National Assembly - 24 February 2004
TUESDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2004 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:01.
The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS ERADICATION OF POVERTY
(Member's Statement)
Mnu M M MASALA (ANC): Ikhwelo lityala, mawethu. Somlomo, ndiphakamela ukubulela, ukuthi enkosi kuRhulumente, egameni likaKhongolosi nomzi waseMpofu neziphaluka.
Aniyivanga na injoli yesizwe, uMphathiswa wezeZimali xa ibizathuza kule nkundla isithi: ``Wagwetywa ndlala’’. Ibibhekisa kuni maxurandini aseGangceni, aseNcaza, aseDyala, aseMpofu, aseMhlangeni, aseBhafoliti, akuNondyola naseNtilini, nani mafa-nankosi kwikomkhulu likaMaqoma ngokwakhe, eTshokotshela. Ngxatsho ke, Ngqongqoshe! Ngxatsho ke, Mphathiswa!
Baginy’ ingwiq’ abant’ abakhulu. Mababe ngathi banyathelela phezulu oonozakuzaku bakho angade omiwe ngumoya amaxhego. Zibolile iintaba zeNkonkobe yidywabasi, Khumalo. Bakhangele kuwe abantwana bakho, ngethemba. Uthini?
Kunamhlanje nje ngathi iintili zeNgxwengxwe zaphusile, kodwa amabel’ ale mazi abhonxile. Enkosi, Mama. [Laphela ixesha.] [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa member’s statement follows.)
[Mr M M MASALA (ANC): That is a whistleblower, fellow countrymen and women. Madam Speaker, I stand here to express my gratitude to this Government on behalf of the African National Congress, Seymour and the surrounding areas.
Did you not hear the hon Minister of Finance when he was giving the medium- term budget thereby announcing that hunger and poverty will be driven away? He was talking to you, those who come from the areas of Gangceni, Ncaza, Dyala, Seymour, Mhlangeni, Balfour, Nondyola and Ntilini. He was talking to you, subjects of King Maqoma at Tshokotshela. Thank you, hon Minister, thank you! The elders are waiting in anticipation. Let your department deliver before they become impatient. Your children are waiting on you. What are you saying? In you lies our hope. In you lies our destiny! [Time expired.] [Laughter.]]
IRAQI OIL SCANDAL
(Member's Statement)
Ms R TALJAARD (DA): Madam Speaker, the Iraqi oil scandal is increasingly engulfing the ANC-led Government. ANC mouthpiece Kgalema Motlanthe’s irresponsible statements of cosy relations between the ANC and Saddam Hussein’s Baathists puts South Africa in a category with yet another international pariah. Questions raised by the alleged links between Mr Sandile Majali, the ANC, prewar Iraq’s crude oil bonanza and Imvume Resources’s R2 billion windfall from Government contracts, and possible kickbacks for ANC fundraising cannot remain unanswered. [Interjections.]
Mr Motlanthe’s responses are wholly inadequate. To make matters worse, South African peace support operations in Burundi and the DRC are compromised by charter companies, Volga Atlantic Airlines, Marvotech and Norse Air Services’ alleged links to Russian mafia gunrunner Victor Bout and his Ukranian sidekick Yuri Sidorov, who were implicated in arms trading by the UN Security Council’s expert panels and the Centre for Public Integrity’s Study on War Profiteers. [Interjections.] The DA calls on …
The SPEAKER: Order, hon member. Yes, Minister?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Is it appropriate for members to raise party-political issues or party-political allegations under this item on the agenda? The SPEAKER: I regret that that is a habit, and there is nothing in the Rules that prevents it.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Then we have to sort out the Rules, Madam Speaker, because this is completely out of order.
The SPEAKER: Minister, I would welcome radical reassessment of the Rules.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: We might have to ask about the links between the hon member and the mafia. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, there is an opportunity for members to make statements and members should follow up. Hon Ms Taljaard. [Interjections.] Order!
Mr T D LEE: Madam Speaker, the Minister referred to the member’s links with the mafia. I think that is totally unacceptable. The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, that was out of order. Would you please withdraw that statement?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, I did not draw any inferences. I said we might have to ask.
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, I think the comment in the context was unacceptable.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: In the context of her sensitivity, I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Thank you very much. Will you please proceed.
Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Speaker, it is regrettable that the Minister has stooped to this level.
The DA calls on the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Intelligence to take all the necessary steps to clear the air and save South Africa’s foreign policy and international reputation from these scandals.
Hon MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, I want to draw your attention to the fact that I prefaced my earlier ruling by saying that I regret that this is a habit in the House, and I do wish that you would not, on all sides, engage in it.
PROBLEMS REGARDING DELIVERY OF ANTIRETROVIRALS
(Member's Statement)
Dr R RABINOWITZ (IFP): Madam Speaker, the IFP would like to congratulate the team within the Health department that has put together the operational plan for the roll-out of antiretrovirals. They have compiled an excellent programme. But, as the IFP has warned before, with regard to health delivery, good ideas without realistic mechanisms for implementation are as good as seeds without water.
The entire programme revolves around the delivery of medicines. For years we have argued over drug procurement. Even now we are consumed with a debate over the prices of medicines, but the method of delivery is our greatest downfall. It is filled with cracks between private companies that deliver medicines to Government warehouses, thence via private tenderers to Government hospitals who take them to clinics, and between those cracks billions of rands’ worth of medicines are stolen. The antiretrovirals will be to the people who want to get their hands on them what the elixir of life was to people in the past.
There is no reason why we should not have single, public/private partnerships which provide private management of the entire delivery service, from the source of production to the source where the people consume the medicines. Also, the funding mechanism is too bureaucratic, as is the entire health structure which attempts to centralise control in the office of the Minister, while aiming for decentralisation and delivery to the people.
The IFP proposes a far simpler relationship between national, provincial and local governments, with power vested from the bottom up rather than from the top down, and this would enable the programme to be well- delivered. Thank you. [Time expired.]
YOUTH INTERNSHIP PROGRAMME
(Member's Statement) Mrs D G NHLENGETHWA (ANC): Madam Speaker, the ANC commends the continuing efforts of Government to improve the skills base of the youth of our country. On Friday, 20 February 2004, the State Information Technology Agency held the official launch of the Youth Internship Programme. This programme will assist in building an ICT skills base by providing 300 individuals from historically disadvantaged backgrounds with training every year.
The programme is a partnership between Sita, the Umsombomvu Youth Fund and the Public Sector SETA. It targets 51% female and 4% disabled persons. We commend the ANC-led Government on implementing this very progressive programme which cuts through the nerve of the colonial apartheid legacy by focusing on skills development among those sectors that bore the brunt of the policies of the past. I thank you. MATRIC EXAMINATIONS DISCREPANCIES
(Member's Statement)
Mrs M E OLCKERS (New NP): Chairperson, the Minister of Education should consider expanding investigation into the failure rate of Grade 10s to cover also the alleged high drop-out rate of matrics. The New NP is not questioning the hon Minister’s statistics, but according to press reports 555 118 matrics were registered last year, but only 440 267 wrote the final exam. This means 114 851, almost 115 000 matrics, disappeared from the system during the year. The reason for this should be urgently determined and addressed.
It is also important to know whether the thousands of matrics who did not write the exams are still completing their school career or whether they dropped out of school altogether. The New NP realises that there will always be the no-shows and other unforeseen reasons for matrics not writing the final exams, but the discrepancy between the number of learners who registered for Grade 12 and the number who completed the year is still unacceptably high. Therefore the New NP calls on the Minister to investigate these allegations and address the situation effectively, as he is now doing in the case of the failure rate of Grade 10 learners and will, we hope, also do with regard to the poor numeracy and literacy ability of Grade 8 learners. I thank you.
FF PLUS AND CPC ELECTION CO-OPERATION AGREEMENT
(Member's Statement)
Dr P W A MULDER (VF): Mevrou die Speaker, Die VF Plus en die Cape People’s Congress (CPC) het ná indringende samesprekings vandag in Kaapstad ‘n verkiesingsooreenkoms van samewerking bereik. Die CPC is ‘n politieke party wat sy steunbasis veral in die Wes- en Noord-Kaapse bruin gemeenskappe vind. Die CPC het in 2000 aan die munisipale verkiesing in die Wes-Kaap deelgeneem en het die magsbalans in die Theewaterskloof-stadsraad gehad. Die CPC het nou besluit om verder te gaan en die politiek ook op provinsiale vlak te betree.
Die VF Plus en die CPC gaan albei afsonderlik in hul eie reg met hul eie kandidate en veldtogte aan die 2004-verkiesing in die Wes-Kaap en in die Noord-Kaap deelneem. Aangesien die CPC nie aan die verkiesing op nasionale vlak gaan deelneem nie, het hy op sy ondersteuners ‘n beroep gedoen om op nasionale vlak hul stem vir die VF Plus uit te bring.
Die twee partye stem saam oor onder andere die volgende: die nastreef en bevordering van Christelike waardes, die beskerming en uitbouing van Afrikaans as inheemse taal, die herinstelling van die doodstraf ten einde ons gemeenskappe te beskerm teen misdaad, die beëindiging van regstellende aksie wat albei ons gemeenskappe en van ons jongmense benadeel, en die bemagtiging van ons onderskeie gemeenskappe. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER (FF): Madam Speaker, the FF Plus and the Cape People’s Congress (CPC) have, after incisive discussions in Cape Town today, reached an election agreement of co-operation. The CPC is a political party which finds its support basis especially in the Western and Northern Cape coloured communities. The CPC took part in the municipal election in the Western Cape in 2000 and held the balance of power in the Theewaterskloof Town Council. The CPC has now decided to go further and also engage in politics at a provincial level.
The FF Plus and the CPC are both going to participate, separately in their own right with their own candidates and campaigns, in the 2004 election in the Western Cape and in the Northern Cape. As the CPC is not participating in the election at national level, it has appealed to supporters to vote for the FF Plus at national level.
The two parties are in agreement about, inter alia, the following: the promotion of Christian values, the protection and building of Afrikaans as an indigenous language, the reinstatement of the death penalty in order to protect our communities against crime, the termination of affirmative action which is to the disadvantage of both our communities and our young people and the empowerment of our respective communities. I thank you.]
NEW AND IMPROVED HEALTH CARE FACILITIES IN MAMELODI
(Member's Statement)
Mr D C MABENA (ANC): Madam Speaker, South Africans are consistent in their determination to unite in a people’s contract to ensure progressive improvement in their mental, physical and social health. On Friday, 20 February 2004, the Gauteng MEC for Health, Dr Gwen Ramokgopa, officially opened the Holani Clinic in Mamelodi East within the Tshwane metropolitan area.
The clinic itself was built in partnership with the De Stichting Verpleging/Verzorging Eindhoven, an NGO from the Netherlands. The building and official opening of this clinic further demonstrates the commitment of the ANC-led Government to bringing quality primary health care to all our people, especially those who have been deprived of these basic services for far too long.
On the same day there was a sod-turning event for the building of the second phase of the Mamelodi Day Hospital in preparation for its upgrading to a level 2 full-fledged hospital. This sod-turning event has been hailed by the people of Mamelodi as a demonstration of the continuing commitment of the ANC to the creation of a better life for all.
TREES GIVEN TO MEMBERS BY FINANCE MINISTER
(Member's Statement)
Ms T E MILLIN (IAM): Madam Speaker, as this is probably my last member’s statement in this honourable House, I have resolved to be nice to everybody, including the ANC. In any case, I believe congratulations are in order to the Minister of Finance on his eighth Budget Speech delivered last week, which could in broad terms be described as pretty balanced, albeit with a strong socialistic tone. It has been described by a certain newspaper - which I shall quote, so I hope no points of order for unparliamentary language will be called by the ANC Chief Whip or anyone else - as ``a bloody good Budget’’.
I would also like to thank the hon Minister for his gift of a tree, which I shall plant on returning home. Unfortunately, not having any grandchildren yet, it will more likely be my great-grandchildren who will be sitting in its shade one day. I did wonder, though, why we were receiving trees from our Finance Minister, rather than from our Forestry Minister. But I think I have hit on the answer to that one - our Finance Minister, by presenting us all with our young saplings is proving beyond doubt that money does not grow on trees. I thank you. [Applause.]
HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT FOR CHILDREN CAMPAIGN
(Member's Statement)
Mrs M M MALUMISE (ANC): Madam Speaker, the ANC commends Government and, in particular, the Department of Health on its launch of the Healthy Environment for Children campaign. Each year the unhealthy environment contributes to the deaths of over 5 million children under the age of 14 years.
The health of a large number of South Africa’s children is threatened by environmental risks in their homes and schools. Exposure to higher levels of indoor air pollution, chemicals in the environment such as lead, pesticides and mercury, together with poor access to water and sanitation, and other poor hygiene practices, are some of the issues the effects of which require improved awareness among our people.
Studies have shown a link in children with high blood lead levels and lower IQ scores, short concentration spans, decreased growth and even brain damage. We call on South Africans to unite in a people’s contract to further accelerate the rate of delivery of water and sanitation programmes and of elimination of the use of lead in petrol. I thank you. [Applause.]
SOUTH AFRICA'S QUIET DIPLOMACY FAILS ZIMBABWE
(Member's Statement)
Mrs S M CAMERER (DA): Madam Speaker, President Robert Mugabe’s statement that he would not hold talks with Morgan Tsvangirai for as long as the MDC were allies of Western countries, along with his earlier statement that he will cling to power for the next five years, has exposed President Thabo Mbeki’s policy of quiet diplomacy as an embarrassing and costly disaster.
Quiet diplomacy may delay international action on the Zimbabwe crisis and buy more time for Robert Mugabe to bring ever more ruin to his country, but it is damaging to South Africa’s national interests and it undermines President Mbeki’s international standing. South Africa deserves better. The ANC must move from its policy of not-so-silent support for Zanu PF to a real condemnation of Robert Mugabe and the exertion of significant pressure to bring about a democratic transition in that country before it is too late. Thank you.
ABUSIVE BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS
(Member's Statement)
Mr B W DHLAMINI (IFP): Madam Speaker, physically challenged people have many challenges and obstacles that they have to overcome every day of their lives. It is, therefore, totally unacceptable that there are still people who insult, abuse and violate their rights.
A Pretoria man, who is not physically challenged and who recently appeared in court, allegedly parked his car across several parking bays designated for physically challenged people outside a restaurant. When asked to remove his vehicle, he allegedly refused and started to insult disabled people and the police who were called in to assist.
This behaviour is disgraceful and has no place in our society, and it should not be tolerated. All South Africans, whether they are physically disabled or of a different race, have rights and must be treated with respect and dignity. We South Africans need to be more sensitive to the rights of those who are physically disabled. As MPs, let us set a trend and treat the physically challenged with respect and dignity. I thank you. [Applause.]
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE ACTION ON THE ISRAELI SEPARATION WALL
(Member's Statement)
Dr Z P JORDAN (ANC): Madam Speaker, on 23 February 2004 the Government of South Africa joined with others in requesting the International Court of Justice in the Hague to offer advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the construction of the separation wall including in and around East Jerusalem, by Israel, the occupying power in the occupied Palestinian territory.
The 7,50-metre-high wall, which runs through the lands occupied by Israel
since June 1967, that is for the past 36 years, is responsible for an
escalating humanitarian catastrophe in the occupied Palestinian
territories. Its construction will result in the fragmentation of the
territory of any future Palestinian state into a number of economically
unviable walled ghettos or shtetls'' as they were called in Eastern
Europe. The construction of the separation wall, which the Palestinians
today referred to as anapartheid wall’’, is serving as a pretext to
seize more land and to annex it to the state of Israel. This wall is unique
in history and poses unprecedented challenges to international law.
We, in this House, have repeatedly called on both sides in this conflict to cease all acts of violence. We once more reiterate our commitment to the creation of a regional environment in which Israel can coexist with its neighbours within secure borders and free from the threat of violence. However, the actions of Israeli authorities, such as the construction of this wall, can only fuel the cycle of violence and counterviolence. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANC FOR LAND
(Member's Statement)
Ms C B JOHNSON (New NP): Madam Speaker, the New NP still believes that the best way to address the concerns of all South Africans is by way of its approach, namely through negotiation and discussion with the ANC.
Why do we say this? At the time when the Land Restitution Bill was before the portfolio committee, we were of the view that not all our constituencies’ concerns were adequately expressed. We entered into negotiations and discussions with the ANC, and certain checks and balances were built in in order to address these concerns.
Why is this important to a landowner? It is important because the landowner must know that the Minister, as an administrative functionary, is always subject to judicial review; that the Minister must in all cases of expropriation give adequate notice, give adequate reasons and give the landowner the right to make representations.
This shows that the New NP’s approach of speaking to the ANC, instead of screaming at the ANC as certain other parties do, is the best approach and the only way to achieve win-win solutions for all South Africans. So, while the DA is on its continuous little mission of being an alternative government, the New NP will speak to the real Government. Thank you. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Order! In the absence of the ACDP, I will give the slot to the FF.
HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN ZIMBABWE
(Member's Statement)
Dr P W A MULDER (VF): Agb Mevrou die Speaker, die ANC-regering het gister ‘n voorlegging gedoen voor die Internasionale Geregshof oor die menseregtevergrype in die stryd tussen Israel en die Palestyne. In die Zimbabwiese situasie is net sewe van die 55 MDC-opposisielede nog nie een of ander tyd deur die Mugabe-regering in die tronk gegooi nie. By ‘n internasionale mediakonferensie oor mediavryheid is verlede week bevind dat Zimbabwe se mediavryheid die swakste in Afrika is.
Dit bly vir die VF Plus onverklaarbaar waarom die ANC steeds voortgaan met stille diplomasie as ‘n oplossing vir die menseregtevergrype in Zimbabwe, maar dieselfde strategie nie gebruik rakende die situasie in die Midde- Ooste nie. Hoekom werk dit by die een en nie by die ander nie? Die korrekte optrede sou wees om ook in Zimbabwe op dieselfde wyse op te tree, naamlik om duidelik te sê hierdie Regering heg belangrikheid aan menseregte. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER (FF): Hon Madam Speaker, yesterday the ANC Government made a submission before the International Court of Justice regarding the human rights violations in the battle between Israel and the Palestinians.
In the Zimbabwean situation only seven of the 55 MDC opposition members have not been jailed by the Mugabe government at some or other stage. At an international media conference on media freedom last week it was found that Zimbabwe’s media freedom is the weakest in Africa.
The FF Plus cannot understand why the ANC is still continuing with quiet diplomacy as a solution to the human rights violations in Zimbabwe, but does not use the same strategy regarding the situation in the Middle East. Wy does it work for one and not for the other? The correct action would be to act in Zimbabwe in the same way, namely to say clearly that this Government attaches importance to human rights. Thank you.]
IMPACT OF BUDGET ON THE POOR
(Minister's Response)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to both hon members, Masala and Millin. Hon Masala said that the Budget impacts very directly on his constituency in Limpopo. I’m sure members who live and work amongst the poor would be able to reflect that similarly.
The change over the past 10 years has brought measurable improvements in the quality of life of all our people. I think it is that that will see this side of the House returning in even larger numbers after the elections on 14 April 2004. Thank you. [Applause.]
MATRIC DROPOUTS
(Minister's Response)
The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Speaker, for your forbearance, there are two issues here, and one is education. I belong to the international cluster, in relation to the hon Mulder’s intervention.
I am grateful to the hon Olckers for raising the issue of the matric drop- outs. The figure of those who wrote the matric examinations is not 440 000, it is 600 000. And there were nearly 200 000 who were … I’m being disturbed by the hon Chief Whip of the … He is referring to my stylistic presence today, which I abjure. [Interjections.] Style has nothing to do with Parliament.
The SPEAKER: Minister, you are using up your time. The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Sorry. Can I say, therefore, that this is a matter that we have looked at for the statistics. Secondly, if it’s part- time people who have registered and written the examinations, it is quite clear that there will be repeats. But, in any case, we must look at this very seriously because the number of those who write the matric examination is enormously important for human resource development, apart from the waste of capacity, talent and initiative that’s involved in that. So we will do this seriously, but we won’t do it simply because the statistics are brought to our attention in the newspapers.
The second point is in relation to the comparison that the hon Mulder has made between the wall and, in fact, the situation in Zimbabwe. I am surprised that the hon Mulder, who believes that the most important right in a democracy is self-determination forgets to apply it to the Palestinian situation. Whatever happens - even in Zimbabwe - is in relation to a sovereign independent state. We may take a position in relation to a sovereign independent state, but the most elemental and fundamental right of all is the right to self-determination, which Israel forbids, ignores, violates and refuses to accept. It refuses to accept that the wall is in breach of the Geneva Convention, as the hon Deputy Minister said at The Hague today, in fact, that it is an acquisition of Palestinian territory rather than a guard against terrorist activities. I’m surprised that the hon Mulder makes that equation, because there are two fundamental, different features: 3 500 Palestinians have died whilst about 800 Israelis have died.
The Government’s position is that there must be negotiation. There must be recognition of the right to self-determination for the Palestinian people and that the Palestinian people must decide their own future in a national territory that the international community recognises. The hon Mulder may agree to that, but I think equating the two situations is highly opportunistic, unnecessary and, in the end, a dismal intervention in this House. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, I’m sure both you and Mr Gibson will enliven the forthcoming elections with a debate on the dress code. [Laughter.]
HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT FOR CHILDREN CAMPAIGN
(Minister's Response)
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the hon member Malumise for raising the issues around a healthy environment for our children.
Yes, indeed, I may report to this House that yesterday we formally opened the International Congress on Environmental Health, the first conference of this nature to be held on the continent. We are very proud that as South Africans we are hosting this conference.
We raised exactly the same issues that MP Malumise mentioned in her statement, and, as I say, we are very grateful for that. In this regard, we will recall that in the margins of the WSSD we launched, as the Department of Health, a campaign for a healthy environment for our children. We have also established a multisectoral committee to develop concrete plans and monitor their implementation for the sake of our children so that they live, learn and play in a healthy environment.
Once more, thank you very much MP Malumise, for your statement. [Applause.]
DIVISION OF REVENUE BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Speaker, I rise against the hon Gibson in support of the sartorial elegance of the Minister of Education. South Africa has one of the most transparent and equitable systems of intergovernmental grants, with three allocations made per province and per municipality from the National Revenue Fund. This information is published in the Division of Revenue Bill as tabled on Budget Day, allowing each province and municipality to include all grants in their budgets and to properly plan for their expenditure.
However, we must constantly remind ourselves that, while exceedingly important, transparency of our intergovernmental system is not an end in itself. To fellow South Africans what matters most is the extent to which we as political office-bearers take advantage of the strengths of our system to deliver more and better services for the betterment of the quality of life for all South Africans. What matters to fellow South Africans is whether between the executive and Parliament we hold each other accountable for the appropriate use of the resources allocated in this Bill.
Given our intergovernmental system, each province and municipality will budget for these national allocations, determining how its share of the funds will be used to give expression to its priorities under the umbrella of policy frameworks agreed to through the intergovernmental forums such as Minmecs, joint Minmecs, the Budget Council, the Budget Forum and also the extended Cabinet meetings. Last week, when we tabled the Budget, we spelt out how the national share is divided among the national functions. We are not able to do this for the provinces and municipalities, as they have not yet published their budgets. But, as in previous years, we shall publish this information in the Intergovernmental Fiscal Review later this year.
This year’s Bill allocates 61,8% of nationally raised revenues to provincial and local governments, to give effect to this Government’s priority of reducing poverty and vulnerability. The core of the Division of Revenue Bill is contained in the seven schedules to the Bill.
Schedule 1 provides a summary of the allocation of funds to the three spheres of Government. Of the R389,9 billion in the Budget for the new fiscal year, the national Government is allocated R201 billion. This allocation includes R52,9 billion for debt service costs and the contingency reserve, leaving national Government with R120,6 billion to allocate to national departments, including conditional grants to provincial and local governments.
Schedules 3 and 4 allocate the equitable share component to provinces and municipalities. Schedules 5 to 6 further allocate conditional and other grants to provinces. About R21,2 billion is given to provinces and R6,6 billion is given to local government.
The 2004 Medium Term Expenditure Framework builds on the sound policy framework that evolved over the first decade of democracy and provides for further deepening and consolidation of social services, which make up the bulk of provincial expenditure.
The allocations to provinces further reinforce spending to reduce poverty and vulnerability through increased allocations for social security to provide for the further extension of the social security net. The emphasis is on completing the phased extension of the child support grant to children up to the age of 14 years through grants introduced, starting from last year.
The allocation of the child support extension grant rises from R1,2 billion in the current fiscal year, to R3,7 billion in 2004-05, further increasing to R9,2 billion in the fiscal year ending on 31 March 2007.
The Budget strengthens Government’s response to HIV/Aids. It provides additional funds for the health sector to implement Government’s comprehensive response to HIV/Aids. It allocates R1,9 billion more to a conditional grant over the three years to roll out the antiretroviral drugs. This brings earmarked spending to combat HIV/Aids to R3,5 billion over the next three years.
The 2004 Budget maintains a strong growth in the allocation targeted for provincial infrastructure development and maintenance, rising from R2,3 billion in the current fiscal year to R4,1 billion in the third year. As a result, national transfers for infrastructure amount to R11,2 billion over the next three years.
In addition to addressing backlogs in social and economic infrastructure, rising infrastructure allocations lay the basis for the expansion of labour- intensive projects under the auspices of the Expanded Public Works Programme. The grant will also provide for agriculture infrastructure development to support farmers who acquire new land, particularly beneficiaries of our land reform programme.
In this year’s Budget, a new conditional grant is proposed to support the implementation of a broad range of farmer-support services to developing farmers. Increasing access to services is critical for the success of land distribution initiatives and the LRAD programme. About R750 million is allocated to this over the MTEF years.
Over the next three years, municipalities will receive R47,3 billion or an additional R3,9 billion. The substantial increase in the local government share mainly targets the provision of free basic services, the extension of services to areas not presently serviced and job creation through investment and labour-based infrastructure programmes.
The 2004 MTEF also takes major steps in streamlining funding through the consolidation of infrastructure grants into municipal infrastructure grants. The MIG totals R16,6 billion over the next three years, reflecting an additional R1,7 billion. This grant together with other infrastructure grants being phased out is a key instrument to support the infrastructure budgets of municipalities, to support the extension of services to poor households, to maintain and upgrade municipal infrastructure and to support urban renewal and rural development.
Finally, allocations for capacity-building and restructuring, up to R750 million a year over the MTEF period, are appropriated. This is to encourage municipalities to build in-house capacity to focus on planning, project and financial management and budget reforms envisaged in the Municipal Finance Management and Municipal Systems Acts. Our system of grants is so transparent and so voluminous, with the many appendices on local government grants, that even our journalists missed the importance of publishing our consolidated tables on total grants per municipality, as set out in table E22 in Annexure E in the Budget Review. For example, it notes that the OR Tambo municipalities, including Umtata, will collectively receive the highest at R823 million in the first year of the MTEF, followed by the Amathole municipality at R743 million, Johannesburg at R683 million, eThekwini at R643 million, Ekhurhuleni at R504 million and Vhembe at R445 million.
I want to conclude by noting that the first decade of democracy has witnessed remarkable progress in the development, evolution and consolidation of South Africa’s intergovernmental grants system. Looking ahead, we need to improve this system to ensure that it is able to deal with the challenges facing us in the coming decade. The publication of Census 2001 results, together with the restructuring of the system of social grants and the electricity distribution industry, provides us with the opportunity to undertake this review for the 2005 Budget.
More importantly, we need to focus on how to improve the quality of spending in all spheres of government. Ten years on, we should be able to reap the benefits of any improvements in the delivery of services over the second decade of democracy. To do so, Parliament and all elected legislatures will need to improve their system of oversight to assess the performance of government in all three spheres. I have pleasure in tabling the Division of Revenue Bill for its second reading debate. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr N M NENE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hon members, when the Minister of Finance delivered his Budget Speech on 18 February 2004, he also tabled this Division of Revenue Bill, which is before Parliament today. This Bill is a constitutional requirement that determines the equitable division of nationally raised revenue between the three spheres of government vertically, and also horizontally amongst provinces.
In his speech the Minister referred us to the principles of the Reconstruction and Development Programme underpinned by five major policy programmes. These principles are: the meeting of basic needs, building the economy, democratising the state and society, developing human resources and, finally, the implementation of the RDP.
For purposes of this debate, allow me to address myself to the task of democratising the state and society and that of meeting the basic needs of our populace, which is central to the Division of Revenue Bill. The ANC’s commitment to the course of equality and socioeconomic development is demonstrated by this piece of legislation. To quote from the RDP document:
Democratisation is integral to the RDP. Without thoroughgoing democratisation the potential of our country and its people will not be available for a coherent programme of reconstruction and development.
The matter of an equitable division of revenue is an issue of human rights enshrined in our Constitution and is in line with the Freedom Charter adopted by the People’s Congress in 1955, in Kliptown. When the Division of Revenue Bill is tabled, one thing that is of prime importance is how it takes into account all matters listed in Section 214(2)(a) to (j) of the Constitution. These include: the national interest, provision for debt, national Government needs, and provision of the constitutionally mandated basic services by provinces and local government. These matters are covered by the FFC recommendations which one of my colleagues is going to deal with.
Given the history of this country, where resources were not shared equitably among all citizens, it became imperative that the new democratic order be supported by democratic instruments like this Bill. Our systems have evolved and matured and they ensure the progressive realisation of socioeconomic rights and the creation of a people-centered and transparent process that addresses the legacy of apartheid.
There has been a steady improvement in the provinces’ capacity to spend efficiently and compliance with the Public Finance Management Act has been positive lately. This year also sees the phased-in implementation of the Municipal Finance Management Act and I am confident that this will also add to the already developing trend towards accountability and transparency. Considerable funding has been dedicated to building capacity in local government, specifically in the areas of management, planning, technical services, budgeting and financial management.
As we debate the Division of Revenue Bill today, I’m tempted to reflect a bit on our past, when the majority of us were marginalised and totally excluded from sharing in the resources of this country in total disregard of our basic human rights. This gave rise to the situation that the ANC Government inherited in 1994. Our people were condemned to live in places that are not suitable for human habitation and were referred to as surplus people. Despite the tremendous progress that the ANC has made in addressing these disparities, many challenges still confront us. This division of revenue takes us a step closer to the realisation of our dream of a better life for all, as well as building the fiscal capacity and efficiency of the provincial and local spheres and the reduction of economic disparities whilst promoting stability and predictability.
Building on the Growth and Development Summit resolutions and the Ten-year Review, this division of revenue feeds into the 2004 MTEF’s renewed focus on strengthening investment and job creation, reducing poverty and supporting vulnerable groups, education and skill development, creating sustainable communities and enhancing service delivery. One of the key challenges facing delivery programmes is to address the problems of the second economy. We need to deal with issues such as income poverty, unemployment and social exclusion, hence the expanded public works programme.
To give expression to our commitment to the improvement of service delivery, both the shares for provincial and local government allocations increase significantly. The provincial allocation increases from 56,8% to 58% and the local government allocation from 4,4% to 4,6% over the MTEF whilst the national share decreases from 38,9% to 37,4% over the same period. Over half of the additional resources are allocated to the provinces in recognition of the challenges they face in delivering social services, building and maintaining economic infrastructure, employment creation, promoting rural development and coping with HIV and Aids. Local government, which must deal with the provision of free basic service and expand municipal infrastructure, also gets a larger slice of additional revenue than its baseline allocation. These allocations alone are not the solution to the problem of years of dispossession and deprivation. The ANC is not only faced with the responsibility of delivering on its mandate of a better life for all, but all of us were victims and therefore all our people are the beneficiaries.
The most critical part is that of ensuring that reconstruction and development really takes place. Oversight therefore becomes critical for us as public representatives and that calls upon all of us to ensure that these Government policies are implemented. Some of us tend to abdicate this responsibility because of our political persuasions and lack of commitment to this country and its people. The rightwing in this country has taken a decision that they will fight any effort to bring about a better life for all and they continuously insult our people’s integrity by asserting that life is now worse than it was pre-democracy. As they tell the story of a bleak future, they cannot even convince themselves that the lie they are telling will one day be true. Our people know the truth.
It takes a lot of courage to tell a person who did not have a roof over his or her head and who now does, that apartheid was better. For a pensioner who now earns R740, it is absurd in the extreme to tell him or her that life was better before; and to all recipients of social grants and the indigent policies of the ANC Government one must be insane to attempt to tell our people that they were better off without electricity and running water and decent access roads. It’s a long and arduous road that requires a people’s contract to overcome and our people are taking up the challenge already, taking advantage of the Expanded Public Works Programme, Working for Water projects and Zibambele in KwaZulu-Natal. Whilst these are short- term measures, the skills acquired and the installation of infrastructure has long-term socioeconomic benefits.
Indeed, there will be no major policy changes but an acceleration of the implementation of our programmes supported by the resources allocated through this process of the Division of Revenue Bill. The ANC supports this Bill. I thank, you Madam Chair.
Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Speaker, hon members, Minister, the R327 billion revenue projection in this Budget is to be primarily located at provincial and local government levels. Nationally raised revenue is divided to target considerable spending on the Expanded Public Works Programme via conditional provincial infrastructure grants and the municipal infrastructure grants, as well as the new conditional HIV/Aids grant to be administered by provinces as part of the new comprehensive HIV/Aids treatment and care strategy.
In their submissions to the Portfolio Committee on Finance, the Financial and Fiscal Commission highlighted that the number of households living in poverty rose from 28% to 33% between 1995 and 1999, largely driven by the current and growing unemployment crisis.
The consequences of the unemployment crisis can also be seen and, indeed, felt in budgetary terms in the pressure on social grants and on social grant expenditure. When social grant expenditure grows from R10 billion in 1993 to R40 billion projected in 2004, with the highest real growth projected for social welfare, a stark reminder is delivered of what South Africa’s non-negotiable top priority must be: economic growth and job creation. There is, clearly, no greater political challenge and there is equally no more effective means of arresting poverty.
The Division of Revenue Bill takes the first step in rolling out the Expanded Public Works Programme, with a considerable amount of R1,7 billion allocated and targeted at the municipal infrastructure grant.
Clause 11 of the Division of Revenue Bill introduces four new subclauses to facilitate the phasing-in of the Municipal Infrastructure Grant. Clause 11(6) requires municipalities to provide specific details on the implementation of capital budgets as part of a three-year capital plan. Compliance with these provisions will have to be carefully monitored by National Treasury, councils and, indeed, provincial legislatures to ensure that spending on the Expanded Public Works Programme results in economically productive infrastructure.
While the DA believes that the Expanded Public Works Programme has a contribution to make to poverty alleviation in the context of South Africa’s structural skills deficit, it cannot provide long-term sustainable solutions and job creation. While these programmes, if closely monitored, can contribute to addressing the infrastructure backlogs, they will not arrest the unemployment crisis or result in higher economic growth and job creation.
The DA would like to highlight two critical elements that could even hamper the implementation of the Expanded Public Works Programme. Firstly, the implementation of the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act will bring considerable upheaval in the context of limited financial management capacity at local level, which could inhibit the roll-out of public/private partnerships and private sector involvement.
Secondly, at the very time that the Expanded Public Works Programme is being announced, the meddlesome Minister of Public Works is phasing in and implementing a new register for the construction industry. These two factors can, indeed, impede the roll-out of the Expanded Public Works Programme.
When the Minister announced the R2,1 billion additional allocation to fight HIV/Aids, this was obviously welcomed by all in civil society and, indeed, by the Official Opposition. I would like to raise a question on a matter in respect of clause 23(2) of the Division of Revenue Bill and the new HIV/Aids grant allocation. In terms of this provision, the Minister of Health and the Department of Health will have a considerable say in reallocating funding of the new conditional grants to provinces that are spending faster.
Well, this may sound in principle, but there is a concern. According to Annexure E of the Division of Revenue Bill, this will be done taking cognisance of the monitoring framework established by the National Department of Health and the reporting requirements specified by the National Monitoring and Evaluation Framework of the comprehensive treatment plan.
Based on the performance of the Minister of Health in HIV/Aids, the DA can but express the hope that the Minister will not frivolously redirect funds to different provinces. In addition, the DA trusts that the Government will finalise the tender for the antiretroviral drugs before opting to penalise provinces and redirect spending. The DA supports the Division of Revenue Bill.
Dr G G WOODS: Madam Speaker, I don’t intend to dwell on the numbers or the other details of this Bill. Rather, I will talk more generally about the evolution of the Bill as a legislative instrument, because I believe that this far-reaching division of revenue exercise is as deserving of a reflective 10-year assessment as many of the other achievements that we are, these days, acknowledging.
I suppose the most general observation to make is on the seemingly uncontested and methodical production of the Bill each year. I remember back in the mid-1990s, before the first Division of Revenue Bill was produced, attending a number of workshops and conferences and listening to a number of high-ranking international experts making us aware of the complex formula difficulties and of inevitable tensions between levels and components of government resulting from the contestation of funds. We were told that it would take at least 10 to 15 years of technical debate and heated challenges from the lower stratas of government to achieve a division of revenue consensus in our country.
Madam Speaker, despite the production of a highly intricate set of intergovernmental fiscal relations, as can be seen in the Bill before us, there has been relatively no discord between the various governmental components over the gradual development of these arrangements. And I, each year at this particular time, phone the KZN MEC for Finance for his views on the current Bill and each year, in the main, he expresses satisfaction with the collegiate and fair way in which the Bill has been produced.
Moving from process to substance, the content and the structure of the Bill has become increasingly well-considered and businesslike, leaving little room for intergovernmental misunderstandings in its implementation.
I have, however, in recent years, wondered about the growing scope of the Bill and its development beyond the purpose expressed in section 214(1) of the Constitution and even perhaps beyond the Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act of 1997, especially as to the detail of the processes of how moneys are transferred and spent at the lower levels, as well as the responsibility and accountability arrangements in this regard. However, one is very pleased that there has been no challenge to this extended scope put in the Bill as circumstances at provincial and local government level, for now any way, make this scope very necessary.
Further to this wider role of the Bill, I would like to acknowledge a few specific developments: I think the Bill, as an instrument of policy co- ordination across Government, has taken on a very useful position like the emerging prominence of municipal financial considerations; the elimination of unfunded mandates; the improved formula-based and project or conditional grant proportion and the way these have come to increasingly recognise real socioeconomic conditions as they exist on the ground; the extension of financial management considerations and, in particular this year, the introduction of value-for-money requirements. These are all very useful and welcome developments.
We want to acknowledge the strong and effective leadership that the National Treasury has demonstrated, both from the technical perspective and the facilitation of subnational Government participation in the production of this Bill. We support the Bill.
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Madam Speaker, the New NP will support the Bill providing for the revenue payment payable to the various provincial and local governments. The provinces and municipalities are going to play a crucial role in the execution of the Extended Public Works Programme aimed at the empowerment of the unemployed.
This will only be the start of a process to permanently reduce the unacceptably high unemployment rate in South Africa, so crucial for the survival of our young democracy. Billions of rands will be at stake. The Constitution of South Africa requires that factors such as national interest, developmental needs, economic disparities and the fiscal capacity and efficiency of the second and third tiers of government in South Africa be taken into account before payments to the provinces can be enacted.
The media reports continued negligence and financial mismanagement by provinces such as the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. Fingers are pointed at certain councillors for self-enrichment to the detriment of the poor. An example is the Kannaland Municipality in the Western Cape reported on in this morning’s papers. Poor service delivery is still the order of the day in many municipalities. We cannot allow this to continue. After 10 years in Government, inexperience is no excuse anymore. The question is, has any action been taken against any province or any municipality on the grounds of financial mismanagement, inefficiency or corruption and fraud? Will the Minister today undertake to enact the Constitution against people who, through greed and dishonesty, in future maliciously undermine the outcome of job creation programmes such as the Extended Public Works Programme? We will have to improve on delivery to the people. Thank you. [Interjections.]
Mr F C FANKOMO: Madam Speaker, hon members, the Division of Revenue Bill for the year 2004 provides for the equitable division of revenue anticipated to be raised nationally among the national, provincial and local governments and therefore promotes co-operative governance and the principles of intergovernmental relations on budgetary matters as is required by the Constitution. This Bill promotes a culture of predictability and certainty in respect of all allocations to provinces and municipalities.
This allows these governments to plan their budgets over a multiyear period. It promotes transparency, equity and accountability for the use of public resources by ensuring that all transfers are reflected in the budgets of benefiting provinces and municipalities. These are the drastic major policy changes that have taken place since 1999, when the Public Finance Management Act was promulgated.
Interestingly, the Bill correctly fits in with the policy of the ANC of providing a better life for all by way of the national and provincial governments’ transference of assets to municipalities. This goes well with the principle of co-operative governance, which is a constitutional requirement. For this purpose the ANC promises in its manifesto to create 1 million jobs for the poor over the coming five years through a public works programme.
During these years people will be trained to ensure self-sustainability, as opposed to dependency on Government social grants. Government will continue in its fight to roll back the frontiers of poverty and create a better life for all people.
In addition to this there is a serious challenge posed by unemployment. The ANC-led Government will strive to create job opportunities via infrastructure projects, environmental programmes, community-based care programmes and small business/co-operative development.
In the fight against poverty the local government share increases over the next three years by more than R3 billion over the baseline for 2004-05, with an increase of 6%, beginning with R1 billion for 2004-05 and R1,3 billion for 2005-06. There are additional allocations, giving effect to Government’s commitment to fighting poverty and creating job opportunities. These include the provision of free basic service infrastructure development and institution building.
Local government’s share grew from R12,4 billion during the course of last year to R14 billion during the course of this year. Thus the allocation will grow to R17 billion by the end of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework in 2006-07. For the current fiscal year of 2004-05, a total amount of R12,3 billion will be transferred to local government by the national Government. This is subdivided into R7,3 billion for equitable shares and related matters, R4,1 billion for infrastructure and R9 million for current transfers.
In accordance with section 214 of the Constitution the national Government must unconditionally allocate equitable shares to local government. This is growing in significance relative to the conditional grants. Over the past eight years the equitable share to local government grew from R1,5 billion to R9,4 billion, from 1996 to 2004, and rising over the MTEF period for 2004-07. The growth is six times more than the 1995 grant.
This is as a result of the progress made in the consolidation of infrastructure grants at municipal level. However, as a result of the seriousness of the ANC during the current MTEF period, an amount of R12,3 billion has been apportioned for the combating of the HIV/Aids pandemic. This shows that the ANC takes into consideration the concerns and contributions of the country’s citizens.
Over the past eight years the ANC and its Government have been striving to improve systems for the purpose of good governance in all three spheres of government. Therefore the current capacity-building and restructuring grants are allocated at R2,2 billion over the next MTEF period for municipalities.
With regard to the actual concern and dedication of the ANC, the poverty- stricken provinces received a large stake of the national share, unlike rich provinces. For example, Limpopo, the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal received more than 56% of the cake from the national Government. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr A BLAAS: Deputy Speaker, the ACDP can comfortably align itself with the objectives intended by the Division of Revenue Bill. Considering the vast amounts of money transferred to provinces and local government through this division, notice must be taken of the concerns raised by the department in terms of oversight and management.
The complex dynamics driven by this Division of Revenue Bill between the tiers of government puts tremendous pressure on any effort to establish an audit trail to ensure that the money is spent on what it was intended for. Through a network of Acts the Bill tries to define responsibilities and control mechanisms to try to establish such a path. It also indicates what amounts of moneys are allocated for what purposes.
Various reports by the Auditor-General, however, indicate qualifications and, in many cases, the impossibility of being able to report at all. The lack of capacity, the nonexistence of recognised financial systems and procedures and the wrong appropriation of funds are some of the reasons given.
The Constitution determines the distribution of funds. This, by implication, enforces the establishment of the necessary capacity. Funds are dedicated for capacity-building, but progress is not satisfactory. It is suggested that the Department of Finance keep back a portion of the equitable share. This can then be used to strengthen the team in order to evaluate the individual receiving provinces, municipalities and institutions in terms of their capacities and affordability of compliance.
Where necessary, assistance should be given in the implementation of systems, as well as dedicated training. If administration support should be contracted in to ensure financial control on a more affordable basis, it should also be considered. One does not want to infringe on the autonomy of governing bodies, but the responsibility of ensuring responsible spending of revenue must also be accepted by the collecting agent. The ACDP, however, will support the Division of Revenue Bill.
Mr J T MASEKA: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UDM welcomes the increasing share of national revenue that is being awarded to provinces and municipalities. The proportional division among provinces also reflects the greater needs of provinces with large populations of poor people.
The infrastructure development allocations for provinces and municipalities are similarly welcome. However, these welcome provisions do not necessarily translate into delivery on the ground. In far too many cases, especially where it affects mostly poor people, there has been an unacceptably high incidence of roll-overs and underspending. Lack of capacity and mismanagement remain problems that undermine the equitable division of revenue.
The UDM would have liked to see more direct involvement by the national sphere of government in, for instance, infrastructure delivery. This would help to ensure that budgets are transformed into delivery at a better and more responsible pace. Such an approach would also create opportunities to directly enhance and promote capacity at provincial and local levels. The UDM supports the Bill. I thank you.
Mr C AUCAMP: Hon Deputy Speaker, the NA supports the amounts reflected in the Division of Revenue Bill, especially the new provisions for HIV/Aids grants and the amount of R1,7 billion for the Public Works Programme to local governments.
Dis een ding om geld beskikbaar te stel; dis maklik. Die vraag is of die administratiewe en rekenkundige kapasiteit daar is om hierdie geld effektief aan te wend. Daarom steun die NA die bepalings in Deel 6 van hierdie wetsontwerp, wat vereistes stel aan plaaslike owerhede, by gebrek waarvan toegekende fondse teruggehou of selfs weerhou kan word. Ook steun ons veral artikel 26, waarvolgens ‘n stelsel van voogmunisipaliteite in werking gestel word om munisipaliteite by te staan wat oor swak administratiewe kapasiteit beskik.
Die vraag wat die NA aan die Minister wil stel, is dit: Indien sekere munisipaliteite nie oor die kapasiteit, kundigheid en toewyding beskik om fondse wat van die nasionale fiskus kom verantwoordelik aan te wend nie, geld dit nie ook hul bevoegdheid om belastings verantwoordelik te hef en aan te wend nie? Te veel munisipaliteite gebruik gewoon die roete van verhoogde eiendomsbelasting om selfgemaakte tekorte aan te vul.
Die vraag is of die belastingbetaler nie ook dieselfde reg het as die Minister om geld terug te hou indien dit swak aangewend word nie. Die kontrolestelsel oor die onbevoegde munisipaliteite ten opsigte van belastinggeld moet dringend opgeskerp word. Die NA steun die wetgewing oor die verdeling van inkomste. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[It is one thing to make money available; that is easy. The question is whether the administrative and accounting capacity is there for the effective utilisation of this money. Therefore the DA supports the provisions in Part 6 of this Bill, which set conditions for local authorities, failing which allocated funds are held back or even withheld. We also support especially section 26, in accordance with which a system of guardian municipalities are implemented to assist municipalities which have a poor administrative capacity.
The question which the NA wants to ask the Minister is this: If certain municipalities do not have the capacity, competence or dedication to make responsible use of funds coming from the national Treasury, would that not apply to their ability to levy and utilise taxes a responsible way as well? Too many municipalities simply take the route of increased taxation to supplement deficits they themselves have created.
The question is whether the taxpayer does not also have the same right as the Minister to hold back money if it is used irresponsibly. The check system over the incompetent municipalities in respect of tax payments must be urgently improved. The NA supports the legislation on the distribution of income. I thank you.]
Mr M F CASSIM: Hon Deputy Speaker, I have been wanting to say something and now I have the opportunity to do so. Hon Minister of Finance, I think you would like this. One Manuel is good, but two Manuels would be infinitely better. Basically, what I am saying is that all processes have a front end and a back end.
Now, at the front end we have a Trevor Manuel who, by all accounts, is extremely good at his work. He is a great visionary and an extremely competent Minister of Finance; and, so long as we have him at the helm, this country can be assured that we will make great progress. [Applause.] But now that is the story of the one Manuel, the Trevor Manuel.
Now, I have said this previously and I have every reason to repeat that we have total confidence in this Minister of Finance. Now we come to the story of the second Manuel. The second Manuel would be an appendix no 8 to the Division of Revenue Bill, because all of us in this House have spoken about the important need for oversight. But without a formal document of oversight that sets out in detail what needs to be done by whom, when and where, we are merely exercising a wish, rather than putting a programme in front of us which determines how this House and all of us as members of Parliament would give value to this great Minister of Finance by ensuring that that which he does so well at the beginning continues to happen well at all levels, because we have continued to exercise oversight.
So my plea is that we should have two Manuels and, with that, I have great happiness in supporting the Division of Revenue Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr P J RABIE: Madam Speaker, hon Minister and hon members, the South African economy can be divided into a well-developed component with access to credit security for individuals that participate in this economy. These individuals also have a fair, acquired level of skill. The other component of the economy experience a high degree of unemployment, relatively low job security and limited access to credit. Individuals from this component also suffer from unemployment. We also found that they very much depend on Government grants and social networks for their income.
It is estimated that only 4 million South Africans pay taxes. This particular tax gap is of great concern. It is roughly estimated that two to three million South Africans do not pay taxes. This is clearly unacceptable. It is also well known that jobs come at a massive cost. In the Budget the hon Minister outlined the forthcoming Public Works Programme that seeks to provide employment to one million people in the next five years. It is of crucial importance that this programme be implemented in order to alleviate the unacceptable rate of unemployment, which stands at 31%.
During hearings regarding the Budget, an official of Sars mentioned that tax documentation will be simplified. In a submission to the finance committee this morning, a well-known tax lawyer said that our tax system is so complex that, and I use his exact words, ``compliance is hindered by complexity’’. Die belastinggaping kan verminder word indien dokumentasie meer verbruikersvriendelik word. Belastingontduiking strek niemand tot voordeel nie. Armoede is ‘n verskynsel wat die hele wese van die sosio-ekonomiese orde in Suid-Afrika bedreig. In wese beteken die wetsontwerp dat toelaes van die fiskus na drie regeringsfere, naamlik die nasionale, provinsiale en plaaslike regeringsvlak afgewentel word.
Insette en uitsette moet gemoniteer word rakende die kwaliteit van dienslewering. My eerlike mening is dat die proses van die toewysing van toelaes streng op behoefte geskoei moet word en dat veel meer gedoen kan word om die kwaliteit van dienslewering op voetsoolvlak te verbeter. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The tax gap can be reduced if documentation could be made more user- friendly. Tax evasion does not benefit anyone. Poverty is a phenomenon that is threatening the very fibre of the socioeconomic order in South Africa. In essence the Bill means that grants will be passed on by the fiscus to the three government spheres, namely the national, provincial and local government level.
Inputs and outputs must be monitored in regards to the quality of service delivery. My honest opinion is that the process of the allocation of grants must be based strongly on need and that much more should be done to improve the quality of service delivery at grass-roots level.]
The state will not be able to provide adequately for the aged in future. Retirement tax, according to Professor Matthew Lester, took more than R6 billion from the pockets of individual members of retirement funds over the past tax year. Hon Minister, I will not be able to speak on Friday and that is why I am referring to this now.
In your submission to the finance committee, you stated that tax on retirement funds is an extremely complex issue with far-reaching implications. The age profile of the elderly is rising. The interest income of many has declined, coupled with rising medical and other expenses. An urgent appeal is made to set a deadline of 12 months for the task team assigned to investigate the taxes on retirement funds. I thank you.
Mr L M KGWELE: Madam Speaker, hon Minister Manuel, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers and hon members, the African writer and poet, Ben Okri, wisely cautions us when he says, and I quote:
To poison a nation, poison its stories. A demoralised nation tells demoralised stories to itself. Beware of storytellers who are not fully conscious of the importance of their gifts, and who are irresponsible in their application of their art: they could unwittingly help along the psychic destruction of their people.
As we celebrate the first decade of freedom and democracy, the overwhelming majority of our people who had known nothing but despair, deprivation, exploitation and humiliation since time immemorial, know that yesterday they had nothing to hope and live for. Today things are better, but tomorrow things will be even better.
The Division of Revenue Bill, which I rise to support on behalf of the ANC, confirms that contrary to what doomsayers are saying, our first 10 years of freedom have indeed been 10 years of increasingly making resources in the hands of the state available to uplift disadvantaged South Africa. These have been 10 years of expanding opportunities to build a better life for all.
Throughout the years, the ANC led with the slogan, ``Power to the people’’. It waged a determined political and ideological struggle to ensure that, both in theory and in practice, this was not misinterpreted and vulgarised to mean power to the ANC. This position, grounded on a particular understanding of the task of the democratic movement, continues to inform the perspectives of the ANC on the nature of the democratic state. The most important, current defining feature of the South African democratic state, led by the ANC, is that it champions the aspirations of the majority who have been disadvantaged by the many decades of undemocratic rule. Our primary task as the ANC is to work for the emancipation of the black majority, the working people, the urban poor, the rural poor, women, youth and the disabled. The task of our democratic state is to champion the cause of our people in such a way that these basic aspirations of this majority assume a state of hegemony which informs and guides policy and practice of all institutions of Government and state.
Together as a people, we have made great strides in the first decade of freedom and democracy. Despite the challenges that we face, the future is brightening daily, giving us new possibilities. Indeed, yesterday we had nothing to hope or live for, but today things are better, and tomorrow things will be even better. We have created the possibility of releasing more resources for social and economic services while building a modern and competitive economy. Learning from our experiences in the first decade of democracy, we can do better in the second decade.
In your Budget Speech, hon Minister, you correctly identified key challenges facing all delivery programmes to address the problems of the second economy, income poverty, unemployment and social exclusion. As the ANC, we are satisfied that the Expanded Public Works Programme and the expansion of the social net by extending the child support grant to children up to the age of 14 years, skills development and agricultural support redistribution programmes and various other policy initiatives and interventions will benefit, albeit in the short and medium term, those people who are trapped in the second economy.
We call on all our people to take advantage of these measures and opportunities. The announcement of the Expanded Public works Programme ties in well with earlier proposals by the Financial and Fiscal Commission during the 2003 MTBPS hearing and a recommendation by the Joint Budget Committee that capital grants be designed to progressively address infrastructure backlogs.
Se setla thusa go isa ditirelo kwa bathong ba rona le go lwantsha tlala le lehuma tse di aparetseng bontsi ba batho ba rona ba ba tlhokang ditiro. [This will help by taking services to the people and to fight poverty which has engulfed many unemployed people.]
Our goal as the ANC is to create a South Africa in which all can experience an improving quality of life, enjoy equal human rights, with access to the opportunities that freedom has brought us, bound together as a nation by our humanity. As the ANC, we have confidence in our future and call on all our people to join in a people’s contract to create work and fight poverty. As we welcome the comprehensive review of the fiscal framework of provinces and municipalities, we also note that Government has considered all recommendations of the FFC and has either responded favourably to them or has taken them into account in investigating options to address challenges and concerns raised. We appreciate the crucial role that the commission plays in shaping the determination of equitable shares to all spheres of government and take their input and proposals seriously.
We are also satisfied that in order to monitor compliance and implementation, provinces and local governments will now be required to report on the contribution of their equitable share towards economic growth, employment generation, small business development and black economic empowerment; and have this information published on their websites for public scrutiny. The inclusion of development indicators will also assist in the evaluation of the efficacy of the nodal funding to ensure that development objectives are realised and benefit our people.
In conclusion, I wish to remind the DA and its reactionary self-serving alliance, that no amount of negative rhetoric is ever going to convince the masses of our people that they are a demoralised nation. As the ANC, we have confidence in our future and in the masses of our people. We believe that, learning from our experience, we can do more, better.
I wish to reiterate that we South Africans are not a demoralised nation. Together we can and will do more, better, because yesterday we had nothing to hope or live for. Today things are better, but tomorrow things will be even better. Forward to a people’s contract to create work and fight poverty! Power to the people!
Ke a leboga. [Thank you.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I would like to express appreciation to all the parties for supporting the Division of Revenue Bill, 2004. Just one or two issues to clarify for the hon Aucamp.
Is jy by, Cassie? [Are you with us, Cassie?]
Mr C AUCAMP: Ek luister nou. [I am listening now.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: O, dankie. [Oh, thank you.] They raises issues about local authorities. Now the law is the law. You can’t withhold rates and taxes from local authorities. The issue about capacity is that it must be built; and the whole idea of local authorities and the entire structure of the Municipal Systems Act and the Municipal Structures Act is, in fact, that councillors be directly accountable. And unless we deal with those issues and hold councillors accountable, we will fail in that mission. Democracy will be one sphere short. And so in trying to understand this issue - I speak on behalf of the Minister for Provincial and Local Government - it is very important that we ensure that we can hold local authorities accountable.
I think the same applies to the issues that the hon Odendaal raised about the Expanded Public Works Programme. Some work will be done there, and some in the provinces, but it is very important that we are able to have measurable objectives. And our entire system has now evolved to the point where, in the estimates of national expenditure or the 131 pages which hon members received last week, there are measurable objectives.
I accept that the hon Rabie has taken a bit of a detour, because he can’t participate in the debates on Friday, but we must watch these lawyers who talk their own book. We must not convert what they say into indisputable fact.
You know, there was one gentleman who addressed the committee this morning. He had a figure, and he published the figure. He was confident enough to publish the figure on amnesties last week. And I was very surprised. How does he arrive at a figure like that? What kind of abacus does he use? Is it the same one used by opposition parties as they arrive at numbers? It is a curious thing, but it doesn’t make it fact because he said it. So my pleading is just, Doctor, you are older than 12 now. You must be able to see through what this gentleman was saying this morning. He is talking his own book. Thank you very much for supporting the Division of Revenue Bill,
- [Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That concludes the debate. Are there any objections to the Bill being read a second time? No objections. Agreed to. The secretary will read the Bill a second time.
Bill read a second time.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Bill will be referred to the National Council of Provinces for concurrence. The secretary will read the second Order of the day.
DROUGHT RELIEF ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(First Reading debate)
Mr E (Cassim) SALOOJEE: Madam Deputy Speaker, allow me to digress a little in order to illustrate the social context within which the ANC-led Government seeks to introduce the Drought Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill.
It is important to know where we come from, before we can really know where we are heading. There are those in our country today who, for their own reasons, want to forget where we come from; those who want to deny the fact that our country is still suffering as a result of the scourge of apartheid; those who want to tell our people that they were better off under the previous regime and that the strides taken by the ANC-led Government in the past 10 years have done nothing to improve the lives of our people.
Surely South Africa demands better than these doomsayers who want to take us back to a time when the majority of our people lived in conditions of oppression and fear. To these people we want to say it that will take a lot longer than 10 years to erase from memory centuries of deprivation and the dehumanising treatment meted out to the majority of our people. [Interjections.] However, this ANC-led Government is committed to doing just that, and the past decade can bear testimony to our efforts.
There were both resounding successes and some failures, and we say that frankly. Through good planning and hard work our successes have consistently outweighed our failures, and where we have failed we have learned from such mistakes. Our people know where we are, that we are a caring Government which takes care of all South Africans, not just a chosen few.
Despite our ongoing efforts, it is an unfortunate truth that many people in our country continue to live in conditions of extreme poverty, hunger and malnutrition. The ANC-led Government, which is committed to turning the situation around, has put in place many programmes to fulfil this goal.
In order to further address this problem our Government launched the Integrated Food Security and Nutrition Strategy and Programme during July
- A very successful part of the Integrated Food Security and Nutrition Strategy and Programme is a food emergency scheme which is aimed at significantly reducing hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity by 2005. The food emergency scheme also aims to develop comprehensive food production and trade schemes through the establishment of household and communal food gardens, and ensuring that the poorest families have food on the table.
Communities, therefore, empower themselves by developing skills necessary to maintain such communal gardens and by contributing to their own sustenance. The food emergency scheme targets families with little or no income, children, orphans, child-headed households and people living with HIV/Aids, and has assisted over a million of the most vulnerable people since its inception.
The Minister of Social Development announced recently that about 300 000 of the poorest households have thus far been provided with food parcels as part of the scheme. This has had a significant impact on ensuring that the most vulnerable and poor in our country have some sort of food security.
Another important part of the food emergency scheme has been that, whilst beneficiaries have been receiving these food parcels, they have been registered for social grants. Significant numbers of the people who benefited from the distribution of food parcels need not rely on this form of assistance if they receive the social grants to which they are entitled. Many of these beneficiaries are also participating in sustainable poverty relief and income-generating programmes, which allows them to move to positions where they become more self-reliant.
We want our people to move out of what President Mbeki has called the ``Second Economy’,’ where they are continually reliant on informal jobs and social assistance in order to survive, to situations where they can become full participants in our economy.
The Portfolio Committee on Social Development has had first-hand experience of the many successes of our Government’s antipoverty programmes during our various oversight visits and in our constituencies. However, we have also seen that much more can be done to improve the lives of our people.
Despite the undeniable success of the food emergency scheme, we are all aware that our country is currently in a situation where as many as 4 million South Africans are still at risk of food shortages owing to the drought. Our Government has put in place a co-ordinated and integrated drought-mitigation plan, which aims to reduce the impact of the drought by providing emergency relief to vulnerable rural communities; by providing fodder and water to both communal and commercial farmers; and by providing water for human consumption and preventing communicable diseases, with special emphasis on malaria and cholera.
Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the Minister of Finance recently introduced the Drought Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill, which aims to make funds available to provide for further drought relief to the most vulnerable in our country.
The Department of Social Development has been entrusted with the allocation of a further R60m in order to fund emergency relief among vulnerable communities affected by the drought. The department has decided to give our people a one-off cash payment instead of food parcels, which will be distributed with the aid of traditional leaders, faith-based organisations and other NGOs.
It is important that communities assist the Government in ensuring that the right people benefit from this assistance. We ask our people to remember that it is only through partnership in the people’s contract that we can fight all forms of poverty. Our Government intends to pay those households which are hardest hit by the drought a one-off cash payment of at least R900 for survival. The benefit will be available in certain parts of those areas which our President has declared disaster areas.
This benefit will go to significant numbers of people who depend on farming, and will provide immediate relief instead of food parcels and fertiliser packs, which may take a long time to reach our people. The aim of this programme is to make sure that our people have the immediate tools to provide food during this time of drought. Fertiliser packs and other measures do not provide an immediate solution to those people who need food today. The following people will be entitled to apply for emergency drought relief: vulnerable individuals as well as households of poverty-stricken families who are destitute as a result of the drought in certain districts of the affected provinces; those who live in such areas and who have no, or limited, employment and/or income-generating opportunities; farmworkers who have been laid off work due to the persistent drought; persons in farming communities whose livelihoods have been severely affected by the drought; and persons in households who rely directly or indirectly on farming. This programme is another example of the inclusive approach taken by our Government.
We are committed to ensuring that all South Africans who are suffering as a result of this drought benefit from this emergency relief. We will provide the same relief to all eligible people, according to the same criteria; not more benefits to some than to others, based on arbitrary and meaningless distinctions. We all know the consequences of such a practice. We know where we come from, unlike some members on this side of the House.
Of course, there is a very real concern that people could use the money for alcohol and other nonessential items. Our Government is committed to providing relief to our people in this time, but we appeal to people to remember that this is a once-off payment meant to provide immediate relief, and we asks them to use the money responsibly. The people’s contract ask us to work together to fight poverty and corruption.
The people’s contract will not be as successful as it could be if one or both parties do not fulfil the ends of the bargain. This bargain in this instance is that the ANC-led Government is giving our people money during their time of need, and we ask the people to buy food and other necessary items. The purpose of this form of assistance is to ensure that our Government provides crucial humanitarian relief to people affected in order to reduce the serious impact of this drought.
The ANC support this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
An HON MEMBER: Praat! [Speak!]
Mnr A J BOTHA: Wag maar net so bietjie tot my tyd reg is, hoor. [Tussenwerpsels.] Agb Adjunkspeaker, ek verneem dat die agb Hanekom, gewese Minister vir Landbou en Grondsake, waarsku dat die Parlement nie te maklik bystand moet verleen aan boere nie, want hulle kan dan moontlik bederf word en afhanklik raak van dergelike hulp in die toekoms. Nou terwyl mens met die agb Hanekom moet saamstem dat dít moontlik is, is dit verbasend dat ander mense - ander dele van die bevolking - nie aan dieselfde versoeking blootgestel word nie, en mens wonder hoekom die landbou uitgesonder word.
Die ANC glo hoeka dat boere bedorwe, vet hanslammers is wat geleer moet word hoe om aan die agterspeen te suip. In dié verband moet ek sê die ANC is nogal doeltreffend, soos die ondervinding die afgelope 10 jaar geleer het, én soos wat hul planne met grondbelasting en onteiening nou vir ons ‘n voorskou gee. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dis baie waar, my vriend; jy moet maar bietjie lees wat julle doen.
Die DA verwelkom die bykomende geld wat moet help om ‘n landbouramp af te weer, en ons sal dus niks doen om hierdie fondse in gevaar te stel of te vertraag nie, want dít kan op sy beurt net bydra tot die ramp, soos wat die twee-en-‘n-half-jaar vertraging met die hantering van die koueramp in die Drakensberge en die Maluti-hooglande alreeds menselewens tragies, onnodiglik en skandelik verwoes het. Daardie mense kry nou net een kwart van hul skade twee-en-‘n-half jaar te laat, maar netjies in tyd vir die komende verkiesing.
Vir ramphulp om doelgerig en van waarde te wees, moet dit sinvol en tydig aangewend word, dáár waar dit ‘n verskil kan maak. In hierdie opsig het die ANC-regering tragies nog niks geleer nie. Die hulppakket aan veeboere word byvoorbeeld beperk tot net 30 grootvee. ‘n Kommersiële boer - dit is nou een wat boer vir die mark sodat al dié lede wat vandag hier in die Parlement sit, vleis op die tafel kan hê wanneer hulle gaan aansit vir ete
- kan nie ‘n bestaan maak met 30 grootvee nie; dis bykans onmoontlik. ‘n Paar honderd is nodig vir dié boer om selfstandig te raak en homself in staat te stel om droogtes en ander rampe te oorleef wanneer hulle kom. Kommersiële veeboere is dus vir alle praktiese doeleindes uitgesluit van hierdie hulp. Agb Adjunkspeaker, Suid-Afrika verdien definitief beter as dít.
Verantwoordelike regerings stel tereg belang in die ontwikkeling van besproeiing en die bou van damme en besproeiingskemas om te help met die daarstel van voedselsekuriteit vir die land. Wanneer so ‘n dam, soos bv die Allemanskraaldam in die middel van die Vrystaat, begin opdroog - soos wat nóú die geval is - en Minister Kasrils die besproeiingswater summier afsny in die middel van die seisoen, dan is dit ‘n ramp, want daardie nedersetters se gesaaides, wat heeltemal afhanklik is van besproeiingswater, gaan tot niet op die land. Ook vir hierdie kommersiële boere word geen ramphulp beplan nie, Minister.
‘n Mens kan dus verstaan met hoeveel vreugde en dankbaarheid hierdie boere verneem het dat die Departement van Maatskaplike Ontwikkeling wel hulp aanbied vir hul werknemers wat vanselfsprekend nou die gevaar loop om werkloos te raak.
U kan uself dus indink met watter skok hierdie mense toe moes verneem dat dit hoegenaamd nie die plan is nie. Nee, dit is nie net vir die werkers wat die gevaar loop om hul werk te verloor as gevolg van die droogte waarvoor dié hulp aangebied word nie, maar alle plaaswerkers in alle droogte- verklaarde distrikte word ywerig aangemoedig om aansoek te doen om R900 elk vir droogte-ramphulp, òf hulle nou hoegenaamd ly onder die droogte òf nie.
Die agb lede moet nou baie mooi verstaan, hierdie Regering wat hier sit sê vir mense wat voltyds in diens is, én wat ‘n volle salaris ontvang dat hulle moet kom sodat die Regering vir hulle ‘n pasella kan gee net vóór die verkiesing. Mens wonder wat die ander mense wat hier buite op die vlakte en in ander townships bly, wat nie werk het nie en nie ‘n inkomste het nie, dink van dié plannetjie waaroor jy so lekker daarso skrou. Gaan vertel hulle van dié plan; praat die waarheid.
Hierdie ANC-lede wat hier sit, en hul Nuwe NP-bondgenote, moenie sê hulle weet nie van hierdie ongerymdhede nie, want ons het hulle, by name - en by name, adjunkminister Du Toit - net 12 dae gelede ingelig hieroor en uitgedaag om dit stop te sit. Hy en al die ANC-lede en hul bondgenote wat hier sit, bly egter tjoepstil soos muise. En hoekom bly hulle tjoepstil? Dit is dan juis hul plan om ander mense se geld só te misbruik tot hul eie voordeel, en as dit nie so is nie, praat daarteen en sê vir ons wat die waarheid is. Suid-Afrika verdien beter as dít.
Is dít die kontrak? Kom sê jy vir ons, is dít die kontrak waarvan die ANC
en julle praat, wat julle met die mense wil sluit? Is die gedagte dat dié
geld soos manna uit die Presidensiële vliegtuig afgegooi gaan word vir die
mense om dit te ontvang sodat hulle kan glo dat hulle daarom vir die ANC
moet gaan stem, én vir julle, by name, deur vir die ANC te stem? Ek het vir
julle nuus, en dit is dat baie minder mense dié kontrak by die stembus gaan
teken as wat die ANC dink. Die rede hiervoor … [Tussenwerpsels.] Julle
kan maar wag, die dag kom nader. Die rede hiervoor is baie eenvoudig: hulle
is moeg van leë beloftes, hulle is moeg van ANC-bogstories wat vir hulle
vertel hoe lekker hulle lewe, want hulle lewe nie lekker nie, Meneer; hulle
sit en krepeer daar op die kant, hulle krepeer dáár in Soweto waar hulle
moet kyk na ‘n billboard'', so groot soos die Arabella-hotel hieronder by
die Waterkant, waarop jou leier se gesig pryk à la Saddam Hoessein, en dan
wonder hulle:Waar kom die geld vir daardie ding vandaan?’’, terwyl julle
nie geld vir hulle het nie, maar geld het om vir mense te gee om vir julle
te stem. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Die mense gaan nie dié kontrak onderteken nie, want hulle weet dat dié pasellas gesteelde geld is. Dit is gesteelde geld, Meneer, en as dit anders is, verduidelik vandag vir ons hier hoekom dit anders is. Dit is gesteelde geld in die eerste plek, want die geld van die belastingbetaler word wanaangewend. Dit is gesteel in die tweede plek, want dit word gesteel by die werklike hulpbehoewendes, soos die bestaansboere wat as gevolg van dié droogte geen oes of geen kos gaan hê tot ten minste volgende jaar nie.
Dié negehonderd rand wat so lekker misbruik word om stemme te koop, behoort aan daardie mense en mense soos hulle, wat dit nodig het om kos te koop vir hul families tot ten minste volgende jaar wanneer daar hopelik weer ‘n oes gaan wees. Negehonderd rand vir drie maande gaan nie daardie kos koop nie. Agb Alie jy weet blykbaar nie waarvan jy praat nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Jy sal nog die alie sien vir ‘n tweede maal.
Die DA steun die toekenning van addisionele fondse vir die ramp, maar ons sal elke moontlike middel gebruik om die wanaanwending daarvan te stop, wat die kommersiële landbou - en dis die oorgrote deel van die landbou in dié land - totaal uitsluit, soos wat ek hier verduidelik het. En dié van julle wat sit en skrou, weet nie daarvan nie, julle weet nie waarvan julle praat nie en julle gee nie om nie, want julle dink die kommersiële boere is net 50 000. [Tussenwerpsels.] Jy weet nie waarvan jy praat nie, Meneer, jy eet net die kos, want jy kan dit nie maak nie. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Jy probeer al die laaste tien jaar om boere te vestig. Julle het nog nie een honderd suksesvolle boere gevestig nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Julle kan maklik mense maak, maar julle sal nou leer dit is baie moeiliker om ‘n boer te maak. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ons sal dus alles in ons vermoë aanwend om julle te stop om hierdie geld te steel en stemme daarmee te koop. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek dank die agb Adjunkspeaker. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr A J BOTHA: Listen, just wait a bit until my time starts, you hear. [Interjections.] Hon Deputy Speaker, I understand that the hon Hanekom, former Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, has warned that Parliament should not render assistance to farmers too readily, because they could then become spoilt and dependent on such assistance in the future. Now while one has to agree with the hon Hanekom that that is possible, it is surprising that other people - other sectors of the population - are not exposed to the same temptation, and one wonders why the agricultural sector is being singled out.
The ANC already believes that farmers are spoilt, fat hand-fed lambs that must be taught to take the hindmost teat. In this regard, I must say that the ANC is rather effective, as experience has taught us during the past 10 years, and as their plans with regard to land tax and expropriation are now giving us a preview of. [Interjections.] It is very true, my friend; you should read about what you are doing.
The DA welcomes the additional money that has to assist in avert an agricultural disaster, and we will therefore not do anything to jeopardise or delay these funds, as this in turn can only contribute to the disaster, in the same way as the two-and-a-half-year delay in the handling of the disaster when it snowed in the Drakensberg and the Maluti highlands has already tragically, unnecessarily and disgracefully destroyed people’s lives. Those people are now only receiving compensation for a quarter of their losses two and a half years too late, but perfectly in time for the forthcoming election.
In order for disaster relief to be effective and of value, it has to be implemented meaningfully and timeously, right where it can make a difference. In this regard, tragically, the ANC Government has learned nothing. For example, the relief package to cattle farmers is limited to only 30 head of cattle. A commercial farmer - that is a farmer who farms for the market so that all these members sitting here in Parliament today can have meat on the table when they sit down to a meal - cannot make a living with 30 head of cattle; it is virtually impossible. A few hundred are needed in order for the farmer to be self-sufficient and to be in a position to survive droughts and other disasters when they happen. Commercial cattle farmers are therefore, for all practical purposes, excluded from this relief. Hon Deputy Speaker, South Africa certainly deserves better than that.
Responsible governments rightly take an interest in the development of irrigation and the building of dams and irrigation schemes to assist in the achievement of food security for the country. When such a dam, for example the Allemanskraal Dam in the middle of the Free State, begins to dry up - as is now the case - and Minister Kasrils summarily cuts off the irrigation water in the middle of the season, it is a disaster; because the standing crops of those who are settled there which are entirely dependent on irrigation water are destroyed on the ground. For these commercial farmers no disaster relief is planned either, Minister.
One can therefore understand with what joy and gratitude these farmers learned that the Department of Social Development did in fact offer assistance to their employees who now clearly run the risk of becoming unemployed.
You can therefore imagine the shock when these people then had to learn that that was not the plan at all. No, this assistance is not being offered only to those workers who run the risk of losing their jobs as a result of the drought; rather, all farmworkers in all drought-ravaged districts are enthusiastically being encouraged to apply for R900 each for drought relief, whether they are suffering at all as a result of the drought, or not.
Hon members must understand clearly that this Government sitting here is telling people who are permanently employed and who receive a full salary that they must come so that the Government can give them a present just before the election. One wonders what the other people who live out there on the flats and in other townships, and who do not have work or an income, think of this little plan you are taking so much pleasure in advocating there. Go and tell them about this plan; tell the truth.
These ANC members sitting here, and their New NP allies, must not say they are not aware of these irregularities, because just 12 days ago we informed them by name - and Deputy Minister Du Toit specifically - about this and challenged them to put a stop to it. However, he and all the ANC members and their allies sitting here are as quiet as mice. And why are they as quiet as mice? It is, after all, precisely their plan to misuse other people’s money to their own advantage, and if that is not the case, speak out about it and tell us what the truth is. South Africa deserves better than this.
Is this the contract? Tell us, is this the contract that you and the ANC talk about, that you want to conclude with the people? Is the idea that this money will be thrown from the presidential aeroplane like manna for the people to receive, so that they can believe that for that reason they should vote for the ANC, and for you, specifically, by voting for the ANC? I have news for you, and that is that far fewer people are going to sign this contract at the polls than the ANC thinks. The reason for thisà [Interjections.] Just wait, the day is coming. The reason for this is very simple: They are tired of empty promises; they are tired of ANC nonsense telling them how well they are living, because they are not living well, sir, they are wasting away on the sideline. They are wasting away in Soweto where they have to look at a billboard as large as the Arabella hotel at the Waterfront down here, on which your leader’s face appears á la Saddam Hussein, and then they wonder: ``Where does the money come from for that thing?’’, while you do not have money for them, but you do have money to give to people to vote for you. [Interjections.]
The people are not going to sign this contract, because they know that these presents are stolen money. It is stolen money, sir, and if that is not the case, explain to us here today why that is not the case. It is stolen money, in the first place, because taxpayers’ money is being misused. It is stolen, in the second place, because it is being stolen from those who are truly needy, such as the subsistence farmers who are not going to have any crops or any food until at least next year because of this drought.
These amounts of nine hundred rand that are being freely misused to buy votes, belong to those people and people like them, who need it to buy food for their families until at least next year, when one hopes there will once again be a crop. Nine hundred rand for three months will not buy that food, hon Alie. Apparently you don’t know what you are talking about. [Interjections.] ``Jy sal nog die alie sien vir ‘n tweede maal.’’ [You will come up short again.]
The DA supports the allocation of additional funds for the disaster, but we will utilise every possible means to stop the misuse of those funds, which, as I have explained here, totally excludes commercial agriculture - and that is by far the greater portion of agriculture in this country. And those of you who sit and hoot, do not know about it, you do not know what you are talking about and you do not care, because you think the commercial farmers only number 50 000. [Interjections.] You do not know what you are talking about, sir, you merely eat the food, because you cannot make it. [Interjections.]
You have been trying to establish farmers for the past 10 years. You have not yet established a hundred successful farmers. [Interjections.] It is easy to make people, but you will now learn that it is far more difficult to make a farmer. [Interjections.] We will therefore do everything in our power to stop you stealing this money and using it to buy votes. [Interjections.] I thank the hon Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I now call the hon Joubert who will be making his maiden speech.
Mr L K JOUBERT: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon members, it is a great privilege and honour for me to address this House for the first time. I express my thanks and appreciation to the president of the IFP, the hon Dr M G Buthelezi, for the trust put in me. Thank you.
Water is the blood of Mother Earth and there is nothing that can survive without water. Unfortunately, water is a scarce commodity in South Africa and drought conditions are the rule rather than the exception.
In the past, we had the so-called great droughts of 1864, 1903, 1916, 1933, 1964-66 and 1983, which affected large areas of our country and left permanent scars on agriculture and rural society. From time immemorial, some parts of the country have experienced constant droughts and only very rarely has the entire country been free of drought in any particular year.
I therefore avail myself of this opportunity to salute the farmers of South Africa who continue to supply food under these adverse conditions; who continue to have faith to plant, even sometimes in dry soil; who continue to have faith to put the ram to the ewes not knowing what pastures will be like five months later; and who continue to put the bull to the cows not knowing what grazing conditions will be like nine months later.
This House has done much for drought relief in the past and the first Drought Stress Relief Act was passed as far back as in 1916. I am proud to state that my great-grandfather, the hon George Kolbe, South African Party member for the constituency of Wakkerstroom, where I hail from, was one of the active supporters of the 1916 Act. It is therefore a great honour and privilege for me to support this Bill on behalf of the IFP.
However, as drought conditions are the rule rather than the exception, more preventive action should be taken. The obvious preventive action is to conserve more water. Much has already been done in this regard and, excluding the Lesotho Highlands project, there are 143 public dams in the country with a total storage capacity of 30 billion cubic metres. But this is not near the potential we have, and it is my submission that where a dam can be built in this country, it should be built. Like the electricity network we have, I envisage a pipeline system covering the whole country to bring drought relief where and when needed.
The fact that we are a drought-stricken country is not necessarily a deterrent. It has been said that the ideal place to farm is a desert, provided you can supply enough water, as has been proven by some Middle- Eastern countries.
If we can lay a pipeline from Durban to Johannesburg for oil or from Mozambique to Secunda for gas, surely we can do the same with water by establishing a water pipeline grid over the whole country. In the past, people trekked to greener pastures when drought struck. This is no longer possible, but instead we can bring the water to people when and where needed. I thank you. [Applause.]
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Mevrou die Adjunkspeaker, dit is vir my ‘n aangename voorreg om die nuwe lid, mnr L K Joubert van die IVP geluk te wens met sy nuwelingstoespraak wat hy vanmiddag hier in die Raad gelewer het. Ek weet nie of hy dalk ‘n rekord opstel vir die lid wat die kortste termyn in die Parlement gedien het nie, maar indien hy toekomsplanne het met sy parlementêre loopbaan, wens ons hom baie sterkte daarmee toe.
Wat het die agb lid mnr Andries Botha vanmiddag vir Suid-Afrika se kommersiële boere gedoen? Hy het van hulle vyande van die Regering van die dag gemaak. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dit is wat hy vanmiddag vir die kommersiële boere gedoen het. Kyk hoe lyk die Minister van Finansies. Die Minister van Finansies is nie baie gelukkig met hierdie skree-en-skel-tegniek of styl waarmee die DA hierdie sake aanpak nie. Dieselfde het gebeur met munisipale belastings op landbougrond. ‘n Geskree en geskel op die Regering het absoluut niks bygedra tot die verligting van die dilemma waarin die boere hulle bevind het nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.]
Dit is die Nuwe NP en sy leier, mnr Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, wat die Minister van Provinsiale Sake en Plaaslike Regering gaan spreek het, en ons het met hom ‘n ding uitgewerk. Die wet is verlede week deur hierdie Parlement gevoer. Die Suid-Afrikaanse Landbou Unie, namens die boere van Suid-Afrika, is heeltemal tevrede met dit wat bereik is, en ons sê baie dankie vir die Regering dat hulle ingestem het om met ons te praat. [Tussenwerpsels.] Maar u bereik absoluut niks. U beduiwel die saak van die kommersiële boere in Suid-Afrika met die styl wat u vanmiddag weer gevolg het, en dit is wat vorentoe sal gebeur.
Hierdie droogtehulp is noodsaaklik. Dit maak voorsiening vir die verskaffing van drinkwater aan mens en dier, en ook vir die aankoop van veevoer gedurende die knellende droogte. Dit maak verder voorsiening vir sekere addisionele mediese en maatskaplike dienste aan kwesbare gemeenskappe in ons land wat baie hard deur die droogte gekwes word.
Die probleem, soos u uitgewys het, is dat die hulp egter beperk word tot 30 beeste per boer. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dit sal beteken dat die hulp egter beperk word tot 30 beeste per boer. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Dr W A ODENDAAL: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is a great privilege for me to congratulate the new member, Mr L K Joubert of the IFP on his maiden speech, which he made here in the Council this afternoon. I do not know whether he has perhaps not set a record for the member who served the shortest term in Parliament, but if he has future plans for his parliamentary career, we wish him everything of the best.
What did the hon member Mr Andries Botha do for South Africa’s commercial farmers this afternoon? He has made them enemies of the Government of the day. [Interjections.] That is what he has done for commercial farmers this afternoon. Just look at the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance is not very happy with this shouting and screaming technique or style that the DA employs to deal with these matters. The same happened with municipal tax on agricultural land. Shouting and screaming at the Government did not contribute anything to relieve the dilemma in which the farmers found themselves. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
It is the New NP and its leader, Mr Marthinus van Schalkwyk, who met the Minister for Provincial and Local Government, and together we worked something out. That Act was passed by this Parliament last week. The South African Agricultural Union, on behalf of the farmers of South Africa, is completely satisfied with what has been achieved and we would like to say thank you very much to the Government for agreeing to talk to us. [Interjections.] But you are achieving absolutely nothing. You are bedevilling the cause of commercial farmers in South Africa with the style that you once again followed this afternoon, and that is what will happen in future.
This drought relief is essential. It provides for the provision of drinking water to humans and animals, as well as for purchasing fodder during the oppressive drought. It further provides for certain additional medical and social services to vulnerable communities in our country that are being hit very hard by the drought.
The problem, as you pointed out, is that the aid will be restricted to 30 head of cattle per farmer, however. [Interjections.] This will mean, however, that the aid will be restricted to 30 head of cattle per farmer.]
Mnr A J BOTHA: Is dit ‘n probleem? [is that a problem?]
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Dit beteken dit sal noodsaaklike verligting bring aan kleinboere. [This means that it would bring urgent relief to small farmers.]
Mnr A J BOTHA: Is dit ‘n probleem vir jou? [Is that a problem for you?]
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Maar, dit stuur ‘n nare boodskap deur aan die kommersiële boeregemeenskap. My styl om dit aan te spreek is heeltemal anders as joune, Andries Botha! [Tussenwerpsels.] Jy dien nie die belange van die boere in Suid-Afrika nie. Jy beduiwel die saak van kommersiële boere in Suid-Afrika. [Applous.]
Kommersiële boere, geagte Minister, is ook maar net soos bestaansboere of kleinboere. Hulle is afhanklik van die natuur, en as die natuur jou hard slaan en die 30 beeste wat jy besit vrek van die droogte, dan is jy in die sop. As jy ‘n honderd beeste besit en die droogte slaan jou hard en al honderd van jou beeste vrek, is jy in die sop. Dit is maar dieselfde probleem wat jy het. Dit is so dat die landbougemeenskap hierdie maatreëls wat getref word, verkeerd sal beleef. Dit is so dat hulle sal dink dat hulle deur hierdie Regering nie gesien word synde ‘n belangrike bydra in Suid-Afrika te lewer nie.
Ek weet mos dat almal van ons om voedselsekuriteit in hierdie land te verseker … (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[But it sends out an unfavourable message to the commercial farming community. My style of addressing this issue differs completely from yours, Andries Botha! [Interjections.] You are not serving the interests of farmers in South Africa. You are obstructing the cause of commercial farmers in South Africa. [Applause.]
Commercial farmers, hon Minister, are precisely the same as subsistence farmers or small farmers. They are dependent on nature, and when nature hits you hard and the 30 head of cattle that you own die because of the drought, then you are in trouble. If you own one hundred head of cattle and drought hits you hard and all one hundred of your cattle die, then you are in trouble. It is the same problem that you have. It is a fact that the agricultural community will experience these measures that are being taken in the wrong way. It is so that they will think that they are not seen by this Government as making an important contribution in South Africa.
I know indeed that in order to ensure food security in this country all of us …]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, your time has expired.
Dr W A ODENDAAL: Ek dank u. [Applous.] [I thank you.] [Applause.]]
Mr A BLAAS: Deputy Speaker, one cannot object to any form of relief given to the people affected by the drought. For this reason, the ACDP will support the principle of the Bill. The ad hoc manner in which this Bill is presented to the House, however, does not do justice to the lawmaking process. It has, undoubtedly, a ring of election opportunism attached to it.
As indicated, it allows for an additional R250 million to be made available for drought relief, bringing the total drought mitigation to R625,1 million. The concern is that uncertainty exists as to what the long- term objectives of the relief measures will be.
An additional R60 million is made available to the Department of Social Development to fund emergency relief to vulnerable communities. One would have expected that this would have been focused on people who have lost their jobs as a result of the drought. It may be the case that people may now still be employed and qualify for this social grant. How will it be ensured that people do not receive double benefits, while other people lose out completely? If farmers are forced off their land this will necessarily result in job losses.
An additional R30 million is made available to provide fodder for livestock. To what extent will this ensure sustainable breeding stock for future supply? The anticipated preventative steps against diseases must be supported as well as the long-term investment in safeguarding boreholes.
One cannot object to any form of relief given to people affected by the drought. This Bill, unfortunately, is short-term focused, with hardly any attention given to the long-term consequences of the drought. We express our sincere compassion for everybody who is affected by the drought and pray that the much-needed rain will still fall to relieve the difficulty and suffering. Thank you.
Ms N C NKABINDE: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the full extent of the drought across large parts of the country is, in all likelihood, only going to make itself felt in the coming months. Therefore, it is wise that we should respond to this looming crisis pre-emptively. Already the drought is threatening the livelihoods and food security of many farmworkers and the rural poor.
There is therefore no doubt about the correctness of taking this relief measure. The UDM would, however, express concern about the method of applying this relief. We are in concurrence with the Sowetan newspaper editorial of yesterday in which the view was expressed that it would perhaps be better to provide relief in the form of food vouchers, as opposed to direct cash payouts. There is simply no guarantee that the cash will be spent on addressing household food security, which is what we intend this relief for.
Another matter that we have to raise is the preparedness of Government to deal with the drought should current weather conditions persist. Whilst the current drought relief should address current problems to some extent, it remains an ad hoc measure.
There is simply no guarantee that the drought will not deepen, especially with the dry season upon us. We would urge the National Treasury and relevant line-function departments to develop adequate long-term plans to cope with reduced agricultural production, water scarcity and greater rural poverty and hunger. The UDM supports the Bill. I thank you.
Mr M F CASSIM: Madam Deputy Speaker, as I was a small-scale farmer growing subtropical fruit, I know exactly how devastating it is when the rain stays away. Therefore the need to have a Government programme in support of drought mitigation is something that all of us can indeed heartily support. However, as the hon Blaas pointed out, we also need to look at the long- term effects of the drought. The fact that because of climatic changes we are going to get droughts on a more regular basis, and also floods on a more regular basis, indeed means that we have to take a long-term view of supporting our farmers.
Hon Minister, I think one of the most overlooked aspects - and I say this to the Minister of Agriculture who is here too - is the need to look at shade-cloth farming. In a country that is as water-shy as South Africa, we are missing out on a great opportunity in not investigating the possibility of subsidising small farmers with shade cloth. This is the way in which we can make the limited water resources in our country go very far indeed.
Also, we need to look at the opportunities that Ecosan offers, in which we take the system of sanitation and also link it to food production. This is something that has been done very successfully and it is obvious that in South Africa, facing future droughts and facing food shortages, we need to look at this.
So, I would like to make an appeal that we please look very deeply into the question of shade-cloth farming, because this is one way in which with a plot as small as 5 square metres we can guarantee that a family of five can be adequately fed and raised. That’s how my father raised us - with a very small garden - and I can appreciate the value of that in a country where a food shortage is still a problem. Thank you.
Mr D A HANEKOM: Madam Deputy Speaker, Minister Manuel, Minister Didiza and hon members, although we are dealing with the Drought Relief Adjustments Appropriation Bill, I would like to locate it in the context of the overall Budget, because this particular money that we are voting on now is an additional amount - I think Minister Manuel may explain that. It is an additional amount of money allocated in 2003-04 for that particular Budget. I will concentrate on the agricultural part of it and the provision of water for mainly human consumption.
This amount of money - R250 million - has been divided into various parts. Thirty five million rand is going towards primarily malaria and cholera control. It is going to the Department of Health. Sixty million rand will go to the Department of Social Development as we have already heard from the hon member Saloojee. An amount of R60 million is going to vulnerable communities. Thirty million rand of this money will go to agriculture mainly for fodder for livestock; and R125 million goes to the Department of Water Affairs mainly for water for human consumption.
Now the R30 million that goes to agriculture is not all the money that is being spent on agriculture. The way I read it is that a total - I think Minister Didiza might help us here - of R220 million has been allocated to support farmers in the context of this current drought. So it is much more than the R30 million that appears in this particular Adjustments Appropriation Bill.
The reality of drought is that it hits hard and it hits certain areas harder than others and it hurts. I think it is necessary to say that this allocation is another reflection of the fact that the ANC-led Government is a caring government.
Most of this money goes directly to vulnerable communities and to water provision for human consumption. Most of this Budget goes to poor people. It does raise certain policy questions though, Minister, and I think we need to apply our minds to these matters in an ongoing way. Some of the policy issues relate to drought relief and in particular money going to farmers during periods of drought for drought relief. What we have to consider is that South Africa is a drought-prone country. Drought is part of our normal climatic cycle and it will occur periodically.
Clearly, livestock farmers are affected in areas that get less than their normal rainfall and that will always be the case. The policy question is: What is the difference between the needs of a livestock farmer who has to buy in fodder during a drought year and a fruit farmer, for example, who loses his entire crop through hail damage? Is there relief for that fruit farmer who has suffered hail damage or a poultry farmer who loses all her chickens because of an outbreak of Newcastle disease? Is there going to be relief for that poultry farmer or, for that matter, for a livestock farmer who experiences a devastating veld fire which not only happens during times of drought - it can happen at any time. These are some of the policy questions that arise.
The question, of course, Minister Manuel, is where does it stop? So we have to think about these things very carefully. However, we welcome these initiatives and in particular some of the work done by the Department of Agriculture and some of their interventions. I think they are very important in particular where we have good information going to farmers. We have good weather forecasts and it is up to farmers to make use of this information. I think this has been improving systematically as years have gone by. Livestock farmers were in fact advised by the Department of Agriculture to reduce their livestock, especially in these areas where drought and dry conditions were predicted. However, not everybody heeded this warning. I think the important message here is that farmers should plan carefully, heed the warnings, heed the good advice and listen to the information.
The other thing that I think we really would welcome, Minister Didiza, from an agricultural point of view, is the move towards the Agricultural Risk Insurance Bill, which is an initiative from your department. That is very important. Crop farmers were also warned in certain areas that they should be careful; and of course some people did proceed to plant and incurred all of the expenses that go along with that and then did not get a crop. I think it’s very important for farmers to listen to the good information and to reduce their risk by planning very carefully and listening to the good advice that is available.
Obviously, when it comes to supporting vulnerable people, some of the same questions arise as, of course, people are affected in these drought- stricken areas, but while we are talking there are hungry people in other areas as well. The question will always arise, once you make a one-off payment available to some areas, what about the hungry people in other areas? Those questions are very important, Minister.
Now, regarding the issue of water, there is no question about the fact that these things have to be done anyway. The R125 million or the R100 million that is being allocated for emergency water supply, I think is very important. It is part of ongoing work. We should take note of the fact that the prediction at the moment is that this drought is unlikely to be substantially broken, although it’s raining well in many parts of the country. We welcome that. But again, as I have said before, I am going to situate this in the context of the overall Budget.
Now, Trevor, I do not want to be a praise singer. You know that your praises have been sung by many people. I am not going to add to that, but I must say that this Budget, the 2004-05 Budget, comes at quite a difficult time. Revenue is down from what was expected and yet expenditure continues to go up, especially social expenditure. I think this is a good-news Budget and I think it is a remarkable achievement. Yes, the deficit is up slightly, but in real terms it is much lower than the earlier deficits that you were dealing with. The amount of money that we spend on servicing the debt has gone down dramatically. So the good news is that here we have Minister Manuel, not just the good Minister Manuel, but a Minister Manuel carrying out ANC policy. Our country’s economy is on a sound footing. [Applause.]
In the few minutes I have left, we need to reflect on what have been quite extraordinary achievements over the past ten years. Ninety five percent of our young children today are in primary schools. Poor children all over the country are getting some nutritious food every day. This is a remarkable achievement. [Applause.]
About 7,5 million people today are receiving social grants and the figure continues to rise. As you know, in this Budget Minister Manuel announced a R40 increase in the social grants, the disability grant and the old-age pension. That’s a remarkable achievement and it will continue to rise. And why? This is happening in a difficult year. Why we can say with confidence that it will continue to rise is simply because we have a well-managed economy. We know that the money will be available in years to come.
Minister, we can say that with absolute certainty and absolute confidence. Minister, you could have taken the easy route in earlier years and spent more money, but that route was resisted. I know you came under attack and received a lot of criticism, but I think you have proved that you have considered these matters very carefully because today, in a difficult year, we can spend more to improve the lives of poor people and in years to come even more. We have a well-managed economy and when we celebrate 10 years of democracy and freedom we also celebrate 10 years of considerable achievement.
We are also acutely aware of the massive challenges in front of us, but the good news is that plans are in place, the economy is sound and much more can and will be done in the next 10 years. We can say that with confidence because the economy is growing, the deficit is low, revenue collection is sufficient and we can do it. ``Trevor Ché Manuel’’, The Mail and Guardian called him. Well, I would not go that far, neither would Jeremy, he tells me. I do not think you would even say that yourself. Clever Trevor, is what I would call him; just Clever Trevor. But Comrade Trevor, what you have shown is good leadership over a long period of time. The pieces are in place and you have a fantastic team. If you move to greener pastures or other pastures - we read in the newspapers that this might happen one day and it will happen one day; we all will, even if we don’t know as we sit here today what our pastures are going to be in a few months time - the thing here, Minister Didiza, is that there is nothing to be worried about because the pieces are in place. There is a good team and we can be confident, and that is a sign of good leadership … [Interjections] … that is why we should probably vote for the ANC. I think it sounds like a good idea. [Applause.] That sounds like a good idea.
I would like to say, Comrade Trevor, that you also have outstanding people from the committees who have given you good support. And, let me add, not a popular thing to say amongst the masses today, who don’t really like some of the opposition parties, that some of the opposition representatives in the committee have really contributed well. One of them gives you a really hard time, but I think … [Interjections] …
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: It’s okay.
Mr D A HANEKOM: She’s fine. You know people like Raenette Taljaard over there have made a really good contribution. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, your time has expired. [Applause.]
Mr D A HANEKOM: That’s a pity, but thanks very much. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson and hon members, let me again express appreciation for the support for the Bill, but also deal with a few issues. The first of those is to highlight the point that the hon Hanekom made, and that is that South Africa is drought prone. And this will shape the agricultural sector for all time. There would be times that are worse and times that are less bad, but that we live in a drought prone area cannot be in dispute and the approach that we, therefore take to businesses like agriculture become quite important.
In many respects the changes introduced since 1994 have been about recognising that agriculture is a business, that what parts of the world are doing in support of the agricultural sector by way of subsidies is wrong and that Government must exercise choice and in exercising choice, we would not stand there to support farmers in all circumstances. But clearly, within the context and circumstances of severe drought or severe floods, we would have to look at it. That’s why we are dealing with this, not as an election ploy, but because the drought is exceedingly severe.
We said that we would examine this matter going forward and that we would
look at the contingency reserves in the new fiscal year and evaluate
against that. Now, the hon member for Orania, Botha, his mind, his body,
his soul, is in the past. He wants a koffieraad'', aCremora-raad’’ and
a ``mielieraad’’, but we are not going to run agriculture like that.
[Interjections.] We are not going to run agriculture like that. Farmers
will stand essentially on their own feet. They have done remarkably well
over the past decade. We will deal with the issues when times are severe,
and that is going to be the approach. When eventually, maybe in the next
century or so, the hon Botha represents a party that comes into government,
they can change the policy. But I think we must not mislead people. We must
say to all South Africans that this will be the approach of Government that
is there after 14 April and they should not delude themselves.
The issue that the hon Botha can’t understand, because he is so deeply in the past, is that in negotiations with AgriSA the position of farmworkers was taken into account with the full agreement of farmers. So you don’t only help the farmers, but you recognise the hardship of farmworkers who have nothing, absolutely nothing, and that’s a change, and it is a significant change.
I hope that one day the hon Botha, instead of shouting, will become a democrat, stop being a fool, join us in the new South Africa and recognise that farmworkers are as important as farmers. [Applause.]
In conclusion I would like to join the other … [Interjections.]
Daar is nie ‘n vraag nie. Die enigste vraag is dit … [There is no question. The only question is that …]
Mr A J BOTHA: Jy kan hom nie antwoord nie. [You cannot answer my question.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Daar is nie ‘n vraag nie. [There is no question.] I wanted to say that I agree with hon Hanekom, that the hon Taljaard is not so bad. [Applause.]
Debate concluded. Bill read a first time.
DROUGHT RELIEF ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-NINTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - MARKET THEATRE
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - NATAL MUSEUM
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-ELEVENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - VOORTREKKER MUSEUM
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWELFTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - PUBLIC WORKS
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FOURTEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - AMATOLA WATER
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FIFTEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - BLOEM WATER
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-SEVENTEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - HOME AFFAIRS
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-EIGHTEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - STATISTICS SA CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-NINETEENTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTIETH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - SEDIBENG WATER
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTY-FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTY-FIFTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - PELLADRIFT WATER BOARD
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTY-NINTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTIETH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - MUNICIPAL DEMARCATION BOARD
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT UNIT
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-SECOND REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - MAGALIES WATER
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, we move for adoption.
Mr V G SMITH: Chairperson, the Public Accounts Committee recommends that this House adopts all the reports as reflected on the Order Paper. We believe, however, that it is important to highlight a few general points listed in the various departmental reports.
Let us begin by stating upfront that all the reports were unanimously adopted by Scopa without a single one having to be voted upon. Generally, the committee is of the view that there is a marked improvement as far as the departments’ adherence to the Public Finance Management Act is concerned.
However, there are certain areas of weakness that the departments will need to address urgently. Amongst these weaknesses, the committee identified the lack of internal controls, the lack of proper asset and inventory management systems and a delay in the clearing of expense accounts.
Another very serious shortcoming, in our view, is the inability of certain departments to provide the Auditor-General with supporting documentation as well as other departments appearing before the committee and challenging the competence and the work method of the Auditor-General’s staff.
In relation to specific department reports we would like to highlight our serious reservations and concerns about Report 111 - Voortrekker Museum; Report 112 - Department of Public Works; and Report 118- Statistics SA. In all of the above the Auditor- General was unable to express an opinion on the financial statements of the department. The audit opinion in these was a disclaimer.
Another problematic department, as far as we are concerned, is the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry. Of particular concern to the committee was also Report 136, listing more than 30 government/state institutions that failed to submit their 2001-02 financial reports 16 months after the end of that financial year. The committee recommends that Parliament acts urgently on these cases to ensure that accountability for all prevails.
A separate mention is warranted for Report 134, the Special Report by the Auditor-General pertaining to allegations on the Joint Investigating Team Arms Deal Report. Section C of the report recommends that alterations need to be made to the now nonexistent Auditor-General Act. These concerns were addressed in the new Public Audit Bill adopted by this House last week. In as far as reflections upon the integrity of the Auditor-General is concerned, the committee recommends that Parliament uses the tools at its disposal, such as the Rules and the Ethics Committee to deal with these allegations and that Scopa is not the appropriate structure to deal with such matters.
Notwithstanding these areas of concern, Scopa recommends that the House adopts all these Reports in a similar fashion as all other Scopa Reports have been adopted today. That is, without any debate on any specific Report. If need be, we will elaborate on this point, as can the various political parties represented on Scopa. [Applause.]
Motion agreed to.
Reports accordingly adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-FOURTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - JIT ARMS DEAL REPORT
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, we move that the Report be adopted.
The SPEAKER: The DA has requested an opportunity to make a declaration of vote. Before I put the motion to the House I will allow parties an opportunity for declaration of votes.
Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Speaker, when hon members are sworn in we all pledge an allegiance to the Constitution. This is an allegiance to the Constitution and the institutions it creates. This is a sacred responsibility that binds us all.
Since 1994, no other matter has exercised our democratic oversight structures, our Parliament, courts, the fourth estate and individual consciences inside and outside of this House, as much as South Africa’s strategic defence procurement. No matter has tested the mettle of our democracy and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts more. No matter has exercised the minds abroad in France, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom as much in relation to unresolved allegations of corruption.
This matter even resulted in a motion of confidence debate in the Speaker of this House and in a special Report by the Auditor-General which the Scopa Report deals with.
When the first allegations against the Auditor-General emerged, the DA raised concerns about the possible unconstitutionality of Section 46 of the Auditor-General Act. In accordance with the Rules of this House, I and the hon Chief Whip of the Official Opposition, Douglas Gibson, moved substantive motions expressing concern at allegations flowing from the Promotion of Access to Information requests before the courts and the compliance by the Office of the Auditor-General with a court order in this regard.
We called for a special committee of Parliament to probe these allegations and reopen the probe of the Arms Deal in the light of unanswered questions left untouched by the JIT Report and Scopa’s Report on the JIT Report.
These substantive motions were all but ignored by the relevant structures of this House and this inaction hampered the ability of members to engage sufficiently with the issues raised pursuant by the Auditor-General’s office releasing copies of the draft JIT Report in compliance with the court order.
In its report on an unprecedented special report of the Auditor-General, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts in its 134th Report recommended that paragraph 6 of the Special Report that deals with statements and motions in the National Assembly, be referred to the Speaker of the Assembly for such action as may be considered appropriate. While Rule 66 is clearly aimed at protecting the integrity and honour of constitutional institutions and Parliamentary conventions will evolve in this regard over time, members of this House moved substantive motions in full compliance with the Rules.
It is deeply regrettable that remnants of Section 46 of the Auditor-General Act remain lodged as Sections 18 and 22 of the newly-adopted Public Audit Bill.
Instead of recommending that the Speaker takes action against members of this House that have raised legitimate concerns about Section 46 of the Auditor-General Act and consultations between the Auditor-General and the executive during the course of the Arms probe, Parliament should have taken considered and concerted action pursuant to specific substantive motions that were moved in this House in full compliance with Rule 66 of the rules.
This Report is yet another narrative in the sad history of the devastation that the Arms Deal has wreaked on South Africa’s constitutional oversight structures. [Applause.]
Ms C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker, the Auditor-General gave evidence on this special report. The report has been accused of being superficial as many significant questions and concerns remain largely unanswered, and the ACDP has registered its concerns.
The ACDP agrees with Gavin Woods, who was the Chairman of Scopa at the height of this contentious issue, that given more serious implications for social spending, the fiscus and the macroeconomy, the rising cost of the SDP could hold. The public as far as possible should be informed as to how much they as taxpayers will ultimately have to pay, and in what other negative ways they could be affected.
The significance of these tens of billions of rands is undeniably great. It is also unfortunate that the JIT did not address the key question concerning the basis used to compare C2I2 and competing products, and stands accused of not taking into account much available evidence. Whether or not new evidence will come to the fore remains to be seen. However, the ACDP remains unconvinced as to whether or not we have got to the bottom of the matter.
The ACDP is committed to using our best efforts and all avenues available to uncover the truth in the public interest, making sure that criminality is pursued vigorously and unethical deals exposed. Ongoing criminal and other investigations may well uncover issues which still need to surface and the ACDP believes Scopa must follow up on these investigations and monitor progress through regular reports to Parliament.
This matter cannot be quietly put to bed or wished away, and the ACDP will not support this One-Hundred-and-Thirty-Fourth Report of Scopa as justice has not yet been seen to be done in the public interest. The ACDP, unlike the ANC, is committed to exposing and eradicating crime and corruption, and has an advantage over the ANC in that they know the difference between right and wrong.
The ACDP is not squeamish when it comes to appropriate punishment. Enough is enough. It is time to vote ACDP, the party that offers real hope for this nation. Thank you. [Interjections.]
Mr B W KANNEMEYER: Madam Speaker, it’s indeed regrettable that we continue to see a continuation of a very desperate alliance clutching at all straws that remain regarding the upcoming election. This request for a debate on this matter is nothing more than that. As is common cause now, I think we all know that at the height of the arms procurement saga the ANC were accused by, amongst other parties, the DA of polarising the Public Accounts committee along political lines.
It was exactly - and this is what is not told - at that time that the work of the committee was indeed politicised and polarised, exactly because the representatives of the DA at that time could not say aye or nay on anything unless they had consulted with their leadership, so much so that, as I think and as we all know today, during the five years of this Parliament the DA have changed their membership in the Public Accounts committee no less than five or six times. [Interjections.] The person who spoke today again here on the matter is someone who has never been in the Public Accounts committee for the past couple of months. In fact she just recently returned from outside the country.
Hon members, Nigel Bruce and Brown Bell have stood and worked in the Public Accounts committee, and really with them there we’ve been able to process during this year 136 reports that have been discussed, progressed and agreed upon by every single party, including the DA, in the Public Accounts committee. Therefore, it is clear that when we are working on this there are special people in the DA who are hit persons. They are there just to hit on certain things regardless of the truth and what it means for the country, so much so that the spokesperson of the DA was the first person who led members of Parliament to walk out of the Public Accounts committee at a very important committee meeting. They undermined the work of this particular Parliament in representing the people.
Not so long ago Scopa discussed the wisdom or otherwise of debating committee reports. Now, the representatives of the DA who were in that meeting, Mr Nigel Bruce and Mr Brown Bell, were the ones who were supporting and pushing that we do not discuss these matters here in Parliament. Their motivation - not the motivation of the ANC - as DA representatives in Scopa was that we could not take these matters to Parliament because our parties would instruct us to hold a particular political line, and the work, work method and ethic that we were developing in Scopa would come under threat if we took matters agreed upon in Scopa into Parliament for debate here. That was not said by the ANC, it was said by the DA’s own representatives. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon member, your time has expired.
Mr B W KANNEMEYER: Madam Chair, in conclusion, the ANC, in line with the decision of this committee, rejects this opportunistic publicity-seeking gimmick and moves that the House adopts this report in a similar manner in which all other Scopa reports … [Interjections.]
Mr D H M GIBSON: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: That hon member simply ignores the Chair. [Interjections.] Not only does that hon member not address the subject, he also ignores the Chair.
The SPEAKER: Hon member, I did ask him to stop. Please, could we proceed. Hon members, order! Please, let us proceed. I put the motion by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party that the report be adopted.
Motion agreed to (Democratic Alliance and African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).
Report accordingly adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-FIFTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - WATER AFFAIRS AND FORESTRY
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-SIXTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - ANNUAL REPORTS
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-SEVENTH REPORT OF STANDING
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - STATE THEATRE
CONSIDERATION OF ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-EIGHTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS - GUIDELINES FOR APPEARANCE BEFORE COMMITTEE
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move that the reports be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Reports accordingly adopted.
ONE-HUNDRED-AND-THIRTY-FOURTH REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
ACCOUNTS - JIT ARMS DEAL REPORT
(Statement)
The SPEAKER: Hon members, before adjourning, I wish to make a comment on the One-Hundred-and-Thirty-Fourth Report of Standing Committee on Public Accounts that we have just adopted. In that report, the Public Accounts committee recommends that the Auditor-General’s concerns, as expressed in paragraph 6 of his special report about the possible transgression of Rule 66, be referred to me ``for such action as may be considered appropriate’’. The Auditor-General also wrote to me directly to voice his concerns.
The purpose of Rule 66, a Rule made by this House, is to protect the integrity and independence of judges, the Auditor-General and office- bearers of other constitutional structures, and to prevent unwarranted and unsubstantiated attacks in this House on their honour or competence. Parliament pre-eminently should be committed to upholding and protecting the independence and standing of those institutions, which are required to play a key role in our constitutional democracy.
If there are grounds for an investigation of the conduct of such office- bearers, this House has available the mechanism of a substantive motion, and procedures for such substantive motions still need to be worked out.
Although steps were taken by the Chair at the time to restrain members from transgressing Rule 66, various members were disinclined to observe the letter and spirit of the Rule. This is both unacceptable and regrettable.
I would therefore strongly recommend that the next Parliament should give serious attention to all facets of the interrelationship between Parliament and the constitutional institutions supporting democracy, on the one hand, to prevent those institutions from being undermined within Parliament and, on the other hand, to establish effective accountability mechanisms.
I thank you for that. This ruling will be passed on to the next Parliament.
House adjourned at 16:36. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FRIDAY, 20 FEBRUARY 2004
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- Report of the Joint Budget Committee on Chapter 13 of 4th Report of SA Human Rights Commission, dated 17 February 2004:
CREDA insert 1ATC2002e
Report to be considered.
National Assembly
- Report of the Portfolio Committee on Social Development on Public Hearings on South African Social Security Agency Bill, dated 12 February 2004:
CREDA insert 2ATC2002e
- Report of the Portfolio Committee on Social Development on Public Hearings on Social Assistance Bill, dated 11 February 2004:
CREDA insert 3ATC2002e
TUESDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2004
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly
-
Messages from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly in respect of Bills passed by Council and transmitted to Assembly: (1) Message from National Council of Provinces to National Assembly:
Bills, subject to proposed amendments, passed by Council on 24 February 2004 and transmitted for consideration of Council’s proposed amendments:
(i) Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Bill [B 12B - 2003 (Reprint)] (National Assembly - sec 75) (for proposed amendments, see Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 19 February 2004, p 236).
The Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security of the National Assembly for a report on the amendments proposed by the Council.(ii) Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Bill [B 19B - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75) (for proposed amendments, see Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 19 February 2004, p 229).
The Bill has been referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development of the National Assembly for a report on the amendments proposed by the Council.
TABLINGS
National Assembly
- The Speaker
Final Declaration of the African Parliaments' Speakers Conference on
Democracy and Development, Cairo - 5-7 January 2004.
Copies of the declaration are available at the Office of the Clerk of
Papers.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the National Gambling Bill [B 48D - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 24 February 2004:
The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having considered the National Gambling Bill [B 48D - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), amended by the National Council of Provinces and referred to the Committee, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
Report to be considered.