National Assembly - 16 September 2004
THURSDAY, 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:01.
The Deputy 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.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr C M LOWE: Madam Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day:
That the House discusses ways of addressing the unemployment challenge through skills development and training.
Mr L M GREEN: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day:
That the House allocates time for Parliament to examine and debate the factors and conditions that led to the failed labour negotiations between the Minister for the Public Service and Administration and the labour unions, with a view to avoiding future mass strikes.
SITTING OF PAN-AFRICAN PARLIAMENT IN GALLAGHER ESTATE
(Draft Resolution)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that the Pan-African Parliament -
(a) is having its second sitting from today in Gallagher
Estate, Gauteng; and
b) amongst others, seeks to –
(i) facilitate the effective implementation of policies
and objectives of the African Union;
(ii) promote the principles of human rights and democracy
in Africa;
(iii) encourage good governance, transparency and
accountability in member states; and
(iv) promote peace, security and stability; and
2) welcomes the Pan-African Parliament to South Africa and wishes the
memberS success with their deliberations.
Agreed to.
MEETING OF WORLD METHODIST COUNCIL IN PORT ELIZABETH
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M T LIKOTSI: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) an important gathering of the World Methodist Council is
meeting in Port Elizabeth from 15 to 18 September 2004; and
(b) this body represents nearly 75 million people from 132
countries; and
(2) welcomes the delegates of this august assembly and wishes them
every success.
Agreed to.
PRECEDENCE TO ORDERS OF THE DAY
(Draft Resolution)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:
That, after disposal of Order No 7 on the Order Paper, precedence be
given to Orders No 2 and 3 under “Further Business”.
Agreed to.
SUSPENSION OF RULE 253(1) TO CONDUCT SECOND
READING DEBATE ON GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES PENSION LAW AMENDMENT BILL
(Draft Resolution)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move the draft resolution printed in his name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That Rule 253(1) be suspended for the purposes of conducting the Second
Reading debate on the Government Employees Pension Law Amendment Bill
[B 15 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 75).
Agreed to.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, it doesn’t mean, since today is the last day of the term, that you just have to agree to everything. [Laughter.] I know we are all very tired and we can’t wait for this House to adjourn tonight so that we can go home, but the House should at least still be as lively as always. [Interjections.]
The ANC says I shouldn’t encourage that, but I think it becomes just too boring when you don’t even indicate whether you agree or not.
ANC YOUTH LEAGUE TURNS 60
(Member’s Statement)
Ms T V TOBIAS (ANC): Deputy Speaker, last week the ANC Youth League celebrated 60 years of its existence. It celebrated six decades of positive contribution to the liberation and development of this country.
As we celebrate the role that our youth has played over the years, we salute the founding fathers and mothers of the youth league. Among them are Oliver Reginald Tambo, Walter Sisulu, Dan Tlome, Antony Lembede and Stanza Bopape, to mention but a few.
This is a generation that played a critical role in the 1950s and they were central to the formation of uMkhonto weSizwe in later years. Leadership examples continued to be set by these leaders to the generations of the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the generation of the 1990s, as more young people joined the forces that liberated their country. They are today contributing to the transformation and development of South Africa into a nonracial, nonsexist and democratic society.
Ke a leboga. [Legofi] [Thank you.][Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, did I hear you saying “You are a fat cat”? If you did, then I would like you to withdraw those words.
Mr J P I BLANCHé: I withdraw it, Madam.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you very much.
CONSEQUENCES OF FLOOR-CROSSING
(Member’s Statement)
Ms H ZILLE (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, the window period for defections has closed and this Parliament must acknowledge the depth of disgust that voters feel about this process. The DA supported the principle of floor- crossing but warned that provisions in our legislation could lead to serious abuses such as floor-crossing for personal gain and other opportunistic reasons.
We warned that the legislation should seek to prevent government’s use of patronage to buy public representatives. These warnings have turned out to be prophetic. We have had many accounts from our councillors regarding attempts to improperly induce them to cross the floor, particularly to the ANC. Offers have ranged from mayoral and executive positions to study trips abroad. We are collating evidence in this regard and will pursue the matter.
Despite the fact that the DA refused to offer any inducement to floor- crossers, we nevertheless gained a total of 69 new councillors, bringing our total of municipal seats to 1 034 - a new platform for strong growth in the upcoming municipal elections where the voters and not the public representatives will express their choice. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
CYCADS THREATENED WITH EXTINCTION
(Member’s Statement)
Ms C N Z ZIKALALA (IFP): Deputy Speaker, it could take a cycad plant about 400 years to grow from a seed to a height of 3 to 4 metres. It is for this very reason that these highly priced ornamental plants are often harvested in the wild, despite laws against this. According to data provided by the SA National Biodiversity Institute, two more species have become extinct in the past two years, while 24 of the 37 species in the country are now being threatened.
It’s too sad to think that unscrupulous poachers who steal these highly endangered plants from the wild, as well as the people who buy them on the black market, have no reservations about causing this plant to become extinct in order to increase the value of their personal collection.
Although there is legislation in place to protect these plants, we urge members of the public to play their part and assist the authorities as far as possible by not buying cycads on the black market. They should instead obtain them legally from nurseries. It would be a great loss if we failed to protect these plants that have been around for such a long time from becoming extinct. I thank you.
INTERNATIONAL LITERACY DAY
(Member’s Statement)
Ms N M MAHLAWE (ANC): Deputy Speaker, 8 September is regarded as the International Literacy Day. South Africa also joined the world in celebrating this important day. Over the whole of last week various events were held in different parts of the country to mark this day. The Department of Education dedicated the whole week to literacy.
The ANC welcomes the strides made by the government over the past 10 years to fight illiteracy. The results are starting to show. The moving story told by Mr Winkie Adonis from Cradock is one example. He is a long-distance driver who has, over the years, depended on other people to show him directions. But, he is now able to read direction boards and he no longer depends on other people. He is grateful to Abet because it has liberated him.
The ANC salutes the decisions taken by the government to recruit tutors for adult basic education and training from the ranks of the unemployed teachers. The real increase in the budget allocation for Abet is beginning to roll back illiteracy. I thank you. [Applause.]
UNVEILING OF KGOSI SEKHUKHUNE’S MONUMENT
(Member’s Statement)
Mr M DIKO (UDM): Madam Deputy Speaker, the UDM welcomes the unveiling of a monument by the government in Limpopo, commemorating Kgosi Sekhukhune. Traditional leadership is an institution supported by millions of South Africans as an integral part of their lives. It is for this reason that this part of our heritage deserves to be preserved and promoted. As a proper sign of respect, we should remember their contribution to our society.
However, we appeal to the government to show respect and recognition to traditional leaders in life as well as in death. The unfortunate history of the past decade between the government and traditional leaders has been of a difficult and sometimes outright antagonistic relationship. Often, traditional leaders have not been properly consulted regarding legislation and government programmes that directly affect them or the people who support them.
Furthermore, the exact role and function of traditional leaders within a constitutional democratic state remains a matter of dispute. The traditional leaders have often complained that the ruling party only remembers them just before elections. This unhealthy state of affairs must be addressed in order to accommodate a system of governance with roots reaching back centuries into our rich past. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
GOVERNMENT’S REACTION TO PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS’ STRIKE ACTION
(Member’s Statement)
Mr V C GORE (ID): Madam Deputy Speaker, the ID is extremely dismayed that the government was not able to avert strike action by negotiating a better deal with public sector unions. Thousands of public servants throughout the country took to the streets today in what must be one of the largest public demonstrations in our country’s democratic history.
The ID shares the sentiments of public sector workers who have constantly been undervalued in our society. If government really believes in the Batho Pele philosophy, then it must put those people first who are expected to implement this policy.
The public sector is currently characterised by low morale, a poor skills base and low remuneration. All of these impact negatively on service delivery. The ID wants to see the government putting more emphasis on the public sector and making it more attractive for professionals and young graduates. Without this, all its lofty implementation goals will come to nought.
The ID feels that the Government has not negotiated in good faith over this issue. The demands of the unions were put forward over six months ago and it is only now that the government has responded with a dismissive take-it- or-leave-it attitude.
The ID also believes that the argument put forward by the Director-General of the Public Service and Administration is not correct. He stated that there are no sufficient funds to budget for real increases in the MTEF years. If R49 million can be spent on a discredited arms deal, why can´t money be found for our public servants?
It is one thing to be proud of our financial stability, but if we are unable to deal with the social instability of our country then it all means nothing. The ID would like to see our government investing more heavily in the people who perform the services that truly keep our country going. I thank you.
CALL FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF CHAIR OF AFRICAN MEDICINE
(Member’s Statement)
Mr K D S DURR (ACDP): Deputy Speaker, the House calls upon the Ministers of Education and of Health to co-operate with a view to establishing a chair of African medicine at one of South Africa’s medical schools.
Such a school of African medicine would focus on African traditional medicine as well as Pan-African medical health challenges. It would also seek to identify best practice and to isolate the active ingredients and curative potential of indigenous African medicines. It would establish a databank of African medicine and a library to list, record and codify African best practice as well as protect Africa’s intellectual property rights on these health remedies.
Such a medical school would link with the universities of Africa and other universities around the world that share these disciplines and have an interest in African diseases or African health challenges. It could come about through the expansion of an existing medical faculty in South Africa. Such a medical school would become the centre of learning for Africa’s specific medicine as well as provide a bridge to, and teaching of, orthodox medicine for students. I believe such a university would attract widespread international donor interest. I thank you. [Applause.]
INCREASING RATE OF FOETAL ALCOHOL SYNDROME
(Member’s Statement)
Ms P TSHWETE (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, the ANC is alarmed at the rate of alcohol abuse by expecting mothers. This results in children contracting an illness that is known as foetal alcohol syndrome. It is estimated that one out of every 10 children who attend grade 1 suffers from foetal alcohol syndrome. Twenty-five per cent of women who attend antenatal clinics are drinkers. This problem was highlighted last week, on 9 September, during the observation of the World Foetal Alcohol Syndrome Day.
The prevalence of this syndrome in South Africa is associated with our terrible past where the “dop system” was used by farmers as a form of payment. The alcohol industry is not doing enough to warn people about this side effect of taking alcohol. The interesting thing is that the same industry does put warning signs on its products when it exports alcohol.
We urge our people to join hands with the government to fight this syndrome. We further urge the alcohol industry to assist in the fight against the foetal alcohol syndrome by warning consumers about possible effects of alcohol, particularly on expecting mothers.
We congratulate the Northern Cape government and sections of the media for making efforts to raise awareness about the dangers of alcohol abuse. I thank you. [Applause.]
PROPOSALS FOR AVERTING FUTURE PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKES
(Member’s Statement)
Mr R S NTULI (DA): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The DA sympathises with the plight of the many Public Service workers who often work in unenviable conditions for very low pay. These workers extend themselves beyond the call of duty for wages that are paltry in comparison to those earned by their counterparts in the private sector.
The recent strike could have been avoided had the government abandoned central bargaining whereby collectively determined wage agreements are uniformly applied to the entire Public Service. Central bargaining weakens the claim of outstanding teachers, nurses and doctors for higher wages and better conditions.
In order to afford the Public Service the respect they deserve and avert future public sector strikes, the DA calls for immediate abrogation of the central bargaining system in favour of sector bargaining components, which will address sector interests more effectively; a remuneration system that rewards workers according to measured productivity improvements; and the adoption of a well-structured constructive recruitment and retention management system that targets employees with scarce skills. I thank you.
INVOLVEMENT OF NORTH WEST PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH OF SOUTHERN AFRICA IN EFFORTS TO SAVE THE LIFE OF KELEBOGILE MASEKO
(Member’s Statement)
Mr B E PULE (UCDP): Madam Deputy Speaker, the UCDP notes with appreciation the involvement of the North West provincial government in an endeavour to save the life of 16-year old Kelebogile Maseko of Lehurutshi Unit 2 who needs financial assistance for her kidney transplant.
Whilst this transplant has not yet been performed, arrangements are already at an advanced stage as the MEC for health, the hon Mandlenkosi Mayisela, visited the family on Monday 13 September 2004. The leadership role played by the Premier of the province, hon Edna Molewa, is appreciated.
The UCDP would also like to thank the dean of the Madikwe circuit of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Southern Africa’s western diocese, Dean Morebudi and his parish council for initiating this process. This partnership of church and government in action is not the first of its kind, as this circuit of the Evangelical Lutheran Church has just completed building a daycare centre for people affected by HIV and Aids.
It is hoped that God will bless this endeavour that is calculated to improve the quality of life of the people of our country, South Africa. [Applause.]
ESKOM’S CONTRIBUTION IN SUPPORT OF SMALL, MEDIUM AND MICRO ENTERPRISES
(Member’s Statement)
Mr J J COMBRINCK (ANC): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The ANC salutes the initiatives taken by the Electricity Supply Commission, Eskom, to spend R7 billion on buying goods and services from small, medium and micro enterprises. This demonstrates Eskom’s resolve to support small and black- owned businesses. This will not only boost the enterprises in question but also create numerous economic opportunities for the local population.
Over the past seven years, Eskom has steadily increased its acquisition of goods and services rendered by small enterprises. In 1997 they spent R286 million on small businesses. In the past financial year they had reached R6,8 billion. Goods and services worth about R1,2 billion were bought from companies owned by women.
This parastatal has led by example. The ANC calls upon other parastatals to follow the shining example set by Eskom. This is another step in our effort to widen the participation of people in the economy of our country. I thank you. [Applause.]
AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND
(Member’s Statement)
Mr E W TRENT(DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, the DA notes with great concern the recent Auditor-General’s report on the financial statements of the Unemployment Insurance Fund. The UIF is an important tool with which we can fight poverty. Without it, there is no doubt that there would be an additional strain on the welfare services of this country.
For the second consecutive year, this entity has been given a disclaimer - I repeat, for the second consecutive year. This means that the Auditor- General, because of the significance of the matters referred to, has declined to express an opinion on the financial statements of the UIF. This is serious and is the worst opinion that the Auditor-General can give.
The qualifications listed by the Auditor-General highlight fundamental breakdowns in internal financial control. These controls would normally be in place to prevent corruption. It is truly alarming that such a breakdown has been allowed to occur.
Although the Auditor-General’s report will come before Scopa in due course, I raise the issue today as a matter of urgency because it could take some time to get to Scopa. While we acknowledge that the financial position of the fund is still secure, the appalling financial management reflected in the report rings alarm bells.
We therefore call on the Minister to take urgent steps by appointing a task team to assist in correcting these shortcomings. Such an intervention will assist the newly appointed chief financial officer to get the financial management of the UIF back on track. We wish him well in his endeavours.
Let us never forget what happened to the Road Accident Fund, a vital fund and a vital entity that has led to great pain for many people. [Time expired.]
DEATH OF SIX CHILDREN IN CAR ACCIDENT IN EAST LONDON
(Member’s Statement)
Mr T E VEZI (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, it was with great sadness that we learnt about the six primary school children who were killed and 10 others who were injured in a bakkie accident on the N2 near Amalinda, in East London, earlier this week.
The children were all travelling from uMdantsane Township to primary schools in East London when the driver of the van, who was contracted by their parents, and who allegedly did not have a driver’s licence, lost control and caused the van to roll over.
The relevant authorities should conduct a thorough investigation into this matter and, together with the parents, find a suitable system to get the learners from their far-off places to their schools.
We offer our deepest condolences to the families of the children who died and hope that those who sustained injuries will make a full and speedy recovery. I thank you.
MILITARY TRAINING CENTRE CONVERTED INTO TOURIST CENTRE
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs D M MOROBI (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, the decision taken by the Department of Defence to convert the 21st Battalion training and military dogs’ training centre into a tourist centre and the handing over of the centre to the Thabaneng Municipality in Mpumalanga are welcomed by the ANC.
In 1970 the apartheid government turned what was then a public hospital into a military camp. The decision taken by the then government led to a drastic decline in the health standards of the local communities. People were forced to travel long distances in order to access health care facilities.
This act marks not only the desire to revitalise what has become a white elephant but is also an attempt to obliterate the past memories of pain and suffering that the community endured at the hands of that battalion. This historic relocation represents the closure of a chapter of three decades of misery and a life of constant servility.
As our people celebrate the decade of freedom and democracy in this month particularly, being both tourism month and heritage month, we call upon the women and the youth in the area to utilise the centre optimally. Thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, hon member. We are at the end of Members’ Statements. We may only take 14. I know that there are a number of people who want me to break that rule, and I am not going to do so. I am tempted because some people have actually not spoken in this term, and I really wanted to give them an opportunity, but I don’t want to do that.
I want to give this opportunity to the only Minister we have with us today. If there is anything you would like to say, Minister, this is your opportunity. [Applause.]
GOVERNMENT WAGE NEGOTIATIONS
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I think that the comments by the hon Gore and the hon Ntuli are worth responding to. Firstly, the accusation that government has negotiated in bad faith cannot be further from the truth.
The Minister for the Public Service and Administration has led the mandate committee, and we have overseen the negotiations consistently since March this year. At a very early stage in the process, when it appeared as if no agreement could be reached, the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, as the employer, took the unprecedented step of inviting the parties to mediation so that we could find an early agreement to the process.
You cannot suggest that that was done in bad faith. Similarly, if you look at the offer that has been on the table from government, we have been consistent all the way through. When it was clear that the 5,5% for this year would not be agreed upon, we raised that to 6%. But, the negotiations this year have happened in a particular context.
Two issues have been predominant. The first of those is the broad agreement that we should seek a multiterm settlement; something that will cover us for three years so that we do not enter into these make-or-break negotiations every year. The second one is the emphasis on the request by the trade unions initially that we should include macro benefits to improve on equity in the Public Service. And the macro benefits include housing allowances for lower income earners who have been excluded hitherto, and then the extension of medical aid provisions to lower income earners.
But when we deal with these issues, as the employer, we have to deal with them together. You cannot separate the cash packages from the rest of the benefits. And it is in this environment that the negotiations have been as tough. Clearly, from the side of government as the service provider and as people committed to a contract with the masses of South Africa, we do not want the strike.
It was as late as Monday this week that the unions rejected the offer and the Minister was then forced to take the offer off the table. That has created the present impasse. But notwithstanding that, the Minister has still provided three scenarios to try and facilitate the negotiations, because we think it is in the best interest of all South Africans to secure an agreement soon on this matter.
The total package over the three years adds R27 billion to the wage bill. That is not small cash; that is quite substantial. But it is also important to recognise that there have been certain issues on the table for a number of years. Amongst those has been a commitment to an improved system of pay progression, especially for educators, which has been on the table since
- That’s not something government could impose unilaterally.
Included in the issues that we have offered the trade unions for consideration are improvements for maths and science teachers and scarce skills, especially in poorer areas. We want township schools and rural schools to have maths and science teachers. We haven’t been able to persuade the trade unions of the correctness of that strategy. And what we have done year on year has been, perhaps, to support mediocrity in the way in which pay progression has allowed for a 1% allowance above the general salary increase. And we know that this does not serve the interest of maintaining the skills of those upon whom we rely to educate the next generations of South Africans.
The other issue that has been part of the negotiations is centralised bargaining, which is not something that government can opt out of. We cannot do it unilaterally in terms of the Labour Relations Act or the Public Service Commission Act or indeed in the context of the Constitution, which defines that there shall be one Public Service.
The other issue that has been included in the negotiations has been a very strong commitment of the voiced in the negotiations, the organised workers, that we should increase the conditions of service for lower income earners.
So we have a mismatch in society today and it is something that we are really battling with. Income levels for entry-level workers are substantially higher than the market medians. But because of the large numbers there, we are not able to remunerate professionals adequately in the Public Service. It is an enormous challenge that we have. The comparator is often with the private sector, but we cannot always do that. If indeed government did that for itself, everything in this country would be unaffordable.
What is happening in the private sector is that there are some very unsustainable trends and inequalities growing in leaps and bounds. You only have to look at the level of executive remuneration in this country and having awarded that to themselves they then ensure that they can pull up a particular skills set within the private sector.
A study done recently by the labour research service suggests that it will take the average worker in South Africa 111 years to earn what senior executives in the private sector earn. That kind of inequality is clearly unsustainable. I would like to submit that it is a threat to democracy, but I want to assure this House that we are negotiating in the best faith and that we do not want the strike, but at the same time we have to ensure that our interlocutors understand that there are constraints. We cannot push up the cost of everything. The only thing that we can do when we run out of money is either to borrow more, and that will impose a tax on future generations, or we can tax more now. There is no other source of money, there is nothing hidden from view.
I think the trade union should recognise this. It is very important that all of us as South Africans come together, to support and endeavour to ensure reasonable remuneration in the Public Service. We should also ensure that we maintain the skills, but we cannot do so if within this House there are accusations of bad faith. I thank you.
FINANCE BILL
(First Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a first time.
FINANCE BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
PUBLIC INVESTMENT CORPORATION BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Speaker, hon members, the Public Debt Commissioners Act of 1911 was one of the first pieces of legislation to be passed by the Parliament of the Union of South Africa. At that time the legislation sought to create a source of funding for the Union’s budget deficits.
In 1911 there was no domestic capital market to speak of in South Africa, nor did this country have the access to international capital markets that we enjoy today. Since then, and especially over the last 10 years, circumstances have changed dramatically in our capital markets.
We can now boast deep sophisticated domestic capital markets with maturities of over 25 years. We have a system of auctioning government bonds to the markets on a weekly basis. More importantly, the introduction and uptake of the new retail bonds have introduced instruments that allow ordinary people to invest in government bonds, with returns that are far more superior to what our financial markets had made possible.
Since 1994, South Africa has received numerous credit rating upgrades from international rating agencies. Whereas in 1994 we were not considered an investment grade rating, today we are firmly entrenched in a solid investment grade. We are also proud to say that while we have increased our exposure to foreign borrowing, we have no significant borrowing from the Bretton Woods institutions, either the IMF or the World Bank.
Therefore, the introduction of the Public Investment Corporation Bill must be understood in this context. It is no longer necessary for South Africa to retain a commission whose main reason for existence will be to finance our deficit.
Our situation is different from that of the Union of South Africa in 1911. It is also different from 1984 when the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa passed the Public Investment Commissioners Act in anticipation of the 1985 debt standstill. South Africa is now a different country. It is no longer on the brink of debt default, and our institutions must reflect this.
It is important for us to make this point as often as possible, because there are some in this House who have difficulty in grasping it. The PIC manages 42 public funds. The biggest of these is the Government Employees Pension Fund. Some of the bigger funds under the PIC’s management are the Associated Employees Pension Fund, the Unemployment Insurance Fund and the Compensation Commissioners Funds. Total funds in the management of the PIC were R308 billion as of 31 March this year. This makes the PIC the largest asset manager in the country.
The Bill seeks to complete and formalise a process that was essentially started in 1996, when for the first time the public investment commissioners were allowed to invest funds in instruments other than government bonds. Since then the PIC has also been investing in corporate bonds, listed equities, property, infrastructure and private equity through the Isibaya Fund.
This process has transformed the PIC into a modern asset management operation. In line with this, the Bill provides for the establishment of a juristic person to be known as the Public Investment Corporation, which will be wholly owned by the state. The state will not be able to dispose of the shares in the corporation, unless it is by an Act of this Parliament.
The corporation’s main object is to be a financial services provider in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. Furthermore, the corporation will be listed in terms of the Public Finance Management Act and will report to this Parliament in terms of that Act.
It is important to remember that the largest client in the PIC, by far, is the Government Employees Pension Fund. But the GEPF, unlike most private sector funds, is a defined benefit fund whose members are entitled to their benefits, irrespective of the performance of the PIC managing these funds. If it should happen that there is a shortfall between the defined benefits of any pensioner and the available funds due to mismanagement or some other calamity, the fiscus has guaranteed to make good the difference.
Therefore the GEPF represents a contingent liability on our books, a liability that one day might become real - I hope not. But it does exist as a risk to the fiscus. Despite what some in this House may say from the comfort of their armchairs, I wish to respectfully submit that it would be dangerous and irresponsible for any Minister of Finance not to take an interest in the affairs of both the GEPF and the PIC. Because of the amounts of money involved it would in fact be a gross dereliction of duty.
I, therefore, hereby introduce to the National Assembly for the second reading the Public Investment Corporation Bill of 2004. In doing so I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the previous chairperson of the PIC, Minister Mandisi Mpahlwa, for his dedicated leadership of the organisation under very trying circumstances.
I would also like to extend my gratitude to the new chairperson - it is important that members note that that the Deputy Minister of Finance has been the chairperson since Gill Marcus was Deputy Minister - that is Deputy Minister Jabu Moleketi and to the commissioners - Mr Ignatius Sehoole, Mrs Ntombifuthi Mtoba, Mr Yunaid Waja, Mr Zakhele Sithole, Mr Veli Ntombela, Mr James Strydom and the external member of the audit committee, Mr Gerald Salanje. It is their dedication and leadership that has seen the PIC grow from strength to strength. I also wish to commend the Secretary of the PIC, Mr Brian Molefe, for his sterling work.
Special thanks must also go to the former chairperson of the Parliament portfolio committee, Ms Barbara Hogan, and to the current chairperson, Dr Rob Davies, for encouraging debate around the policy issues relating to this Bill, thereby ensuring that the proposals we make here today are properly considered, and have been informed by the debate as it took place within the Portfolio Committee on Finance. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Dr R H DAVIES: I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As the Minister indicated, the Public Investment Commission, or Public Investment Corporation as it will become after the passage of this Bill, is the largest asset manager in the country. Just to put the figure of R378 billion that he mentioned into context: Compare that with R252 billion that was managed by Old Mutual and R200 billion by Sanlam.
As the Minister also indicated, the roles and the responsibilities of the PIC have been expanding since 1911 and also 1984, when it was only permitted initially to invest in government bonds. However, its current mandate involves still investing in government bonds, but it can now also invest in equities, property, and cash and in other investments, including developmental investments in terms of the provisions of the Isibaya Fund.
The Bill before the House today seeks to address a number of problems in the organisation and corporate governance structure of the Commission that were identified, amongst others, in several reports of the Auditor-General and also in reports of Scopa. Under the present arrangement employees of the PIC are seconded from the National Treasury and report to the Director- General of Finance.
The commissioners, however, are held responsible for making and monitoring investments even though they have no authority over the employees who actually carry out their instructions. The PIC also does not at present fall under any of the regulatory legislation which is applicable to other fund managers and, most importantly, the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act of 2002.
The Bill before us today will retain the character of the PIC as a government-owned public entity, responsible for the management of funds on behalf of organisations like the Government Employees Pension Fund, and other public entities. At the committee stage some clauses, that might have created some ambiguity in this regard, were removed and any change in the PIC’s public character will, as the Minister indicated, require new legislation to be introduced into this Parliament.
The PIC, however, will become a public corporation, operating outside of the framework of the Public Service. It will become something like the Industrial Development Corporation, or other bodies of that ilk. This will enable it more easily to attract and retain the skills that are necessary to manage the large funds for which it is responsible.
Significantly it will be required to register as a financial services provider in terms of section 7 of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. This means that it will be required to operate according to an investment mandate given to it as a contractual obligation by the depositors, the largest of whom is the Government Employees Pension Fund. This most of us in the committee believe will give depositors, who include Public Service trade union representatives on boards of funds, real control over the investment policy of the PIC.
However, we also introduced a further amendment at the committee stage. While the board of the PIC, as a wholly-owned government corporation, will be appointed by the Minister acting in consultation with the Cabinet, the Minister in making this appointment is required to give due regard to nominations made by the depositors. We hope this will lead to the appointment of a board that will be able to build a relationship of real confidence with the depositors.
This was not an easy Bill for us to process in the committee. We were confronted with a number of complex procedural issues, which took us to issues of the boundaries between parliamentary processes and the social dialogue and collective bargaining processes which are provided for in other laws, and which I am sure that most of us in the committee wanted to ensure were well respected.
In discussing some of these issues, I need to draw distinction between good practice in preparing and processing legislation, and some of the technical and legal issues that we had to consider in the committee. Good practice, as we have come to understand it in this democratic Parliament, I believe needs to involve significant consultation, both in the processing and in the drafting of legislation.
Many of us felt that there had not been sufficient consultation in the preparation of this Bill. And in particular we felt that persons who have been nominated to serve on the boards of depositing institutions, like the GEPF, could have been consulted in the preparation of the Bill. At the committee stage we tried to compensate for this with extensive consultation and engagement with stakeholders, which I think went a step or two further than the minimum requirements in this regard.
However, we had to deal with more than that. We were presented with submissions from union representatives from Cosatu, Fedusa and the Suid- Afrikaanse Onderwysersunie. They argued that the subject matter of this PIC Bill should as a matter of law - in terms of legislation relating to Nedlac, and in terms of legislation relating to collective bargaining in the public sector - have been referred to Nedlac and the Public Service Co- ordinating Bargaining Council.
We ourselves as the committee took legal opinion on this, and also grappled with legal opinions presented to us by various interested parties, as well as by the state law advisers. We were very clear that, although we were not sitting as judges or legal experts, as elected representatives we needed to exercise our minds on the issues presented to us.
We were also very clear that we were in full support - most of us - of the social dialogue and the collective bargaining processes established, and did not want to take any decisions that would in any way undermine these.
As far as the argument for a prior referral to Nedlac was concerned, this depended on establishing that the PIC Bill would bring about a significant change in socioeconomic policy. The argument that it would rested on the fact that the PIC, as I’ve already mentioned, is responsible for managing large funds and ipso facto, so went the argument, any change in its nature would have an impact on the economy of the country.
Most other opinions, with which the committee in the end concurred, argued the fact that the Bill was about internal organisational issues and that the investment mandate in terms of the provision of the FAIS Act would continue to be given by depositors, meant that this did not amount to a significant change in socioeconomic policy. The argument for a prior referral to the Public Sector Co-ordinating Bargaining Chamber depended on the definition of mutual interest in the constitution of said PSCBC. This was a close call, but in the end the thrust of most of the legal opinion was that the issue of internal structuring of a service provider did not constitute a matter of mutual interest as contemplated in the constitution of the PSCBC. Besides, the PSCBC had an established procedure for deciding upon whether or not a matter proposed by any party would be so considered and no one had attempted to operationalise that procedure.
On balance therefore the best judgement of the portfolio committee was that the procedural points did not have sufficient merit to prevent us from proceeding to deal with this Bill in a normal manner and with considering the content issues involved therein. We do not believe that our decisions have set any negative or unfortunate consequences or precedents for collective bargaining and social dialogue processes through these other institutions. Of course anyone who disagrees with these process points has the right to seek redress in the courts.
I hope, however, that this Bill will not become the subject of long drawn- out litigation. The PIC needs to become a more effective and efficient public entity, managing the public funds that it is entrusted with on behalf of the stakeholders in a more effective and more efficient manner than it is able to at the moment.
The board of the GEPF needs to be constituted urgently. We heard yesterday in the portfolio committee that most of the nominations have already been made and that the board could well be sitting before the end of the year. It is my earnest hope that this is the case and I think this will remove some of the rather specious arguments about conflict of interest between the Minister appointing the board of the PIC and the Minister as the trustee of the GEPF, which I think we may hear about later on.
The Bill therefore provides the basis to begin work with all stakeholders to give effect to the objective for which the PIC was set up. I therefore have pleasure in commending it to the House. I thank you. [Applause.]
Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Deputy Speaker, based on a list of funds submitted by the PIC to the committee, I need to declare an interest in the matter before the House today as a member of the Public Office Bearers Pension Fund, and I would like to do so before I speak.
The controversy and legal wrangling that surrounded the processing of this Bill, since it came to the finance committee, was entirely avoidable had there been better management of the consultation processes by the National Treasury - this has been alluded to by the chairperson of the committee.
If the GEPF Board had been constituted in accordance with the Public Sector Collective Bargaining Council Resolution 12 of 2002, having trade union representatives present, Parliament would have arguably been spared the unseemly interchanges and flurry of legal opinions between the National Treasury, the PIC, the trade union movement and indeed the portfolio committee itself. This lack of consultation placed the Portfolio Committee on Finance in an untenable position in arbitrating a myriad of legal opinions in relation to the passage of this Bill.
The legal concerns of the unions were essentially threefold. Firstly, that the Minister of Finance remains the sole trustee of the GEPF and the responsible lead Minister who is responsible for the changes to the administration of the GEPF’s funds through the changes effected to the PIC dispensation, and therefore has a conflict of interest. Secondly, the issue procedurally of Nedlac, which I believe has sufficiently been dealt with by the chairperson and his input. Thirdly, that the Public Sector Collective Bargaining Council should have been consulted about the PIC changes, as the content of the Bill touches on matters of mutual interest and pensions in their incarnation as deferred wages. Ultimately, in our view, only objections 1 and 3 of the trade union movement had any substantive potential legal merit, and we might see litigation on this in the future.
The DA members on the PCOF requested a meeting with the Minister of Finance, Trevor Manuel, which due to diary and time constraints could regrettably not be accommodated. We subsequently urgently sourced legal advice and wrote to the Minister in relation to concerns raised about the conflict of interests in the committee in the context of the Minister’s fiduciary responsibilities to the GEPF. Despite the passage of this Bill, these are ongoing concerns we would like to engage the Minister on at an early opportunity.
The PIC Bill seeks to achieve two goals: the one laudable and worthy of support and the other clearly potentially highly controversial. The first aim of the PIC is to corporatise the Public Investment Commissioners. In future, the PIC will therefore function effectively like an asset manager subject to regulation by the FSB under the provisions of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Schemes Act.
This aspect of the legislation will constitute a major step forward in the management of the PIC and its ability to function as a professional and sufficiently regulated organisation within the market. It will also enhance the ability of the PIC to invest money from its new clients under FAIS, primarily the GEPF, as well as other moneys currently under administration by the PIC. All moneys invested on behalf of the GEPF, in particular, will have to be negotiated by a newly constituted GEPF Board, comprising the government and labour representatives that are still due to be appointed. The GEPF Board will therefore be a client of the PIC and give it a mandate for investment, which will resort under the investment policies and overall investment strategy of the new corporate PIC.
The investment strategy and the investment policy aspects of the Bill are at the heart of the controversy surrounding this Bill, and must be seen in the context of the agreements of the Growth and Development Summit to earmark funds for socially responsible investment. And I accept the arguments that the Minister was putting forward that the fund can never technically be bankrupt. But this is an undesirable situation ever even to countenance.
It must also been seen against the backdrop of the experience of the PIC’s Isibaya Fund that has to date performed rather badly. This is where the key controversy lies, as the Minister of Finance gets the power in terms of the proposed legislation to issue directives to the new PIC Board in respect of the management of the corporation, and indeed any other matter. This power is only bridled by whether it is either in the public interest or reasonable and necessary to do so.
The Minister would therefore have a potential key role to play in the investment policy and the investment strategy of the PIC. Not only is it arguably bad corporate governance for a new corporatised entity to receive directives from a member of the government, but it brings the Minister of Finance’s conflict of interest to the fore as currently sole trustee of the GEPF, a conflict we believe persists, even if the GEPF Board is fully constituted with union representation.
We firmly believe that this conflict of interest will arise, arguably, on a case-by-case basis, depending on the directives issued by the Minister, whilst he remains the trustee, and arguably the most important trustee on the employer’s side of the newly constituted GEPF Board to the PIC Board.
The arguments offered by the legal council of the National Treasury at deliberations that the Minister has a confluence rather than a conflict of interest were not only, with due respect, unconvincing, but are bound to be tested by future litigation on a case-by-case basis. These arguments were put forward throughout the consideration of this Bill, as we believe there to be insufficient safeguards to adequately hem in the near unbridled directive authority granted to the Minister in the legislation before the House.
We moved amendments to try to curtail this power, but they were defeated subsequently in committee. The corporate governance changes in the Bill are to be welcomed, but concerns raised about the Minister’s power, as under the current PIC dispensation, is untenable. The Minister of Finance and the experience of the Isibaya Fund raise alarm bells in terms of the powers granted to the Minister in section 10 of the proposed legislation before the House.
The public sector trade union movement is obviously rightly concerned to ensure that their pension income is not squandered on either ill-conceived or ill-executed Black Economic Empowerment deals, or potentially on economically unproductive infrastructural spending. If these provisos are addressed and it is productive infrastructural spending and the market decides that the BEE deals are clearly sound, and therefore generate a high return, there will arguably be no objection. But the unions are rightly concerned in the aftermath of the Isibaya Fund experience.
It will be up to a vigilant newly constituted GEPF Board, with sufficient union representation, to guard against any investment decisions that would be against the interests of the members of the GEPF and yes, Minister, obviously you have not only a fiduciary responsibility, but a very active interest in anything that may or may not go wrong in the context of this new role.
The DA calls on the Minister of Finance to ensure that the GEPF Board is constituted as a matter of great urgency, particularly in the context of Resolution 12 of 2002, which has clearly indicated that there has been far too much of a time lag in establishing the board. And, in order to address the current untenable position in which he finds himself as the sole trustee of the GEPF, to deal with this matter expeditiously.
Despite our concerns in relation to the conflict of interest of the Minister, and indeed the directives to be issued, the DA believes that on balance the corporatisation of the PIC is worthy of support. However, Minister, I can assure you that we, and I have no doubt all the other colleagues on the Portfolio Committee of Finance, will check regularly whether the GEPF Board has now been fully constituted. In addition, we will interrogate the overall investment strategy concluded by the PIC, scrutinise the consequences of any directives issued by the Minister of Finance to the PIC, and check the investment performance of all moneys under the administration of the PIC.
We trust that regular reports to Parliament under the new dispensation will allow sufficient transparency on the implementation of the new legislation we pass today and we take reassurance from the fact that it will be a listed entity in relation to the Public Finance Management Act, and therefore this reporting to Parliament will clearly be adhered to. We thank you. [Applause.]
Mr T E VEZI: Madam Chair, I was originally informed that my speech would be restricted to a minute or so. So, with that in mind, I prepared a very brief speech.
The object of the Bill is to establish a statutory corporation to be known as the Public Investment Corporation Limited. Currently the commissioners are responsible for the investment of certain moneys received, held by, for and on behalf of the government and certain bodies, councils, funds and accounts. The activities of the commissioners are, however, curtailed, as they are not juristic persons.
The entire operation of the commissioners, comprising the assets, liabilities, rights and obligations, will be transferred to the corporation on a date to be determined by the Minister of Finance. The board of directors of the corporation must determine the guidelines of the corporation. In supporting this Bill, the IFP sincerely believes that disasters, like the Isibaya Fund, will never occur again. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M STEPHENS: Thank you, Chair. Hon Minister and members, I, too, shall be brief. It is a watershed day indeed, for public funds have been invested by public commissioners virtually since the Act of Union in 1910. Today, the whole vehicle of management changes into that of a public corporation. That is a very important step and one that we sincerely foresee will be to the benefit of all funds that are managed.
It was in fact an innocuous Bill. Members have already heard that in the committee we had a whole basket of red herrings drawn all over the Bill and we had to make a meal out of that. There´s only one point that’s worth mentioning about the Bill, and that is that it proves, once again, how important it is for prior consultations to take place on full basis with all role-players.
Asset management is a developing profession. It has become, indeed, very important and it is daily becoming a more involved process that requires highly trained people in order to do it with the necessary expertise. We can only wish the new corporation well in its endeavours. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M T LIKOTSI: Chairperson, hon members, since the inception of our fledgling democratic dispensation, billions of rands are wasted through unethical financial practices and the exploitation of our weak financial control system by world-class money launderers. A systematic embezzlement of state funds has become the order of the day whilst the less fortunate and poverty-stricken people are on a daily basis sinking deeper and deeper into economic oblivion.
Ambitious politicians and untrustworthy public servants are mercilessly devouring any funds at their disposal. Our justice system imposes lenient fines and sentences to the perpetrators who have turned our government into a Disneyland type of administration.
Hardened criminals are treated with velvet gloves by our courts of law while the law-abiding citizens are taxed to the extreme. This Bill should be regarded as a positive attempt to redress major shortfalls that are deeply rooted in our financial control systems. We support this Bill. Thank you. [Applause]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Chair. The MF acknowledges the important function that this entity, the Public Investment Corporation, holds, as well as a need for its efficiency and competitiveness.
Having to manage funds and assets worth approximately R360 billion is a huge responsibility. We agree that provisions need to be legislated to ensure the efficiency of this entity, to establish it as a juristic person and to ensure that it is accountable to its shareholders.
We appreciate the definition offered in clause 1 regarding persons and related legislation, which allows for better interpretation and clarity of responsibilities. The MF supports the formation of the Public Investment Corporation and its establishment as a juristic person. The body’s exemption from certain charges and levies also in the same clause 2 is substantiated, supported and concurred with by the private sector concerned.
We approve of the state being the sole shareholder in this entity, as stipulated in clause 3 that allows for this juristic person to be accountable to the state for its management, and indirectly accountable to all South Africans.
The legalities and division of duties of the entity and its board of directors are clearly laid out in clauses 5 and 6 respectively. We are pleased that this juristic person shall operate independently and that the Minister will be involved only in a selective way.
The MF wishes the corporation the very best in its responsibilities regarding the management of assets of such a large number of public sector pension funds. The MF supports the Public Investment Corporation Bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr Y S BHAMJEE: Chairperson, thank you for offering me the opportunity to address this House. The Public Investment Corporation Bill before us is indeed a very powerful weapon to ensure that we all get involved in the process of transformation. The office of the Auditor-General and Scopa have declared that resources and the PIC Act do not enable the PIC to operate effectively in a highly specialised financial service environment.
At one level, as a response to this challenge, Treasury has repealed the Public Investment Commissioners Act of 1984 and replaced it with the Public Investment Corporation Bill. I quote:
The entire operation of the commissioners, comprising the assets, liabilities, rights and obligations will be transferred to the corporation and will function as a financial service provider.
This is a significant leap, as the state in its intervention has declared that the private sector is not the only torchbearer of the corporate world with its professionalism to compete in the free market economy. This challenge, while being sensitive and acting in the best interest of its clients, requires a transformation of the PIC’s vision, approach, character, personality and work ethic to advance the state’s agenda of reconstruction and development.
The PIC’s clients, 42 in all, empower the PIC with a mandate on how the funds under its management should be invested. The PIC cannot do what it wants to do; it has to abide by that mandate. If this partnership is managed by the principle of best practice, it will be able to meaningfully address the challenge facing the state, while ensuring the best return on the investments. I am repeating some of the points made earlier, but I think it is important, precisely because there has been some degree of confusion in the outside community.
The PIC is the largest investment, we are told, of a management operation in the country, with assets worth more than R378 billion. Until yesterday I thought it was R306 billion. Well done, Minister. As a corporation, the PIC is called on to play the role of a manager with the potential to influence investment trends and priorities.
Historically investment strategies and policies for pension have always been an area of contentious debate, in the main focusing on income investment returns. Shareholders of pension funds expect investment dividends. The argument on investment of public pension funds, such as the Government Employees Pension Fund, GEPF, has always been whether investing in social responsibility projects and infrastructure development, for example black economic empowerment, would necessarily result in better yields or dividends, in other words focusing on investment returns.
However, it has also been proven that socially responsible investments offer pension funds an opportunity to make direct contributions to economic growth, development and economic empowerment. These funds, either mainly private sector or public sector funds, could contribute towards the upliftment of previously disadvantaged communities through investment in infrastructure, job creation, service provision and economic development.
However, this concern is imbued with the concern that the investment should not necessarily affect the risk profile or decrease the return to investors. It is of significance to note that the Bill does not propose the merger of the PIC and the funds of the clients. Directors will only be able to invest funds in accordance with the client mandates as required by the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, or FAIS Act. As the chairperson of the portfolio committee indicated, the mandate on investment generally follows the following format: government bonds where interest is received, but those are guaranteed bonds; equity dividends; property, as far as rental is concerned; 50% cash; and of course the high risk investments, but on bonds at least 52% is invested.
Each of these mandates would require risks; low risks which is a safe option will result in low returns and medium risks will result in medium returns and high risks will result in high returns. There is no investment that does not entail risk. There are no guarantees in any form of investment, but what is crucial is who stands behind the guarantee. In this case the Minister has clearly indicated that as far as the GPF is concerned, he or the Minister of Finance will stand as a guarantor and that should be good for all of us.
Whilst the fund managers or directors will identify and mitigate risks, the oversight role of each client’s board is crucial to ensure the maximum returns for their beneficiaries; thus the main challenge is not with the PIC, but it rests with the board of each client of the PIC. For example, the GEPF is the main investor in government bonds, and therefore it will have to effect a meaningful oversight role and thereby ensure that RDP objectives are being met.
It must be emphasised that the transfer of assets and liabilities in the Bill does not refer to assets managed on behalf of the clients. The transfer of assets refers to the operational assets of the commissioners of the PIC and we are told that this stands at R90,8 million. Previously the government appointed the commissioners who, like auditors, only monitored investments and had no influence over employees. There will now be a change in management style. The Bill, once enacted, will ensure that government appoints the board that will appoint the CEO who will appoint directors to account to the CEO. The CEO will be subject to a performance contract administered by the board.
As a corporation, the PIC would be subject to the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act and the Public Finance Management Act that would ensure sound financial management, because this is the object at the end of the day. This means that the PIC would be subject to the same regulations as other state-owned companies, as well as fall under the umbrella of the Regulator.
The PIC would be empowered to play a role as a corporate entity in a highly specialised world, but how can one do that? To protect the interest of clients, in particular pensioners, the finance portfolio committee intervened and ensured that the state will be the sole shareholder of the PIC. The PIC will remain under the ownership and control of government, bearing in mind that the PIC cannot invest funds outside a definite mandate.
The Portfolio Committee on Finance has ensured that it will remain a state entity and that the shares will not be sold. To lend sustainability to the PIC, the Treasury will pump about, we are told, lots and lots of money, in the range of about R15 billion of the money in its coffers, to promote new projects in public infrastructure, financing of small business development and in property development. In its endeavours the PIC will be guided by the priority framework of the economic cluster.
As the portfolio committee we will have to ensure that this is being done. In terms of this priority framework the following is important: Investment has to be increased in the infrastructure industrial capital, we are told to between 16% and 25% of the GDP. In terms of oversight role, we will have to ensure that the PIC is playing a particular role, improving education, training and skills development to raise productivity. If it wants to compete in the financial world, it has to ensure that the personnel it recruits are empowered to do precisely that.
Poverty and inequalities must be combated through work opportunities, income support and empowerment. Often people are recruited to participate in institutions, but are not empowered to perform the work they ought to be entrusted with, and hence criticism follows. We are calling on the PIC, and we are told that it will certainly move in the direction of empowerment. Plans are also afoot, as the Minister clearly indicated, to expend the Isibaya Fund in infrastructure and job creation.
There will be a strong focus on black economic empowerment. Why? Because the banks and financial institutions will work out where you live, what your economic background is and hence, based on that, either accept or reject your application for funding. If you do not come from an established background, if you come from Umlazi or from Mbali or any African township for that matter, the chances are that the bank will not make this money available to you in as far as the investment and property are concerned.
The PIC has to break that because once it comes into the field effectively, other role-players will come in. With that in mind, we need to ask ourselves seriously, has the business committee come to the party? Has it come to participate in the government’s agenda of reconstruction and development? The aim of transforming the PIC, according to the Minister, will focus on property investment and other sorts of things across the country, and we need to monitor if that will happen. Funding of black ownership will be prioritised by support rendered by appropriate institutions.
As a corporation, the PIC will have the legal status to attract the necessary professionalism to allow it to perform at its optimum by attracting highly skilled personnel who in the past were outpriced by the private sector. With those specialised skills, the PIC will compete aggressively in the marketplace. Furthermore, it will be able to offer jobs to young job seekers, who so often are overlooked by colonial tradition, to make their mark in the world of finance. If this does not happen, the status quo of the old order will remain.
The annual return rate of the PIC, we are told by Brian Molefe, is about 13%. This is very high indeed, and in that sense the PIC must be complemented. The PIC will invest moneys received by government in relation to a client’s loss. If there is a loss indicated, then the government will stand guarantee as far as pensions are concerned. I pose the question again: Did business come to the party to influence the national agenda?
In 1994 government’s policy was underpinned by the RDP to address the following challenges: reduction in poverty and unemployment; narrowing socioeconomic inequalities; nation-building; bridging of the divide between the two economies; and the culture of ploughing back and not one of plundering. The fact of the matter is that the private sector has not come to the party as we had expected them to. The private sector, in a way, has kept away, hence we have no choice now but to ensure that the PIC fills that gap at one level, and to do so, it has to focus, guided by government agenda.
The economy was burdened with debt and several structural problems. We inherited this before 1994. The challenge has been to manage the economy in such a way as to strike a balance between economic realities and developmental needs while keeping the confidence of important stakeholders, government, labour, the business community and foreign investors intact.
A question has been posed since 1994: Should the government have borrowed needed funds from multilateral agencies to meaningfully execute the 1994 election mandate? Would this have increased government’s burden and dependency on the multilateral agencies, resulting in subordinating the state to foreign agendas and conditions? Did the business leadership come to the party to influence the agenda?
If the route of reaching out to multilateral corporations had been followed, it could be argued, we would have experienced a short-term economic boom, and then a long and painful recession would have been the order of the day. In 1996 the government in its wisdom appreciated the long- term effects of the short-term boom of the policy and amid severe criticism took the bold step and changed to Gear.
Eight years later the economy is on a sound footing: From a growth of 1% we are now in the region of a growth of 3%; investment between 1984 and 1993 shrank to 2,9% and it has now expanded to 4,7%; the inflation average was 14,3% between 1994 and 1993, it is now down to less than 6%; and in 1993 the deficit was high, it is now down to 3%. Concerning financial outflows, there was a financial outflow of about a R46 billion, but now there is a finance account net inflow of R169 billion. There was an investment boycott and now there are unprecedented rating upgrades.
Our debt service as a percentage has dropped. South Africa’s credit rating is high, and South Africa now can only look forward. In fact, as we celebrate our 10 years of freedom, we are adjusting to change by using the government’s readiness to inject major investments to meet the RDP goals. If we don’t we must pose the question, who will?
We are much wiser and we have learnt from our experiences, and in some instances at a huge cost in one or two of the Isibaya Funds. Like any other business investment opportunities there are risks, but it offers moral returns and market returns. If money goes into a project that has failed, it is not money lost at one level, it is still in the market.
Given the fact that government has taken the lead to foster a corporation, why is business not fully endorsing a process that it naturally would support? They must come to the party. Is it that it wants to shape the agenda of the PIC and thereby safeguard and influence its vested interests rather than that of the government? We are arguing that effectively. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Chairperson, may I express appreciation to all the participants in the debate and the parties for their support. A few issues need to be dealt with, and the first of these is that of trusteeship of pension funds, and I have actively campaigned, and will continue to actively campaign, for the rights of workers to decide on the investment policy of their pension funds.
It is correct - and it must be so - and I have dealt with the situation with some alarm where the trade unions were not prepared to come up with trustees because they were caught in the Public Sector Bargaining Council. That was the reason for the hold-up, and I am glad that the trustees are now there.
In the GPF law, which in itself is curious because the GPF law is the product of the Public Sector Bargaining Council and not an Act of Parliament, the key issue, however, is that in the law, apart from the trustees, the Minister of Finance has the right to veto investment policy decisions. It is there.
The key issue is how we can ensure that trustees are equipped to demonstrate a role model to other trustees as well, so that you do not have a repeat of what happened in some of the other pension funds where the trade unions have actually behaved rather badly. We want to ensure that this works in the best interests and that in respect of the investment decisions you can have codetermination.
What is happening at the moment is that in the current year some R110 billion is transferred to private sector management. We have no control over it and with R110 billion that amount of money is so large, it is in fact the whole of the market.
So, we cannot index ourselves against anything else because of the quantum that we made available. What we need is a strong capable body ensuring that we can direct investments in a way that would facilitate growth and development within this economy.
Now, the hon Taljaard has profound concerns about the fact that the Act allows for direction from the Minister of Finance, but it must be like that. At the end of the day the Constitution requires the Minister of Finance to be responsible as a keeper of the fiscus. And if you have a contraction and the GPF law does not even provide for a hands-off approach entirely, you will open up a huge liability that we will have to make good in a different way.
I would like to invite the member to look at other defined benefit funds. The largest is CalPERS, the California State Employees Pension Fund, and the Controller of California, the treasurer of the State of California in other words, is the sole trustee of the fund. The Act is very clear about the rights of trustees. Similarly, in the case of a large defined benefit fund such as with the Dutch workers, it is exactly in the same position, because there the Minister of Finance is in fact also the sole trustee.
We are taking this in a different direction. We are taking a position towards codetermination by bringing workers in as trustees. But at the end of the day you have to have a keeper somewhere in the pack. I do not think we should apologise for that. We cannot hand this thing over entirely to market fundamentalism.
In respect of the Isibaya Fund, at least two members have spoken of a disaster, yet I am not quite sure what that disaster has been. The hon Bhamjee referred to the fact that in the nature of the investment environment there is always a risk. Yes, there has been some risk, but as the annual report of the PIC will reflect, the returns on the Isibaya Fund for the 2003-2004 year are in fact 45,8%. That return is based on the roughly 1% of money under management, which is allocated by the PIC to the Isibaya fund.
In conclusion, clearly we want an institution that is strong and accountable. We must maintain an interest in ensuring that there are returns, and I am glad to hear that across the board from all parties there is an interest in knowing that the PIC will report to Parliament. I would like to, of course, caution against interfering in the investment policy direction, because that would remain the responsibility of trustees, and they must be empowered to do that.
There is a very fine line, and I think we need to be cautious and in the forthcoming discussions maintain that as a caveat. I would like to believe that once the PIC is constructed, as a Bill allows for its construction, it would be better able to deal with the thrust of the agreements of the Growth and Development Summit last year.
But because we are dealing with a fairly sporadic environment within the investment arena, we always need to be cautious, and I am sure that the ultimate safeguard will be the responsibility of the PIC to Parliament. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
NATIONAL PAYMENT SYSTEM AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. Hon members, South Africa’s financial system is generally described as “robust, highly developed, sophisticated and well regulated”. We boast a particularly stable banking system as compared with most other emerging markets. Our banks are well managed and most have sophisticated risk management systems and corporate governance structures in place. South Africa is effectively compliant with all of the Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision.
The benefits of a stable financial system are numerous. It has enabled us to weather periods of emerging market volatility, in terms of sharp adjustments in capital flows and the exchange rate, without these resulting in banking crises. In some other emerging markets currency shocks have translated into banking crises, often with massive costs to the real economy and the fiscus, long into the future.
A stable financial system is also a vital foundation for sustainable growth and development. It allows for the efficient allocation of capital, the protection of savings and the management of risk. The strength of South Africa’s financial system has undoubtedly been a key component in this remarkable period of positive real growth that the economy has experienced over the past few years.
Maintaining this stability, however, is an ongoing task. The National Payment System Amendment Bill before the House today seeks to contribute to this ongoing objective of improving the financial stability of South Africa’s banking system.
There are four main reasons for the principal changes to the Act of 1998. Firstly, the most important amendment is to allow the inclusion of the South African rand in the Multicurrency Continuous Linked Settlement, the so-called CLS, operated by CLS Bank in the United States.
Secondly, the amending Bill clarifies the role of the Reserve Bank and the payment system management body, currently the Payments Association of South Africa.
Thirdly, the Act is amended to allow for smaller financial institutions to collect, for example, payments that are due on behalf of third persons such as city councils. This amendment will also enable second- and third-tier banks to participate in the payment system.
Finally, wider powers are granted to the SA Reserve Bank in relation to the issuance of directives. These powers will further enable reserve banks to include second- and third–tier banks that have the correct systems to participate in the payment system.
Deputy Chair, as I mentioned earlier, the proposed inclusion of the South African rand in the CLS will position the rand globally as one of the top 15 currencies. Furthermore, the inclusion demonstrates that the South African payment system provides for global best practice and will foster domestic and international investor confidence in the integrity and robustness of the National Payment System.
The amending Bill seeks to rectify certain provisions in the current Act that are ambiguous, and provide an enabling environment to improve access to the payment system.
I am convinced that the promulgation of this Bill will contribute substantially to the national prerogative of promoting financial stability in our banking system and I have great pleasure in placing the Bill before the House for its second reading. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms J L FUBBS: Hon Chairperson, hon members of this House, it is a privilege to be given the opportunity, in my maiden speech, to speak, through the National Assembly, to the people of South Africa.
The invitation to the South African Reserve Bank to consider becoming one of the 15 currencies in the international Multicurrency Continuous Linked Settlement system has, without doubt, enhanced the financial stature of our country, South Africa.
The rand, as I said, now joins 15 international currencies in this way. This invitation by the international financial community acknowledges the sound and stable state the ANC-led government has built in only 10 years. The robust nature of South Africa’s financial management without doubt shifts the curtain of uncertainty around the currency.
But what is all this about, the Continuous Linked Settlement system; what does it actually mean? It is part of a National Payment System, a series of procedures involving the settlement of payments between banks on behalf of their clients. The amendments to this Bill will enable South Africa not only to become part of an international CLS system, but also recognises the good financial governance that is now effective in our country.
The system, and membership of the system, will also reduce the risks associated with cross-currency transactions by simultaneously settling the two legs of a foreign exchange transaction, which we realise in our financially volatile environment globally is a major factor.
The dynamics of credit and liquidity risk were highlighted in the collapse of the German Herstatt Bank. This illustrates the implication when a bank fails to meet its payment obligations. One day the German authorities simply closed down the bank while, in fact, it had already been paid by other international clients. And as a result of the closure of that bank, and without a Continuous Link Settlement system, there was a chain effect, of which perhaps those of us who were not around in 1974 have forgotten the financial implications to major financial countries, let alone South Africa as an emerging country.
South Africa, as part of the CLS, which is vested in 66 member countries, joins, in a way, an exclusive financial club. By recognising one specific time - another aspect of the system - does mean that everything occurs in real time. They have established that the Central European time is the one they will use with a five-hour window for settlement.
But what does this mean? It means that payments will occur simultaneously to avert the kind of problem that occurred with the collapse of the Herstatt Bank. The recognition of the rand is very advantageous to South Africa. Among the many advantages is that foreign direct investment will be positively impacted upon. Indeed, without membership of such a system, domestic banks could incur additional transactional costs, and this may, in fact, even lead to a two-tier pricing system.
The rand now becomes, or will become, with the adoption of this Act and membership of the CLS, a premier currency. The fact that the rand, in less than 10 years of democracy, could have achieved this is a tribute to our financial management. [Applause.]
It is also a tribute to the development of an environment of political and social certainty. In fact, the strength of our financial sector has nurtured a climate not only for the currency to achieve international recognition, but also for the country to place itself alongside other internationally recognised economies.
As a result of our robust system, we have managed to withstand the currency contagions arising from the financial turbulences in Asia, Mexico and in Argentina, to mention a few. And I have no doubt that that is the reason the international financial countries have recognised the financial stability of South Africa. But it is a great pity that we in South Africa find it difficult to acknowledge our financial achievements, and perhaps this is simply a sign of our nascent democracy; indeed, our democratic youthfulness.
But what becomes very important is the timing of this. It becomes very important to us to meet the deadline and accept the invitation by passing this Act in November. If we miss that deadline, we may perhaps have to endure, despite our financial robustness, a two-year wait.
By meeting this deadline, we join the Korean won, the Hong Kong dollar and the New Zealand dollar.
Hierdie uitdaging…[This challenge…]
… this challenge, is perhaps the final financial frontier in this first decade of democracy.
‘n Mens kan nie hierdie uitdaging ignoreer nie. Die vraag wat almal vra is: Is dit net ʼn droom? Maar as ons nadink oor wat die afgelope tien jaar gebeur het, dan is daar geen twyfel dat ons ‘n baie langer pad kon gestap het en ek glo dat die son oor dié verdeelde Huis begin ondergaan het … (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[One cannot ignore this challenge. The question that everyone asks is: It is only a dream? But if we think of what has happened over the past 10 years there is no doubt that we could have walked a far longer path and I believe that the sun has started setting over this divided House…]
Indeed, as we celebrate this first decade of democracy, we see that the sun is rising, not only on a united nation in which all South Africans share her wealth, but also that we become part and parcel of an international financial system. The passing of the National Payment System Amendment Bill will acknowledge this vote of international confidence in our country as a whole.
Hon Chairperson, there are many, many imperatives that this Bill addresses. Perhaps I should just look at a few of them. I think we are all well aware of the need to address the risk: Credit risk, liquidity risk, legal risk, operational risk and systemic risk.
Most of us, as ordinary households, appreciate credit risk and most of us also appreciate a liquidity risk. Very often most of us just see this in our households as a bit of a cash-flow problem. If we can accelerate and escalate that cash-flow problem to a billion rand problem, we realise the magnitude of that risk without going into a simultaneous settlement.
On the legal side, I think it is a tribute to our country that we have been invited to join this small club of currencies – 15 in total - because this recognises that the South African legal system is up there at the front. It gives recognition to our good governance practices.
Yet another issue is the operational side - and I must really make an appeal to the banks involved, particularly the commercial banks - that it becomes incredibly important and an absolute imperative that we ensure that the technical aspects required thereof remain in place. The fact that we have this invitation says that they are currently there.
The DEPUTY HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: Hon member, I regret your time has expired.
Ms J L FUBBS: Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr P J RABIE: Hon Minister, hon members, the National Payment System Amendment Bill of 2004 amends the National Payment Systems Act of 1998. The most important section in the proposed legislation is that it enables the South African rand to be used in continuous linked settlement and eliminates foreign exchange ethics settlement risks through the introduction of payment versus reciprocal payment. What this means in essence is that both legs of a foreign exchange transaction are simultaneously settled by means of a multicurrency continuously linked settlement. To elaborate further, the CLS Bank operates as a multicurrency bank and will establish a settlement account with the SA Reserve Bank.
This Bill will have no financial implications for the state and consultations were held with the National Treasury, the banking industry and all respective role-players in the payment industry. The CLS system came into operation in September 2002 and the first currencies were the Australian dollar, the Canadian dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen, UK sterling, the Swiss Frank and the US dollar. The second wave of currencies was the Danish kroner, the Swedish krona, the Norwegian krone and the Singapore dollar. The Reserve Bank applied to have the South African rand admitted in the third wave of currencies, which will include the New Zealand dollar, the Korean won and the Hong Kong dollar.
International payment dictates that banking systems must be protected against systemic and crosscurrency risk. In a submission to the Portfolio Committee on Finance the example of the Bankhaus Herrstatt in 1974 was cited, where the closure of that bank initiated a chain reaction that disrupted payments and settlement systems and resulted in the loss of an estimated 60% of funds transferred. Settlement risk has two main risk variables, namely credit risk and liquidity risk. Credit risk arises because after a bank irrevocably commits to pay its currency, its counter party may fail to meet its obligations to pay the full value. Liquidity risk can be defined that a counter party may not be able to settle for full value and at the due date but could do so at some unspecified time thereafter. It was mentioned that an important source of liquidity risk is operational risk, which in layman’s terms means that a payment may be misdirected or may not be carried out in due time, due to human error or technical failure.
The CLS Bank originated through the efforts of a group of major foreign bank participants, known as the G20 banks, which worked out a solution based upon the currency payment versus the payment principle in which transactions are settled simultaneously. The DA supports this Bill. This Bill will enable the rand to become one of the 15 most sought-after settlement currencies and one of the strategic currencies in emerging economies. The inclusion is also a clear indication that the South African payment system is accepted in global economic circles.
Allow me to thank the hon Minister and the officials of the Reserve Bank, which worked tirelessly to finalise this Bill and to meet the set deadline. This will definitely strengthen domestic and international business confidence and enhance the robustness and the competitiveness of our payment system. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr T E VEZI: Thank you, Madam Chair. This amending Bill caters mainly for the inclusion of the South African rand in the continuous linked settlement. The rand will therefore be included in the third wave of currencies, which will include the New Zealand dollar, the Korean won and the Hong Kong dollar.
Since the collapse of the Herstatt Bank, settlement risk has been highlighted. The Bill attempts to address the problems of settlement risk, finality, certainty, and exposure to both credit and liquidity risks.
The IFP supports this Bill and hopes that it will also add to the promotion of growth, and result in the creation of jobs. Thank you.
Mr M STEPHENS: Thank you, Madam Chair. It is indeed an honour for South Africa to be included at this early stage with the first 15 currencies. The UDM supports this Bill, which makes that possible.
Gewoonlik maak ek nie danktoesprake aan ‘n Minister nie, maar ek dink in hierdie geval is daar dank wat die agb Minister toekom. Hy het toegelaat dat die pas van hierdie wetgewing versnel word, want daar was ‘n sperdatum verbonde aan hierdie hele transaksie. Die saak moes goedgekeur word voor die einde van November, aldus ons inligting. Die rede daarvoor was dat Suid- Afrika saam met die ander lande toegelaat word, want lande word nie een-een toegelaat word nie. Dit was dus dringend noodsaaklik dat hierdie stuk wetgewing betyds goedgekeur word. Dit was eintlik reeds laat toe dit voor die komitee gedien het, om selfs vanjaar nog goedgekeur te kon word. Derhalwe, baie dankie aan die Minister wat dit tot ons land se eer versnel het, sodat die Parlement dit vinnig kan afhandel en vandag kon goedkeur. Ek sê vir u dankie, Voorsitter. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[I do not usually make thank-you speeches to a Minister, but I think that in this instance the hon Minister is owed a debt of gratitude. He has allowed the pace of this legislation to be accelerated, because there was a deadline attached to this whole transaction. According to our information the matter had to be approved before the end of November. The reason for this was that South Africa had to be admitted together with the other countries, because countries are not admitted individually. Thus it was of the utmost importance that this piece of legislation be approved timeously. In fact, when it was tabled before the committee it was already too late for it even to be approved this year. Therefore, thank you very much to the Minister, who accelerated it to the honour of our country in order for Parliament to be able to conclude it rapidly and to approve it today. I thank you, Chairperson.]
Mr M T LIKOTSI: Chairperson, the PAC of Azania supports this amending Bill. It must be remembered that the principal and original function of banks is to serve as a middleman in the making of payments. In doing so, they transform inactive capital into active capital that yields a profit. They collect all kinds of revenue and place this at the disposal of the capitalist class.
The Reserve Bank settlement participants must be protected from fraudulent actions made by money traffickers who may destroy our currency through a circulation of fake notes and coins in our systems.
We defeated an oppressive political system in our country and are now faced with a different economic enemy of our times. The state has to double its security systems to protect the integrity of our country and its Constitution. The nation needs undivided protection from all forms of systemic risks. I thank you.
Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Chair. With times changing so fast and technology advancing daily, we need to keep up with the changes and develop ourselves in line with such changes. South Africa is developing into a strong global entity, and we need to keep up with the global trends and developments to ensure that we become even stronger. The MF accepts that the financial sector also experiences such changes and development, and that the sector constantly needs to adjust to such changes.
Having viewed the provisions that this Bill amends regarding the payment system in South Africa and such relations abroad, the MF fully supports such development in this sector. Provisions imply strict legalities and firm management over this payment system in relation to all parties concerned. The banks all appear adequately aligned to the payment system. It is hoped that these adjustments shall benefit better management.
The MF supports the National Payment System Amendment Bill. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Igama la makhosikazi! [The name of women!]
HON MEMBERS: Malibongwe! [Let it be praised!]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Deputy Chair. I would like to clearly express my appreciation to the members who have spoken. They devoted a lot of time and attention to the discussion of the Bill and the examples mentioned. I owe a debt of gratitude to the committee because the Bill arrived late and it was taken through a circuitous route to get to the committee, but I would really like to express my appreciation.
Perhaps I should say to the hon Likotsi that the Azanian shilling is not included, it is only the South African rand that is covered. I thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES PENSION LAW AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S BOTHA): As there is no list of speakers, are there any objections to the Bill being read a second time?
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Can the committee’s chairperson, by agreement with all parties, say one or two words to explain the contents of the Bill?
Dr R H DAVIES: Madam Chair, the Government Employees Pension Law Amendment Bill that is presented to Parliament from time to time generally arise from collective bargaining processes in the public sector collective bargaining chamber. Some of these require legislative amendments. The Portfolio Committee on Finance has generally taken the view that when it’s confronted with this kind of legislation it should, by and large, limit itself to making sure that the provisions in the Bill do indeed conform to the agreements.
The Bill that is before us at the moment is informed by two resolutions of the public sector collective bargaining chamber, namely Resolution 12 of 2002 and Resolution 7 of 2003. They give effect to such issues as an agreement to provide guarantees for home loans of members and to recover the costs from any defaulting members, including interest payments.
They provide that interest will not be payable on late payments of funeral benefits, coupled with an assurance that the fund will pay funeral benefits within two days. There are provisions on dormant membership, and there is also an agreement which limits the definition of mutual interest within the GEPF to benefit-related matters.
Beyond this there are a few minor drafting matters. All of these, we were satisfied, derived from agreements within the chamber. The one comment that we did receive, which raised a few questions about some of these matters, was later withdrawn. The Bill was adopted unanimously in the committee and I therefore commend it to the House. Thank you. [Applause.]
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
PETROLEUM PIPELINES LEVIES BILL
(First Reading debate)
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): As there is no list of speakers …
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, I wonder if I could address you on this matter please? I do so with the permission of the ANC Whips but, of course, I really need your permission to do so. I want to say that the DA is concerned at the way this Bill was handled and the way it appears on the Order Paper today. We were notified late last night that this was going to be on the Order Paper, but in fact it was so late that we only picked it up this morning.
It is an important piece of legislation. We are not going to oppose it. We are happy that there is no debate on it. But we do simply ask the ANC Whippery to make sure that when pieces of legislation like this are, in fact, placed on the Order Paper that all parties are forewarned timeously about that. Thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member, I think you should address the issue at the Chief Whips Forum.
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chair, I just want to state for the record that we do take the concerns raised by Mr Ellis on board, but I also want to put on record that we did notify all parties in writing that these items would be put on the Order Paper. I do think this is a matter that could be discussed further in the Chief Whips Forum. Thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): May we then proceed? Again, as there is no list of speakers, are there any objections to the Bill being read a first time?
There was no debate.
Bill read a first time.
PETROLEUM PIPELINES LEVIES BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME, IN TERMS OF SECTION 231(2) OF CONSTITUTION CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPORVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME, IN TERMS OF SECTION 231(2) OF CONSTITUTION
Dr R H DAVIES: Chairperson, a few days ago I had the opportunity to explain to the House with regard to two other such agreements - the broad parameters and double taxation agreements - which generally provide that people who are engaged in short-term temporary economic activities in one jurisdiction will not be subject to taxation by the authorities of that jurisdiction if they come from the other contracting party.
They encourage trade and commercial interaction, as well as cultural, educational and other exchanges, by removing double tax impediments. They also often provide for an exchange of information between the tax authorities of the countries concerned.
The double taxation agreements that South Africa has been involved in have followed a model. This model is applicable in these particular cases, and although the model allows for some variation of some of the details, the details in these two cases, Bulgaria and Ethiopia, are very much within the standard parameters. They were agreed on unanimously in the committee.
Let me just say, by way of conclusion, that I think it is of some small significance that we are today actually approving an agreement that will enhance co-operation with Ethiopia, a country that is the headquarters of the African Union. And we are doing so on the day when the Pan-African Parliament, one of the institutions of the African Union, will be convening for the first time in South Africa. I think it has some significance. I thank you very much. [Applause.]
There was no debate.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income approved.
Convention between the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income approved.
CELEBRATING OUR LIVING HERITAGE IN OUR TENTH YEAR OF DEMOCRACY
(Subject for Discussion)
Mr S L TSENOLI: Chairperson, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
Celebrating our living heritage during this 10th year of our democracy and freedom is very significant. This debate takes place hours after the official opening of the Pan-African Parliament, a key institution of the African Union, in Midrand in our country today.
We are proud to be so privileged to be actively writing, building and crafting the heritage of the return and the reassertion of the African voice. For us these continental initiatives are an offshoot, a parallel unfolding of the reconstruction and development of our country.
They constitute the broad-based campaign codified in our Constitution, to reverse the colonial, apartheid, racist, sexist, and exploitative legacy of the past. Pre-1994 the Reconstruction and Development Programme observed that, as a result of that legacy, in every sphere of our society, be it economic, social, political, moral, cultural, environmental, South Africans are confronted with serious problems.
For us, the year 1994 represents an important dramatic moment in history, because that is when we started a systematic confrontation with the effects of that past.
Ka mantswe a mang ke ha naha e se e kgutletse ho beng ba yona, re se re itlotla, mme lentswe e se e le la rona. [In other words, it is when land restitution has been completed when we pride ourselves and we have a say.] Such is the observation of a critic of the arts and culture sector on our post-1994 achievements to date. There are a number of things to celebrate in this, the 10th year of our democracy. Firstly, while it is true that the arts are still underfunded, we have never had as much funding for arts and culture as we have today. The Department of Arts and Culture has a budget of more than a R1 billion; a 40% increase since it was still part of the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology.
The National Lottery provides more than R100 million per year in new funding for the sector, and Create SA, a vehicle to fund skills development from Seta funding, has substantial funding for this purpose. This is besides the funding through statutory bodies such as the National Arts Council, the National Film and Video Forum and provincial bodies.
The recent DTI announcement of a new funding dispensation for films and various film commissions in the three major cities testifies to the growth of this sector. We have 17 local films slated for production this year. This is unprecedented in the country’s history and it includes the first one in an indigenous language, which hon members will remember features Leleti Khumalo as a leading performer.
Our committee returned last Friday from visiting Freedom Park Trust in Pretoria, one of the key presidential projects. The park is destined to be a very influential monument that speaks both to our past and present, presenting a healing and cleansing opportunity for our country. Across the areas of music and dance, prominent icons, indigenous knowledge systems and in dialogue we intend to surface more vigorously perspectives that have been marginalised. The Department of Arts and Culture has correctly phased the theme “Celebrating our Living Heritage” for three years. It will give us an opportunity to forcefully assert our national identity and our proudly South African character. The three spheres of government have a key role to play to unlock the potential that remains unexplored. The impact of their efforts will be multiplied by active partnerships that already exist and those yet to be formed.
Our rich living heritage lies in the many languages that we speak in our country, and the many cultures, religions and political traditions. Unlike the past systems, we need to actively promote the flourishing of these and embrace the new things that arise from our interactions as well as from the new knowledge and information that emerges today.
However, the cynicism of the ignorant and the greed of patent pirates must be tackled forcefully in many ways. One way is through cultural exchange, exposure, and active protection of those who have knowledge about these things. We must prevent those people who could benefit from the knowledge of local people, who have used some of these, for example, medicinal plants, from benefiting from it. In the case of the popular Imbube, many have benefited, except the family of the originators of the song.
Our principal task today is to identify, interview and record, before it is too late, those who are still alive, young and old, who possess exceptional talent, skill, knowledge and ability in our neighbourhoods, for the benefit of more people now, and in the future.
Lefa ha le tswe ho ba seng ba ile boyabatho feela. Le ba ntseng ba phela bao re itlotlang ka bona ka lebaka la tsebo eo e ikgethileng ya bona, ho tsa methokgo, ho tsa mmino, tsebo ya dipuo, diroki, dikgeleke, babetli le dinono tse fapaneng. Ha re bua ka batho le ka botho ba bona, re bua ka tshebediso ya dintho tsa mofuta o jwalo.
Empa ha re ke re hlaloseng hore hantlentle hangata ha re bua ka botho re ye be re bua ka eng. Re ye be re bua ka boitjaro, re bua ka bohlweki, re bua ka ho hlompha ba bang le ho itlhompha, re bua ka tshehetsano, re bua ka tshebedisano-mmoho, boithaopi le boitelo. Ke bona botho boo re buang ka bona bona he. Jwale, ha re bua ka ho keteka, monate oo re o unang tsebong tsa rona le lefa leo re nang le lona hona jwale, ke ka hobane re hlokomela hore nakong e fetileng, seo e ileng yaba sona sesosa sa ntwa ya boitseko ke ha re ne re kgahlapetswa, re hatellwa le ka maoto, hore tsa rona di shebelwe fatshe di se nkelwe hloohong.
Tse neng di bonahala di ena le molemo di ile tsa utsuwa mme tsa sebediswa ke ba bang mme rona ra se ke ra una molemo ho tsona. Jwale re re ka ha naha e se e kgutletse ho beng ba yona, re e lwanetse. Re tshwanetse ho kgutlisa seriti sa tshebediso ya dintho tseo re hodisitsweng ka tsona, tseo le hona jwale di ntseng di ena le molemo o moholo maphelong a rona.
Letsholo lena leo re leng ho lona leo lefapha le itseng le nke dilemo tse tharo, ke ka lebaka la hobane re batla ho tsitsisa botjhaba ba rona jwaloka MaAfrika Borwa a seng a lokolohile ho tloha ka 1994. MaAfrika Borwa a tshwanetseng ho itshupa ha ba ena le ba bang ba dinaha tse ding, hore bona ba tswa Afrika Borwa. Hono ho bolela hore re tshwanetse ho hlokomela, re natse le hore ka dinako tse ding ho na le hore ha ke bua Sesotho, ke sa tsebe Sezulu, ke be ke shebela batho ba buang Sezulu fatshe.
Ha ke bua Senyesemane, e leng yona ntho e tlwaelehileng haholo, ha motho a sa bue Senyesemane ha se motho wa ho reng [Ditlatse.] Re itse, ka ha naha ena e se e le ya rona, re itlotla ka yona, ka ha e kgutletse ho beng ba yona. Puo ke tsa rona, re tla ikgantsha ka tsona, re tla di bua, mme ha ho mang ya tla re thiba. Ba tla qetella ba e tsebile ba e buile ntho ena. [Ditlatse.]
Modulasetulo, re motlotlo haholo, jwaloka ka ha ke ile ka re ha ke qala mona, letsholo lena le etsahala mohlang Palamente ya Afrika e thehwang ka hara naha ya rona. Katleho e kaalo eo re bileng le yona, ya hore e re ha re bua le ba bang ka hara Afrika, ba bone e le rona ba tshwanetseng hore re be sebaka mmo palamente ena e tlang ho thewa teng. Re lebohile haholo hobane hona ho etsahala mahetleng a moetapele wa rona e moholo, Comrade Thabo Mbeki, moetapele ya hlwahlwa ka hara kontinente kaofela yona.
Ba ile ba bona hore e ye naheng ya hae, ka lebaka la hore o se a itshupile ka diketso le ka dipuo hore o emetse Afrika kaofela ha yona. Jwale le rona he, batho beso, ha re se ke ra tshwarang ba bang hampe, ka lebaka la hobane ba sa bue dipuo tsa rona, hobane ba tlotse meedi, le ha ba kene ka ntle ho molao. Rona ha re tiiseng hore molao o sebetse, empa bona re ba tshware jwaloka batho, re ba hlomphe jwaloka MaAfrika a matle, le ha ba tobane le mathata.
Lebaka la hore re lwantshane le ho tlisa kgotso dinaheng tsena kaofela ha tsona, ke hobane re amana le bona ka dipuo, ka bonono, ka botjhaba le ka dintho tse ding tse fapaneng. Jwale re tshwanetse hore jwaloka ha re theha palamente e kopanyang Afrika ka kakaretso tjena, re kgothaletse batho ba ha bo rona hore ba itshware ka tsela e amohelehileng e bontshang kutlwisiso ya hore jwaloka MaAfrika, re ntho e le nngwe, re bana ba thari e ntsho, re ngatana. (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)
[Heritage does not come only from those who died. And those who still live, with whom we pride ourselves, because of their special knowledge, in traditional medicine, in music, in their knowledge of languages, poets, eloquence speakers, carpenters and different artists. When we talk of people and their humanity, we are talking about the use of such things.
Let us explain, when we actually talk about humanity in many cases what we are really talking about. We are talking about sustainability, we are talking about cleanliness, we are talking about respect for others and respecting ourselves, we are talking about supporting each other, we are talking about working together, volunteering and devotion. That is the humanity that we are talking about. Now, when we talk about celebrating, the satisfaction that we get from our knowledge and the heritage that we have presently, that is why we are aware of what in the past was the cause of the struggle for freedom.
We were ill treated and oppressed, so that our culture must be looked upon as inferior and not be given any consideration. Whatever they deemed useful was taken away from us and used without any benefit to us. Now that we have regained the freedom we fought for, we must restore the dignity of our traditions, which are still very important in our lives.
The campaign, which according to the department will take a period of three years, is aimed at restoring and protecting our culture as free South Africans since 1994. That means we should be careful that if I speak Sesotho and I do not understand IsiZulu, I should not degrade IsiZulu.
When one speaks English, as is the normal practice, the other person who does not speak English is regarded as a nonentity [Applause]. We said, now that the land is ours, we pride ourselves, because land restitution is complete. Our languages are ours, we shall be proud of our languages, we shall speak them and there will be no one to stop us. They will end up knowing and speaking our languages. [Applause.]
Chairperson, we are very proud, as I indicated before, that this campaign happens when the Pan-African Parliament is being formed in our country. We have had such a great success that when we talk to others in Africa, they deem it fit that South Africa is where this parliament should be erected. We are very thankful that this is the responsibility of our leader, Comrade Thabo Mbeki, the most active leader on the whole continent. They deem it fit to take the Pan-African Parliament to his country, because he has shown in words and deeds that he stands for the whole of Africa. Now, fellow countrymen, let us not ill-treat others just because they do not speak our languages, because they crossed borders, even though they are illegal immigrants. Let us ensure that the law takes its course, but we should treat them as human beings, we should respect them as beautiful Africans, even though they are faced with problems.
The reason why we fight for peace in all these countries is because we are related to them through languages, arts, culture and other different things. Now, as we are laying the foundation that is uniting Africa in general, we must encourage our people to behave in an acceptable way, showing understanding that as Africans we are one, we are a black nation, we are united.]
Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter. We have arrived. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Chairperson, as the people of South Africa are invited to participate in these heritage month celebrations, it is pertinent to reflect that this country should indeed be the ideal repository for its 11 constitutionally recognised language groups, each with their own particular culture niche, as well as the representative of the many unofficial languages and cultural groups whose families settled here generations ago, or who may well have settled here last week. Having one of the most evolved constitutions in the world has indeed ensured that any person who chooses to enter into a life-partnership with this country is welcomed with open arms.
It is gratifying to note that in this very Chamber there are members of Parliament who have chosen to bring their disparate skills from other lands and have dedicated their lives, as have we all, to work for this new South Africa of ours in our common vision to ensure an improved lifestyle for each and every individual in the land.
We see, for example, that there are today several MPs in the House from Taiwan: an hon member, there on my right, Mr Huang, within the ranks of the ANC; others to my left, hon members Mr Wang and Ms Chang, and indeed the DA daily enjoys the input made by NCOP MP Sherry Chen. All of these MPs, no doubt, are contributing invaluable expertise to this country, and for that we thank them and welcome them.
Yet, for some reason this welcome the House proffers to members of Parliament who hail from other lands seems suddenly and shockingly unreal in this month in which each of us is called upon to look back and celebrate the rich tapestry of our individual heritage – all equally important in the eyes of the Constitution. We are suddenly experiencing a xenophobic attitude that flies in the face of everything this Parliament represents.
Time and again we have watched utterly unprovoked and irrelevant personal attacks made upon my colleague, the hon Dr Enyinna Nkem-Abonta, because he was born not in Taiwan, but in Nigeria. What an example to set our nation during Heritage Month!
Xenophobia is against the law and is repugnant to any right–thinking individual who gives it more than a moment’s consideration. [Applause.] Is this country moving towards the acceptance of selective xenophobia? Is this state of affairs going on? It is as vile as that which we lived under during the dark days of apartheid. If a single person is attacked again and again, if he or she somehow both blamed and despised as a lesser being in relation to the circumstances of his or her birth, does that mean that it will somehow evolve into the truth?
That is exactly the sort of illogical thinking that has begun to rear its head in this House. It is despicable in its intentional utterance in precisely the same way that repeatedly labelling a person a traitor is recognised by the DA as a cold and calculated strategy to create an urban myth, accepted as the truth by South Africans. So is the xenophobic attitude expressed towards my hon colleague in this House. [Interjections.] We will not tolerate one single repetition of this apartheid-style race- based attack on a member of our party. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
South Africa used to be referred to globally as the “rainbow nation” before this peculiar move towards a monotone society where whatever is not the norm is of necessity something to be attacked, where there seems to be an open season on certain cultural groups, but not on others.
To cite an example, the nation is watching as the ruling party chooses to erase much of the historical evidence that the Afrikaners and their ancestors, the Boers, ever lived here. My colleague, the hon Désirée van der Walt, will later look at the quiet destruction of the Afrikaans culture. In 1994 there were 2 000 Afrikaans-medium schools in South Africa. Today there are only about 300 left. [Interjections.]
Presumably the aim is to wipe out the existence of the Afrikaner once and for all. [Interjections.] The world is watching as this cultural group is cleansed from the nation; with Afrikaans names wiped from towns, streets and cities; as their education in their home language comes under threat and as their language is removed as a language of daily life; all of it just erased, erased, erased. [Interjections.]
This cultural group has, as we’ve seen, been politically and morally emasculated by their fear of being labelled racist should they attempt to demand the linguistic and cultural rights that are accorded them in the Constitution.
On a lighter note, it is a source of considerable amusement that as the architects of apartheid have now finally been absorbed for digestion by the ruling party, they who are attempting to rid themselves of the inevitable indigestion caused by this move are now referring to the liberal DA as a right-wing party. Indeed, we see evidence of an attempt to erase the proud heritage of our party by referring to it in the terms formerly saved exclusively for the NNP. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S BOTHA): Order, hon members! Order!
Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Chair, let me reiterate: No one has the right to despise or denigrate a person’s heritage, or indeed to attempt to alter it in the name of political expediency.
One of the great success stories in the upholding of cultural traditions lies with the various facets of the South African Indian community. They are proud of where they come from, and proud to be South African. They relish their individual cultures, celebrate their ancestry and add invaluable threads of brightness to the tapestry that is this country.
This brings me to the group I have come to believe is most under threat in this country as a single, identifiable cultural entity. I am referring here to people who speak English as a first language in this country. Only last week I was informed by a linguistics professor that there is no such thing as an English culture here in this country. The presumption is that every person in this country may find pride in their heritage, unless their roots may be traced back six generations ago to certain parts of the northern hemisphere. If this is the case, then by default they lose their right to cultural recognition. I beg to differ! [Interjections.]
It is interesting, in a land which purports to celebrate its diversity, that specific cultural minority groups should be targeted and locked out of society by, for example, affirmative action. By ensuring that the children of these minorities are locked out of the economy by virtue of their race, the ruling party is ensuring that they leave the country. One doctor in four in England was trained here in South Africa; and they leave their magnificent home not willingly, but because their cultural groups are no longer welcome here. Emigration is often the only career-advancing move that people who speak English as a first language are able to make. It is their only option. It is being referred to at grass-roots level as the legalised ethnic cleansing of South Africa.
The reality is that there are millions of people in this country who speak English as a first language and who aren’t going anywhere. This is their nation and their home. Their culture does exist and has existed here for generation after generation and will continue to do so. And it is protected by the Constitution. [Interjections.]
Sadly, one of the facets of English culture is to be self-effacing, not to want to cause trouble by complaining. Well, this is where I come in. I’m here to state that the English cultural group will not be wiped out, that they have a right to hear their language and revel in their culture and that they have a right to be proud of the fact that their great-great grandmother was French, or their great-great-great grandfather was British. [Interjections.] The fact that part of their culture emanates from Europe should be a source of fascination, not a means to score political smear points. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Order please, members. Order!
Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Chair, they have a right to their own public service radio station, and they have a right not to be insulted when paid professionals mangle their language. This is allowed on not one of the other public service stations, yet it is virtually a prerequisite on SAfm. Indeed, the Minister of Communications has informed me that SAfm uses English merely as a language of communication, rather than to reflect a culture.
They have the right to be proud of the positive contributions that their ancestors made to this country as creators of some of the finest museums and libraries in the land, of the advances made in all fields: medicine, commerce, legislature, the arts and the very contribution that their language has made to the world. [Interjections.]
Today each and every one of us is, even unwittingly, working together to form what will eventually become a single, recognisable South African culture. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Ms M M MDLALOSE: Madam Chairperson, it is appropriate that this debate takes place at a time when we are also celebrating our 10th year of democracy, as heritage has played a part in moulding us into the people that we are today and in, ultimately, helping to create a free South Africa with such a rich and diverse cultural heritage.
Living heritage is all the intangible aspects of inherited culture and can include many different elements such as tradition, oral history, performance, ritual, popular memory skills, techniques, an indigenous knowledge system and the holistic approach to nature and society, and social relationships.
We cannot allow our living heritage to be forgotten and become a distant memory that we only read about in books and journals. It is part of who we are and provides us with a sense of belonging and pride. There are people living amongst us, within our respective communities, many of whom are taken for granted or forgotten, who have retained a wealth of invaluable information about tradition, oral history and many other important elements of our cultural heritage. These people must be identified and their knowledge used and appreciated, as they have a vital role to play in preserving and reviving our cultural heritage. In many instances, they are the only source of information or point of reference about certain aspects of our cultural heritage.
We, in South Africa, have much to be proud of and have achieved a great deal during our first 10 years of democracy. Elements such as respect, values, as well as a sense of community and family were, amongst many other things, aspects of our everyday lives that we held in high regard and were an integral part of our cultures and communities. Many of these elements, however, seem to be lacking and forgotten today. We believe that this campaign can go a long way in reviving these essential elements that are so desperately needed. It is with this in mind that we are glad to see that one of the objectives of this campaign is to use living heritage as a vehicle for moral regeneration.
We support the fact that Heritage Day celebrations and Heritage Month are being brought to the communities and celebrated at local levels. That will see various municipalities as well as traditional authorities playing a more prominent role and, therefore, giving greater recognition to the local cultures and traditions that are unique to their specific areas. This will also allow the different aspects of living heritage, especially those unique to certain areas, to receive more attention.
We believe that the localisation of the celebrations, as opposed to a big national event, will encourage communities to get more actively involved in the celebrations and events, inspire them to greater levels of creativity as well as instil a greater sense of pride in the occasion and, ultimately, in their cultural wealth. This increased creativity will promote social cohesion and add value to the community and society as a whole.
Umphakathi uzibone futhi uzizwe ufanelekile, uphinde uzigqaje ngobuzwe bawo. [The community sees itself and feels worthwhile and also takes pride in itself as a nation.]
Those sections of the communities who in the past felt sidelined and hence did not bother to participate in national heritage celebrations will now, through local activities, get actively involved in celebrating and promoting their heritage with pride.
There has been a lot of attention and interest on South Africa from around the world throughout the years. We should use this attention as a platform to show off our rich cultural heritage to the rest of the world. Many benefits, especially economic benefits, can be derived from this and people should therefore see this as an opportunity and take full advantage of it and all that it has to offer.
We have also been exposed to and influenced by cultures from around the world and learnt much from them. Caution must, however, be exercised to ensure that we are not overly influenced by fashions and cultures from foreign countries at the expense of our own. Many sections in our society, especially the youth, are susceptible to these influences and see, for example, Western cultures as ‘cool’. These celebrations will, hopefully, open their eyes to all the wonderful and “cool” influences that surround them in South Africa, from which they are also able to draw inspiration and utilise the opportunities that they present. It is therefore important that they see the uniqueness and learn to embrace their local cultural heritage, and see it as relevant.
The department has been working with certain universities in the collection and preservation of indigenous music, dance and oral history. This is very encouraging and must continue if we are to preserve and accurately document these important aspects of our heritage.
There must also be a concerted effort to promote the study of various elements of South African culture and heritage in tertiary institutions. This will go a long way towards its revival. We, in South Africa, are affectionately known as the “rainbow nation” because of our rich and diverse cultural heritage. Our country is like a salad bowl that consists of many different ingredients which have all contributed towards making us the culturally diverse and unique nation that we are today.
Asisigcine-ke lesi sitsha nalesi sidlo siyisidlo esihle nesimnandi futhi sisithokozele. Ngiyabonga. [Let us keep this utensil and the meal good and delicious and enjoy it. Thank you.[Applause.]]
Mr L W GREYLING: Chair, living heritage refers to the way in which our heritage influences the manner in which we all live our lives. All of that which has come before - from our cultural tradition, oral history, indigenous knowledge systems and the icons of yesteryear - influences the way in which we perceive the world and choose to live our lives in the present moment.
South Africa has an extremely rich cultural heritage that dates back thousands of years to when humans first expressed themselves on the rocks of the southern Cape. Over the last few centuries, many cultures have imbued themselves into the rich tapestry of South Africa’s landscape. Unfortunately, this process was often characterised by violent clashes as each culture attempted to defend itself from the others. Unfortunately, from what I have seen in the House today, it seems that practice has not stopped.
I just want to put on record that I am not a self-effacing English speaker as one member stated, but I am, in fact, a proud young South African who revels in the opportunity to have my culture influenced by those around me.
In our tenth year of democracy, the challenge is to find ways of weaving these different cultures into a shared national vision where all of us take pride in the diverse identities that we possess.
Whereas the diversity of culture in this land used to be a source of conflict, it must now become a source of pride and strength. Apartheid kept all of our cultures separate and actively generated suspicion and misunderstanding. During those tragic years, I was prevented from truly enjoying and understanding the diverse cultures that make up this country, and for that matter my identity. The advent of democracy in 1994 has, however, opened up a new world for me and afforded me the opportunity of immersing myself in traditions and cultures that are very different from the one that I was brought up in.
I am extremely proud to call myself an African. But, it is only in the past ten years that I have been able to fully explore what that identity means. The challenge for all South Africans is to move out of their cultural comfort zones and take an active role in understanding other South Africans’ unique perspectives on life. The cultural divide has to be bridged in this, if we are to experience true reconciliation. Respect for each other’s culture does not only mean allowing one another to practice it, but for all of us to develop an understanding of and appreciation for it.
I would therefore challenge the department in all its activities not only to elevate previously marginalized cultures, but to find ways whereby all South Africans can move out of their narrow cultural boxes and take pride in our shared cultural heritage. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr F BEUKMAN: Chairperson, a living heritage implies something that adds value and benefits. There is a similarity between the Unesco definition of ``heritage’’ and the Latin origin of the word, referring to the passing of ownership or benefits from one generation to another.
In the South African context, with special emphasis on the tenth year of democracy, I want to focus, in terms of Unesco and the original definition, on the wine industry established in 1659 – seven years after the original settlement by the Dutch. In 1685, Governor Van der Stel established the wine estate at Constantia and when the 200 French Huguenots arrived in 1688, they brought with them a wine culture.
From 1788 onwards, when Hendrik Cloete of Constantia produced wines that became famous overseas, the majority of South Africans were excluded from ownership and direct benefits in terms of the original definition referred to earlier. The past ten years have created opportunities for this heritage to become an inclusive South African heritage and enable South Africans, irrespective of background and gender, to enter the industry and culture not only as labourers, but as managers, wine makers, producers, owners, beneficiaries and scientists.
I want to refer to the finalisation of the black empowerment transaction between KWV Limited, Phetogo and KWV Werkersbemagtigingstrust whereby the consortium obtained 25,1% in the world-renowned company. Phetogo and Werkerstrust can assure broad representation as follows: Werkerstrust has 456 members; the Black Association for the Wine and Spirit Industry – BAWSI – has 7 000 members; NAFU – the National African Farmers Union of South Africa – has 2 000 members; and it includes Kumnandi Liquor with 1 000 tavern and shebeen owners.
Hierdie gaan nie net oor swart bemagtiging nie. Binne die konteks van die bou van ‘n gesamentlike erfenis wat sy beslag in die daarstel van ‘n demokratiese bestel vind, moet ‘n belangrike erfenis soos die wynbedryf as voorbeeld geneem word waar noodsaaklike en snelle verandering in die kort- en medium termyn haalbaar en uitvoerbaar is.
Die bou van ‘n nuwe en gemeenskaplike lewende erfenis wat kultuurgebonde is vir daardie bedrywe waarin alle Suid-Afrikaners deelneem, moet die vertrekpunt wees.
Kultuurgegronde bedrywe wat ekonomies lewensvatbaar is, is ‘n bonus vir die samelewing, aangesien die regering van die dag dit nie kunsmatig in stand hoef te hou nie. Die werk wat mense soos Willem Barnard, Beyers Truter en Lourens Jonger onderneem het om die hande te vat van die Minister van Landbou, Thoko Didiza en andere, is ‘n aanduiding van die benadering wat nodig is in die daarstel van gesamentlike kultuur wat werk. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[This is not only about black empowerment. Within the context of building a shared heritage, which is settled in the creation of a democratic order, an important heritage such as the wine industry should be taken as an example where necessary and speedy transformation within the short and medium term is feasible and executable.
The building of a new and collective living heritage that is culture bound for those industries in which all South Africans participate, should be the point of departure.
Culturally based industries that are economically viable, are a bonus for society, as the present government does not have to sustain them artificially. The undertaking by people like Willem Barnard, Beyers Truter and Lourens Jonger to hold hands with the Minister of Agriculture, Thoko Didiza and others, is an indication of the approach needed in the creation of a shared culture that works.]
The current developments in the wine industry prove that the ideal is alive and working.
Die uitdaging is dat hierdie benadering in alle kultuurgegronde bedrywe tot uiting moet kom. Dankie, Voorsitter. [Applous.] [The challenge is that this approach should find expression in all culturally based industries. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]]
Ms P R MASHANGOANE: Chairperson, hon members, guests in the gallery, the people of every great country are bonded together by their history - hence their cultural landscape is enriched by a variety of buildings, monuments, sites and other places of meaning which reflect the events and layers of experiences and processes throughout the centuries. And our country is no exception. In fact, our story, and more so because of where we come from, is one of which the layers of experiences, debilitating and inspiring alike, must be told.
For centuries many myths and prejudices have concealed the true heritage of South Africa. It is therefore imperative that as we approach Heritage Day in our first decade of liberation, we do so from this perspective and contribute to the development of national consciousness and identity. Heritage Day in our view, as the ANC-led Government, goes beyond the mere assembly of representations of diverse legacies. It endeavours to bring together these multiple identities and perspectives to form a holistic picture of our national identity and thereby provide a coherent, wider and overarching perspective of the South African character as a whole.
In line with our ANC-led government’s programmes for Heritage Month 2004, it is appropriate that we, because of the extent to which eurocentrism still decorates the South African cultural landscape, utilise this podium to pronounce ourselves on the promotion of African values. We want to emphasise this because every vote for the ANC in the April election this year was also a vote in support of nurturing this component of the people’s contract. Moreover, it is our duty to dispel any notion that might exist in the minds of our people that as their representatives serving in this law- making institution we are merely paying lip service to this project.
We are all aware of the erosive effect colonialism and apartheid had on our indigenous knowledge systems, which include tradition-based literacy, artistic and scientific works, inventions, scientific discoveries and all other intangible aspects of inherited culture.
Right now the legacy of South Africa’s heritage landscape is a denial of the existence of tradition-based innovations and creations that resulted from African intellectual activity. Therefore, our role should be to recognise, celebrate and promote African values and contributions in a meaningful way. Moreover, it is incumbent upon us to lead by example and inform the attitudes of our people as to how and why our communities have undergone the changes that they have, and hence our arrival at this point in our history.
In this regard, we are indeed inspired by the policies and legislative frameworks that have been put in place to ensure the preservation and protection of all treasures - be it ritual, oral history, cultural tradition, skills and techniques, indigenous knowledge systems, and so forth.
It will be amiss if we celebrate and give expression to our cultural heritage without paying tribute to our cultural icons. They are the individuals who have, through various modes of expression, either contributed through solid action toward revitalising a cultural tradition or reaffirmed the cultural identity of people and communities. Moreover, they are individuals who have excelled in the application of skills and techniques and have given testimony of living cultural traditions.
In this regard, we are reminded by the doyen of struggle photography Alf Kumalo, who has worked for over 50 years as a photo journalist in South Africa, and others like G R Naidoo and Peter Magubane. These photographers have, through sheer skill and technique, ensured that pictorial images of our struggle for liberation published in the Drum magazine in the 1950s and 1960s became etched in our collective memory. Through their work, they have recorded social structure, initiation ceremonies, rites of passage to adult life, religious life, dance, art and vibrant customs. But, above all, they have offered us an insight to rich and varied cultural history of apartheid.
Op skool was daar hierdie gedig: ``Daar kom Jan Valie aan; hy het sy vrou se tjalie aan’’. [Gelag.] [At school there was this poem: “Daar kom Jan Valie aan; hy het sy vrou se tjalie aan.” [Laughter.]]
Bogologolo mogologolo o boletše segologolo a re: Rutang bana ditaola le se ye natšo badimong. [In ancient times an ancient person said in an ancient language: Teach the children your traditions before you die.]
Nna mme o mphile boswa jwa go re ke ipoke ke re. [I inherited the clan name praise from my mother, who taught me to recite it.]
Ke motho wa ga Lebuledisa wa mogotsa Tshukudu, a ntlhoma ke mma ka matlhogole. A tlola a re ke mosowana a ntse a letsa diletso mo gare ga maje a Bahurutshe. Go ka bo go bua bopula o dije, go ka bo go bua boseimela, go ka bo go bua bophalana a pula. A re ge le re mogaka le be le mo gakatsa, le be le bona ‘tlhodi se be se gaketse. Sebera se be se ntse se enwa metsi se a latlha mme se ntse se lomeletsa ditšhaba.
Chairperson, other icons that left indelible impression on our heritage landscape include Jonas Gwangwa, Johnny Mekoa and Johannes Kerkorrel. The latter, although from a different cultural background, ensured artistic expression and opposition to a system that could never be serenaded.
In conclusion, as the ANC we will ensure that the importance of heritage and its enriching impact on the lives of ordinary South Africans is sustained. This effort includes the creation of new social structures and support for existing forms of cultural expression. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, heritage is about history and every nation treasures its history. History is one of the greatest assets any nation can have. History gives people pride in themselves; it gives them status; it gives them a position; and it gives them a direction.
When our historians write the history of our nation, they must be as truthful and as objective as possible about events and people, without denigrating any particular race. For too long our history books have described the Khoisan people as a lazy, unreliable and worthless people. This inaccurate historical description had a devastating effect on our youth, especially those who believed in such inaccuracies. I am encouraged to note that our modern history books, written over the past 10 years, are correcting this.
The Bible teaches us that no one is worthless. Everybody is somebody, and nobody is a nobody. The wonder of the Bible and biblical history is that it does not humiliate one race in order to exalt another. It presents God’s view of events. All its heroes are presented with their strengths and their weaknesses. It is not a sanitised version of events in order to score political points, but simple statements of fact intended to help people understand God’s plan for their lives.
What South Africa needs, especially our youth, at this time is a sense of divine destiny. What we need to do is to empower each man, woman and child with the knowledge that we are all created in the image of God with a divine nature, a divine value and a divine destiny.
In the new South Africa there is no one individual group, tribe, race or nation that can claim superior status over the other. As a Christian political party, our supporters, alongside all other South Africans, must know and study our own history so that we can understand ourselves and our destiny as a nation.
We must know how much sacrifice was made, how much blood, sweat and tears were spilled to bring us to where we are today. And although we must not forget the founding fathers of our democracy, we must not forget either God’s guidance in using the right people from both sides to forge our new democracy. God knew that we needed a Nelson Mandela and an F W de Klerk, with all the other players, to avert a bloodbath in our country. Those who forget the lessons of the past are condemned to repeat its mistakes.
Without minimising the contributions made by all other faiths in our nation, I believe, like the late great Christian leader Dr Beyers Naudé, that the teachings and the example of Jesus Christ have inspired the greatest acts of generosity, hospitality, self-sacrifice and service for the sick, poor and needy. Let us continue to celebrate our heritage by emulating the self-sacrificial servant leadership of great South Africans like the late Reverend Beyers Naudé. [Applause.]
Mr B E PULE: Chair, a lot more attention should be given, more than ever before, to the crucial human factor in these times of tumultuous technological change in which breathtaking advances are made in almost every sphere of endeavour. This reminds me of what Martin Luther King once said when he referred to the prosperity of his country:
The prosperity of the country depends not upon the abundance of its revenue, nor on the beauty of its public buildings, nor on the strength of its fortifications, but it consists in the number of its cultivated citizens, in its men of enlightenment, education and character.
On the basis of this statement, the heritage that we must celebrate is not so much of material things, but of humanity.
Re tshwanetse go ya boswa jwa botho. Go bonala sentle gore boswa jo bo siameng ke mokgwa o o siameng o re o tsereng mo batsading ba rona. Ke puo e e phepa e re e antseng mo batsading ba rona. Ke tsona tse di siameng tse re tshwanetseng go aga setšhaba ka tsona, ra di tlogelela bana ba rona go nna boswa jwa bona. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)
[We must go the humanity heritage route. It is very clear that the good heritage is the best way that we inherited from our parents. It is a good command of the language that we sucked from our parents. They are so good that through them we must build our nation; leave them to our children to be their heritage.]
As we celebrate our living heritage in the tenth year of our democracy, it would be an exercise in futility to concentrate more on the abundance of revenue and not on human resources, that is, the capacity to handle the resources we have. It would also be an exercise in futility to neglect nation-building. We must have cultivated citizens, that is, law-abiding citizens who regard human life with very high esteem.
As we celebrate our living heritage in the tenth year of our democracy, men of enlightenment, education and character, as referred to by Martin Luther King, will obviously contribute meaningfully to the economy of our country, which economy can be inherited by the next generation.
His Excellency the President of India yesterday alluded to graduates who do not look for jobs, but create jobs. This culture of nondependency should be encouraged. Skills development and the transfer of skills are household words in the minds of both the provincial and the national government, but until these ideals have been achieved our living heritage as a nation will just be a hollow euphemism.
In conclusion, celebrating our living heritage in this tenth year of our democracy means that the nation must think big and dream big, for if we do, God will not fail to present us with blessings beyond our wildest dreams. I thank you. [Applause.]
Dr S E M PHEKO: Mr Chairman, our languages must not only be preserved and developed to cope with technological terminology, but must be spoken well and used for educational purposes without discarding English, which is now an almost universal language. It is atrocious the way some of our educated people especially speak African languages. They really murder them. Examples:
“Uyandifrastreyitha; ubhuti usehlal’ endlini ene-swimming pool.” [“He is frustrating me. ”My brother is staying in a house with a swimming pool”.]
“Nami ngizophusha ngize ngiyithole.” [“I will also push until I get it.]
Ha ba co-operate batho bana. Ho tshwanela ba try (we) ho build(a) di- containers. Ke mmolelletse hore a iketse distant nthong eno.[They don’t co- operate, these people. They must try to build the containers. I told him to be distant from that thing.]
“Kufuneka sipatisipeyite kwezi zinto; kusilekhthwe abadlali.” [“We must participate in these things and players should be selected.”]
If this bastardisation of African languages does not stop, 20 years from now these languages will be Fanakalo languages, which will make our great defenders of these languages such as Mqhayi, Mofolo, Moloto and Dhlomo turn in their graves, let alone our ancestors.
African languages are rich. They have uCanzibe for the month of May, Phupjane for June, Pherekgong for January, Tshitwe for December, Sunguti for January, Mudyaxihi for May. These are names in isiXhosa, Sesotho and Xitsonga respectively.
The Germans do not speak English. They have produced the Mercedes Benz car. The Chinese do not speak English. They are a nuclear power. The Japanese have excelled in trade and industry. They do not speak English. We must decolonise our minds as Africans. We can invent and teach many skills in African languages.
Ha re se keng ra kgahlwa ke none e feta e hlotsa. [Do not be easily swayed.]
Masingalahli imbo yethu ngophoyiyana. [We must stick to our roots.]
This country is full of colonial names, including its own. Why do we still have East London, Port Elizabeth, Paul Roux, Smithfield, Standerton, Zeerust, Ladysmith, you name it? Where are the indigenous precolonial names for these places? Slaves and dogs are named by their masters, but free men and women name themselves.
Some places in this country are named after war criminals. Harry Smith was responsible for the decapitation of King Hintsa. Benjamin Pine seized the land of the African people and sentenced Langalibalele to life imprisonment on Robben Island. He waged a war of extermination, but Pinetown is named after him.
Bloemfontein is named after Jan Bloem. He waged a war of extermination against the Khoisan and the Tlhaping … [Laughter.] Benjamin D’Urban was a British colonel. He was honoured by the King of England and made a Sir, after he had seized large tracts of land in what is today called KwaZulu- Natal. That is why we must speak of African restoration. We must retrieve and restore that which is … [Applause.] … Mandivale ke ngokukhumbula uMjongwangantshiyini bath’uqumbile… [… Let me conclude then by remembering Mjongwangantshiyini, they say he is cross…][Time expired.][Laughter.][Applause.]
Mr G SOLOMON: Chairperson, the living heritage of a nation, namely its people, the land, language, religion, customs and culture can be both subtle and sensitive, providing some of the most powerful motivating forces for human behaviour in all societies across the world. If misunderstood, misused, unregulated, cultural power relations can cause instability, insecurity and destruction as is happening in some strategic regions in the world today.
South Africa had this experience more than three centuries ago when the so- called superior European colonialist culture, that which the hon Kohler- Barnard was shouting about, impacted in a destructive way on the living heritage of this country and its people, and elsewhere in the world. New elements of violence were introduced into the living heritage of the Khoi and the San people, the result of which, in the words of President Mbeki at the opening of the second democratic Parliament: … condemned millions to a catastrophic loss of national identity and human dignity, and the systematic destruction of families and communities.
I want to emphasise and I want us to conceptualise the systematic unleashing of cultural aggression, hegemony and “baasskap”. Armed with the fruits of the European enlightenment and Renaissance - much of which, anyway, came from the cultures of Arab, Indian and Chinese in terms of mathematics, medicine, literature, communication, mobility and fire power - these strangers from across the seas committed genocide, enslaved the native people and worst of all, through this aggression against this living heritage, particularly in the Cape, literally denied the native peoples of Southern Africa an enlightenment and renaissance of their own.
Their heritage became a subculture, an appendage to the so-called superior white European culture as the hewers of wood, drawers of water and migrant workers in the mines and industries who satisfied the greed of the so- called superior culture. This situation led to a number of conflicts from both sides.
As the decades went by, the majority victims of this cultural aggression initiated a conflict of their own to regain their own living heritage space in a struggle for liberation. We must note that it was a struggle for liberation for all who live in the land of South Africa, which destiny created into one of the most multicultural and pluralistic countries in the world, with deep wounds and severely divided memories; a country divided into two nations with two economies: a minority rich economy and a majority poor economy. Note again that the majority, who initiated the struggle, did not set about to destroy the cultures of the minority.
After a long and protracted struggle, elements of African culture and wisdom have prevailed. In the spirit of the ancestors and for the future of the unborn, we mix the elements of the spear of the nation, uMkhonto weSizwe, and the charitable and magnanimous tradition of ubuntu as a solution.
We salute Comrade Chris Hani and others for giving the spear its sharpness and teeth. We salute leaders of immense wisdom and foresight such as Comrade Oliver Tambo and Mama Adelaide, Comrade Walter and Mama Sisulu for giving the movement and its cause international stature and respect. We thank former President Madiba and those around him who, during the crucial period of negotiations, guided us through the eye of a potential conflagration and a potential conflict of cultures. The aggressor finally acknowledged defeat in April 1994 in peaceful free and fair elections.
That was the past. Now for the future, one of our struggle heroes and trade unionist, Oscar Mpetha, said that the past was theirs and the future is ours. “Ours” means all those who live in South Africa.
How do we deal with a living heritage largely defined for us by colonialism in its form and structure? In the 10th year of our freedom our President, Thabo Mbeki, gave direction. He first told us that we are Africans politically and culturally. Our primary allegiance is to Africa, with the boldness symbolised in our new mace, which is upright as opposed to the previous one which was placed horizontally.
Mr W P DOMAN: But it’s still a mace!
Mr G SOLOMON: Yes, but it is upright. He told us that we require frankness in our appraisal, in our development as well as boldness in identifying and rectifying mistakes and weaknesses. When the President launched the Freedom Park, he said that it was a symbol of the entire South African history and the role played by all sectors of our society so that we may appreciate our country, its people, their diversity, and their determination to build a single nation with a common vision.
In celebrating the launch of Freedom Park, he posed a pertinent question: Freedom for what? The answer to this pertinent question is the crux of the message of the celebration of our living heritage; the remarkable national reconciliation and the high degree of political stability. Hope and goodwill that we generated during the transition must be used as a foundation to start to accelerate economic change.
It is crucial, as we debate how to memorialise our heroes and victories, that we emphasise that which will have meaning for local communities. The socioeconomic needs of our communities demand different routes to memorialise our living heritage. Bonteheuwel, for example, will value and appreciate it very much if we were to build an Ashley Kriel sports field for the youth of Bonteheuwel instead of a statue. The Department of Education should create a scholarship in recognition of the Autshumato scholar and in recognition of the Khoikhoi history. The famous Rhodes scholar is reminiscent of imperialism of the highest order.
The needs of our communities demand different routes to memorialise our heritage. The greatest challenge with memorialisation, however, will be: How do we find symbols that can unite us across communities and yet accommodate diversity?
In conclusion, I wish to quote the Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi. This is a lesson for the different faiths and cultural communities to reach deep into their respective cultures with an open mind so that we, together, can take South Africa forward to a single nation with many cultures. He said, and I quote:
I do not want to be walled in on all sides of my house and my windows
to be stuffed. I want all the cultures of the land to be blown about
to my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my
feet by any of them.
Dr Abdul Kalam, His Excellency the President of the Republic of India, confirmed this when he said that the hallmark of India through the ages had been that “all places are our native land and all people are our relatives”. Thank you. [Applause.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Igama lamakhosikazi, igama le-freedom. [Praise be to the name of women and freedom.] Chairperson, it is amazing how fast time flies. We are already 10 years into our democracy and establishing South Africa as a true people’s nation. Though the horrors of slavery, colonialism and apartheid form part of our history, we have many things to be proud of. We are of a strong people, a rich, beautiful nation with an astounding composition of flora and fauna, wildlife, natural resources and so forth.
Today, in our tenth year of democracy, we are crafting a South African heritage for the future of South Africa, and the MF is proud to be a part of this construction team. We have a national flag, animals, flowers, trees, fish, monuments, museums and many forms of archives of our history - present and future.
South Africa has a diverse population. South Africans, other than the natural black inhabitants of South Africa, have an ancestry from various countries abroad. Some were brought to South Africa as slaves and others immigrated here to South Africa to become inhabitants. After a very rocky history, and after 10 proud years as a democracy, I can say we are all proudly South African. This democracy is the heritage of the future South Africa.
Our national Constitution that governs supreme ensures a heritage of democracy, human rights and equality for people. The MF calls on all South Africans to proudly celebrate our heritage and our status as South Africans. Celebrate your diversity and your unity as one people. We need to make ourselves aware of our surroundings, of all we have, of our potential, and we need to appreciate and celebrate it by uniting and working together for a better life for all South Africans.
Do not cause greater divisions amongst yourselves. Unite and fight for a safer, stronger South Africa. Only we, as a nation, can work together to ensure a better tomorrow and a better South Africa. Let’s respect and appreciate each other in our diversity. Appreciate and conserve our environment and living conditions. Let’s show South Africa to be the true rainbow nation it is and utilise all our potential to assure our professionals that South Africa is a home.
South Africa, we love you. You are our home, our people and our life. We pray that God will help our people to strengthen our nation and pave an even stronger heritage for future South Africans. We need to socialise learners at educational institutions of our affluent heritage and ensure proud South Africans of our humble entity.
We have of late lost a number of activists that worked hard for the freedom of our people. We celebrate their contributions and mark their efforts as part of our heritage. Everything in South Africa has a story to tell for generations to come. Through that our heritage shall live on.
Our great heritage is our freedom. The hon President of India will be travelling in a train from Durban to Pietermaritzburg, free at heart, knowing that he will not be thrown out of the train as our great Mahatma Gandhi was thrown out of the train. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mevr D VAN DER WALT: Geagte Voorsitter en lede, daar is ’n alledaagse uitdrukking wat lui: “’n Mens kan nie weet waarheen hy op pad is tensy hy weet waarvandaan hy kom nie”.
Op 24 September vier die nuwe demokratiese Suid-Afrika die tiende herdenking van Erfenisdag. Vir 10 jaar was dit ook die doel om die diverse, voorheen ook vervreemde, takke van die land se familieboom bymekaar te bring, en om elkeen te eer as gelyke begunstigdes van ’n unieke multikulturele erfenis. Kan ons simbole vind wat ons reënboognasie kan verenig? Sal dit minder sektaries as die vorige wees?
Daar is voortdurend kommer by ons oor: Op watter geskiedenis moet ons ons beroep? Is dit moontlik om ’n inklusiewe geskiedenis te vind? Of sal die aanneming van ’n nuwe simbool of ander naam altyd beteken dat iets anders verwyder moet word? Die ontwikkeling van Vryheidspark in Pretoria is werklik ’n eerste poging om kultuurgroepe, asook al die provinsies, te akkommodeer. Dit is ’n projek wat van stapel gestuur is vir alle Suid- Afrikaners, en nie net maar nog ’n projek wat van naam verander nie. Hierdie projek is ’n bewys dat dit nie nodig is om byvoorbeeld die Witwatersrandse Botaniese Tuin te verander na Walter Sisulu Botaniese Tuin of die Hugenote-tonnel na die Dullah Omar–tonnel nie.
Is dit nasiebou om elke dorp se naam te verander? Kan die ANC-regering nie nuwe dorpe, uitbreidings, publieke tuine, universiteite en tonnels self ontwikkel en dit noem soos hulle wil nie? [Tussenwerpsels.] In die Limpopo provinsie, behalwe vir omtrent vyf of ses dorpe, het al die dorpe reeds nuwe name, sonder voldoende vooraf konsultasie met die relevante gemeenskappe. Dit verdeel gemeenskappe en ontneem ons van ons erfenisse. As een van die armste provinsies in Suid-Afrika behoort die finansiële uitgawes van sulke veranderings eerder bestee te word om ons mense van noodsaaklike water, sanitasie en behuising te voorsien. [Tussenwerpsels.]
Dit is ook met groot teleurstelling dat, terwyl erkenning gegee word aan ons ryk geskiedenis, die ANC-regering tot op datum nagelaat het om gewone mense daarin op te voed. Gegewe die bevordering van historiese simbole sedert 1994 is dit skandelik dat op skoolvlak geskiedenisleerplanne en handboeke nog steeds nie gemoderniseer is nie, en skynbaar nie voor 2006 sal wees nie. Geld wat op dié dag aan feesvieringe bestee word, behoort eerder hiervoor aangewend te word. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dis jou foute wat jy gemaak het toe jy vir die onderwys gewerk het.
Museums en biblioteke het drastiese finansiële inkortings ondervind. Boeke word onnodig swaar belas en erfenisdienste is chaoties, veral in die Wes- Kaap. Daar word van plaaslike owerhede verwag om biblioteke te finansier, terwyl dit volgens die Grondwet ’n provinsiale funksie is. Biblioteke kry dus glad nie die aandag wat hulle verdien nie.
Behoort die skoolkurrikulum - en dis vir jou, mnr Gaum - nie ook aangepas te word om by wyse van mentorskappe te verseker dat daar in die toekoms opgeleide werknemers in dié sektor sal wees nie? Dit dien geen doel om nasionale simbole te bevorder op Erfenisdag nie, veral wanneer die massas in die land geen middele het om hul geskiedenis te leer nie.
Elkeen se moedertaal is sy erfenis. Volgens die Handves van Menseregte, soos vervat in die Grondwet van Suid-Afrika, word elkeen die reg gegun tot onderrig in hul onderskeie moedertaal of in die taal van hul keuse. Die ANC ignoreer dit. Wanneer dit gebeur, is ons ook nie besig om nasie te bou of besig met die bewaring van ons erfenisse nie.
Verlede week het die LUR vir Onderwys in die Noord-Kaap opdrag gegee dat drie skole in dié provinsie hul taal- en toelatingsbeleid vanaf Januarie 2005 verander – dit in ’n provinsie wat oorheersend Afrikaanssprekend is! [Tussenwerpsels.] U kom van Noordwes. U weet nie wat in die Noord-Kaap aangaan nie. Van die 2 000 Afrikaansmedium skole voor 1994 is slegs 300 vandag oor. Daar was ses Afrikaansmedium universiteite uit ’n totaal van 27 voor 1994, tans is daar twee. Watter waarborg het Afrikaanssprekendes om in die toekoms in hul moedertaal onderrig te ontvang om sodoende hul erfenis te verseker?
Ons nasionale volkslied, waarvan die eerste verse deur Enoch Sontonga geskyf is, en wat ’n gebed is, en waarvan die derde vers uit die ou Stem en die vierde vers uit Engels kom, behoort ons as ’n nasie patrioties te bind. Die regering behoort daadwerklik uit sy pad te gaan om alle bevolkingsgroepe aan te moedig om ons nasionale volkslied en ander simbole, soos die vlag, te leer ken en te koester.
Dit is verbasend om te hoor dat die VF Plus die nuutste toevoeging tot die volkserfenis, naamlik die nuwe ampstaf, aanvaar. Maar hulle permanente verskonings by die portfeuljekomitee en ook tydens die Erfenisdebat vandag laat mens wonder hoe ernstig hul is oor die erfenis van die volk. Dankie. [Tyd verstreke.] [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mrs D VAN DER WALT; Hon Chairperson and members, there is a well-known expression that says: “One cannot know where one is going unless one knows where one comes from.”
On 24 September the new democratic South Africa will be celebrating the tenth anniversary of Heritage Day. For 10 years the goal has been to bring together the diverse, previously estranged branches of the country’s family tree and to honour everyone as equal beneficiaries of an unique multicultural heritage. Can we find symbols that can unite our rainbow nation? Will it be less sectarian than the previous one?
We are continuously concerned about the question: To which history should we turn? Is it possible to find an inclusive history? Or will the adoption of a new symbol always mean that something else must be removed? The development of Freedom Park in Pretoria is really a first effort to accommodate cultural groups as well as all the provinces. It is a project that was launched for all South Africans, and not just another project of which the name was changed. This project is proof that it is not necessary, for example, to change the name of the Witwatersrand Botanical Garden to the Walter Sisulu Botanical Garden or the Huguenot Tunnel to the Dullah Omar Tunnel.
Is it nation-building to change the name of every town? Can the ANC government itself not develop new towns, extensions, public gardens, universities and tunnels and call them what they want to? [Interjections.] In the Limpopo province all the towns, with the exception of about five or six, already have new names, without sufficient prior consultation with the communities concerned. This divides communities and deprives us of our heritage. As one of the poorest provinces in South Africa, the financial expenditure on changes such as these should rather be used to provide our people with essential things such as water, sanitation and housing. [Interjections.]
It is also with great regret that the ANC, although giving recognition to our rich history, has so far failed to educate ordinary people about this history. Given the promotion of historical symbols since 1994, it is a disgrace that history syllabuses and textbooks at school level have still not been modernised, and will apparently not be modernised until 2006. Money spent on that day on celebrations should rather be used for this. [Interjections.] Those are your mistakes that you made when you worked for education.
Museums and libraries experienced drastic cutbacks. Taxes on books are unnecessarily high and heritage services are chaotic, especially in the Western Cape. Local authorities are required to finance libraries while, according to the Constitution, it is a provincial function. For this reason libraries do not get the attention they deserve at all.
Should the school curriculum – and this is for you, Mr Gaum – not also be adapted to ensure, by means of mentorships, that there would be trained employees in this sector in future? It serves no purpose to promote national symbols on Heritage Day, especially when the masses in the country have no means to learn their history.
Everyone’s mother tongue is his heritage. In terms of the Bill of Rights, as enshrined in the Constitution of South Africa, everyone has the right to be educated in his or her mother tongue or in the language of their choice. The ANC ignores this. When this happens, we are not engaged in nation- building or the protection of our heritage.
Last week the MEC for Education in the Northern Cape issued instructions for three schools in this province to change their language and enrolment policy from January 2005 – this in a province which is predominantly Afrikaans-speaking! [Interjections.] You come from the Northwest . You do not know what is happening in the Northern Cape. Only 300 out of the 2 000 Afrikaans-medium schools existing before 1994 still exist today. Before 1994 there were six Afrikaans-medium universities out of a total of 27; at the moment there are two. What guarantee do Afrikaans-speaking people have to get their education in their mother tongue in future in order to be able to ensure their heritage?
Our national anthem, the first verse of which was written by Enoch Sontonga and is a prayer, and the third verse, which comes from the old Die Stem, and the fourth verse, which comes from English, should bind our nation together patriotically. The Government should actively go out of its way to encourage all population groups to learn and cherish our national anthem and other symbols such as the national flag.
It is surprising to hear that the FF Plus accepts the latest addition to our national heritage, the mace. But their permanent excuses in the portfolio committee and also during the Heritage Day debate today makes one wonder how serious they are about the heritage of the nation. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Thank you. [Time expired.]
Mr H P MALULEKA: Chairperson, I first want to respond to what the hon member Kohler-Barnard said about us, namely that we were xenophobic. I just want to make it clear that we do not care where the hon member Nkem-Abonta comes from. He was heckled because of his right-wing politics and nothing else. [Interjections.]
But I also want to inform you, hon member Kohler-Barnard, that I am also an Afrikaner, and that whilst there were 2000 or so Afrikaner schools, there were areas in our country where there were no schools. There are still areas today where our children do not have access to proper schools. It is we who said that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, both black and white. So you are absolutely wrong to accuse this side of the House of being xenophobic.
When I was ten years old, because there were no Afrikaans-medium schools where I lived, I had to walk 10km to get to an Afrikaans-medium school. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon members, order!
Mr H P MALULEKA: Because children of other races today have access to those schools that you used to consider Afrikaans-medium schools, now you think that they are no longer Afrikaans-medium schools. [Applause.] Those schools are still there and still have pupils and students who attend them. [Interjections.]
Moet ek Afrikaans praat? [Should I speak in Afrikaans?]
Addressing the Heritage Day celebrations in 1996, our former President Nelson Mandela stated, and I quote:
When our first democratically elected government decided to make Heritage Day one of our national days, we did so because we knew that our rich and varied cultural heritage has profound power to help build our nation.
In celebrating our heritage this month, it is important that we also reflect on how popular our national symbols are amongst our citizens. We all agree that a lot of work needs to be done to educate our people about our national symbols – their meaning and value.
We often see embarrassing situations at some of our national events, with some people singing one part of the national anthem and not the other. And this is found in all our communities. Sometimes people just mill about or even answer their cellphones while the national anthem is being sung, which shows complete disrespect for our national anthem and our flag.
Our symbols form a very important part of our heritage, making us unique in the world, setting us apart from other people and allowing us to identify ourselves from other nations, which gives us a feeling of belonging and pride of place.
As members of Parliament I think we need to play a leading role in popularising our national symbols. We also need to involve our schools and mobilise the media to play their role. Maybe it is important to remind hon members that our symbols are all-embracing and that there is no geographic, racial, religious or ethnic bias. This makes them a binding factor in nation-building and they inculcate a new sense of patriotism.
Our symbols are also firmly rooted in our Constitution, which is a living document and is meant to promote reconciliation and nation-building. In the founding provisions of the Constitution it is stated:
The Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state founded on the following values:
a) Human dignity, the achievement of equality and advancement of human
rights and freedoms.
b) Nonracialism and nonsexism.
c) Supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law.
d) Universal adult suffrage, a national common voters´ roll, regular
elections and a multiparty system of democratic government, to
ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness.
These values are expressed in the national anthem, the national flag and the national coat of arms of our country.
I think I want to start playing my role now, here in this Chamber, by reminding members of what our three principal national symbols are. First there is the national flag. The central design of the flag, beginning at the V-shape of the flagpole and flowing into a single horizontal band to the outer edge of the fly, can be interpreted as a convergence of diverse elements within South African society, taking the road ahead in unity.
Our national anthem is a combined version of Nkosi Sikelela iAfrika, which was written by Enoch Sontonga in 1897, and the Call of South Africa or Die Stem van Suid Afrika, which was written by C J Langenhoven in May 1918. The words of the first stanza were originally written in isiXhosa as a hymn. Seven additional stanzas were later added by the poet Samuel Mqhayi. It became a popular church hymn and was later adopted as an anthem at political rallies. It has been translated into most of our official languages.
Our coat of arms or state emblem is the highest visual symbol of state. The design of the coat of arms is a series of elements organised in distinct symmetric egg-like or oval shapes placed on top of one another. The lower oval shape represents the elements or foundation. The first element is a motto in a green semicircle. Completing the semicircle are two symmetrically placed pairs of elephant tusks pointing upwards. Within the oval shape formed by the tusks are two symmetrical ears of wheat that in turn frame a centrally placed gold shield.
There is the oval shape of ascendance. Immediately above the oval shape of foundation is the visual centre of the coat of arms or a protea. The petals of the protea are rendered in a triangular pattern reminiscent of the crafts of Africa. The secretary bird is characterised in flight - the natural consequence of growth and speed. It is equivalent to the lion on earth. The secretary bird is a powerful bird whose legs are depicted as the spear and tribal kajar or knobkerrie, in this sense it is a symbol of divine majesty. Its uplifted wings are an emblem of the ascendance of our nation, whilst simultaneously offering us its protection. It is depicted in gold, which clearly symbolises its association with the sun and the highest power.
The rising sun - an emblem of brightness, splendour and the supreme principle of the nature of energy - symbolises the promise of rebirth, the active faculties of reflection, knowledge, good judgement and willpower. It is the symbol of the source of life, of light and the ultimate wholeness of humanity.
The completed structure of the coat of arms combines the lower and higher oval shapes in a symbol of infinity. The path that connects the lower edge of the scroll to the lines of the tusks, with the horizon above where the sun rises at the top, forms the shape of the cosmic egg from which the secretary bird rises. In the symbolic sense, this is the implied rebirth of the spirit of our great and heroic nation.
In future, those who come after us will reflect and understand the reason these symbols were identified and used. Therefore, our young democracy is busy adding value to the history of South Africa for generations to come.
With regard to morality, which is about accepted rules of conduct pertaining to behaviour that involves values and standards, it consists of beliefs in what is good and right that holds together a community with a shared history. Our citizens have high moral values and are concerned about the antisocial acts taking place in our country.
The Moral Regeneration Movement is an initiative to encourage, facilitate, sensitise and network the response of every sector of our society. Its mission is to revive the spirit of Ubuntu/Botho - or as we would say in Afrikaans “menslikheid” - using all available resources in South African society, and it is committed to affirming the noble values enshrined in our Constitution.
Members of Parliament must also take up the moral regeneration campaign and provide leadership. We must make this an integral part of our constituency work, moving from the understanding that as we were our own liberators during resistance against apartheid, today we should also act as our own liberators in dealing with its legacy. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
COMPANIES AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move that the House adopt the Companies Amendment Bill.
There was no debate.
Motion agreed to.
Bill accordingly passed.
The House adjourned at 17:40. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The Minister of Finance
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Financial Services Board
for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 133-2004].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Public Accountants’ and Auditors’ for 2003, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the the Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2003.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy on the Petroleum Products Amendment Bill [B 16 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 16 September 2004:
The Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy, having considered the subject of the Petroleum Products Amendment Bill [B 16 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendment.
CREDA PLEASE INSERT - Insert No 2 from “ATC0916e”