TUESDAY, 23 SEPTEMBER 2003 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:09.

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

QUESTIONS AND REPLIES - see that book.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE CONFERS WITH PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: I share the gratitude, Chairperson, thank you very much. Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Select Committee on Finance -

(1) confers with the Portfolio Committee on Finance of the National Assembly in considering the subject of the financial administration of Parliament; and

(2) reports to the Council by not later than the end of November 2003.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                  ESTABLISHMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I move further without notice that:

That -

(1) notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 244(3), the Council establish an ad hoc Committee in terms of Rule 160(1)(a) to consider the application for approval of an intervention made by the province of the North West in the Mafikeng Local Municipality in accordance with section 139(1)(b) of the Constitution;

(2) the following members be appointed to serve on the ad hoc Committee:

   Rev M Chabaku; Ms J L Kgoali; Mr L Lever; Mr P D N  Maloyi;  Mr  B  J
   Mkhaliphi; Kgoshi M L Mokoena; Mr J O Thlagale;

(3) if necessary, any additional members be added; and

(4) with reference to the decision of the Council dated 19 September 2003, the decision be amended to indicate that the ad hoc Committee report to the Council by no later than 28 November 2003.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

             BROAD-BASED BLACK ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Thank you, Madam Chairperson and colleagues. The tabling of this Bill in Parliament on 2 September 2003 was another milestone and an important step in the economic revolution that the new democratic South Africa has been engaged in since 1994.

Structural reform of an economy is not easy and takes time. The legacy of apartheid leaves us with particularly difficult challenges and the development of new enterprises and increasing the depth of participation by black persons in the economy. By restricting skills development, expropriating land, wealth and assets and by restricting business opportunities for the majority, colonialism and apartheid laid barren the fields of wealth creation and opportunity for that majority. Structurally such an economy could never prosper. To grow and develop our country requires an economy that can meet the needs of all our citizens, our people and their enterprises in a sustainable manner. This will only be possible if our economy builds on the full potential of all persons and communities across the length and breadth of this country.

Starting with the RDP, we have systematically addressed this legacy. However, it became evident that we had to more systematically address the participation of black people in the mainstream of economic activity and within the corporations and enterprises, including co-operative forms of enterprise in the economy. This realisation led to the formation of the Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council and their path-breaking report. The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Bill is the outcome of this process.

The policy approach for empowerment is complex and has to balance many economic processes and forces, not all of which make empowerment easy. After careful consideration, the framework of the BEE policy was released by the DTI on behalf of the Government on 19 March 2003. Parliament’s Trade and Industry portfolio committee adopted the broad-based Bill on 20 August. After public hearings we’ve been able to make a number of important and constructive amendments.

The Bill is in essence enabling legislation that creates a framework for the development and implementation of black economic empowerment. It does this by important mechanisms of the Advisory Council Strategy Document and codes of good practice in the publication of transformation charters. We believe that it is an innovative response to what will be an important learning and developmental process that cannot be dealt with in the tight confines of detailed legislation and regulation. However, where there’s also a need for more certainty and clarity of purpose, the BEE Bill will give black business a strong participation and voice in the South African economy. In the hearings there was concern that the empowerment process must not have too narrow a base of beneficiaries. This is a concern that the Government shares. However, we have to balance this against the fact that the Bill cannot embrace all the programmes and actions introduced by Government and redress the inequity historically imposed on the majority of our people. I believe that the amendments find this balance.

The Bill has been amended to ensure that the law targets a broader spectrum of beneficiaries. The concept of empowerment is not one-dimensional and is a process that should result in both higher levels of black ownership, as well as a reduction in income inequalities. It should result in effective black participation in the economy, reflected in both the broadening of the entrepreneurial base and increased participation in managerial, professional and other skilled occupations.

The process will therefore include elements of human resource development, employment equity, enterprise development, preferential procurement, as well as investment, ownership and control of enterprises in economic assets. Social responsibility programmes and community development activities represent many billions of rands and the injection of moneys into our economy, most which are in terms of the BEE criteria and supportive in their nature. We believe that these are complementary programmes to those I have just mentioned above.

As indicated earlier, the Bill is innovative in that it essentially provides the enabling environment for the implementation of a strategy. The efficacy of the strategy lies in the ability of the Government to use its own economic position to shape the behaviour of the private sector in a transparent and a co-ordinated manner towards certain objectives. In doing this, it works with the market and not against it. However in doing so, it achieves objectives that the market would not achieve or achieve too slowly.

There is now a realisation that we will not have growth and development if we cannot ensure that all our citizens are active and meaningful participants in the economy and have equal opportunity for such participation. This allows a common purpose around which the state intervenes in a developmental manner to ensure that the large and collective benefits of growth and development will be generated and shared by all. This developmental and growth-orientated approach is and must be fundamental to our understanding of the process and how we implement it. BEE is not an imposition, but the opening of opportunities that the market itself would have inadequately realised.

The new Act will provide the instruments to monitor and sensibly adjust by consultation as the process unfolds. These instruments are the establishment of the advisory council as an advisory body to allow for stakeholder participation in the formulation, monitoring and implementation of policy; the ability of the Minister to issue codes on good practice on BEE which must also be taken into account by organs of state; and the ability of the Minister to issue guidelines for the development of transformation charters by different sectors of the economy. Such charters would need to include specific mechanisms to achieve BEE objectives in that sector in a comprehensive and appropriate manner, and provide measurement indicators and powers.

The Bill also empowers the Minister to publish in the Gazette these charters for the particular sectors of the economy. This is the essence of the score-card approach. The publication of the strategy document provides a flexible and authoritative vehicle for articulating policy and guiding public and private sector participation in BEE. Since the publishing of the strategy document in March, we have already seen many developments which confirm the wisdom of allowing for a stable, but evolving approach. The different forms of ownership participation have emerged as the score-card approach unfolds.

So does the question of how this works over time arise, and we’ve had to address the varied corporate strategies of large multinationals through to small family-owned enterprises. All have to be treated within the same framework with flexibility that accords with their economic positions.

We have a very diverse economy and a very sophisticated one at that. The need for the public sector to be more uniform in its approach has emerged strongly. In all this we have to continuously balance the need for certainty with that of being flexible in the face of commercial and financial good sense.

In the financing of BEE there have been new approaches. As we indicated in the strategy document, financing of BEE must also deal with some of the macro aspects of the capital market. This requires us to co-ordinate our efforts and ensure that we have the right products for the purpose. The IDC has done good work and has recently announced its empowerment bond and its approach on this and other new products will become available.

In the DTI we’ve had a fresh look at the National Empowerment Fund and it too will make certain new products available that complement those of the IDC and the private sector. We are therefore confident that we can manage the process that leverages in private sector financing in a manner that is sustainable and promotes growth and stable capital markets.

I want to stress once again that what drives our policy is that equity and participation by all are the real drivers of growth and development. It is growth and development that are the final nails in the coffin of apartheid and the first in building a new and prosperous democracy. Hard work and goodwill are required to build a strong, nonracial, nonsexist, equitable and sustainable economy. There are no magic formulae or quick fixes; only the determination and the vision of our people.

The process from here is to begin putting in place the mechanisms for implementing the strategy. I’ve asked the task team that I appointed to meet again in October to do some work on finalising the strategy document and thereby addressing many areas that have been raised in the public hearings and in the interactions with the private sector and the task team itself.

Financial services and information communication technology sectors are the two most prominent sectors currently involved in the process of developing their own specific charters. This process is driven entirely by the private sector itself, with Government only providing support and guidance where required. Some progress has been made in the design of the ICT and financial sector charters. We hope to have the benefit of insights gained in their work before we publish the final strategy document.

We will prepare the initial codes of practice and put in place the institutional support for the advisory council once the Act is passed into law and that council is appointed. The work on the other financial products to be provided by the NEF will continue and we hope to announce these within the next few months. The NEF will in the meantime continue with the venture capital deals that it has in the pipeline.

We have presented the policy to the wide range of institutions and structures, and I’m pleased to say that there is general support for this. At the weekend in our discussions with the international advisory council, again there was support, both for the policy’s objectives and also for the pragmatic approach that we are taking with regard to foreign companies and generally the pragmatic approach we’re taking with regard to the policy.

I believe that within the private sector we now have a sense of common purpose that this is a common task that we must all embark upon for our common good. There’s been a flood of approaches and initiatives that Government has been asked to comment on. Multinational companies as a whole and often by their national origin have considered BEE and are continuing to make constructive and exciting inputs.

The Oppenheimer family has had the courage of their convictions and made concrete proposals in public to advance the process - the so-called Brenthurst initiative. As one would expect and welcome in South Africa, there has been intense debates on the politics and efficacy of Government’s approach. However, it is my impression that the market is responding well to the policy and strategy. So, events are certainly moving in the right direction. It is an exciting challenge upon which much in our future depends. Let us go at the matter with determination and good sense that are becoming the hallmark of our democracy.

I would like to express in this House as well the gratitude of Government to the Black Economic Empowerment Council chaired by Cyril Ramaphosa, for its pioneering work and commitment to this worthy cause. Many members of the council have continued to work hard in the task team that I mentioned a moment ago, to which the DTI and Government owe a great deal. I would like to thank the portfolio committees under Dr Davies and Mr Tolo who once again have done their work with professionalism and insight. I really don’t know what the DTI would have done without such fine committees. Finally, thanks from the Deputy Minister and I to the team in the DTI led by Lionel October and Philisiwe Buthelezi for their tireless and intellectually thorough commitment to the purpose of this Bill. I believe we are adding another crucial dimension to the programmes of economic transformation and restructuring that will ensure our future, and I commend this Bill to the National Council of Provinces. Thank you, Madam Chairperson. [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon members, I am pleased to note the presence in the gallery of the President of the Senate of the Czech Republic, President Pithart and his delegation. If we could ask them to stand for a moment. [Applause.] Colleagues, hon colleagues, President Pithart, you are most welcome to the National Council of Provinces and the Parliament of South Africa.

Mr L G LEVER: Chairperson, at the outset let me be quite clear, the DA shares the aspirations to create the space and opportunity for those fellow citizens who have been dispossessed by the apartheid state, to have an equitable stake in the economy of the democratic South Africa.

Even though we may have drafted the objectives of the Bill slightly differently, in substance the DA supports those objectives set out in clause 2 of the Bill. The DA will support creating opportunities to enable meaningful participation of black people in the economy. The DA agrees that there is a need to change the racial composition of ownership and management structures. We agree that communities, workers and co-operatives should have a stake in the economy. We agree that black women should own and manage enterprises and that they should have greater access to economic activities, infrastructure and skills training.

The DA supports promoting investment programmes that lead to broad-based and meaningful participation in the economy by black people in order to achieve sustainable development and general prosperity. We agree that rural and local communities need to be empowered by enabling access to economic activities, land, infrastructure, ownership and skills. Where then does the problem lie?

The Bill establishes a council which will amongst other things advise the Government on black economic empowerment, codes of good practice and a strategy on black economic empowerment. Recent history has taught us that this council will be packed with ANC yes men and women, more intent on entrenching the position of a black elite … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M J Mahlangu): Order! Order! Continue, hon member.

Mr L G LEVER: … which already has access to capital, rather than focusing on the truly disadvantaged.

One only has to look at the application of the preferential procurement legislation to see that the elite always gets the lion’s share, while those most in need are given the crumbs.

The DA has nothing against a black elite - in fact, it welcomes a successful and prosperous black elite - but in a Bill like this the truly disadvantaged should be the primary beneficiaries. Abuse and manipulation of this Bill is made possible by the way it has been built around the definitions of black people'' and broad-based black economic empowerment’’. The DA believes that the Bill should have been built around a means test which would have focused on the truly disadvantaged, the overwhelming majority of whom are black. These are the people this Bill should have served. For this reason the DA will not support this Bill.

Dr E A CONROY: Hon Chairperson, Minister Erwin and colleagues, the purpose of this Bill, as the hon Minister has already indicated, is basically to establish a legislative framework to promote black economic empowerment.

Clause 2, which sets out the objectives of the Bill, makes it abundantly clear that the Bill not only represents top DTI priority, but understandably so also that of Government. We all realise and, as a matter fact cannot deny, that transformation in the economic field is imperative because colonialism and apartheid left a legacy of dispossession and disempowerment; transformation has political, social and economic dimensions; and a more equitable economy will support the drive for accelerated growth.

Since 1994 there have been various policies and programmes aimed at transformation, namely urban renewal, rural development, tourism transformation, a strategic plan for agriculture and small business development, and an integrated human resource development strategy.

The key principles playing an important role towards the attainment of this goal are that black economic empowerment is an inclusive process; that it is part of South Africa’s growth strategy; and that economic growth, development and BEE are complementary.

The strategy of a broad-based BEE involves a process which directly contributes to the economic transformation of South Africa and brings about significant increases in the numbers of black people who manage, own and control the country’s economy, and brings about significant decreases in economic inequalities. The term ``broad-based’’ in the Bill’s title seeks to broaden the entrepreneurial base to extend black participation in the economy as measured in terms of ownership, management and skills development; to develop local communities and employees; and to reduce income inequalities and poverty.

Business Day less than a month ago reported on a study prepared for the Bank of New York that, and I quote:

Uncertainty about the implementation of black economic empowerment and what its effect is likely to be, has negatively affected US investors’ perceptions of investment in South Africa.

That same newspaper, however, displayed the other bright and encouraging side of the coin by reporting yesterday that, and I quote once more:

World business leaders represented on President Mbeki’s International Investment Council have given their backing to South Africa’s black empowerment strategy, signalling to fellow investors that empowerment does not pose a threat to their businesses in South Africa.

A former chairman of a Swedish-Swiss conglomerate summarised and voiced the opinion of world business leaders with his remark that they are convinced that it is the right and necessary move to make. The New NP shares and endorses that sentiment.

I, however, wish to express disappointment that the definition of black people'' as it appears in the Bill, namely that it is a generic term which means Africans, coloureds and Indians’’, does not include the original caveat that they, for very obvious reasons, should also be South African citizens or permanent residents of the Republic. The argument that the present definition conforms with the definition in the Employment Equity Act is not convincing, as two other petroleum-related Bills which are in an advanced stage in their progress through Parliament specifically make mention in various sections that the purpose is to promote the advancement of, not just any historically disadvantaged individuals, but specifically historically disadvantaged South Africans.

The New NP will, however, not allow this small but significant detail to change our already stated favourable sentiments. We support the Bill. [Applause.]

Mr T S SETONA: Deputy Chairperson, hon members and hon Minister, debating this Bill as we do, on the eve of the national Heritage Day and a few months towards the dawn a decade of freedom, we in the ANC are more than confident to declare that the past nine years of democratic governance represent a legacy of a nation in action for self-renewal - self-renewal to eradicate socioeconomic and political disparities for the creation of lasting peace, stability and prosperity.

As we approach a decade of freedom, we look back with pride that the marathon traversed by our people under the leadership of the ANC, since its founding conference in Mangaung in 1912, has not yet been in vain.

In passing the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Bill this afternoon, we are simultaneously fired with a great sense of celebration regarding the 48 years of the living ideals of the Freedom Charter. The Freedom Charter, upon whose ideals we seek to reconstruct our society, proceeds from the recognition that this country belongs to all those who live in it. It envisages a society based on the principles of equality, where all can share in the country’s wealth.

Based on the history of inequalities created by the legacy of colonial oppression, conscious action must be taken to undo this legacy of inequalities and, indeed, the ANC-led Government has the mandate of the people of this country to do that. There is no problem with that, hon Lever, and we are going to proceed with that mandate.

The Bill before this House today marks yet another watershed in the long marathon to undo the inequalities of the past. The Bill aims to establish a legal framework for the promotion of economic transformation in order to, amongst others, enable meaningful participation of black people in the economy; achieve substantial change in the racial composition of ownership and management of the economy; and to promote access to finance for black economic empowerment.

In pursuit of the broad objectives of this Bill, there will be an advisory council, as the Minister has already alluded to, that will, amongst others, review and monitor the progress in the achievement of black economic empowerment. Allow me just to make a few comments. I expected the DA to oppose the Bill on the basis of its original intentions as they were raised in the committee - the intentions around the definition of ``black’’ in the Bill. However, the DA have not raised that. They have raised an issue around their mistrust regarding the ability of the Government to appoint its own yes men. I want to advise hon Lever and his colleagues that they must create their own government where they can appoint their own yes men.

As the ANC, we are not going to deterred in our determination and will to transform the economic relations in this country. The Bill gives the Minister the power to issue codes of good practice on black economic empowerment that may include, amongst others, further interpretation and definition of broad-based black economic empowerment and categories of black empowerment entities, and also give qualification for the criteria of preferential purposes of procurement. This will go a long way in adapting and refining the Act in line with the changing conditions.

The Bill also empowers the Minister to issue a comprehensive strategy for broad-based black economic empowerment that will provide for an integrated, co-ordinated and uniform approach to empowerment by state organs, public entities, the private sector, nongovernmental organisations, communities and other stakeholders.

Whilst the Bill is a product of extensive consultation and has enjoyed wider support amongst the roleplayers, it is, however, worth noting that the DA has masqueraded behind the question of mistrust on the appointment of the advisory council in order to oppose this Bill. Their objection to the Bill is reminiscent of their own slogan, the slogan of fighting back - fighting back who? That slogan is about fighting the historically disadvantaged majority of this country, and fighting the Africans of this country by retaining the status quo and the privilege of the elite minority. As the ANC, we are not going to bow to that particular pressure. On the basis of this, I want to persuade the House to vote for this Bill without any reservation. I thank you. [Applause.] The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Chairperson, the late Kwame Nkrumah had a very well-known axiom which says that once you get the political kingdom, everything automatically falls in place. It is an axiom which has been proved to be not entirely correct in the sense that after that political kingdom, you have to strive for economic kingdom, and this is what we are actually doing.

The broad philosophical objective of the Bill in front of this House is to promote the economic unity of the nation, protect the common market and promote equal opportunity and equal access to Government services. The economic kingdom that I am talking about therefore means to increase broad- based and effective participation of the black people in the economy; and to promote a higher growth rate, increased employment and more equitable income. I think this is the most fundamental philosophical objective which the IFP is very much amenable to; in other words, we agree with that very much.

However, the BEE enterprises will not meaningfully succeed if the traditional financing institutions and the state-owned parastatals do not actually provide friendly, reasonable and manageable interest rates. And, what we see now and again are our BEE enterprises collapsing in front of us, Mr Minister. It is not an interesting thing and we know that one of the contributing factors to that is the interest rates which have not been actually structured to help our people.

According to Business Map, for instance, the market capitalisation of black- controlled companies is only 3% of the JSE, and according to Empowerdex, there has been little increase in black ownership at the JSE. Figures show that black-owned initiatives on the JSE are not keeping up well. According to this report, there will be a significant decline in black representation on the JSE by the end of this year.

I found these findings quite disturbing. They make me begin to ask what it is that we should do to ensure that this wonderful dream comes to fruition, so that we can move away from what our President once said about a country of two nations and begin to develop a country of one nation. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr J O TLHAGALE: Thank you very much, Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and the honourable House.

The argument propounded by this Bill is an economically sound one. It says very clearly that our country’s economy cannot operate to its full potential because the majority of its people earn very low incomes and are still excluded from the ownership of fixed assets and the possession of advanced skills. This is an indisputable fact. The argument that this state of affairs is to the detriment of all South Africans is also very clear and understandable.

So what is it that needs to be done? What collective measures are on offer under these circumstances? The Bill provides for the necessary steps to be taken to increase the effective participation of the majority in the economy. Can we, for argument’s sake, imagine in an agricultural setup a camp with green grass, water and other nutritious licks, but with most of the cattle shut out of this camp so that only a few are able to enter through a narrow gate?

What needs to be done is to broaden access to the camp so that as many cattle as possible can enter and enjoy the fattening products and new concentrates that are there for them. Similarly, the Bill before the honourable House seeks to broaden access to the economic field so that as many blacks as possible can get to play their part.

The Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council would be set up to advise the Minister. Otherwise, the UCDP supports the Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr K D S DURR: In a manner of speaking, Chairman, Minister, I agree with the hon colleague who has just sat down. I think that we would like to see the black cattle, the white cattle, the black and white cattle and all of the cattle in the field. [Interjections.] He put it much better than I do.

You see, Minister, we need to build this economy and we need a national, broad-based, overarching, national economic identity that binds us all, that builds us all, that prospers and empowers us all, motivates us all, encourages everyone, shuts out no one and obstructs no one. To that extent, I think, in a sense, that is what the Bill is doing.

What we don’t like is the allusion to race. We simply don’t like that. Technically, for people, many of us who spent our lives trying to end that debate in South Africa, when it comes back at us like that, we’re just allergic to it, Minister, if I must be honest with you.

As far as the objectives are concerned, the only thing amiss in them, Minister, is that the word growth'' appears nowhere. I know you might say,Ipso facto, that’s what we are trying to achieve’’. The reality is that it doesn’t, in fact, appear anywhere among the objectives of the Bill, and we believe that our ability to employ our people, our ability to elevate our people and our ability to uplift our people must be in growth. It is only general economic growth that will lift all boats in South Africa. Even if it’s wrong, the impression that it is exclusive somehow, or partial, I think, is counterproductive.

You know, we can sit here trying to be rude to each other, particularly with the election coming, and we can beat the tribal drum and so on, but actually there’s consensus in this House. If you listened to Mr Lever, he was actually supporting you, Minister, and I think that’s great. I think it’s wonderful. [Interjections.] He was, let’s be fair. He’s my political opponent also, but let’s divide on the things that we genuinely don’t agree on. [Time expired.]

Mr T S SETONA: Mr Chairperson, will the hon member take a question?

Mr K D S DURR: I will welcome any opportunity to extend my speaking time. The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M J Mahlangu): Unfortunately, your time has expired. [Interjections.] Order! Order!

Ms N D NTWANAMBI: Chairperson, people must just know that I will speak in isiXhosa. So nixhobe [be prepared.] I left my English at home, for a change.

Chairperson, Minister and hon members, I want to begin by saying that …

… thina be ANC siwuxhasa kakhulu lo Mthetho uYilwayo kuba uneenjongo zokukhuthaza abantu ukuba bavuke bazenzele. Kwakhona, Mhlalingaphambili, kukho imibutho engahambisaniyo nalo Mthetho uYilwayo, njengoko sele sivile, kuba ijonge ukukhusela oko yakufumana ngokungekho mthethweni. Akukho mgca uthi baza kuhluthwa nto, koko abazange bakwazi ukuphucula abantu kwasekuqaleni.

Ndifuna ukubuza lo mbuzo, Mhlali-ngaphambili, kwaba bathi bamele amaKrestu: Ngaba bakulungele na ukwabelana kwanokuphuhlisa abo bangabaqeshwa babo? Okanye, ngaba bazimisele kwinto yokuba abaqeshwa bahlale bengabaqeshwa, bengena sabelo kwezo fama okanye kwezo nkampani zabo? Ndifun’ ukuthi kwaba bantu bangamaKristu, ndinguye nam, eZulwini ayikho indawo yabantu abangabaziyo abanye abantu, yaye eZulwini kulawula ooLazaro, ooDivas bayatsha. [Uwele-wele.]

Lo Mthetho uYilwayo ulungiselela bonke abantu, ngakumbi abo babevinjwe amathuba enkqubela nempucuko ngabo babesemagunyeni. Utsho okokuba uRhulumente uza kuthabatha uxanduva lokubona ukuba amathuba anikwa abo bafuna ukungenela ushishino olusemthethweni. Akukho Mzantsi Afrika uya kuba nemigodi yakwaOppenheimer kuphela, okanye uthotho lweevenkile zomntu omnye ngenxa yokuba enebala elikhanya ukudlula abanye.

Xa ndigqibezela, Mhlalingaphambili, mandilumkise abo basandula ukungena emtshatweni ongengcwele, okokuba akwaba bebesazi ukuba bazimanye nabantu abawuchasayo lo Mthetho uYilwayo. Mandilitsolise, Mhlalingaphambili, ndithi i``Demolition Alliance’’ izimanya nabantu abamele ukuphuculwa ngulo Mthetho uYilwayo. Okanye mandiphinde ndiyiguqule ndithi, xa i-IFP itshata nabantu abangoofunz’ eweni nabandlela zisoloko zanxaxha, njengaba, ngaba ibiyiqondisisile na into eyenzayo, kuba itshate nabantu abangena zinjongo zakuphucula abo babevinjwe amathuba?

Kungakuhle ukuba umtshato, xa ungasekwanga yiNkosi, ukhawuleze uwuqhawule. Hleze niphele ningumbutho weenkokeli, abalandeli bemke baya kuzimanya nombutho onguwo wodwa omele abantu. Enkosi, Mhlalingaphambili. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)

[… we in the ANC fully support this Bill because it aims to encourage people to stand up and do things for themselves. Again, Chairperson, there are parties that oppose this Bill, as we have heard, because they are trying to protect their ill-gotten gains. Nowhere in the Bill does it say that they are going to lose certain rights. Its just that from the outset they showed that they were unable to develop the people.

I would like to direct a question, Chairperson, to these people who claim to represent Christians: Are they prepared to share with and train their employees? Or do they want their employees to remain just that, employees, without any shares in the farms or companies employing them? I would like to say to these Christians - I am one myself - that in Heaven there is no place for people who do not care about other people, and that in Heaven the Lazarusses reign supreme and the Diveses burn.

This Bill caters for everybody, particularly those who were denied opportunities for development by the apartheid governments. Government has stated that it will take upon itself the responsibility to ensure that opportunities go to those who want to participate in legal businesses. South Africa will not have a situation where only Oppenheimer has mines, or where one person has a monopoly of a certain industry just because he is of a much lighter hue than everyone else.

In conclusion, Chairperson, let me warn those who have just entered into an unholy alliance, that they are aligning themselves with people who are opposed to the Bill. Let me state categorically, Chairperson, that the “Demolition Alliance” is entering into an alliance with people who should benefit from this Bill. In other words, when the IFP entered into an alliance with devious people with crooked ways, did they stop to consider their decision, because they’ve entered into an alliance with people who have no plans to develop those that were denied opportunities?

It is only proper that when not blessed by God, an alliance should be ended, otherwise you will end up leading your own jackets, with the followers having gone to join the only party that has the interests of people at heart. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]]

The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chair, may I first deal with certain issues which, I believe, can be easily clarified and, hopefully, also allay some of the concerns raised, and then I would like to spend a few moments dealing with what I believe is the fallacious position of the DA.

Let me say that, in regard to uncertainty of our black economic empowerment, obviously, when you change policy, I think, there is always that potential. However, I think we have managed to allay that uncertainty considerably. The hon Conroy quoted a statement from International Investor Council. These very experienced business leaders, I think, indicated quite clearly that if we hadn’t undertaken this policy, we probably would have had more problems than by undertaking it, and also that they supported, as I indicated, the pragmatic manner in which we are doing that.

Let me also clarify the matter with regard to these ``South Africans’’. This legislation applies to South Africans, citizens or permanent residents. For the sake of consistency, in the legislation we used African as it’s defined in the Employment Equity Act. However, when you read the strategy document, including the scorecard, it makes it clear that this applies to South Africans. This has been the matter on which we’ve been approached by other countries and other governments. The Government has made it clear that this applies to South African citizens or permanent residents of the country. The reasons for that, I think, are pretty obvious as to why it needs to be done in that manner.

Let me deal briefly with the matter of financing. Hon Bhengu, the Government’s approach has been consistent on this matter and I think, increasingly, you see considerable amounts of finance being made available. What we don’t believe would be correct is to create an artificially low interest rate for the black entrepreneur. The reason is a very clear one: paying interest is an expense. You have to pay off each month and each day whatever it is that you have to pay. If you were to lower that interest rate at some point and then raise it, you would be creating uncertainty in the business environment because the business would not be geared to paying what the market rate is. Then, suddenly, when it has to pay it, you create a problem.

This is a worldwide experience that heavily subsidised interest rates create two kinds of problems. One is the problem for the business. The business itself often runs into difficulties later. The second is a major problem for government because it has an open-ended exposure about subsidising interest rates. It’s that very exposure which increases the perception of risk and which increases interest rates again. So, you get a very dangerous circle that can emerge: Whereas interest rates go up, the government has to pay more, and because the government pays more, the interest rates carry on going high.

So, you can see that our Government’s approach to macroeconomic policy is stability, not instability. This is why the assistance that we give to BEE is usually in the form of assisting with start-up grants, or increasing in the form of giving guarantees in support for the loans taken. I would appeal that we see and accept the problems of finance. Yes, there are different problems, but we will not take the course of a subsidised interest rate.

Regarding hon Durr, well, I’m sorry, we have to deal with the race issue. As this Government has shown and as the ANC has shown, we are the most profoundly committed organisation to nonracism. However, it is black people who were discriminated against. We, therefore, have some way to bring them into the economy. I’d also stress to you that, in the Act, we may not make mention to growth because the objectives deal with black economic empowerment. However, any reading of the strategy documents will show how strong our commitment is to the concept that growth and development have to go hand in hand and, in my statement today in the National Assembly, we stressed this point and the President stressed it in his state of the nation address. So, I really think that we can give you comfort in those areas and we are making progress here.

The final point I would like to make is that, really, there’s real hypocrisy in the position. Hon Durr thinks that the DA agrees with this approach. Let me argue the contrary position: I think that there’s real hypocrisy in the position. In this House and the other House they purport to support the objectives and then develop what are essentially spurious arguments against it.

What are the spurious arguments? There have been two that have been put forward. The one is that the definition of black is too narrow and should be related to a means test. However, this is about black economic empowerment for skilled professionals, for people who are going to own a business and for managers. Now, what are we doing if we set the means test? It just makes no sense. The means test deals with another problem which this Government has massively committed itself to, and that is helping poor people, but here we are talking about economic empowerment. Now, you are saying that we must only empower those people who are poor and we can’t empower anyone else? It’s a spurious argument designed to find an excuse for not supporting this.

The second argument, too, is spurious. To argue that people of the calibre of Cyril Ramaphosa are immediately fat cats and therefore suspect is, really, to profoundly misunderstand that most of the finest people in South Africa, particularly the finest black people in South Africa, supported the ANC. Why did they support the ANC? Because they were people who knew that, fundamentally, racism was wrong. Good people, great people, mature people, inspired and idealistic people believe that. Quite obviously, when they come into the open economy, they will also be leaders in this economy. To say that these people have not made a massive contribution to our economy is really wrong. Any government would appoint experienced and good people to a board, but when we appoint them, suddenly it’s the ANC.

Both of these arguments are profoundly fallacious, and I would submit that we always have these arguments in the DA for two reasons. One is that, as an opposition, the only thing that they can do - on every single issue, no matter how useful and no matter how it stands for building the nation - is to oppose. In the House, the other day, the President dealt with an extremely sensitive matter, and what did the DA person do? He stood up and made a stupid point. When we try to deal with the essence of nation- building and problem issues, they don’t see that. So, anything that the ANC does, the DA will oppose. This is what undermines the DA as a legitimate and useful opposition in this country. [Interjections.]

Secondly, I believe that regarding everything that we try and do to bring about transformation for our nation, the DP is always opposed to it. That is the truth behind the DA, and you should reflect on it. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

    PROMOTION OF NATIONAL UNITY AND RECONCILIATION AMENDMENT BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, to some people it’s still a miracle how we managed to smoothly move away from our ugly past to where we are today.

After the 1994 elections, the people’s Government deemed it fit and proper that something had to be done by all South Africans, especially victims and perpetrators, to honestly and openly talk about their past. For that to happen, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Amnesty Committee were the answer.

Indeed, people used that platform effectively. A lot was revealed. That is why good doctors, like Dr Conroy, will advise you that if you cough out whatever is troubling you, you will feel relieved and healed. In 1995, the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act was passed by this Parliament. It is a known fact that a lot was achieved through that process. People who could not see eye to eye have reconciled and are now on good speaking terms. The majority of applications of those who applied for amnesty were successful. This process was like our traditional courts whose aim is not just to punish people, but to reconcile them.

The Bill, amongst other things, wants to deal with those identified victims and communities who suffered the injustices of the past. The Bill makes it possible for some amounts to be paid to some people identified by the commission. Again, they shall be paid from the funds, all amounts payable by way of reparations towards the rehabilitation of communities as prescribed.

The Bill also enables sympathetic, progressive and patriotic individuals or companies to make some contributions or donations towards the same cause. This can be in a form of buildings, schools, hospitals, recreational facilities or any other assistance to the affected community. No price can equal the suffering, sacrifice and pain endured by our people and our leaders. This is just a gesture to say we acknowledge or recognise the role that they played.

When the commission and Amnesty Committee closed shop, it later discovered that there were still cases that were pending for various reasons. The Bill makes it possible for the Minister to appoint a subcommittee to deal with such instances. The Bill also allows the Minister to, by way of a notice in the Gazette, correct any error in names published by the commission.

I think that I have tried to simplify what this Bill is all about. Hon members, you are all aware that there are many people out there who await the passing of this Bill. I know you cannot disappoint them. I now, on behalf of my select committee, commit this Bill before the House. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

     CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AMENDMENT BILL

(Debate on particulars of proposed amendments in terms of 74(5)(c) of the Constitution)

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, comrades, the amendment that we propose today aims to create a constitutional foundation for two envisaged changes that relate to our superior courts. Those changes are contained in the Superior Courts Bill.

The first change is aimed at combining the various existing High Courts into a unitary structure, namely a single High Court of South Africa. The second change makes provision for the appointment of a second deputy president of the Supreme Court of Appeal to manage labour appeals in that court. Before 1994, in the old South Africa, we had Supreme Courts of South Africa which consisted of the Appellate Division and various provincial and local divisions that functioned in terms of the Supreme Court Act of 1959. The former TBVC states had similar Supreme Courts that functioned under largely corresponding legislation. As you know, the interim Constitution introduced the Constitutional Court as the apex court in constitutional matters. In addition, it retained the Supreme Court structure, but abolished those appellate divisions that existed in the TBVC states. The 1996 Constitution converted the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of South Africa to the existing Supreme Court of Appeal. It also converted each provincial and local division of the former Supreme Court of South Africa and each Supreme Court of, I quote, ``a homeland’’ into a separate High Court. This change was in line with section 167 of the Constitution which states that the courts are inter alia the High Courts, and section 169 which states that any High Court may decide certain matters.

The Constitution left one anomaly, though, in so far as it stated that when considering a matter that specifically relates to a provincial and local division of the High Court, the judge president of that division is a member of the commission. This anomaly was addressed in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Amendment Act of 2001 that substituted the reference to a provincial or local division of the High Court with the reference to a specific High Court. Notwithstanding the amendment in 2001, the original wording of section 178(1)(k) begged the question whether the drafters of the Constitution consciously intended to divide the former unitary structure of the Supreme Court of South Africa into distinct separate High Courts.

As a result of this separation, the question can be raised whether a judge of a specific High Court can be transferred horizontally to another High Court without again having to be interviewed and recommended for appointment by the Judicial Service Commission. The steering committee for the rationalisation of the courts, led by the chief justice, holds the view that the establishment of a single High Court of South Africa, comprising various divisions, will be better aligned with the principle of establishing a single judiciary, and would rather underscore the principle that the administration of justice is a national competence.

The Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court were established by the Labour Relations Act, sections 157 and 173 respectively. The judges of the Labour Court comprise a judge president who must be a judge of the High Court and who is also a judge president of the Labour Appeal Court, and other judges who must be High Court judges or legal practitioners appointed by the President on the advice of Nedlac and the Judicial Service Commission.

The Labour Appeal Court comprises the said judge president and High Court judges who are also appointed by the President upon the advice of Nedlac and the JSC. Since all judges of the Labour Court are not also High Court judges, there are differences in respect of security of tenure. Unlike High Court judges who hold that office for life, judges of the Labour Court are appointed for a fixed term. This makes it difficult to attract the best candidates to the Labour Court as those persons are hesitant to interrupt their careers to serve as Labour Court judges. Those who aspire to appointment to the Bench would much rather accept an appointment in the High Courts where they will, on the one hand, be exposed to the diversity of the law associated with that office, and on the other hand enjoy security of tenure for life. This also leads to a perceived inferior status of the non-High Court judges.

The High Court judges who are also judges of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court are faced with a different challenge in that they, in effect, serve two masters. They must apply themselves to the duties associated with their particular High Courts and simultaneously avail themselves to hear matters in the Labour Court. Legally, a strong argument could be made that section 173 of the Labour Relations Act which bestows exclusive appeal jurisdiction on labour matters on the Labour Appeal Courts is, in fact, unconstitutional.

Section 168(3) of the Constitution provides that the Supreme Court of Appeal is the highest court of appeal, except in constitutional matters. Another constitutional problem lies in the fact that section 166(e) of the Constitution allows for a court of similar status to the High Court, whereas section 173 of the Labour Relations Act purports to create a Labour Appeal Court as a court of similar status to the Supreme Court of Appeal, ie of a higher status than the High Courts.

This has led to some confusion regarding the jurisdiction and status of the Labour Appeal Court, and the judgment regarding this issue is currently pending in the Supreme Court of Appeal. Furthermore, the proliferation of courts established at the High Court level, which have specifically confined areas of jurisdiction, different selection criteria in respect of judges and, in some cases, different conditions of employment than those of the High Court judges, is a matter of concern to the department and other role-players who act in the administration of justice.

The proliferation of these courts is detrimental to the sound administration of justice and particularly to the coherent development of a cost-efficient court structure and, ultimately, to the development of a single judiciary model. Following a process of extensive consultation with the Judge President of the Labour Court, Justice Zondo, and the representatives of Nedlac, the steering committee has adopted the Superior Courts Bill in order to make provisions for the abolition of the Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court.

The Bill bestows jurisdiction in labour matters on the High Court of South Africa, whilst labour appeals would be dealt with in the Supreme Court of Appeal. However, the specialist nature of labour adjudication is affirmed by establishing a panel of specially selected judges who may hear labour matters. Provision is also made for the appointment to the Supreme Court of Appeal of a second deputy president who will be responsible primarily for managing labour appeals in the Supreme Court of Appeal. This seems to clear up the matters and it does prepare us, in the long-term vision, for justice and the administration of justice as a department, and for our clients who are not only the public, but the judges who serve in those courts. I stand in support of this Bill and I trust that the debate will also support the approval of this Bill by the National Council of Provinces. [Applause.]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Ke hole boha Mohlomphehi Modulasetulo. [Thank you, hon Chairperson.]

It is not an enviable task to follow after the hon Deputy Minister in this debate given her thorough exposition of the proposed amendments and the underlying principle thereof.

Since the Bill is sort of linked to the model for the rationalisation of our courts being proposed in the Supreme Court Bill, one could be forgiven for falling into a trap, so to speak, of appearing to debate the Supreme Court Bill rather than the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Amendment Bill that is the subject of this discussion for this afternoon.

Our Constitution pays considerable attention to our legal framework and particularly to our judiciary, since the judicial authority of the Republic forms the third tier of government alongside the legislature and the executive. It is the judicial authority who, in the final instance, must uphold and interpret the Constitution. It is therefore almost inevitable that when major structural changes to our courts are envisaged, those changes will have to be synchronised with Chapter 8 of our Constitution. It is also fitting, therefore, that the steering committee appointed by the hon Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development to develop the proposals in question, carried out its task under the auspices of the chief justice.

I have already referred to the fact that our Constitution deals comprehensively with the composition of the courts. I suppose that one could say, in a certain sense, that the price you pay for such detailed provision is that whenever those details are sought to be changed and regardless of the scope of those changes, the Constitution itself needs to be amended.

The proposed Bill amends the Constitution in two parts, the two parts which were correctly spelled out by the hon Deputy Minister. Let me not bore members by repeating exactly what she said.

Lastly, it should be recognised that the amendments being proposed in the Constitutional Amendment Bill seek to sanction the changes which are presently being contemplated in the Superior Courts Bill and, consequently, we need to be informed about any major changes that might still be effected to that piece of legislation during the course of its passage through the House and Parliament as a whole.

As a committee we sat and discussed this Bill, and there was consensus that instead of wasting time, we should task one member to make a statement, but then we said that people of this country need to know exactly what this Bill is all about. That is the reason why we are debating this.

I have tasked my two soldiers, Matthee and Maloi, and a third one, Lever, to do justice to it by outlining a few things which are to be changed in this Bill. On that note, let me rest my case and allow my soldiers to take over from where I left off. [Laughter.] [Applause.]

Mr P A MATTHEE: Voorsitter, ek volg graag op my voorsitter. [Chairperson, I take pleasure in following after my chairperson.]

I would like to start off by quoting from Item 6 of Schedule 6 of our Constitution, which really lays the basis of this amending Bill, where it says: ``that as soon as is practical after the new Constitution takes effect, all courts, including their structure, composition, function and jurisdiction and all relevant legislation must be rationalised with a view to establishing a judicial system suited to the requirements of the new Constitution.’’

This is what this is all about and, as the Deputy Minister has explained, this is to make it possible for the Bill which will also come to us in the near future. She has dealt with the Bill in quite some detail and I will therefore not repeat anything that she has said.

Een van die heel belangrikste, indien nie dié belangrikste pilare van ‘n effektiewe konstitusionele demokrasie en ‘n regstaat soos ons s’n nie, is sekerlik die oppergesag van die reg, wat internasionaal meer bekend is as die ``rule of law’’, soos wat dit ook blyk uit Artikel 1(c) van ons Grondwet. Hierdie wysiging van die Grondwet sal hopelik, en dit is ook die motivering daaragter, die verdere uitbouing van hierdie beginsel bevorder en tot groter toeganklikheid tot die reg deur al ons mense bydra.

Ons as openbare verteenwoordigers van ons mense behoort onsself voortdurend af te vra hoe ons die toegang van ons regstelsel vir al ons al mense kan uitbrei sodat elke burger, insluitende al ons kinders, werklik effektief gelyke beskerming deur die reg kan kry soos uiteengesit in die voorwoord tot ons Grondwet. Dit wil sê, beskerming teen misdadigers wat hulle nog heeltemal te veel besteel, aanrand, verkrag en vermoor, ten spyte van die goeie nuus dat die tendens aan die afneem is, en ook om hulle te beskerm teen gewetenlose uitbuiters wat hulle op groot skaal nog ekonomies uitbuit.

In ‘n regstaat soos ons s’n behoort ons dit werklik te oorweeg om ‘n nuwe skoolvak soos basiese inleiding tot die reg in te stel en dit ook by ons universiteite en kolleges aan te beid as deel van buitemuurse en volwasse opleiding. Die doel daarvan moet wees slegs om die bevolking bewus te maak van hulle regte en hoe hulle toegang tot die reg kan kry, wat ons hopelik nou deur hierdie wysiging van ons Grondwet verder sal kan uitbrei en meer toeganklik kan kry.

Daar behoort terselfdertyd sorg gedra te word dat die regsprofessie altyd ‘n uitdagende en aantreklike loopbaanrigting bly vir ons jeug sodat die allerbelangrikste pilaar van ons demokrasie, naamlik die oppergesag van die reg, of ``die rule of law’’, altyd in Suid-Afrika sal gedy, want dit is, per slot van rekening, die grootste waarborg vir elkeen van ons, vir elke burger en elke kind in Suid-Afrika vir ‘n vooruitstrewende en veilige demokrasie waarin elke Suid-Afrikaner tot sy of haar volle potensiaal sal kan ontwikkel. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[One of the most important, if not the most important, pillars of an effective constitutional democracy and a constitutional state such as ours, is surely the supreme authority of the law, which is known internationally as the rule of law, as is also apparent from article 1(c) of our Constitution. This amendment to the Constitution will hopefully, and this is also the motivation thereto, further promote the extension of this principle and contribute to greater accessibility to the law by all our people.

We, as public representatives of our people, ought to continually ask ourselves how we could possibly extend accessibility to the judiciary to all our people so that every citizen, including all our children, can really be equally and effectively protected by the law, as set out in the preamble to our Constitution. In other words, protection from criminals who are robbing, assaulting, raping and murdering them much too easily, despite the good news that the tendency is waning, and moreover, to protect them from unscrupulous exploiters who are preying on them on a huge scale economically.

In a constitutional state such as ours, we should really consider introducing a new school subject such as basic introduction to the law and to also make this available at our universities and colleges as part of extramural and adult training. The objective of this should merely be to make people aware of their rights and how they can gain access to the law, and we will now hopefully be able to extend this even further through this amendment of our Constitution, and achieve access.

At the same time we should make sure that the legal profession always remains a challenging and attractive career path for our youth so that the most important pillar of our democracy, namely the supreme authority of the law or the rule of law, will always flourish in South Africa, because it ultimately is the biggest guarantee for every one of us, for every citizen and every child in South Africa, of a progressive and safe democracy in which every South African can develop to his or her full potential. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr L G LEVER: Thank you, Chairperson, the hon Kgoshi Mokoena pointed out how difficult it was to follow on the Deputy Minister’s comprehensive exposition of what this Bill entails. It is indeed true, and the hon Kgoshi has a way out by appointing us, his traditional warriors - my hon friends and colleagues Mr Maloyi and Mr Matthee and I - to take it further. I was also hoping the hon Matthee would use only one language.

Dan kon ek dieselfde punt in die ander taal gemaak het. Hy het in albei tale sy punt gestel. [Then I could have made the same point in the other language. He stated his case in both languages.]

So, my only consolation at this stage is that the task of the hon Maloyi is somewhat more difficult because he has to find something new to say after the Deputy Minister, Kgoshi Mokoena, Mr Matthee and myself. [Laughter.]

This Bill, as hon Matthee pointed out, really gives effect to the rationalisation process in schedule 6 to the Constitution. I can foresee no difficulty with it. It rationalises the courts as it is envisaged with the Constitution and, clearly, I think it will pass through the National Assembly when it is debated there. [Applause.]

Mr P D N MALOYI: Chairperson, the mistake I did was to write in English. If I had written it in Setswana, it was going to be easy because I was going to repeat what the Deputy Minister and Kgoshi Mokoena said and other people would not have understood what I was saying.

Anyway, let me start here: The present situation with our courts still reflects the boundaries determined under apartheid. Let me quickly state one practical example. Mdantsane and East London are 10 to 15 kilometres from each other, yet Mdantsane falls within the jurisdisction of the Ciskei High Court and East London within the jurisdiction of the Eastern Cape High Court. It is, therefore, imperative that the Superior Courts Bill be introduced in order for us to address this situation which is irrational, does not make any sense and which does not assist anybody and does not meet the demands of the local population.

The Superior Courts Bill, which I just spoke about and which I know is not the issue we are debating today, attempts to remedy the situation which I have just indicated to you, but I think what the Deputy Minister did was to indicate all the problems, so I am not going to repeat what she just said.

This matter has been a dispute for several years within various groups in the legal fraternity. We were briefed by the department, and they talked about the High Courts as contained in the Constitution. The situation is that for a judge in the Cape High Court it is very difficult to immediately go and sit on the Bench in Pretoria. There might be certain problems. The department even went to the extent of asking Mr Lever: You are an advocate of what? You know, all those issues cause a number of problems.

Now, the Superior Courts Bill is attempting to address all these matters. However, for us to pave the way for the Superior High Courts Bill, it is more than necessary to amend the Constitution, hence the amendment which we are presenting to you today. I am happy that Mr Lever and the DA, for a change, agree with everything without any reservations.

It is, therefore, necessary for me to appeal to Mrs Versfeld to follow in the footsteps of Mr Lever and agree with the Bill as it is presented to us today. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, thank you very much for this very good debate and uncontested debate - which is what I like most about this. However, just to make a point: I think the reason that we all agree is that this is about the ongoing transformation of our justice system, the improvement of its structure and the way that it functions. We will also supplement this by transforming the judiciary that populates the architecture of justice, not only in terms of representivity, but also in the quality of service experienced by the people of this country.

We then also have a supplementary process of judicial and legal reform, and we have new and progressive Bills. Some of the best legal structures in the world have been produced by this Parliament, and the committee process is really one of our success stories in the way that they fine-tune, examine and put under the microscope the legislation that comes before them.

At the end of the day we are trying to improve the service that we give our people, and I believe that today’s legislation that has been discussed, will achieve this. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

  CONSIDERATION OF EIGHTH REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON AFRICAN UNION

                      (Consideration of Report)

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr M J Mahlangu): Chairperson, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to lead this debate.

Today we are gathered on the eve of Heritage Day to review the progress made in the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament and its organs. It is not a coincidence that the debate on the Pan-African Parliament should be held today. As a country and a nation we have travelled a very long road to be where we are today.

Hon members would recall that this House passed a resolution establishing a working group on the Pan-African Parliament in order to facilitate the ratification of the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to the Pan-African Parliament, and to enable members to engage in issues relating to the establishment of the protocol.

Several reports have been tabled in the past on the progress made thus far, and today I would like to focus on the Eighth Report which is before the House. It would be recalled that following the meeting of all African parliamentarians which Parliament hosted on 30 June to 1 July 2003, a resolution was adopted calling on those countries which had not deposited their instruments of ratification, to do so by 31 December 2003. Let me report that as at 30 July 2003, 21 countries had signed, ratified and deposited their instruments.

Though there is progress, there are also challenges. In terms of article 22 of the protocol, the protocol shall come into force 30 days after the deposit of instruments of ratification by a simple majority. I have been made to understand that this means that once 27 member states have deposited their instruments, the Chairperson of the African Union, in consultation with the commission, may determine the beginning of the first term of office of the Pan-African Parliament.

Before that happens, there is a lot of work that we have to do as members of Parliament. This includes, among other things, the drafting of the rules for the inauguration session. The protocol further provides that each state shall be represented by five members, at least one of whom must be a woman. It also provides that the delegation must reflect the diversity of political opinions in each national parliament. It should also emphasise that it was South Africa which argued for the inclusion of a provision for the representation of at least three women in that delegation. We support this very strongly: that out of the five there should be three women who go to the Pan-African Parliament.

On the question of political representation, there are two options before the working group. The first option is that the largest party be represented by three members and two members from among other political parties. That is the first option we are putting forward to the members of the House. The second option is that five parties with the biggest numbers could have one member each. Then you would have your composition of five members that will represent us at the Pan-African Parliament. These are some of the issues the working group still has to finalise, and members are urged to make their inputs.

The working group is still looking into the procedure of the election of the delegates. This also includes the representation of the delegation from both Houses: the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces. However, let me also emphasise that in terms of the protocol, members of the executive shall not form part of the parliamentary delegation. This is also in line with parliamentary delegations to most international forums.

In terms of article 6 of the protocol, members of the delegation to the Pan- African Parliament vote in their personal and independent capacity. The working group noted that though the protocol might make such a provision, those members still are elected to represent Parliament and, therefore, need to be held accountable to Parliament.

As a result, the working group recommends that a committee be established to process and deal with the issues pertaining to the African Union. This could include the Southern African Development Community Parliamentary Forum. The point here that I am trying to make is that those people who are going to the Pan-African Parliament are still accountable to this Parliament. We therefore need to find a mechanism as to how they account to Parliament, how they get the mandates and how they report back to Parliament. That mechanism will be in the form of establishing a committee, which will sort of scrutinise all these things, be a clearing mechanism and deal with those issues. These are the proposals at the present moment before the working group.

The other issue, perhaps, which is very important for this debate, and which I would like to mention, is that article 5.4 of the protocol does provide for the recall of delegates. The working group recommends that a procedure needs to be developed and included in the rules of the Pan- African Parliament for the recall of delegates. These are some of the mechanisms to ensure that those members who will be representing our Parliament are accountable.

In other words, we need to design rules in such a manner that members could be recalled during that period if a parliament or a national parliament wishes to do so. Those rules will be within the purview of the rules that we shall have drafted and that we shall have agreed to as to what, when and how we recall those members and whether they are replaceable or not. I think they will be replaceable anyway, because there will be a vacancy in terms of that national Parliament.

So there are quite a few issues, particularly issues that will affect us during the inaugural day which, we think, will be very late in January

1. These rules should be in place before the inaugural session that will be held next year.

It is very important that we should also look at how these members will take an oath. How they will be sworn in is another very important aspect. How are we going to create the committees? It is important that the in- house committees should actually be in place. Your programme committee should be in place on that day, and your management committee should perhaps be in place on that day too.

We also need to look at the rules committee to be established by that day, so that during those three weeks that the Pan-African Parliament will be sitting, the rules committee will be in a position to begin to draft the rules that will guide the Pan-African Parliament.

However, one of the important issues that we also have to look at is the question of the rules in terms of debate. What are the rules of a debating forum like the one we are creating? How are we going to take the decisions? In terms of the committees, what will be their functions and what will be their roles? So these are the things that should be in place before we go to the inauguration ceremony in January.

In conclusion, let me also indicate that the working group has decided that we need to have a seminar before the end of the 2003 parliamentary session in order to enable members to have a meaningful discussion on the issues of the Pan-African Parliament. I can assure you that that seminar is going to take place very soon. Members are urged, when the day is actually given to them, to participate because we would need your views as we shape all these issues or discussions in the days leading up to the inauguration of the Pan- African Parliament.

Lastly, let me also bring to the attention of members that there will soon be a ninth report which will focus on the draft rules of the Pan-African Parliament, and members are urged to peruse this document. Once the document is tabled in the ATC, I would request that members look further into the ninth report and advise us immediately of the issues that they think we should take on or tackle upfront in the working group.

As the working group in the NCOP, a small group of five, we also try to meet on a weekly basis so that we can shape our ideas and make our inputs more meaningful as we go to the joint working group with the National Assembly. That concludes my report on this, Chairperson. I wish to thank you very much. [Applause.]

Ms C BOTHA: Chairperson, I have been involved in the working group on the African Union for quite a long time, albeit infrequently, but it is only now that the reality of the Pan-African Parliament is looming very definitely in the beginning of the year 2004 that the whole process is shaping up as more reality than theory.

The Eighth Report is already being followed by a ninth draft report. Recommendations from this report of the working group on the African Union includes draft rules for the Pan-African Parliament, PAP. This includes, and the PAP protocol provides for it, that at the first sitting after elections and before proceeding with any other matter, the Pan-African parliamentarians shall take an oath or make a solemn declaration. This will apply to elected representatives, elected from among our own ranks.

What this brings home very clearly is that we are actually embarking on a new venture of African unity, not only in form, but of purpose. This inevitably stirs very basic patriotic emotions, and I immediately want to be sure that South Africa takes a commanding role - a reaction against which we obviously have to guard if we want co-operation.

This stage also brings with it as many questions as answers. While we are enthusiastically going on the chosen path of furthering African unity of action and purpose, are we all sure of what it is that we are committing ourselves to do?

The process of which I have been a part has been an exercise of caution and decorum, but nevertheless it is a process which has been undertaken on behalf of African citizens, and I would venture to say that it is a process of which the vast majority are completely and blissfully unaware.

Therefore, while committing the DA fully to the concept and purpose of the AU, I wish to reiterate the need for us to make sure that civil society and nongovernmental organisations, which have played an increasingly influential role in bringing about high standards of transparency and accountability from an elected government, be constantly informed and involved as the process evolves.

This cannot be an exercise for the aggrandisement of elected representatives. It will serve no purpose if it does not serve the ordinary citizen. We must be very clear that we are forming the proposed regional building blocks towards its continental unity on a variety of fronts, with the express purpose of bettering the lives of the people of the African continent. It is with this proviso only that I wholeheartedly endorse the process on behalf of the DA. [Applause.]

Mr P A MATTHEE: Chairperson, first of all I would like to thank the Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, Mr M J Mahlangu, for the leading role that he is playing in this working group on the AU, specifically as far as the Pan- African Parliament is concerned. He is leading our delegation from the NCOP in those very important discussions.

The vision of our Department of Foreign Affairs, as set out in a document: the operationalisation of the African Union and the implementation of the Nepad programmes, is the following - and I think it is important for all of us to first look at the vision of how we as South Africans look at this. Our vision is -

… an African continent which is prosperous, peaceful, democratic, nonracial, nonsexist and united, and which contributes to a world that is just and equitable.

That is the vision with which we should approach our work as we move rapidly towards the implementation of the protocol of the Pan-African Parliament.

As it has been pointed out and discussed, the Eighth Report is the subject of our debate today. Various aspects thereof have been pointed out and also that we are already busy working on the draft ninth report. I would just like to highlight one or two aspects. Members must also know that in this Eighth Report the conclusion or recommendation at its end is that there should be a seminar on all the issues dealt with and discussed before the end of this parliamentary session, the 2003 parliamentary session, to create an opportunity for all members to meaningfully engage on the Pan- African Parliament issues.

The issues you have heard are very pressing, because it is envisaged that this Pan-African Parliament will actually come into being before the end of January next year. That really does not give us much time, and all of us must know that this is a whole new chapter that we are entering. We, as Parliament, will have five members of Parliament, and may I also say, including members from the NCOP who will be representing us in that Pan- African Parliament.

This brings me to something which I have thought about quite a lot of late, and that is that whilst we are now moving into this new era, there is a real need, and I think a necessity for us, to urge representatives of our people to interact with our counterparts on the rest of the continent - the representatives and the members of parliament in other African countries. This is not happening on a regular basis. I do not know how many of us here have regular interactions with our counterparts, even in the SADC countries around us.

We must know that it will be extremely important for us to be able not only just to interact on a social basis, but to be in a position where we can build up relationships with our counterparts so that we can also be in a position to influence them and be influenced by them, so that we can also, as has been pointed out, see to it that the best interests of our people will be served in this new Pan-African Parliament.

I therefore wish to make a proposal which I think we should really consider seriously, and that is that we should look at whether we should not make it possible for our members of Parliament to travel to African countries more frequently, even if it is just countries close to us, SADC countries, because it will be extremely important to be able to establish those relationships.

If we do not do that, it will not come about, and we will not be in a position to go into this new Pan-African Parliament, without really having established those relationships which are so necessary. [Applause.]

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, the term ``union’’ brings hope. Declaration means commitment. The meeting of parliamentarians from 38 member states of the African Union brings hope of fulfilment of a vision. The inclusion of 30% of women parliamentarians gives the African Union more strength and the wisdom it deserves to be a comprehensive structure.

It is the duty of each member of Parliament to make this vision, PAP, the Pan-African Parliament, come true. On behalf of my party, the IFP, I commend the South African Parliament for the formula of three women to two males, as against the formula that at least one woman of the five delegates to PAP should be a woman. There will be five delegates for each country and they must be true ambassadors of their country in all respects.

The oath of office is necessary for such an undertaking as a means of dedication and recommitment to the duty by delegates. As a group of five, they need a very strong support base to go on with their work with less tensions and stresses. Seminars on the Pan-African Parliament are necessary to inform all members of the three spheres of governance about the knowledge they need regarding PAP.

The Pan-African Parliament is for the country. For a full support of our delegates, all levels of Government must be taken on board. We commend the 23 countries that have signed the protocol. It shows commitment to the establishment of the Pan-African Parliament and the readiness to face the challenges of the African continent together, cross-culturally and across colour lines. Just look at the case of a Nigerian woman who is facing death because of having given birth to a child out of wedlock. So many voices are pleading with the court of Nigeria for her pardon and freedom.

I commend the ANC Women’s League for the stand they took to sympathise and plead for Amina Lawal’s mercy. [Applause.] Hold on! Hold on, daughters of Africa, this is great. We are all very miserable about Amina Lawal’s plight. We hope that the Almighty God will release her from the miserable situation she has to face. We are praying for her. Twenty-five September 2003 must bring good news to the whole of the African continent and the whole world, instead of death and misery which is expected as a result of her death sentence which is despicable.

Without the African Union we would not … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all the delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present?

In accordance with rule 71, I shall now first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. 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, against or abstain from voting. The Eastern Cape?

Ms B N DLULANE: Ke ya rona. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?

Mr T S SETONA: The Free State votes in favour.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?

Ms D M RAMODIBE: Gauteng supports.

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: KwaZulu-Natal siyavumelana. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?

Mr M I MAKOELA: Limpopo e a e amogela. [Limpopo supports.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Ke ya rona. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?

Mrs N E LUBIDLA: Siyavuma. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?

Rev P MOATSHE: Ke ya rona. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?

Mnr C ACKERMANN: Ons steun. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! All provinces have voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted. [Applause.]

PROVINCIAL PERSPECTIVES ON LAND AND AGRICULTURAL MATTERS (EMANATING FROM PROVINCIAL OVERSIGHT VISITS FROM 17-20 JUNE 2003)

                      (Subject for Discussion)

Rev P MOATSHE: Hon Chairperson, Minister and colleagues, we want to say thank you for this opportunity, and thank the Minister for being part of this discussion. We know she has the interests of South Africa at heart on the issues of agriculture and land, and we are very happy that she’s spearheading this important subject at the right time. We wish her every success, and hope that we shall arrive at a stage, one day, when all the people of this country have enough land and food.

Karolo ya 41 (h) ya Molaotheo wa Repaboliki ya Aforika Borwa wa 1996 e laola gore dikarolo tsotlhe tsa Puso le mafapha otlhe a kitlane le go momagana ka botshepegi. Go tshwanetse ga nna le tshedimosetso le kgolagano mo tlhaeletsanong, ka ntlha ya dikgatlego tse di tshwanang. Seno se agilwe godimo ga lemorago la Molaotheo wa naga, gore Khansele ya Bosetshaba ya Diporofense e neelane ka dithata go maloko a yona a leruri go tswa diporofenseng di le robonngwe go tswa letsholo la go tlhatlhoba maemo mo diporofenseng tse di umakilweng, maikaelelo magolo e le go bona tshedimosetso go tswa mo mafapheng a a farologaneng a temothuo le tsa mafatshe, pusoselegae le ditlhopa tse di nang le dikgatlego tsa temothuo le lefatshe. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[Section 41 (h) of the Constitution of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996 states that all the sectors of Government should co-operate with one another in mutual trust and good faith. They should inform one another of, and consult each other on matters of common interest. This comes from the Constitution which also states that the NCOP should empower its permanent delegates from the nine provinces to go out and assess conditions in the provinces, the main aim being to gather information from the different departments of agriculture and land affairs, and local government, as well as the other stakeholders who have an interest in issues of land.]

As gevolg van dekades van grondonteiening en rassistiese grondwette, is grondhervorming in Suid-Afrika van die mees ongebalanseerde in die wêreld, met groot finansieel intensiewe plase wat groot dele van die landelike gebiede domineer. Die resultaat hiervan is dat slegs 28% van Suid-Afrika se landelike bevolking op 88% van die grond woon. Dit wil sê, die oorblywende 12% landbougrond onderhou 72% van ons landelike bevolking, en die voormalige oorbevolkte tuislande skiet ver tekort aan die nodige infrastruktuur vir landbou. [Tussenwerpsels.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Owing to decades of land expropriation and racist land legislation, land reform in South is among the most unbalanced in the world, with large financially intensive farms dominating large parts of the rural areas. The result of this is that only 28% of South Africa’s rural population live on 88% of the land. This means to say, the remaining 12% of agricultural land sustains 72% of our rural population, and the former overcrowded homelands have major shortages in the essential infrastructure required for agriculture.]

The impact of past discrepancies, the historical context of land dispossession and its impact on the majority of dispossessed people have compelled the present Government to restore the dignity and rights of all. The changes foreseen by the Government since 1994 within the agricultural sector are part of a broader process of rural development which includes land reform, investment in water supply and transport infrastructure, and improved social services delivery.

The three major goals for policy reform underpinned in the agricultural policy in South Africa encompass the following: to build an efficient and internationally competitive agricultural sector; to support the emergence of a more diverse structure of production with a large increase in the number of successful smallholder farming enterprises; to conserve agricultural natural resources, and to put in place policies and institutions for sustainable resource use.

The Government identified agriculture as a key sector that required special attention because of its potential contribution to the objectives of higher economic growth. To this end the following plans and programmes were initiated by the Government to achieve its objectives. With regard to the strategic plan for South African agriculture, the vision for the sector implies sustained profitable participation in the South African agricultural economy by all stakeholders. It recognises the need to maintain and increase commercial production to build international competitiveness and to address the historic legacies and biases that resulted from skewed access and participation. [Interjections.]

With regard to food security at national level, the Government made this one of the seven top national priorities in 1999. All provinces developed and implemented various programmes to meet their circumstances and livelihoods. Linked to the issue of food security at national level is an initiative that practically addresses food security problems, both in South Africa and the rest of Africa. The Food and Agricultural Organisation, FAO, of the United Nations launched the tiller food campaign in 1997.

Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development, LRAD, which is a subprogramme of the land distribution programme, has distinct components, and these encompass the transfer of agricultural land to specific individuals in group or commonage projects which aim to improve access to municipal and tribal land primarily for grazing purposes. Regarding land care programmes, agriculture contributes simultaneously to household food security and economic growth. It also has the potential to safeguard the quality of natural resources.

Lefapha la Temothuo mo lenaneong la tshomarelo ya lefatshe le tsosolosa seša dihektara di le 800 tsa mmu o o siametseng temothuo mo metseletseleng ya tshomarelo ya mmu kwa Kapa Botlhaba, Mpumalanga le KwaZulu-Natal. Go tlhomilwe diphatlatiro di le 1 786. Kwa porofenseng ya Bokone-Bophirima go tlhomilwe dikga tsa tshomarelo ya lefatshe di le 25, mme di tlisitse leseding dihektara di le 10 000 mo kagong-seša ya mmu wa temothuo, mme gwa bonwa diphatlatiro-potlana di le 640. Go tlhomilwe ditshomarelo-potlana tsa mmu mo mafelong a a farologaneng. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.) [The Department of Agriculture has, through its land preservation programme, revived 800 hectares of land suitable for agriculture in a series of projects aimed at preserving land in the Eastern Cape, Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal. About 1 786 jobs have been created. In the North West province 25 land preservation programmes aimed at reconstructing agricultural land have brought about 10 000 hectares of land, creating 640 vacancies in piece jobs. Small programmes dealing with land preservation have been set up in different areas.]

The primary data collated in respective provinces during the provincial week visits from 17 to 20 June 2003 on agricultural issues reflect, in summary, the following: The concerns of emerging farmers in most schemes were being considered and addressed at various levels. Skills training and development for project members were ongoing and beneficiaries are beginning to utilise their skills. The financing of projects by means of support grants and loan components from the Department of Agriculture and the Land Bank, respectively, was of crucial importance to members of the projects.

While problems such as postdevelopment settlement assistance were noted by the delegation, the oversight visit provided a forum in which to open up debate and address key concerns of project members. It also noted that the various institutions are aware of the problems and different levels are addressing these concerns.

In South Africa the land question is strongly linked to agricultural development in the provinces. Qualitatively, settlements are characterised by linking restitution and restoration with development. In rural areas a strong emphasis is placed on agricultural development … [Time expired.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I now call on the chairperson of the standing committee on agriculture, tourism and gambling from the Western Cape, Mr Byneveldt.

Mnr S E BYNEVELDT (Wes-Kaap): Agb Voorsitter, Minister, baie dankie vir dié geleentheid, en baie dankie vir die toeligting wat vandag aan besondere kwessies in hierdie Huis en in hierdie debat gegee is, asook die geleentheid vir my deelname vandag.

Die provinsiale fokusweek was ‘n baie welkome oefening en dit was beslis ook ‘n baie waardevolle oefening. In die Wes-Kaap, in die besonder, het ons dié oefening teen die bors gedruk en het ons ons insette probeer maak, en van daardie punte wil ek vandag uitlig en hier herhaal. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr S E BYNEVELDT (Western Cape): Hon Chairperson, Minister, thank you very much for this opportunity, and thank you very much for shedding light today on certain matters in this House and in this debate, and for the opportunity afforded me to participate today.

The provincial focus week was a very welcome exercise, and it was definitely also a very valuable exercise. In the Western Cape, in particular, we embraced this exercise and we tried to make inputs, and I would like to highlight and repeat some of those points here today.]

We have seen an increase of R500 million in the restitution budget, or in the national Budget with regards to restitution. In the Western Cape, however, there are limited rural restitution claims. The redistribution of land in the province will therefore not benefit much from this increase. The main land reform programme in the province is therefore redistribution, and the total national fund available for buying land for land reform, redistribution and tenure reform was reduced by R10 million this year.

So, transfer of land to historically disadvantaged people in the province, through whatever method, is going to be limited. Only R33 million has been allocated to redistribution and tenure reform in a province where current projects on the books amount to R157 million. This therefore demands that we urgently look at the issue of additional appropriation, understanding that there are limitations on redistribution, even in this financial year.

The second issue I want to highlight relates to the issue of municipal commonage. Municipal commonage provides an extremely important opportunity for land reform. It can be used, and must be used, in order for the very poor to gain access to land for their own food security purposes. It can be used by emerging farmers who do not want to own land, preferring to lease land and put their resources directly into production, at whatever scale of production - men and women who may want a stepping stone to the acquisition of their own farm, again at whatever scale of production it may be used.

Commonage land is municipal land, but land reform and agricultural development are often not part of municipal integrated development plans. The result is that there is very little integration between the Department of Land Affairs - DLA - and the programmes of the Department of Agriculture and municipalities. Municipalities are able to obtain additional land through the DLA commonage policy, but it is unclear how many municipalities are aware of this policy, how many have integrated either current land or future land in their IDPs, and how much of this land is focused on poor farmers.

Municipalities need to generate funds for all the services they supply, and commonage is a resource which can generate such funds. At the same time, however, commonage land is a key resource with which municipalities can support the food security opportunities of the poor and the broader land reform programme of the country. Municipalities need to support this programme, and there needs to be a stronger link in terms of our programmes at a national level, a provincial level, and then also the role and responsibility of municipalities.

The third issue I want to highlight relates to the issue of tenure security for farm dwellers. While the Extension of Security of Tenure Act is a law which intends to regulate the eviction process, it does not seem to deter such evictions from taking place. Farmers who evict farm dwellers are not deterred by the punitive measures within this law. A stronger law might be needed which will lengthen the prison terms and increase the fines of transgressions of the law. If we don’t do this, we might just compromise much of the achievement with regards to land reform and so forth.

The final issue I want to raise relates to HIV/Aids, reform and agricultural development. There appears to be little understanding of the impact of the HIV/Aids pandemic and how this is going to relate to the issue of food and agricultural production. There are certain estimates that begin to suggest that about 15% to 35% of adults who could benefit from land reform are currently already HIV-positive, although virtually none of them knows this. They will begin to fall ill from chronic illnesses.

The point is really that we must have a proper sense or understanding of HIV/Aids and its impact with regard to people that we settle on the land, and whether, in fact, this will begin to undermine our food security efforts, and also efforts with regard to land reform and settling new farmers. [Applause.]

Mnr A E VAN NIEKERK: Voorsitter, baie dankie. Hierdie verslag wat vandag voor die Huis is, is heel waarskynlik een van die belangrikste verslae wat ons nog ooit hier gedebatteer het, omdat dit die mense op grondvlak direk raak, as daar erns gemaak word met hierdie verslag, sal dit bydra tot die suksesvolle afhandeling van grondrestitusie, en ook die vestiging van ‘n noemenswaardige nuwe groep landbouers in Suid-Afrika. As dit ernstig opgeneem word, en die Minister en die provinsies neem dit ook ernstig op, bevestig dit die waarde en die plek van hierdie Raad, en bring dit ‘n nuwe dinamika van parlementêre werk onder die aandag wat dié Raad waardig is.

Met dié verslag kom ons as Raad ons grondwetlike verantwoordelikheid na om as Raad in goeder trou die nasionale Departement van Landbou en Grondsake, maar ook ons provinsiale departemente, in te lig oor wat ons bevind het. Ek hoop hierdie verslag sal ook in die provinsies gedebatteer word, en dat die here van die provinsies nie net saam met ons hier debatteer nie.

As ons net dít doen, is dit al baie. Die nasionale departement en die provinsiale departemente het egter hierna ‘n verantwoordelikheid om aan dié Raad terug te rapporteer oor die planne, om die suksesse wat gerapporteer is uit te bou, en om die planne rondom die mislukkings en probleemareas aan te spreek. Dit is ‘n dimensie wat die verslag én ons rol rêrig sinvol sal maak.

Die Suid-Afrikaanse Regering het die landbou geïdentifiseer as ‘n sleutelrolspeler wat spesiale aandag moet kry. Die Regering is oortuig van die potensiaal wat die landbou het om by te dra tot die doelwit van groter ekonomiese groei. Dit is onmoontlik om in besonderhede dié verslag te bespreek, maar ek wil tog net enkele aspekte beklemtoon.

Dit is belangrik dat Suid-Afrika moet weet dat die agb Minister Didiza ‘n klemverskuiwing in grondhervorming teweeggebring het. Haar hoofdoel is nie om bloot mense op grond te plaas nie. Sy wil hê hulle moet daarop kan bly en dus volhoudbaar kan boer en daardeur ‘n bydra lewer om armoede te verminder. Uit die verslag is dit ongelukkig duidelik dat nuwe boere se verwagtings die vermoë van die departement, om juis te voldoen aan volhoudbaarheid, ver oorskry.

Dus egter nie net finansiële vermoë nie, maar ook die vermoë om nuwe grondeienaars te bemagtig om kommersiële boere te wees met die nodige opleiding, voorligtingdiens en navorsing. Daar is verwagtinge geskep wat kan ontaard as dit nie aangespreek word nie. Restitusie-eise moet vinniger afgehandel word, en die verskonings wat in die verslag na vore gekom het oor die gebrek aan kapasiteit van sekere kommissarisse om eise af te handel, is onaanvaarbaar. Die afhandeling van dié eise is veels te belangrik. Korrupsie en blote laksheid moet by restitusie uitgeroei word. Voorkeur en nóg geld moet vir restitusie bewillig word, en rolspelers uit die kommersiële sektor wat betrokke wil raak, moet eerder aangemoedig word as wat hulle gefrustreer word deur agterdog en deur lang prosesse.

Dit is duidelik uit die verslag dat daar te min nuwe boere is wat wesenlike suksesverhale het, en dit moet aangespreek word. Die aanspreek is egter nie net die verantwoordelikheid van die agb Minister nie. Die nuwe boere het nie net ‘n reg om grond te besit nie; hulle het saam met dié reg ook ‘n verantwoordelikheid.

Die klimaat en gereedskap vir sukses moet egter geredelik beskikbaar wees, en dít is die verantwoordelikheid van die Minister. Dit is ook duidelik dat die gevestigde kommersiële boere belangstel in mentorskappe, maar ons sal innoverend moet kyk na insentiewe aansporings dit ook volhoudbaar te maak. Daar is reeds voorbeelde van suksesvolle ``joint ventures’’ [gesamentlike ondernemings], veral in die Noord-Kaap langs die Oranjerivier. Daar is egter ‘n klomp onkunde en ‘n gebrek aan inligting by sekere landbouers oor hoe om te werk te gaan om so ‘n proses te begin, en ek sal dit graag met die departement wil bespreek, want ons het juis ‘n groot druiweboer in ons gebied wat my genader het oor hoe om dit te doen. [Tyd verstreke.] [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Thank you, Chairperson. This report that is before the House today is most probably one of the most important reports that we have ever debated here, because it affects the people at grassroots level directly, and if the report is taken seriously it will contribute to the successful completion of land restitution, as well as the establishment of a significant new group of farmers in South Africa. If taken seriously, and the Minister and the provinces also regard it as serious, it confirms the value and place of this Council and it brings to the attention the new dynamics of parliamentary work that is worthy of this Council.

With this report we, as a Council, are doing our constitutional duty and doing so in good faith as a Council, by informing the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs, as well as our provincial departments, about our findings. I hope this report will also be debated in the provinces and that the gentlemen of the provinces will not only debate it here with us.

If we do only that, then we have already done much. However, the national department and the provincial departments have a responsibility after this. They have a duty to report back to this Council about plans to build on the successes that have been reported, and plans to address failures and problem areas. It is a dimension that will give real meaning to the report and our role.

The South African Government has identified agriculture as a key role player that requires special attention. The Government is convinced of the potential of agriculture to contribute to the goal of greater economic growth. It is impossible to discuss the report in detail, but I do just want to emphasise a few particular aspects.

It is important that South Africa should know that the hon Minister Didiza has brought about a shift in focus with regard to land reform. Her main objective is not to only place people on land. She wants them to be able to live there and farm in a sustainable manner, and in doing so, contribute to alleviating poverty. It is evident from the report, however, that unfortunately the expectations of new farmers far exceed the capability of the department, precisely to comply with sustainability.

It is not only financial capacity, but also the ability to empower new land owners to be commercial farmers with the necessary training, guidance and research. Expectations have been created that may get out of hand if they are not addressed. Restitution claims have to be settled more quickly and the excuses that emerged from the report about the lack of capacity of certain commissioners to settle claims are unacceptable. The settlement of these claims is much too important. Corruption and simple laxity in restitution have to be eradicated. Preference and more money have to be appropriated for restitution, and the role players from the commercial sector who wish to become involved should be encouraged rather than being frustrated by suspicion and long processes.

It is evident from the report that there are too few farmers that have substantial success stories, and this has to be addressed. Addressing it, however, is not the responsibility of the hon Minister only. The new farmers not only have a right to own land. They also have a duty along with this right.

The climate and tools for success have to be readily available, however, and that is the Minister’s responsibility. It is also clear that established farmers are interested in mentorships, but we shall have to take an innovative look at initiatives to make this sustainable. There are already examples of successful joint ventures, particularly along the Orange River in the Northern Cape. However, there is great ignorance and a lack of information among certain farmers about how to go about starting off such a process, and I would like to discuss this with the department, because we do indeed have a major grape farmer in our area who has approached me about how to do this. [Time expired.] [Applause.]]

The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I now call upon the chairperson of the portfolio committee on agriculture, land affairs, environment and conservation from the Northern Cape, Mr Molusi.

Mr K D MOLUSI (Northern Cape): Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister, hon members of the House, it is an honour for me to address this House that represents the voices of the masses. It is also with deep gratitude that I would like to reflect on the critical matters that impact on the domestic economy of those living on the fringes of society. Agriculture is at the heart of the economic advancement of those that never enjoyed land ownership before the advent of our democratic society.

The noble intentions of the provincial visits emphasise the critical role of our permanent delegation. The June 2003 exercise was indeed a highly fruitful one of accountability and fact-finding. With the Northern Cape being a vast agricultural province, ours is to make a thorough analysis of the sector’s teething problems, such as the expensive nature of agricultural ventures.

We are of the opinion that a land summit would be best to address our future actions in the areas of harnessing entrepreneurship, addressing land ownership and dealing with the overall plight of our countryside masses. A shift in focus should, in the interim, allow the Northern Cape to enjoy the reclassification to that of a rural province in calculating the equitable share.

In my mind’s eye lies the issue of postsettlement support. We have noted the tailoring of a draft manual on pre- and postsettlement support for restitution and land tenure reform cases. This process needs to concern itself with Government departments, such as Housing and Local Government, Agriculture and Land Reform, Environmental Affairs and Conservation and others, realigning their budgets to meet the challenges of the postsettlement support. Skills development and material support should be an integral element of postsettlement support. Support from the third sphere of Government is also critical. Municipalities should prioritise restitution processes by linking them to their integrated development programmes. More funds should be made available to restitution. Conflict resolution is a much-needed exercise that will assist in addressing incidents that have marred the smooth resettlement of communities.

The Majeng land claim can be cited as an example in the list of resettlement cases being affected by deep divisions sparked by illegal occupations. Illegal actions must now give way to the development. In the main of these issues, the simplification of the constitutions of communal property associations should also be looked at as a matter of priority. Although a great deal of work had been undertaken in harnessing black economic empowerment within agriculture, our oversight visit did not disregard projects that are experiencing difficulties, such as the Sikhulule Chicken Enterprise project in Noupoort. It is our view that the Department of Economic Affairs should revive this project, and the Department of Agriculture should move in with technical support. Our new breed of entrepreneurs within the agricultural sector should be granted unending support that will allow them to gain a niche in foreign markets with quality projects. The breaking down of trade barriers will benefit those that Government is advancing through the public-private partnership initiatives, such as the Paprika project of Goodhouse. We will have to offer our best products to stop Europe from masquerading trade barriers as health and safety standards. It is for this reason that Government should protect the emergent sector from Europe and the USA’s subsidised competition.

The Northern Cape is a province that has, in a number of instances, been used as a career springboard to many careerists. Blows have also been delivered to our skills pool by corporate poachers. It is for this reason that we strongly recommend that the Premier’s bursary fund beneficiaries should be bound by contracts to remain in the employ of the Northern Cape. We need to retain skills to enforce the implementation of more changes. It is for … [Time expired.] [Applause.]

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Chairperson, the NCOP in Kwazulu-Natal had formulated a programme for us to be briefed by the departments concerned, and also to go out for site visits to some of the projects in their respective areas. The four sites which we visited were the Ezemvelo Gardens, Flower Farm, Gongolo Farms and Mpophomeni Gardens.

Ezemvelo is a community-driven accredited organic agricultural project which grows indigenous food such as potatoes, madumbes, green beans, peas, soya beans and sweet potatoes. The project is run by 20 people who were lucky to be funded by the Government with an amount of R500 000. The seeds were given by the Department of Agriculture of Imbumbulu.

The project to help them water their gardens, according to the project members, is taking too long to be completed. The income generated from the produce is very little as many members are unemployed, so the project is not sustainable at all. It needs some further development. On the second day, we went to the Thuthukani Flower project in Mooi River. It has a greater chance of sustainability.

A lady farmer, Mrs McKenzie, has knowledge of how to do her work. She employs community members to assist her in her work. She also trains her workers and has created an opportunity for her employees to become part of the black empowerment programme, which we admired very much. They are going to produce their own products. They learn and practise. This project pleased us very much during these visits. She approached the Department of Agriculture for extra funds to develop this project. She is still waiting, but the work still goes on tremendously. The Department assisted her in also training her employees in business skills. We admire this very much.

Difficulties arise when she cannot cope with the overseas market needs. Her project is so prosperous that she can pack and send her bulbs overseas. It’s a huge task.

Mr A E VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, on a point of order, I detect some provincial bias here. I don’t know as to whether you have any connections with the hon member’s province, but when the hon member from the Northern Cape spoke, you cut him very short. You are not doing the same now.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I don’t know what you mean, when you say I cut him very short. Hon member Van Niekerk, I did not cut him short.

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Thank you very much, Chairperson. Now I don’t know where I was. Mrs McKenzie has approached the Department of Agriculture and she is still waiting for funds, especially since difficulties arise when she cannot cope with overseas market needs, because of a lack of funds to kickstart the project. Employees do not have a place of their own to do their work and she has allowed them to use her shed. This was very good of her and we admire it very much.

Then we had another visit to the permaculture project at Mpophomeni. This project started in 1998 with 25 members, but now only six members are still working. Due to unemployment there are few chances of sustainability. In this area, the Government has donated R45 000 worth of pipes and pumps, which are not completely installed. The community is not pleased with the system installed. They prefer to use the ordinary hosepipes. [Time expired.] [Applause.]

uMnu V V Z WINDVOЁL: Ngiyabonga Sihlalo, ngibonga lelitfuba lekutsi nami ngibe yincenye yalenkhulumomphikiswano. Ngibingelela emalunga lahloniphekile. Leli kube lilanga lelidze kakhulu, Sihlalo. Ngitsite nangilalela inkhulumo yaSihlalo wetfu, Rev Moatshe, ayibeka ayihlaba ngeSetswana ayigucula ayihlaba nangesiBhunu, ngamangala kutsi mine sengitawukhulumani ngobe cishe konkhe loku lakukhulumile kuhambisana naloku lebengikulungisile. Kodvwa-ke bayasho nangesiNgisi, boKgoshi Mokoena, kutsi `tingcondvo letinkhulu ticabanga ngalokufananako’ (great minds think alike).

Ngitsandza kusho nje kutsi njengobe ngikhuluma egameni lelicembu le-ANC, sibubonga kakhulu buholi balelitiko leliholwa yiNdvuna, Make Didiza, ekulweni nebuphuya, kwatise kutsi sicubulo setfu nasiphuma singematsimba ngematsimba etifundza, besiphume nesicubulo sekutsi: `Silwa nebuphuya!’ (Translation of Siswati paragraphs follows.)

[Mr V V Z WINDVOЁL: Thank you, Chairperson, I am so grateful for this opportunity to be part of this debate. I greet all the hon members. This has been a very long day, Chairperson. When I listened to the speech of our chairperson, Rev Moatshe, eloquently putting it in Setswana and switching to Afrikaans, I was so amazed that I began to wonder what I was going to say, because he said most of the things that I had prepared in my speech. Nevertheless, people like Chief Mokoena put it correctly in English when they say: `Great minds think alike.’

However, I would like to state that, as I am speaking on behalf of the ANC, we are grateful to the leaders of that department which is headed by Minister Didiza, for their successful fight against poverty. When we went out in our different groupings our slogan was: `We are pushing back the frontiers of poverty!’]

It comes as no surprise that in this debate, important as it may be, the DA is not participating. By implication it says that they are not interested in pushing back the frontiers of poverty. In the spirit of their campaign of fighting back, they are well aware that they can’t fight back the political wheel of the ANC-led Government with the social contract, together with the people of South Africa, to push back the frontiers of poverty.

It is through this glorious programme of land restitution that we see the dignity and respect of people being brought back, especially since people are brought back to the land from which they were forcefully removed and dispossessed by the regime which didn’t care for them.

Kuyajabulisa kakhulu kubona tinhlelo letifana naloluhlelo lolubitwa ngekutsi yi-Elradi, lolufaka ekhatsi kwabiwa kwemihlaba wabelwa intfutfuko yetekulima. Sibone tinkhulungwane ngetinkhulungwane tetakhamuti talapha eNingizimu Afrika tiba yincenye yaloluhlelo. Ngikhuluma nje siyatigcabha kakhulu ngabomake nelusha labayincenye yaletinhlelo lapho balima khona umoba, badzimate batfola netingadze letitsite eNkomazi nakuletinye tindzawo letiseMpumalanga. Ngaleyo ndlela bayakhona kuletsa kudla emakhaya lilanga lingakashoni.

Tikhona naletinye tinhlelo lesitsite nasihamba sihlamahlama iMphumalanga yonkhana sabona kutsi impela tikhona tinhlelo letisitako. Ngitawubala kafishane nje; ngibale bomake balapha eMlomo (Ermelo), labanemklamo iChubekani Wesselton Garden, lesiye satsi nasifika kulengadze yabo ngeva inhlitiyo yami itsi cosololo. NgeXitsonga batsi: Mpilu ya mina ya tsaka. [Luheko.]

Sibabonile bomake labakhutsele kakhulu balima, bangasalimeli kufaka kudla ebhodweni nje kuphela kodvwa sebalimela nekutsi bakhone kutsengisa. Ngaleyo ndlela batfola nenzuzo kuze bakhone nekufundzisa bantfwababo babuye babatsengele neyunifomu batakhele netindlu tekuhlala. Kungaleyo ndlela loluhlelo silubona kutsi lufaka sandla ekutfutfukiseni temnotfo.

Asikagcini lapho kuphela, siye satsi nasitsi galuja lapha ngesheya eMalekutu satfola kunemklamo lomuhle kakhulu wekubuyisa umhlaba, lekutsiwa yi-land care project (kunakekelwa kwemhlaba). Lapho liTiko leTekulima lesifundza sakitsi eMpumalanga belelekelela khona balimi labatikhandza sebasimeni lesibucayi ngesikhatsi kunetikhukhula tetimvula letakhukhula imihlaba lapho bebalima khona. Sitibonile tinhlelo letinhle letetama kubelekelela kwekutsi lemihlaba yabo iphindze ilimeke.

Ngabe ngiyaphosisa impela, Sihlalo, nangingakabali umklamo lesawutfola lapha eCarolina/valley project lapho sabona khona lusha lumatasatasa lusemshikashikeni wekutjala titjalo lekutsiwa ngema-Strawberries. Sitsite nasikhulumisana nabo satfola kutsi sebadzimate baba nesivumelwane neWoolworths lapho bakhona kutsi bahambise sivuno sabo khona. Lolusha lengikhuluma ngalo lusha lesasifutfwa nge-teargas kanye nalo; sivutfutwa ngema-rubber bulets kanye nalo. Lusha lebelungenandlela yekutsi lungaba nebuciko kutekulima kodvwa nyalo sibabone sebanebuciko lobukhulu kutekulima.Njengobe sasihamba nababe Tolo naye wakujabulela kakhulu loko labekubona.

Angiphawule ngekutsi kusijabulise kakhulu kubona bantfu baseBotshabelo, eMiddelburg babuyiselwe live labo. [Saphela sikhatsi.] [Tandla.] (Translation of Siswati paragraphs follows).

[It’s a great pleasure to see programmes such as Elrad, which involve the distribution of land for the purposes of farming development. We saw thousands and thousands of South African communities taking part in this programme. As I speak, I am proud of the women and the youth who are taking part in these programmes where they plant vast fields of sugar cane; and they even have some garden plots in Nkomazi and in many other places in Mpumalanga. In that way they can bring food to their homes before sunset.

There are other programmes that we discovered as we combed the Mpumalanga province. We realised that there are programmes that are of great help. I will briefly mention some of them, like the project at Ermelo where we found women working on the Chubekani Wesselton Garden. When we arrived there my heart was overwhelmed with joy. In Xitsonga they say: Mpilu ya mina ya tsaka. (My heart leaps with joy.) [Laughter.]

We could not go without noticing those very strong women working on their farms, not only to bring in food to their pots, but also to sell. In that way they even get a profitable income which helps them pay for their children’s education, uniforms, and to build their own homes. This made us realise that these programmes do contribute to the development of our economy.

Our trip did not end there. When we crossed over to Malekutu, we discovered a very beautiful Land Care Project. That is where the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs in the Mpumalanga province support farmers who found themselves in a great predicament after the floods which eroded their farm soil. We also saw some very constructive programmes which they use to refertilise their soil so that farming could be possible.

I would be making a great mistake if I did not mention the project that we found at Carolina valley, where we saw the youth planting strawberries. When we talked to them, we discovered that they had even gone to the extent of getting a contract with Woolworths where they send their produce.

The youth I am talking about is the youth with whom we were teargassed and at whom rubber bullets were fired during the struggle. It is the youth who had no way of acquiring skills, but now we see them having so many skills in farming. Mr Tolo would also attest to that, since he was with us and he saw these projects.

Let me point out that it was a great pleasure for us to witness the people of Botshabelo, in Middelburg, getting their land back. [Time expired.] [Applause.]]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Thank you very much, Chairperson. Hon members, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to thank the members who have participated in this debate, because indeed they amplified what we have read on paper and also what we know, and because our role is not just to transfer projects, but also to follow up and see whether or not our efforts have an important impact. I also want to thank members who may not have participated in the debate, but who have been part of the visits, for their work.

What these visits reflect, for me and I am sure for all of us, is that through the role that we have as members of Parliament and as members of the executive, we are able to see the impact of our policies, as well as the legislation that we pass, together with the budgets that we appropriate, on those whom we represent.

All members who have spoken, and I am sure also those who have not spoken, have realised from first-hand experience how difficult it is to build anew, as well as to transform our society from the legacy of our past to a new society that seeks to deal with concerns, not only of a section of our society, but all members of our country - appreciating, of course, that some emphasis will have to be given to those who were previously disadvantaged. The report also highlights the need for the strengthening of our government system, and ensures that the integrated approach that we have chosen does take root in all our provinces.

I raise this issue in this way, because clearly in a number of provinces we have seen better integration between the national sphere of Government and the province, as well as local government. We have also seen better collaboration among the different departments. We have also seen better communication with the communities. We do, however, appreciate that it is not the same everywhere, and this is the challenge of our new democracy we have to deal with.

Certainly it also highlights the need for capacity building among those who are recipients of our programmes, as well as the need for continuous Government support in this regard. The report states, and I am sure that members would have seen for themselves, that in most instances those projects that have succeeded are those where there is strong leadership among the community members and where the structures that are managing the land on behalf of the community themselves are aware of their responsibilities and can execute it as such. It is also in instances when the members of the general communities themselves understand what their roles are in relation to those whom they have elected to be their representatives in such committees. It is also in instances where there is accessibility to the offices of Government so that when these communities need help, they know exactly where to go.

It also highlights the work that some of our members of Parliament have done in their constituency offices to keep a bridge between our community, Parliament and Government. However, it also shows that if some of these communities, for instance, have chosen agriculture as an enterprise, it is not only leadership, which may be natural, of course, or even acquired, that is required. What is sometimes needed is further training that will help them to understand the enterprise they have gone in. And this is where, in my view, I think our essential service at provincial level is an element that still needs to be improved. I think in this regard the report might help us to really examine whether or not the nature of our Government structure in terms of concurrent function is really as ideal as we think, because, as you see in the report, there is somehow a disjuncture at certain levels.

The provincial legislatures and the provincial departments of agriculture have some executive functions as well as legislative functions, where they can take particular decisions with the budgets that have been so devolved into those provinces. As we know, once provincial budgets have been sourced, there is very little the national Government can do to interfere. However, we can persuade, cajole and use the co-ordinating structures of the Minmecs, as well as visits at a bilateral level to point out where some of the difficulties are.

Sometimes, however, even in the budget process, some of the important elements, as I have said earlier, such as extension services and infrastructure development, are in one way or the other forgotten. It is for this reason that, as the national Department for Agriculture, we feel there is a need for an accord between ourselves and the provinces which we can sign, regarding those issues that are critical for the sustenance of agriculture so that we can at least commit on a common mandate.

Also, the visit has highlighted, in my view, the need for asserting the campaign of Batho Pele among our public servants so that the way in which our public servants respond to the needs of the community is quicker and more compassionate. As members were listening to communities, I am sure one of the things you heard was how slow the processes sometimes are, as some of the bureaucracies go ``Môre is nog ‘n dag’’ [Tomorrow is another day.]. There is no conscience regarding the need for speed, and I think we all have a duty to make sure that the group of people we have in our Government’s Public Service, both the old and the new, are continuously made conscious of their responsibility to our citizens.

The other issue of importance that I think the report highlights is the need for continuous dialogue between ourselves, as the various spheres of Government, and our communities. One of the things, for instance, I noted in the report, without going into detail, was that there are certain inaccuracies which you can tell are not out of malice, but because people do not have enough information.

A case in point is a matter that was referred to around Mpumalanga. If you read the report, you may actually think the office of restitution of Mpumalanga and Limpopo is still a combined office and the recommendation from the committee actually says we must make sure that those offices are divided. However, members will remember - uphi uchief? [Where is the chief?] He is here - when I informed this House about that decision that we took three years ago. We appointed two commissioners and, as we speak today, the increase of resolution of claims in both the provinces affirms the decision we had so made.

Hon members will recall that in the 2000-01 financial year only three claims were settled in Mpumalanga. To date there are about 542 claims that have been settled. In Limpopo there were only two claims in 1999. Today there are about 1 100 claims that have been settled. [Applause.]

Overall, in the country, 40 323 claims have been settled to date. Again, if you look at the statistics that have been put in the report on the transfer of land in Mpumalanga, they give an inaccurate picture. About 233 000 hectares of land have been transferred to about 47 554 beneficiaries.

Without these inaccuracies, I think it is important to say that, having read your report, we as the department and the commission have taken a decision that we will study it and take into consideration in our planning and budget cycle the recommendations that you have made. Also, they help us as a national department to make sure that we can work with our provinces to assist in the areas where such assistance may be required.

I wish to share with hon members that there are certain challenges, in my view, that we need to deal with continually. You would recall that we took a deliberate decision two years ago that we had to transfer all agricultural state land that was part of the SADT land, where such schemes as Ncora, Qamata, Makhathini and others were constructed, to the relevant beneficiaries.

The challenge is that with some of those schemes, communities were removed and other people were brought in to work on the schemes. If you were to look at this very clinically and say that the beneficiaries of the land are the ones who get the schemes and the rest must go away, you would be likely to create some form of instability. Therefore you need a creative way to try to have a balance between the land rights of those whose land was taken away from them in favour of the scheme, and the underlying rights those people who have worked on the scheme have acquired in the years in which they have been there.

I think that that balancing effect does take time. Therefore you find that in some schemes such as Qamata, Ncora and even Makhathini, the land still belongs to the state while we sort out the underlying rights problems inherent in those areas.

This does not absolve us, of course, of the responsibility of assisting those who are working on those schemes. At the same time, though, I thought it was necessary for us to share this with you so that you understand what the problems sometimes are. For instance, regarding the Tshefu pineapple scheme in Peddie, we assisted that scheme, acknowledging, of course, that there were land tenure rights that needed to be resolved. We offered those communities, in the interim, a lease option so that they could get on with the work.

We wrote off the debt of R10 million. They say to you that they don’t know what happened to that R10 million. We explained what that R10 million was for. Some of the farmers who were funded before by the state were owing an amount of R10 million. Therefore, in order to assist them to go back into production, in partnership with some of the commercial farmers in the area, we had to find a mechanism - working with the province - in terms of which we could write off that debt of R10 million and recapitalise the project, while, at the same time, they would be paying back Government some of the money they owe.

The time of the lease is going to expire, and we have been discussing with the farmers their getting another long-term lease or an option to buy. These are the matters we are discussing, but I think the way in which they have been articulated does not give that real perspective.

Round the area of the Magwa tea estate, there is, again, another issue which my predecessor, Minister Hanekom, tried to deal with. One of the issues we had to deal with in the Magwa tea estate was to find a way, on the one hand, to accommodate the traditional leadership and their interests in that area, particularly iNkosi yamaMpondo [the Chief of amaMpondo], and, on the other hand, to take into consideration the needs of the workers on the scheme and those community members who come from areas such as Cofimvaba to work in the Magwa tea estate.

So, we tried to find a 50-50 situation to accommodate all these interests. We gave the resources to assist and revitalise the scheme. However, I think there is one issue we all have to appreciate, and you would realise that this is a similar issue in the majority of share equity schemes. It is sometimes very difficult for people who have been workers for a long time to understand the change or the transition from being a worker solely to becoming a worker and an owner, or a worker and a shareholder.

I remember that at some stage we had to intervene in Magwa when they were toyi-toying about the wages. We raised the question as to whom they were toyi-toying for, because they were the owners of the entity. So, if the entity was not making money, it meant that they should do something about making money. [Laughter.] These are the challenges which all of us here have a responsibility to articulate.

I do not want us to find ourselves going for a one-size-fits-all approach in which you either lease land or buy land outright for people, without looking for a mechanism which allows for joint partnership with existing farmers and their workers. I think this is an important element, but there needs to be support, growth and understanding of what these roles mean as they change. We are actually engaged in trying to find a resolution to that issue.

In Magwa you have the workers and the community all being members and shareholders. They do not have the technical capacity of making tea. The resources that the adviser required, a specialist in tea, could not be afforded by the new owners. Therefore that created other problems.

The other issue, a complex one that I need to discuss with you, is the issue around hemp cultivation. We reported, again in this House, that we worked together with Mercedes-Benz, the Agricultural Research Council, the MRC and the Department of Trade and Industry, more particularly at the provincial level in the Eastern Cape, to try to look at diversification and other, alternative crops. Hemp was one such product which Mercedes-Benz was willing to finance, because they wanted to build dashboards using material out of hemp. However, as you all know, hemp is part of the cannabis family.

I-hemp iyingxenye nje yensangu, kodwa iyile nsangu engadaki, oyibhema nje ikushiye unguwe. [Hemp is another form of dagga, but it is the kind of dagga that does not intoxicate you. You can smoke it and remain sober.]

What happened is that the Department of Health, which is the entity to certify and remove hemp from the schedule for cannabis, asked for planting varieties to be tested in various areas in the Eastern Cape where it was clear the soil type was susceptible to such a commodity.

The first trial showed good progress and, the second one, again, showed improvements. The other varieties that we started planting also showed some positive and interesting results. Unfortunately, Qamata, in terms of what the managers of the scheme needed to do, could not meet all the requirements of the planting of hemp as this was a pilot project. So, at this stage, there is no drive for the massive production of hemp, unless we finish those trials and unless the national Department of Health removes it from the cannabis schedule of drugs. It is only then that we can move forward.

So, when members say small farmers are not allowed to plant hemp, indeed, it is not true. I am raising these things, because they reflect the need for us as Government, the members of Parliament, to have a very dynamic relationship with our communities so that they are able to understand the processes and are able to be better informed about the choices they make.

Tomorrow is Heritage Day. I therefore do not want to take a long time. One last issue I need to raise is the one raised by … um, Mr … the representative from the Western Cape - before I make a mistake with his name.

I think the issue of commonages, as it is raised in the report, is not only a critical entry point for farming, but also for security, as you have mentioned. What is important for us, I think, is to appreciate that the beneficiaries, who may have been the first to apply for commonage assistance from Government, will not be the same people if you go from here to there.

When we transfer the land of commonages, it is transferred to the municipalities. Beneficiaries themselves cannot claim the right to say that because they were the initiators, they would therefore be there in perpetuity. It is a facility which, when we embarked on the programme with the municipalities, they were to use for food security purposes for their local communities, particularly for those who lived below the poverty line.

What has sometimes happened is that some of the municipalities, after such land was transferred, have sought to sell it or have sought to lease it to richer people who can pay them. We have intervened at various levels, because that was not the agreed intention. These were resources given by the national Government to the local government to assist their vulnerable communities.

The issue of HIV and Aids, as you said, is a matter which, in my view, we need to make a better study of to understand what the impact will be in the agricultural sector, not only in production, but also in the value chain. This is so that we are able to make a proper determination of how we manage the disease within the agricultural sector as a whole.

Mama uVilakazi, ngendaba kamama uMackenzie nesivumelwano somnyango, mangisho ukuthi sizosilandela sona ngoba angazi ukuthi kwakuyisivumelwano sini semali ababesenzile. Sizokulandela-ke siphenye ukuthi ngabe inkinga ibe kuphi.

Kini nonke malungu ePhalamende ngiyabonga ngomsebenzi eniwenzile nasikhathulela indlela mhlawumbe obekufuneka siyihambe ngokwethu. Namhlanje sesizokwazi ukuthi silandele ezinyathelweni zenu sibuye kuleli Phalamende sichaze ukuthi kulezi zinkinga enizibonile sizokwenzenjani, sibekephi. Nibe nosuku oluhle kusasa. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)

[Mrs Vilakazi, regarding the issue of Mrs Mackenzie and the agreement with the department, I must say that we will follow it up, because I do not know what kind of agreement they made. We will follow it up so that we can find out where the problem is.

I would like to thank all members of Parliament for the work that they have done, which has shortened the distance that my colleagues and I would still have to go. Today we will be able to follow in your footsteps and come back to this Parliament to explain what is going to be done about the problems that you have seen, and where we are going. Have a nice day tomorrow. Thank you. [Applause.] ]

Debate concluded.

The Council adjourned at 17:38. ____ ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

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

 (1)    Bills passed by National Council of Provinces  on  23  September
     2003:


     (i)     Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Bill [B 27B -  2003]
             (National Assembly - sec 75).


     (ii)    Promotion of National Unity  and  Reconciliation  Amendment
             Bill [B 34B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75).

1. Introduction of Bills:

 (1)    The Minister of Health:


     (i)     Dental Technicians Amendment Bill [B 63 -  2003]  (National
          Assembly - sec 76) [Explanatory  summary  of  Bill  and  prior
          notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette  No
          24869 of 19 May 2003.]


     Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on  Health  of
     the National Assembly, as well as referral  to  the  Joint  Tagging
     Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule  160,  on
     25 September 2003.


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

National Council of Provinces:

1. Messages from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces in respect of Bills passed by Assembly and transmitted to Council:

 (1)    Bill passed by  National  Assembly  on  23  September  2003  and
     transmitted for concurrence:


     (i)     Firearms Control Amendment Bill [B 28B  -  2003]  (National
          Assembly - sec 75).


     The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Security  and
     Constitutional Affairs of the National Council of Provinces.

TABLINGS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

Papers

1. The Minister of Education: (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Education Labour Relations Council for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 185-2003].

 (b)     Report  and  Financial  Statements  of  the  National   Student
     Financial Aid Scheme for 2002-2003, including  the  Report  of  the
     Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP  162-
     2003].

1. The Minister of Correctional Services:

 Report and Financial Statements of Vote 20 - Department of Correctional
 Services for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Auditor-General  on
 the Financial Statements for 2002-2003 [RP 170-2003].

1. The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs:

 (a)    Report and  Financial  Statements  of  Onderstepoort  Biological
     Products  Limited  for  2002-2003,  including  the  Report  of  the
     Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003.


 (b)    Report and Financial Statements  of  the  National  Agricultural
     Marketing Council  for  2002-2003,  including  the  Report  of  the
     Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for  2002-2003  [RP  6-
     2003].

1. The Minister of Minerals and Energy:

 Group Annual Financial Statements of the Central Energy Fund for  2001-
 2002, including the Report of  the  Auditor-General  on  the  Financial
 Statements for 2001-2002.

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

INSERT ATCs - PAGES 1157 TO 1173 - Insert ATK2309e

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Skills Development Amendment Bill [B 46 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 23 September 2003:

   The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Skills Development Amendment Bill [B 46 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

2. Report of the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises on the Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 40 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 23 September 2003:

   The Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises, having considered the subject of the Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 40

   • 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

3. Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Special Pensions Amendment Bill [B 3 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 23 September 2003:

   The Select Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Special Pensions Amendment Bill [B 3 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.

4. Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Government Employees Pension Law Amendment Bill [B 4B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 23 September 2003:

   The Select Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Government Employees Pension Law Amendment Bill [B 4B - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.