlawumbi baxobule imithi ethile ukwenzela ukuba bona bafumane. Kufuneka kubekho ulawulo lwayo loo ko, njengoko kusenzeka. [That is why the Minister decided to effect control of this matter; so that no one from a foreign country could enter and maybe pluck from a certain tree for their own benefit. There should be control over that, as it does happen.]
We certainly do not want to expose our people to losing their right to our own biodiversity by having genetic material patented elsewhere in the world
- the hon Minister mentioned that - which does not benefit South Africa.
The National Environmental Management Amendment Bill addresses the current lack of effective enforcement and implementation of environmental laws such as NEMA. It is this lack of enforcement that has created opportunities for poachers to continue depleting our marine resources, or for medical waste companies to dump dangerous medical waste in open fields near poor residential areas to which our children are exposed.
Ndithetha kabuhlungu, engekho omnye ugxa wethu owuthandayo lo mba;
iipoachers' neemarine resources’’. Akathandanga kuza kuxoxa apha.
Unikele umntakwabo utata uRaju, esingamaziyo ukuba uza kuthetha athini na
ke yena kuba akalilo nelungu lale komiti. Mhlawumbi, oyena mntu ulilungu
usaye kuloba iintlanzi. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[I am experiencing pain as I speak in the absence of one of my colleagues who is interested in the matters of poachers and marine resources. He was not willing to take part in the debate here. He asked a colleague, Mr Raju, and we don’t know what he is going to say, because he is not even a member of this committee. Maybe the actual members have gone fishing.]
This amending Bill will create legal certainty in terms of administration and enforcement of our environmental laws. It will strengthen our hand to prosecute and punish perpetrators of environmental crimes. Most importantly, it will enable our Government to promote, implement and give substance to our constitutional right to a safe environment.
Besisoloko simva koonomathotholo, simbona koomabonakude, uMphathiswa eyenza le nto, ebabamba abantu. Futhi, kokokuqala simbona encediswa nangamapolisa, abagcini bomthetho. Huntshu, Mphathiswa! Siyayixhasa yomibini le miThetho eYilwayo ephambi kwale Ndlu. Enkosi, Mhlalingaphambili. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[We’ve all along heard over the radio and seen the Minister on television, doing this, arresting people. Also, it is the first time we have seen him being assisted by the police, law enforcement agents. Well done! We support both these Bills before this House. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]]
Mr J P GELDERBLOM (Western Cape): Hon Chair, hon Minister, the Western Cape supports in principle the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill as introduced in the National Assembly as a section 76 Bill and published in the Government Gazette of 3 June 2003, as it makes the necessary provision for strengthening the inadequacies in the current legislation with respect to law enforcement instruments, compliance and monitoring mechanisms and criminal sanctions and remedies.
We welcome the attempts made in the Bill to rationalise and streamline administration and enforcement provisions in NEMA and the proposed sectoral legislation. The Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning has, however, registered concern about the manner in which some of the proposed positions dealing with concurrent competencies are weighed.
Furthermore, we wish to place on record that, in so far as the financial implications of implementing the Bill are concerned, the principle of funds for the function will be applied and that the responsible authority will be able to recover moneys directly from fines and forfeited items. The introduction of spot fines would have helped the provinces in dealing with transgressions.
In general terms, the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill in its current form is acceptable to the Western Cape. Although several suggested amendments were not included, these issues are, in our opinion, not critical and probably not worth pursuing any further.
Problems around the issue of concurrency have been addressed to a certain extent. Once again, these are not worth pursuing. The department requested that Chapter 2, which deals with the functions and powers of the SA National Biodiversity Institute, should be moved to the last part of the Bill, but this information has been ignored.
Preparation by all organs of state of control plans on invasive species will place a burden on certain provincial components in charge of land and road, etc.
South Africa just cannot afford the eradication of invasive species in the foreseeable future. In our opinion, the financial implications for the state do not reflect the actual cost to provinces and management authorities of protected areas. The administration of a bioprospecting trust fund will require a clear definition of owners, providers and beneficiaries.
The scientific authority to be established by the Minister in terms of section 59 should acknowledge the expertise vested in provinces and result in a reduction, rather than an increase in costs. Reference in section 96 to appropriate consultation remains of concern as it is vague. Apart from the above issues, we can confirm that we are willing to support the Bill as amended.
Voorsitter, ek het ook die foto van die Leier van die Opposisie op die boot gesien. Die harde tragedie is dat die dame wat so hard geveg het vir die kiesers, glad nie op daardie boot is nie. As ons mooi kyk na daardie boot, sal ons sien dit is baie na aan die rotse. Ek dink dit sal ook beteken dat die DA op die rotse sal wees. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Chairperson, I have also seen the photograph of the Leader of the Opposition on the boat. The real tragedy is that the lady who fought so hard for the voters is not on that boat at all. If we look carefully at that boat, we will see that it is very close to the rocks. I think this this would also mean that the DA will be on the rocks. [Interjections.] [Applause.]]
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, Minister and colleagues, today we are dealing with Bills concerned with environmental management, namely the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill, Bill 29 of 2003, and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill, Bill 30B of 2003.
The success of the management rests on the efforts of the co-operative governance structures nationally. There is a need for a co-ordinated and integrated approach from all levels of government in the planning, monitoring and management of all natural resources to ensure effective management. This calls for an increased public awareness and involvement on environmental management, which includes vegetation, all animal species of life, grasslands and surroundings as a whole.
South Africa’s unique biological diversity, variety of genes, species, ecosystems and ecological processes occurring in the country are an asset of international, national and local value and significance. The rivers and wetlands, mountains and planes, estuaries and oceans, and magnificent coastline and landscape contain an exceptionally rich and varied array of life forms which are integral to the existence of all South Africans, and upon which the national economy is fundamentally dependent.
To prevent the depreciation of our valuable resources, the following must be taken into consideration: First, there should be monitoring of all alien plants that affect our vegetation. Chapter 5 of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill provides for the management of alien and invasive species through the control of their introduction and spread, as well as the control of eradication of those already established.
Chapter 2 of the same Bill replaces the current National Botanical Institute and provides criteria for selection of a governing body to monitor provisions on general administration. South Africa’s biodiversity is largely a result of the mix of tropical and temperate climate and inhabitants occurring in the country. Since South Africa ranks as the third most biologically diverse country in the world and is of major global importance for biodiversity conservation, failure to take cognisance of this and failure to take immediate action will undermine the resource base upon which people depend. We will close existing and future economic opportunities of using our biodiversity. We will also jeopardise the ecological processes which are necessary to keep our country fit for life.
The Constitution accords national and provincial government concurrent legislative competence in terms of most branches of relevance to biodiversity conservation.
Ukunakekelwa kwesimo sobuhle bemvelo kubaluleke kakhulu impela. UmThethosivivinywa esixoxa ngawo namhlanje thina besifundazwe saKwaZulu- Natali siwamukela ngezandla zombili.
Imvelo ibanzi kakhulu futhi umhlaba muhle ngemvelo. Umhlabathi yiwo osikhiqizela ukudla nokunye. Utshani bona buyingubo yomhlaba. Kukhona izilwane ezinhlobonhlobo, amanzi, amaxhaphozi nokunye engingekubale. Konke lokhu esengikubalile kwenza ubuhle bemvelo obungadingi koniwa, kodwa sidinga ukukulondoloza futhi sikunakekele ukuze umhlaba wethu esihlala kuwo ungoniwa yithi. Izilwane eziphila kanye nathi azingabulawa noma kanjani. Utshani nezithelo akulondolozeke, kulethe umnotho wezwe.
Sidinga ukubambisana emikhakheni yonke ezweni lonke ukuze sigcine izwe lethu linothile, kugeleza amanzi ahlanzekile, futhi siphefumula umoya omtoti ongenaphunga elibi nongenantuthu ekhubaza impilo yethu, izilwane nemvelo yonke.
Utshani obuyingubo yezwe abungashiswa noma kanjani, noma nini futhi nanoma ngubani. Lesi yisenzo esibi esilimaza utshani nenhlabathi futhi kufe izilwane ezinhlobonhlobo, mahhala, kuguge nomhlaba. UHulumeni, kulo mThethosivivinywa, usiza izwe ukuba kubhekelwe indalo ingonakali; umhlaba ungagugiswa; izilwane zivikeleke; futhi imithi, izitshalo nezimbali konke kube sesimweni sokwandisa ubuhle, kungenise umnotho ukuze siziqhenye ngezwe lethu.
Kukhona okuphila emanzini. Amanzi ayadinga ukongiwa futhi anakekelwe ngoba ayikhaya lezilwane eziphila emanzini nathi esibuye siphile ngazo. Nokho, umthetho unakekela ukuthi zingaqedwa ngoba uma siziqeda, kusasa siyodlani? Umnotho uyokwenziwa ngani? Kuningi kakhulu engingakubala ngalo mThethosivivinywa obaluleke kangaka kodwa kwanele ukugcina izwe lethu lisesimweni esihle nesincomekayo. Kukuthina sonke ezweni, ohulumeni bonke, imikhakha yonke nemindeni yonke.
Kudinga siqaphele nokho izitshalo eziphuma kwamanye amazwe ezithi uma zifika lapha zingezwani nezethu izitshalo, kugcine sekumila zona kuthi ezethu zife, umhlabathi ube wugwadule ungabe usafuna ukukhiqiza okwethu. Lo mThethosivivinywa uzobeka ongoti abazoqapha ukuthi akwenzeki lokhu. [Kwaphela isikhathi.] Ngiyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[Taking care of nature’s beauty is very important indeed. We from KwaZulu- Natal province embrace the Bill under discussion today.
Nature is very versatile and the major source of world beauty. The soil produces crops and other things for us. The grass in turn provides a blanket for the soil. There are various types of animals, water, swamps and many more. All the things I have listed provide beauty which should not be interfered with, which we need to preserve and nurture so that we do not destroy the very world that we live in. The animals with whom we co-exist must not be killed indiscriminately. Grass and fruits must be preserved so that they can bring wealth to the land.
We need to co-operate in different sectors throughout the country so that we can keep our country wealthy, with clean water running all over, the people breathing sweet air devoid of stinking smells and smoke that is unhygienic, bad for us, the animals and the whole of nature.
The grass serves as the land’s blanket and should not be burnt anyhow, at any time and by just anyone. This is a bad practice which damages grass and soil, and which leads to the unnecessary death of various animals while causing the soil to erode. Through this Bill the Government helps the country preserve nature, prevent soil exhaustion, protect animals and improve the view through plants and flowers that will bring in wealth and make us proud of our country.
There are also things that live in water. The water needs to be preserved and nurtured since it is the home for animals that live in it, which animals we in turn live on. However, the law takes care that they do not become extinct, for if we destroy them, what are we going to eat tomorrow? How is the wealth going to be created? I can discuss a long list of issues concerning this very important Bill. However, it is enough to state that it ensures that we keep our country in a presentable and commendable state. It is up to all of us in this country, all governments, all spheres and all families to do so.
We need to be on the lookout for imported plants that are not compatible with our indigenous plants. Through this Bill experts will be appointed to ensure that this does not happen. Thank you.]
Mr N M RAJU: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister, colleagues, as mentioned by the hon Minister in his opening remarks, the National Environmental Management Act of 1998 is a seminal piece of legislation to the environmental management area. This Bill seeks to amend the Act with respect to the administration and enforcement of those Acts that provide for co-operative environmental governance. It establishes principles for decision-making and clearly delineates the procedures for co-ordinating environmental functions by the different organs of state.
The Bill has been described by the hon Minister as being ``far-reaching and revolutionary,’’ and if it is indeed intended to strengthen the sinews of our decade-old democracy in South Africa, the DA supports the Bill.
The DA also sees much merit in the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill. The Bill has a number of objectives, which are, firstly, to provide for the management and conservation of biological diversity within the Republic, the use of indigenous biological resources in a sustainable manner, and the sharing of benefits arising from the commercialisation of traditional uses and knowledge, and genetic resources; secondly, to give effect to international agreements relating to biodiversity and which are binding on the Republic; thirdly, to provide for co-operative governance in biodiversity management and conservation, and fourthly, to provide for a National Biodiversity Institute to assist in achieving those objectives.
Provision is also made for the protection of threatened or endangered species. This has a direct bearing on the commercial utilisation of biodiversity and seeks to ensure that this is done in an ecologically sustainable way.
Alien and invasive species also come under the purview of the Bill. Provision is made for the eradication or control of such plants. Fairly stringent measures are introduced relating to the duty and care of landowners in relation to invasive species.
A potentially controversial provision, however, concerns benefit-sharing agreements. No person may engage in bioprospecting without a permit, and no permit holder may exploit any biological resources for which traditional use or knowledge exists without entering into a benefit-sharing agreement with the person or community practising that traditional use or knowledge. This means that, in terms of the Bill, benefit-sharing is confined only to the holders of traditional knowledge. The implications are that numerous research institutions, organs of state, companies and communities that engage in bioprospecting are excluded. That could be problematic.
Be that as it may, the DA finds much merit in this and has no hesitation in supporting the Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
UMnu V V Z WINDVOëL: Mgcinisihlalo lohlon, Ndvuna lehlon yeliTiko leTemvelo neTekuvakasha, kanye nemalunga lahlon, kuyinjabulo kimi kutsi ngisukume ngibe ngulomunye walenkhulumomphikiswano. Ngimele sifundza sakitsi saseMpumalanga. (Translation of siSwati paragraph follows.)
[Mr V V Z WINDVOЁL: Madam Chairperson, hon Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, and hon members, it is a great pleasure for me to be one of the participants in this debate. I represent my province, which is Mpumalanga.]
It’s just disturbing that I am following on the footsteps of Mr Raju who, in the NCOP Newsletter , is defined as a political animal. However, I think if that definition is correct, he is a political animal in the wrong political kraal - an unsustainable political kraal, which can be defined as a political ecosystem where he might find himself becoming an endangered species. [Laughter.]
Our debate today should be understood within the context of challenges South Africa - and, of course, the world - faces in terms of environmental management. The greatest challenge is that of improving human life for both present and future generations without depleting the natural capital or resources. This can only be achieved through a healthy, natural environment which supplies raw material, absorbs and treats waste products and maintains water, soil and air quality.
It’s of importance to understand that food security, water provision and climatic stability depend on having properly functioning ecosystems, maintained levels of biodiversity, sustainable rates of resource extraction and minimal waste production.
Our country, through the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, has risen to the occasion through the introduction of enabling legislation to respond to the aforesaid challenges. The National Environmental Management Act gives a legal framework to put into action the state’s obligation in terms of managing the environment. The National Environmental Management Act, which can be defined as the umbrella legislation, is thus complemented by the introduction of sectoral pieces of legislation; namely, the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill, the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Bill, National Environmental Management: Air Quality Management Bill, the National Environmental Management: Coastal Zone Management Bill and the National Environmental Management: Waste Management Bill.
In Rio, during 1992, the UN General Assembly Conference on Environment and Development adopted Agenda No 21. Our country has gone to significant lengths to implement some of these programmes nationally, provincially and even at local government level.
Ten years later, in Johannesburg, the World Summit on Sustainable Development was in agreement to end poverty and protect the environment. One of the successes achieved by the WSSD, inter alia, was the launch of more than 300 partnerships, including 32 programmes for biodiversity and ecosystem management. It was further agreed that biodiversity loss is to be reversed by the year 2010, and the collapsed fish stock is to be restored by the year 2015. These two pieces of legislation should be read and understood within this context.
Singasho kwekutsi lesichibiyelo seNima siniketa liTiko leTemvelo neTekuvakasha ematinyo ekucondzisa tigwegwe kulabomovonyo labacekela phansi imvelo. Kutaba nesiciniseko sekuhlelenjiswa kanye nekugcinwa kwemtsetfo. Futsi kutawushushiswa kugwetjwe labo labephula lomtsetfo wetemvelo; kuvikeleka kwemalunga eluntfu kutemvelo ngekuhambisana nesigaba 24 seMtsetfosisekelo. Kutaba nekwehla kwekuhhunjulwa kwemvelo lesingakubita sitsi, yi-environmental degradation. Konkhe loku kutaba yimphumelelo ngekubekwa kwemabutfo etemvelo lekutsiwa ngema-EMI. (Translation of siSwati paragraph follows.)
[We can simply say that this amendment to the NEMA gives the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism teeth to straighten the crooked and the perverse who are destroying our nature reserves. There, obviously, will be assurance of order and obedience to the law. There will also be prosecution of those who violate the environmental laws and the safety of the citizens from nature, in accordance with section 24 of the Constitution. The environmental degradation shall be reduced. This will be successful as soon as the soldiers of nature, EMIs, the Environmental Management Inspectors, are put in place and are functional.]
Speaking of the EMIs, for the benefit of Mr Tolo, EMIs does not mean economic marketing institutions: it means Environmental Management Inspectors. [Laughter.]
As the hon Minister has said, South Africa enjoys the third highest level of biodiversity in the world. The country’s rich natural heritage is vast and staggering. We have got an extraordinarily varied plant, animal and marine life.
Mpumalanga shares a significant percentage of this biodiversity. We have our provincial nature conservation parks, the Lowveld National Botanical Garden with a lot of fauna and flora, site life species around the Mananga mountains, the Barberton daisies, and wetlands with numerous species of birds, which include the blue crane.
As Mpumalanga, we are proud to be part of turning the tide towards sound environmental management, and we fully support these two pieces of legislation. I thank you. [Applause.]
Dr E A CONROY: Hon Chairperson, hon national Minister Moosa, hon Western Cape Minister Gelderblom and hon colleagues, the two Bills being debated today, namely the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill, are so closely interlinked that they are being introduced in tandem, and it is therefore logical that they should be discussed in the same debate. I will refer to the former Bill as the NEMA Bill and the latter as the biodiversity Bill.
This complex legislation is worthy in its intent, and has the potential to impact on and introduce complicated requirements for a very wide variety of interests. The Gauteng Portfolio Committee on Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Land Affairs considered it, as a matter of fact, to be of such wide interest that it held public hearings on these two Bills.
The NEMA Bill deals with measures for the enforcement of other environmental Acts and other Bills yet to come. It seeks to provide for the delegation of powers by the Minister, the director-general and the MECs for environmental affairs; to provide for the designation of environmental management inspectors by the Ministers or the MECs; and to provide for matters of compliance and enforcement.
A concern raised by the Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Land Affairs in the early stages of the drafting of the Bill is around the violation of the directive in terms of the Act. The violation does not constitute a criminal offence, and it therefore remains a key issue which is not addressed by the Bill. A second concern raised by the department was that the Bill was heavily biased towards dealing with enforcement aspects, and that there was virtually nothing in it that would facilitate establishing a proactive compliance regime that would possibly have the effect of minimising enforcement problems.
The implementation of the Bill has significant personnel and financial implications. It is envisaged that implementation would imply the establishment of new working hours and the building of capacity and skills in relation to environmental enforcement. Gauteng accepts that this must happen. However, there needs to be a realistic assessment of financial implications, and my province would only be able to accept the new functions allocated to it if these were funded through an intergovernmental transfer. Gauteng nevertheless supports the NEMA Bill.
The biodiversity Bill establishes controls on the management and the utilisation of species. It provides for the management and conservation of the biological diversity of South Africa; the long-term sustainable use of our biological resources; the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use and application of generic resources and material; and the establishment of the SA National Biodiversity Institute.
I agree with the hon Minister that there has been uncontrolled exploitation of South Africa’s biological resources and heritage. A recent controversy over bioprospecting which involved the commercial use of the hoodia plant, traditionally used by the Khomani San of the Kalahari to stave off hunger and thirst, highlights the need to protect wild species, to promote their sustainable use and to ensure that indigenous people benefit from the use of their assets and of their traditional knowledge.
South Africa is the third most biologically diverse country in the world and, as such, is fully cognisant of its responsibilities in ensuring that its valuable natural resources are protected and used sustainably. This Bill is a mechanism designed to ensure the management and conservation of biological diversity in South Africa.
During the public hearings on the biodiversity Bill held in Gauteng it was, inter alia, mentioned that the Bill was silent on the composition of the scientific authority, which has a key role to play in the management of the wildlife trade. It is Gauteng’s view that each provincial nature conservation authority should be recognised as a scientific authority and that the composition of the national scientific authority should be defined in such a way that each province, which is identified as a permit-issuing authority specified in the Bill, should be represented in the national scientific authority body.
This would facilitate coherence in the implementation of their legislation and administrative efficiency, as well as ensure that the scientific capacity based in the provinces, and which is used to assist in decision- making around permits, is integrated into the envisaged national system. We in Gauteng are also of the opinion that key elements of wildlife management are not addressed in the Bill. There are a host of activities related to the wildlife trade, including the regulation of professional hunting, the registering of exemption farms and the regulation of nonthreatened indigenous species which may not be covered.
The effect of this is that the issues dealt with in provincial ordinances will not be addressed in the national legislation, and that provincial legislation will, therefore, remain necessary. The implication is that the present fragmented regulatory framework in regard to wildlife may remain, and the key reason for the introduction of national legislation may not be achieved.
Despite these and other issues raised at the public hearings, which I cannot elaborate on now owing to the limited speaking time at my disposal, I have pleasure in carrying out the mandate conferred on me to indicate that Gauteng supports this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, Minister, we in the ACDP welcome these Bills. When the Minister began his speech, he said that this legislation should also be seen in the context of social and economic development and that there should be a balance.
I agree with that, except, Minister, we must be very careful. There is nothing wrong with you being biased in favour of conservation, which I know you are, because the developers are biased in favour of development and they pull no punches. Therefore, in order to attain the balance, you have to be biased in favour of conservation, otherwise there will be no balance. So, when you are, you have the support of the ACDP.
The interesting thing is, Minister, that environmentalists have always been right. If you look at the literature in the 1970s and 1980s coming from the environmental lobby, who were then regarded as being loony Greens, you will see that they were right. All of the things we are seeing now, were warned about in the 1970s by the environmentalists. So we should listen to the environmentalists, and it is good that we have this legislation. We do have a great responsibility of biodiversity to protect.
To understand this Bill one needs to look at it in context. The NEMA Bill - the National Environmental Management Bill - is the overarching Bill, and then there are its various legs. All the legs are not in place yet. We have, for example, the Biodiversity Bill that is before us today; the Air Pollution Control Bill, which is coming; the Protected Areas Bill, the Coastal Management Bill. It may well be that the Minister will add other legs later to meet some of the things which my hon colleague from Gauteng had to say to us today.
The Bill is wonderful in its scope. One knows that it is ambitious in what it seeks to achieve. Whether we have - and I pose the question - the administrative reach to fulfil many of these objectives is another question. However, we have to start somewhere, and there is nothing wrong with being ambitious, particularly with being ambitious regarding conservation. The Bill, however, does allow us to conform to our national objectives on sustainable use in order for us to meet our international obligations, national environmental obligations and agreements we have entered into.
I just have a few things I would like to say in the very short time that I am given to speak in this House, Minister. After the elections we will have many more members and I’ll have much more time. We have a huge amount of knowledge on fauna and flora at provincial level. However, to rationalise it, we must not dissemble and duplicate that pool of knowledge, but try to increase the pool of knowledge in a national effort. We have to guard against that in what we do in the future in terms of this legislation.
We need to look, Minister, at changing the Constitution to make conservation a local authority concurrent or devolved competency also. At the local level, if you look at the schedules - which I’m sure you have - you’ll notice that only air pollution is something that lies at local authority level. The reality is that land use is a local authority competency. They decide how land is going to be used, or largely decide, and they are on the ground. For them, then, not to have a concurrent obligation or devolved competence, I think, is wrong.
Also, we need to have the legislative teeth to dissuade people from abusing the environment, but we also have to incentivise in that we also have to provide carrots and not only sticks. Most of the carrots that can be used effectively in this field lie at local government level. So, I leave the thought with you, Minister. I really think this is a profound matter that needs to be looked at. The local authorities have to become a part of the process. This is a comprehensive, all-encompassing issue - this protection of our ecosystems - and the local authorities should be involved and also constitutionally involved.
Also, there appears to be no provision for spot fines. You know that the legislative process in this country, Minister, is very laborious. There should be provision for spot fines, which are an effective way of dissuading people from abusing the environment. This is something you might … [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, this is the first time that the legislature of the Northern Cape has requested me to address this Council on this specific cluster. I thank them for it.
However you will also see on the speakers’ list that the very last speaker before the hon Minister is the hon Mohammed Sulliman from the Northern Cape, and I am sure he is there just in case I say something wrong or leave something out! [Laughter.]
We have been treated in this House today with so much technical detail on these two noncontroversial, but very important Bills that it would surely be an overkill if I go into detail as well. Going into overkill would be totally out of order, especially in this debate. [Interjections.]
Wanneer ons oor NEMA-wysigings praat, is dit baie duidelik dat die voorsiening en implementering van wetstoepassing die leemtes in die oorspronklike wet kan vul. Die meer doeltreffende administrasie word ook hierdeur aangespreek en sal ‘n groter verbetering teweegbring. As ons van wetstoepassing praat, sal dit goed wees as die agb Minister reageer op die moontlikheid dat sekere oortreders, soos verkeersoortreders, afkoopboetes kan betaal sonder dat hulle deur die hele regsproses hoef te gaan.
Die agb Minister van die Wes-Kaap, mnr Gelderblom, en agb Durr het ook pas na sogenaamde ``spot fines’’ verwys. Die regsproses moet egter nog steeds daar wees vir diegene wat nie betaal nie en dit moet hard op hulle neerkom. Hierdie benadering behoort vinniger, kostedoeltreffend en effektief te wees.
Ten opsigte van die wetgewing oor biodiversiteit is dit belangrik vir al die provinsies om kennis te neem van die wysigings wat aangebring is deur die gekose komitee om LURe in te sluit by die opstelling van ‘n lys oor sekere spesies. Dit is belangrik dat die nasionale Minister nie in isolasie optree nie, maar in oorlegpleging met die LURe. Die teenoorgestelde is ook waar. Daar moet dus konsultasie wees.
Provinsies mag in sekere omstandighede soos met rampe oor die nodige vermoëns beskik waarvan daar nie noodwendig op nasionale vlak kennis gedra word nie. As daar konsultasie is voordat nasionaal opgetree word, kan die bronne tot voordeel van die provinsie en die land aangewend word.
Dit sal verwelkom word as die agb Minister ‘n aanduiding kan gee oor hoe die biodiversiteitsinstituut in verhouding tot die provinsies gaan funksioneer. Waar gaan die instituut wees? En sal dit bloot onder nasionale beheer staan, of wat is die omstandighede? Met dié paar gedagtes en vrae ondersteun die Noord-Kaap die NEMA-wysigingswet en die biodiversiteitswetsontwerp. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[When we talk about NEMA amendments, it is quite clear that the provision for law enforcement and the implementing thereof can fill in the gaps in the original legislation. The more efficient administration will also be addressed hereby and it will bring about bigger improvement. If we talk about law enforcement, it will be good if the hon Minister would react on the possibility that certain offenders, like traffic offenders, can pay spot fines, without it being necessary for them to go through the whole legal process.
The hon Minister of the Western Cape, Mr Gelderblom, and hon Durr also just referred to so-called ``spot fines’’. The legal process should however still be there for those who do not pay and it must deal with them severely. This approach ought to be quicker, more cost efficient and effective.
In regards to the legislation on biodiversity, it is important for all the provinces to take note of the amendments which were effected by the elected committee to include MECs in the compiling of a list on certain species. It is important that the national Minister do not act in isolation, but in consultation with the MECs. The reverse is also true. There must be consultation.
Provinces might in certain circumstances, like disasters, have the necessary capacity which is not necessarily known about on national level. If consultation takes place before action is taken nationally, the resources can be utilised to the benefit of the province and the country.
It would be welcomed if the hon Minister can give an indication of how the institute for biodiversity will function in relation to the provinces. Where will the institute be situated? And will it simply be under national control, or what are the circumstances? With these couple of thoughts and questions the Northern Cape supports the NEMA Amendment Bill and the biodiversity Bill.]
Li lethu siyaxhasa. [Ons steun die wetsontwerp.] Applous.
Mr R M NYAKANE: Hon Chair, the two pieces of legislation under debate before this House signify the Government’s response to the obligation it is charged with in terms of section 21 of the Bill of Rights. This is an obligation to ensure that everyone lives in an environment which is not harmful to his or her health or wellbeing.
Needless to mention, a clear link exists between the quality of the environment and the health profile of the people exposed to these environments. Cholera epidemics which occurred in some parts of our provinces testify to this phenomenon.
Protection of the environment benefits not only the present generations, but future generations as well. Hence, the emphasis is laid on the concept ``intergenerational equity’’. Harm to the environment results in harm to the present and future generations.
Countries grossly polluted with landmines are characterised by a sizeable number of maimed persons, hence Scarlett Harding’s expression about ``the tragedy of the commons’’.
The past has taught us that legislative measures alone are inadequate to ensure full compliance with the requirements of the law by its citizenry. I raise this matter in relation to section 31(g) and 31(h) of the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill wherein powers and functions of the environmental management inspectors have been clearly articulated. Given this background, it therefore becomes imperative to focus on our measures which will ensure sustainable compliance with these laws. These are simply the change of human behaviour towards their environment. Training modules for the environmental management inspectors have to therefore take cognisance of this element.
Human behaviour is usually manifested by one’s lifestyle, beliefs and practices which are, in most cases, responsible for the pollution of his or her immediate environment. Indiscriminate faecal disposal, veld burning, littering, uncontrolled refuse disposal are practices that are motivated by human conduct. It is for this reason that training modules should strongly stress a change in one’s behaviour.
The media has recently revealed the outcome of a survey conducted at Pietermaritzburg and Kwalezana Hospital, relating to environmental pollution. The survey revealed that the incineration method - though this test case might not be relevant at this juncture - as a means of disposal has proved to be inadequate. Children were found in possession of syringes, bottles and plastic medicine containers which had survived the process of incineration. Disposal of substances such as microwaves posed another great concern.
I share this observation with this House in an attempt to depict the extent of the environmental pollution problem in our country. Most localities in the Limpopo province … [Time expired.]
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Thank you, Deputy Chair. Deputy Chair, I rise in support of these two Bills before us here today. Having listened to the debate, I’m think I’m not going to bore you with the details of the Bills, but just say that we in the ANC support the two Bills.
I want to join the hon Mr Van Niekerk just to assure him that my name was not put there to play policeman, but in order to support him. We have confidence in him. All of us in this House represent our provinces. Whatever party you are from, you can participate on behalf of your province. [Interjections.]
Chairperson, I think I also need to mention the serious allegation which was made by Mr Van den Berg in connection with the hon member Antoinette Versfeld. It’s a pity she is not in this august House here today. What she did …
Ms C BOTHA: On a point of order, Sir …
Mr M A SULLIMAN: What she did was she took Mr Van den Berg’s …
Ms C BOTHA: On a point of order: Is it acceptable for assertions to be made and aspersions to be cast upon a person’s character …
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member, excuse me. Mr Sulliman, could you take your seat please? Sorry, hon member. Actually, the procedure is that I should recognise you first.
Ms C BOTHA: Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Please go on.
Ms C BOTHA: Thank you very much. Is it acceptable for a member to cast aspersions on the character of a member who is not present, without any proof - purely allegations that are being made while the member is not present? [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: That’s not a point of order, actually. [Interjections.] Sorry, Mr Sulliman, could you take your seat, please?
Mr L G LEVER: Deputy Chairperson, on a point of order: The statements which the learned Sulliman refers to have no relevance to the debate at hand and, on the rule of relevance, are not admissible in this debate. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Are you through?
Mr L G LEVER: Yes.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. Again, that’s not a point of order. Mr Sulliman, would you please continue?
Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, then I must say, at this stage, that I must lead my delegation out of the House, which will no longer have a quorum. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! [Interjections.] Please continue. [Interjections.]
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Deputy Chair, it’s typical of the DA to play boycott politics, and that is not going to serve our country at all. [Interjections.] It just shows you that they are not interested in South Africa. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: The DA is against progress. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon member! Order, please! [Interjections.] Just hold on, Mr Sulliman.
Thank you. According to the list here, it was Mr Gelderblom, the MEC for environmental affairs and development planning. So, Mr Sulliman, if you could continue.
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Thank you, Deputy Chair. Deputy Chair, if you’ve noticed, the DA members have left the House. They are playing boycott politics here, and that is not good for South Africa. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Order, hon members! Can we give Mr Sulliman a chance, please?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Thank you, Deputy Chair. Deputy Chair, the hon member member Versfeld also took the R6 000 from Mr Van den Bergh and she never submitted that particular application, which means that poor fisherman from Struisbaai stands a chance of losing his money. However, I want to appeal to the Minister today to investigate this matter. We must make sure, and we must also check on the conduct of the hon member Versfeld. It seems to me she is busy misleading people out there in order to get votes.
My appeal to the hon Minister is to consider Mr Van den Berg’s situation and see if there is any way in which he can perhaps be assisted. I am doing this because it is clear that people are being manipulated somewhere out there. False promises are being made, and once we raise these issues in this House, they stand up and disappear from this august House. They undermine this House. We as members of NCOP do have the right to speak in this House, and that is our constitutional right.
Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: They have respect for … [Inaudible.]
Mr M A SULLIMAN: They respect nothing, I do agree, hon member Van Niekerk. However, I want to conclude by saying that we in the ANC support these two Bills, hon Minister. We are awaiting the rest of the Bills, and you can rest assured that we will scrutinise them and do a thorough job on them. I thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. What is your question, hon member?
Mr K D S DURR: I would like to know what the Minister’s thoughts are about local authorities’ competency regarding conservation.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I wonder whether the Minister is prepared to answer that question.
The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Chairperson, I should have commented on that, because Mr Durr did raise it in his earlier comments during the debate. I don’t think that it is necessary for a constitutional amendment, because it is a concurrent competency as far as conservation is concerned. I think that we would further disaggregate the legislative framework and responsibilities as far as conservation is concerned.
At present, national and provincial governments share that responsibility and commonage as far as conservation in this country is concerned. As you will see from this Bill, and even this debate, it is not necessarily a very easy thing to do. In many countries you would find that when it comes to threatened species or international trade, or any kind of trade in endangered species, there would simply be a national regime on this matter. What I do agree with, though, is that local governments have a role to play in conservation, and local governments must have obligations in regard to conservation, so that when local government planning takes place, it should take into account the question of the environment, particularly conservation. This can be done through both national and provincial legislation, to ensure that local governments adhere to certain norms as far as conservation is concerned. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. Hon members, before we conclude this debate, I would like to refer to the incident that has taken place in this House. The ruling from the Chair is that we would have to check the Hansard records and see whether what Mr Sulliman said is valid, and make a ruling thereon. Thanks.
Hon members, that concludes the debate. I shall now put the question in respect of the first order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. As this decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. I think they are all here.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. There is none.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against, or whether they abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Eastern Cape iyaxhasa. [Eastern Cape supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr T S SETONA: Free State in favour.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Dr E A CONROY: Gauteng iyaxhasa. [Gauteng supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: KwaZulu-Natal iya vumelana. [KwaZulu-Natal agrees.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Mr M I MAKOELA: Limpopo e a dumela. [Limpopo agrees.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms M P THEMBA: IMpumalanga iyawusekela. [Mpumalanga supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: E a dumela. [Agrees.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Rev P MOATSHE: Re a e garela. [We agree.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr K D S DURR: Die Wes-Kaap steun. [Western Cape supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you. All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to. [Applause].
Order! I shall now put the question in respect of the second order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. As this decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. They are all here.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. There is none.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do so in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against, or whether they abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Kwa khona siyayixhasa. [We support.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr T S SETONA: Free State votes in favour.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Dr E A CONROY: Gauteng ondersteun. [Gauteng supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: KwaZulu-Natal sithi elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms M P THEMBA: Mpumalanga iyausekela. [Mpumalanga supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Die Noord-Kaap steun. [Northern Cape supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Sorry, I have skipped Limpopo. Limpopo?
Mr M I MAKOELA: Limpopo e kho tendelana. [Limpopo agrees.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr D M KGWARE: Northern Cape ke ya rona. [Northern Cape agrees.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: Re a e ananela. [We agree.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr K D S DURR: Western Cape supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to. [Applause].
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON LAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL
AFFAIRS PROTOCOL ON WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE
SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
Rev P MOATSHE: Hon Chair, it is good that we have just passed these two pieces of legislation that overlap each other. This protocol also serves the same statement on the Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement.
The protocol before us today signifies, in a very profound manner, that Africans have long been utilising natural assets, not only to develop socially and economically, but also to contribute to a deeper understanding of conservation and the sustenance of it. The objectives of the Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement affirm the sovereign rights of members states of SADC to manage their wildlife resources collectively. Furthermore, it recognises the conservation and sustainable economic use of wildlife and biodiversity in the region.
However, most importantly, it recognises that the survival of wildlife and that of the population of the region depend on each other for survival. Therefore, it has become imperative for member states to co-operate in enforcing laws governing wildlife since all member states are members of Interpol and signatories of various international and African conventions relating to wildlife and biodiversity.
Re setse re bone magato le matsapa a a tserweng fa go tlhomiwa serapa se se Kgabaganyang sa Kgalagadi kgotsa Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park. Go tlhomiwa ga serapa se sa Kgalagadi go etedisitse pele kutlwano e re e ananelang gompieno. Maikutlo a, a tsamaelana le kutlwano e re e tlhomang. E tlisa leseding maikarabelo a naga le dinaga tse di mabapi go tsaya maikarabelo a a tshwaraganetsweng. Tota magora go ša mabapi.
Kutlwano e, e gwetlha baagi le merafe go babalela diphedi tsotlhe, le ditlhopa tsa batho go tsaya matsapa a go babalela ditshedi tsotlhe. Fa se se fitlheletswe, batho ba tla bona dipoelo tse di molemo.
Kutlwano e, e baka ditshwanelo, dipaka le ditsamaiso tse di tlamang dinaga tse di mabapi go gagamatsa tsamaiso ya molao ono fa go diriwa sengwe se se kgatlhanong le ona. Se se akaretsa matsapa a a tsewang go babalela ditshedi tsa naga, kgwebo e e fosagetseng ya go gweba ka diphologolo, go fa dithata go batlhokomedi ba diphologolo, go fa dithata go dinaga tse di mabapi, go tlotla dikutlwano tse go tsenweng mo go tsona le go tlotlana jaaka dinaga tse di mabapi.
LELOKO LE LE TLOTLEGANG: Bua!
Moruti P MOATSHE: Ke a bua, ke a bua! [Tsenoganong.] (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)
[Rev P MOATSHE: We have already seen the efforts made during the construction of the transfrontier park of Kgalagadi, or Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park. The construction of the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park has intensified the co-operation we are talking about today. This feeling is in line with the co-operation that we are establishing. It reveals the responsibility of neighbouring countries to take joint responsibility. People should help each other.
This co-operation challenges the people and communities to protect all living creatures, and to groups of people to make an effort to protect all living creatures. When this has been achieved, people will see good results.
This co-operation binds the neighbouring countries to strengthen and implement this law when it is broken. This includes the efforts taken to protect living creatures, illegal trade in animals, to give powers to game rangers and to neighbouring countries, to respect the agreements entered into, and to respect each other as neighbouring countries.
An HON MEMBER: Speak!
Rev P MOATSHE: I am speaking, I am speaking! … [Interjections.]]
What is also significant in the protocol is that it ensures that the general population in the region is educated and that public awareness concerning issues of sustainable use of wildlife and conservation is ensured. It encourages research and the building of capacity to ensure that our youth are conscientised and kept informed about their heritage. In this regard, the establishment of a regional database is also envisaged and will report on the status and management of wildlife.
With regard to the provision of resources - financial, human and otherwise
- it will be incumbent on state parties to honour their commitments with respect to the effective implementation of this protocol.
Lastly and in conclusion, South Africa’s ratification of the Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement confirms its commitment to the conservation and sustainable utilisation of wildlife and biodiversity in the region.
Chairperson, we support this protocol. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: I shall now put the question that the Report be agreed to. As the decision is dealt with in terms of Section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their votes.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first give provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote, if they so wish. Since there are none, we shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Ke ya rona. [We support.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES. Free State?
Mr T S SETONA: The Free State votes in favour.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Dr E A CONROY: Gauteng supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mrs J N VILAKAZI: IKwaZulu-Natal siyavuma. (KwaZulu-Natal supports)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Mr M I MAKOELA: Limpopo ya e thekga. (Limpopo supports)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms M P THEMBA: Mpumalanga ondersteun.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Northern Cape, siyavuma. (Northern Cape supports.)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Rev P MOATSHE: Ke ya rona. (We support.) The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr C ACKERMANN: We support.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted.
The Council adjourned at 16:15. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
WEDNESDAY, 27 AUGUST 2003
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Acting Minister of Transport:
Report and Financial Statements of the Regulating Committee of the
Airports Company of South Africa and the Air Traffic and Navigation
Services Company Ltd for 2002-2003.
- The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism:
Report and Financial Statements of the National Botanical Institute for
2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2002-2003.
- The Minister of Labour:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Commission for
Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) for 2002-2003,
including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 49-2003].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Diplomacy, Intelligence,
Defence and Trade Education and Training Authority (DIDTETA) for
2002-2003, including the Report of the Independent Auditors for
2002-2003 [RP 94-2003].
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Council of Provinces:
- Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Public Protector Amendment Bill [B 6B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 27 August 2003:
The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs, having
considered the subject of the Public Protector Amendment Bill [B 6B -
2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports the Bill
with proposed amendments, as follows:
CLAUSE 2
1. On page 4, in line 12, after ``Parliament'' to insert ``; or''.
2. On page 4, after line 12, to add:
(f) has acquired any combination of experience mentioned in
paragraphs (b) to (e), for a cumulative period of at least 10
years.
CLAUSE 3
Clause rejected.
NEW CLAUSE
1. That the following be a new Clause:
Amendment of section 2 of Act 23 of 1994, as amended by section 5
of Act 113 of 1998
3. Section 2 of the principal Act is hereby amended-
(a) by the substitution for the heading of the following
heading:
"[Appointment of committee, remuneration] Remuneration,
vacancies in office and other terms and conditions of
employment of Public Protector"; and
(b) by the substitution for subsection (1) of the following
subsection:
"(1) The National Assembly shall[, in accordance with the
rules and orders of the National Assembly, appoint a committee
for the purpose of] refer to a committee of the National
Assembly the -
(a) nomination of a person in terms of section 193(5)(a) of
the Constitution to be appointed as Public Protector;
(b) nomination of a person in terms of section 2A(3)(a) to be
appointed as Deputy Public Protector;
(c) consideration in terms of section 194(1)(b) and (3)(a) of
the Constitution of the removal from office of the Public
Protector;
(d) consideration in terms of section 2A(9)(b) and (11)(a)(ii)
of the removal from office of the Deputy Public
Protector; and
(e) [considering matters] consideration of any other matter
that can be referred to [it] such a committee in terms of
the Constitution or this Act[: Provided that the
composition of such committee shall be in accordance with
the provisions of section 193(5)(a) of the
Constitution].''.
CLAUSE 4
1. On page 6, in line 8, after ``Parliament'' to insert ``; or''.
2. On page 6, after line 8, to insert:
(e) has acquired any combination of experience mentioned in
paragraphs (a) to (d), for a cumulative period of at least 10
years.
- Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Judicial Officers (Amendment of Conditions of Service) Bill [B 33 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 27 August 2003:
The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs, having
considered the subject of the Judicial Officers (Amendment of
Conditions of Service) Bill [B 33 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75),
referred to it, reports the Bill with proposed amendments, as follows:
CLAUSE 16
1. On page 10, in line 34, to omit ``17'' and to substitute ``10''.
CLAUSE 18
Clause rejected.
NEW CLAUSE
1. That the following be a new Clause:
Amendment of section 13 of Act 47 of 2001
18. Section 13 of the Judges' Remuneration and Conditions of
Employment Act, 2001, is amended -
(a) by the addition in subsection (1) of the following
paragraphs:
"(cA) the requirements for, and the registration of, not more
than one person and the deregistration of that person as
a partner of a Constitutional Court judge or a judge with
the Director-General: Justice and Constitutional
Development;
(cB) the determination, for the purposes of the proviso to
section 9(1), 10(1) or 11(7), by a Constitutional Court
judge or judge who has more than one spouse, of the
division of the amounts referred to in those sections
between those spouses in the event of his or her death;";
and
(b) by the deletion in subsection (1) of paragraph (e).
CLAUSE 20
1. On page 11, in line 26, after ``(1)'' to insert ``Subject to
subsection (2),''.
2. On page 11, after line 33, to insert:
(2) The remuneration referred to in subsection (1) does not
include any amount payable -
(a) to a magistrate under a regulation made in terms of
section 16(1)(a) or (g) of the Magistrates Act, 1993; or
(b) to a judge under a regulation made in terms of section
13(1)(c) or (d) of the Judges' Remuneration and Conditions of
Employment Act, 2001.
CLAUSE 21
1. On page 11, in line 43, to omit ``1 November 2003 or on such
earlier date as may be'' and to substitute ``a date''.
THURSDAY, 28 AUGUST 2003
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
- Draft Bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159:
(1) Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Bill, 2003,
submitted by the Minister for Provincial and Local Government on
27 August 2003. Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Provincial
and Local Government and the Select Committee on Local Government
and Administration.
National Council of Provinces:
- The Chairperson:
The following papers have been tabled and are now referred to the
relevant committees as mentioned below:
(1) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Finance:
(a) Government Notice No R1011, published in Government
Gazette No 25192, dated 18 July 2003: Exchange Control
Regulations: Cancellation and appointment of an authorised
dealer in foreign exchange: ING Bank N.V. South Africa Branch,
in terms of the Currency and Exchanges Act, 1933 (Act No 9 of
1933).
(b) Government Notice No 60, published in Government Gazette
No 25217, dated 25 July 2003: Regulations for Accounting
Standards Board in terms of the Public Finance Management Act,
1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).
(2) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Economic and Foreign Affairs:
(a) Community Public Partnership Programme: Annual Review for
2002-2003.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
National Accreditation System for 2002-2003, including the
Report of the Independent Auditors for 2002-2003.
(c) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South
Africa and the Government of the Republic of Namibia
concerning Natural Gas Trade, tabled in terms of section
231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(d) Explanatory Memorandum to the Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Government
of the Republic of Namibia concerning Natural Gas Trade.
(3) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Public Services:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
National Roads Agency Limited for 2001-2002, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for
2001-2002 [RP 31-2003].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Road Accident Fund
for 2001-2002, including the Report of the Auditor-General on
the Financial Statements for 2001-2002 [RP 58-2003].
(c) South African National Roads Agency - Budget Schedules for
2003-2004.
(4) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Education and Recreation:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the William Humphreys
Art Gallery for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of The Playhouse Company
for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Independent
Auditors for 2002-2003.
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Speaker and Chairperson:
Report of the Auditor-General on Performance Audits completed during
the 2001-2002 financial year [RP 156-2003].
- The Minister of Finance:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of Vote No 8 - National Treasury
for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 135-2003].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Financial Services Board
for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 133-2003].
(c) Government Notice No 1103 published in Government Gazette No
25250, dated 30 July 2003: Appointments and re-appointments of
members to the panel of the Tax Board for the hearing of income
tax appeals in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 58 of
1962).
(d) Government Notice No 1104, published in Government Gazette No
25286, dated 30 July 2003: Statement of the National and
Provincial Governments' Revenue, Expenditure and Borrowing as at
30 June 2003, in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999
(Act No 1 of 1999).
(e) Proclamation No R61, published in Government Gazette No 25290,
dated 31 July 2003: Commencement of the Insurance Amendment Act,
2003 (Act No 17 of 2003).
- The Acting Minister of Transport:
Report and Financial Statements of the Air Traffic and Navigation
Services Company Ltd for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors for 2002-2003.
- The Minister of Labour: (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Financial and Accounting Services Sector Education and Training Authority (FASSET) for 2002- 2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 75-2003].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Media, Advertising,
Publishing, Printing and Packaging Sector Education and Training
Authority (MAPPP) for 2002-2003.
(c) Report and Financial Statements of the Clothing, Textiles,
Footwear and Leather Sector Education and Training Authority for
2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 76-2003].
(d) Report and Financial Statements of the Sector Education and
Training Authority for Secondary Agriculture for 2002-2003,
including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 99-2003].
(e) Report and Financial Statements of the Health and Welfare Sector
Education and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-
2003 [RP 88-2003].
(f) Report and Financial Statements of the Construction Education
and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 85-
2003].
(g) Report and Financial Statements of the Insurance Sector
Education and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-
2003 [RP 79-2003].
(h) Report and Financial Statements of the Local Government, Water
and Related Services Sector Education and Training Authority for
2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 89-2003].
(i) Report and Financial Statements of the Chemical Industries
Education and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-
2003 [RP 147-2003].
(j) Report and Financial Statements of the Transport Education and
Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 87-
2003].
(k) Report and Financial Statements of the Food and Beverage
Manufacturing Sector Education and Training Authority for 2002-
2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 95-2003].
(l) Report and Financial Statements of the Services Sector Education
and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 82-
2003].
(m) Report and Financial Statements of the Education, Training and
Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority for
2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 121-2003].
(n) Report and Financial Statements of the Bank Sector Education and
Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 84-
2003].
(o) Report and Financial Statements of the Energy Sector Education
and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 86-
2003].
(p) Report and Financial Statements of the Information Systems,
Electronics and Telecommunications Technologies Sector Education
and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 96-
2003].
(q) Report and Financial Statements of the Primary Agriculture
Education and Training Authority for 2002-2003, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-
2003 [RP 109-2003].
- The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs:
Report and Financial Statements of the Land Bank for the period January
2002 to March 2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for the period January 200 to March 2003 [RP 132-
2003].
National Council of Provinces:
- The Chairperson:
The President of the Republic submitted the following letter, dated 12
August 2003, to the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces,
informing the National Council of Provinces of the employment of the
South African National Defence Force:
EMPLOYMENT OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL DEFENCE FORCE IN ETHIOPIA AND
ERITREA IN FULFILMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA TOWARDS THE UNITED NATIONS
This serves to inform the National Assembly that on the 12th day of
August Two Thousand and Three, I authorised the employment of the South
African National Defence Force (SANDF) personnel to Ethiopia and
Eritrea as part of the United Nations Observer Peace Mission in
Ethiopia and Eritrea.
This employment was authorised in accordance with the provisions of
Section 82(4)(b)(ii) of the Constitution of the Republic of South
Africa, 1993 (Act No 200 of 1993), [which Sections continue to be in
force in terms of Item 24(1) of Schedule 6 to the Constitution of the
Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No 108 of 1996)], read with Section
201(2)(c) of the said Constitution of 1996, for service as part of the
United Nations Peace Keeping Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea, in
fulfilment of the international obligations of the Republic of South
Africa towards the United Nations, in terms of Section 227(1)(b) and
(c) of the Constitution of 1993, (which section is also still in force
by virtue of the aforementioned Item 24) and Section 18(1) read
together with Section 11 of the Defence Act, 2002 (Act No 42 of 2002).
A total of three personnel will be employed additional to members that
were employed pursuant to authorisation given on 5 December 2000.
The expected costs for the deployment of personnel to the mission for
three months until 31 March 2004, R82 500.
The current Defence allocation has been reprioritized to cover this
expenditure.
I will also communicate this report to the Members of the National
Assembly, and wish to request that you bring the contents of this
report to the notice of the National Council of Provinces.
Regards
T M MBEKI
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Council of Provinces:
-
Report of the Select Committee on Public Services on the National Road Traffic Amendment Bill [B 31B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 27 August 2003:
The Select Committee on Public Services, having considered the subject of the National Road Traffic Amendment Bill [B 31B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76], referred to it, reports the Bill without amendment.