National Assembly - 08 November 2004
MONDAY, 8 NOVEMBER 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.
CONGRATULATIONS TO SOUTH AFRICAN SPORTS PEOPLE
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker, I hereby move without notice:
That the House –
(1) congratulates -
(a) Hendrik Ramaala, whose victory in the New York Marathon
yesterday put him amongst the foremost distance runners in
the world;
(b) Retief Goosen, who continued the proud traditions of South
African golfers by winning the Tour Championship in the
United States yesterday; and
(c) the Springbok rugby team, whose victory against Wales on
Saturday kept them on track to win their Grand Slam tour in
Great Britain and Ireland; and
2) acknowledges that their victories brought glory to themselves and
honour to South Africa.
Agreed to.
WITHDRAWAL OF MEMBER’S STATEMENT ON THE LATE DUMISANI MAKHAYE
(Personal Explanation)
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, before we proceed with members’ statements, hon Mr Steyn has requested an opportunity to make a personal explanation in respect of a statement he made in the House on 2 November
- I now give him that opportunity.
Mr A C STEYN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of personal explanation. During the course of a member’s statement delivered by me in this House, on 2 November 2004, in which I condemned the misuse of money spent by the Gauteng Department of Housing in publishing an advertisement in a newspaper, which paid tribute to the late MEC, Dumisani Makhaye, I used certain words about the deceased, which, on reflection, I regret.
The point about the spending of public money could have been made without reflecting negatively on the late Mr Makhaye, who was buried only a few days prior to that day.
I, therefore, withdraw the personal remarks about the late Mr Makhaye and express my regret at having upset those who loved and supported him. [Applause.]
MEMBERS’STATEMENTS
UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH HONORARY DOCTORATE AWARDED TO
THE LATE BRAM FISCHER
(Member’s Statement)
Mr B G MOSALA (ANC): The recent announcement by the University of Stellenbosch to award the late Bram Fischer with an honorary doctorate, is commendable as an act of far-sightedness and a great contribution to the process of national reconciliation.
The ANC welcomes the award as an initiative that will further engrave Bram Fischer’s name in our national memory. This is an honour that Bram Fischer greatly deserves. It is an honour that we, who today live in conditions of democracy and peace, owe to all the heroes and heroines who, because of their belief in freedom and justice, were forced to endure apartheid persecution.
If media reports are true that DA’s Delport is among those seeking to urge the university to revoke its decision, the DA then needs to clarify to the people of South Africa its position towards racism and those who fought against it.
To the people of our country, Bram Fischer stands as an icon of peace that speaks to the shared destiny of our diverse but united people. The ANC commends the University of Stellenbosch on deciding to award an honorary doctorate to Bram Fischer. We salute the university for joining the people’s contract, nurturing and entrenching the spirit of national reconciliation in our country.
EASTERN CAPE’S SCHOOL FEEDING SCHEME CURTAILED DUE TO FINANCIAL
MISMANAGEMENT
(Member’s Statement)
Ms H ZILLE (DA): Chairperson, the DA deplores the fact that school feeding has been drastically curtailed in the Eastern Cape, due to financial mismanagement in that province. This affects 950 000 children who depend on school feeding for protein supplement and other foods that are no longer being delivered because suppliers have not been paid for up to nine months. The Eastern Cape reportedly owes them almost R50 million.
Following a July meeting with the Eastern Cape Premier, Nosimo Balindlela, the suppliers undertook to continue deliveries at their own cost in return for the Premier’s commitment that the amount owed would be paid. Nothing came of this.
Furthermore, in August, Minister Naledi Pandor gave assurances in the NCOP, that the suppliers’ claims for the second term had been paid and that claims during the third term would be paid with a 14-day turnaround period. It is a matter of extreme seriousness that the Minister was clearly misinformed. By the end of the third term, hardly any claims had been paid and the suppliers were owed far more than they had been when they met Premier Balindlela in July. Suppliers cannot afford to subsidise the scheme any longer and have been forced to cease deliveries.
The DA calls on the Minister of Education to take urgent hands-on steps to ensure that the Eastern Cape Education Department pays its bills so that our children can eat. [Applause.]
SUCCESSFUL VISIT OF NCOP TO KWAZULU-NATAL
(Member’s Statement)
Mr V B NDLOVU (IFP): Chairperson, the visit of the NCOP to KwaZulu-Natal was a success, which is highly appreciated. The NCOP fulfilled a promise that was made by the government to people prior to the 2004 national elections.
Irrespective of the opening welcoming remarks, based on what the previous government of KwaZulu-Natal did, there were things that were mentioned without verification, which are not a true reflection of the then government.
Irrespective of that announcement, the whole visit got a positive response and gave our people a sense of trust in their elected government.
The attendance of all dignitaries, including the President of the country, seems to have elevated the status of the KwaZulu-Natal government.
We hope that all the promises made will be fulfilled in due course.
ARREST OF CORRUPT OFFICIALS
(Member’s Statement)
Mr R Z NOGUMLA (ANC): Enkosi, Sekela Somlomo. Umbutho wesizwe, iAfrican National Congress uyavuyiswa yimpumelelo efunyanwa ngamapolisa eli loMzantsi Afrika, ngokuthi gqolo ibamba abarhwaphilizi. Kutsha nje kukho isihlanu sonke sabantu esisandula ukuvalelwa kwezimnyama izisele, esinukwa ngorhwaphilizo. Kwesisihlanu sibanjwe eMpuma koloni abathathu kubo ngabaqeshwa bakarhulumente, esinye isibabini ngabahlali. Sithetha nje amapolisa alele ekhondweni labanye abathathu abanukwa kwangesisifo sinye. Esi sihlanu sithyolwa ngokubaneminwe emide nentliziyo ezingcolileyo ngokuphathelelene nezimali zikarhulumente. Umbutho wesizwe iAfrican National Congress wenza isibhambathiso nabemi beli lizwe sokuba sibambisene singabantu siyakubulwa ubuqhophololo sibuncothule neengcambu zabo. Ukubanjwa kwesisihlanu kuyayingqina loo nto. Enkosi. (Translation of Xhosa member’s statement follows.)
[Mr R Z NOGUMLA (ANC): Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. The ANC as a national organisation commends the SAPS for their success in apprehending corrupt individuals. Recently five people were arrested following allegations of their involvement in corrupt activities. Among these five people that were arrested in the Eastern Cape, three were government officials and two were community members. Police are following up and tracing another three. These five individuals are alleged to have been involved in fraudulent activities, driven by their impure hearts.
The ANC reaffirms its commitment, together with the citizens of this country, to fight and uproot corruption. The recent arrest of the five individuals is evidence of that. Thank you.]
IN MEMORY OF THE LATE GIBSON KENTE
(Member’s Statement)
Mr G T MADIKIZA (UDM): Madam Deputy Speaker, the UDM extends its condolences to the family and friends of Gibson Kente, who passed away yesterday.
Over the course of several decades, Gibson Kente touched the lives of countless people with his plays and musicals. Not only is he credited with the production of 23 plays and three television dramas, but he will also be remembered as the founding father of township theatre.
Despite his own success and the acclaim he received, he did not hesitate to assist and promote other artists. It is said that he trained 400 artists over the years. He was a pioneer who served as an inspiration for the many artists that came after him. Renowned for his work ethic and the unflinching realism of his work, he set a standard that raised the quality of South African theatre.
We salute Gibson Kente, an artist of exceptional talent, and today we also salute Gibson Kente, the Aids activist. Last year, he announced, publicly, his HIV status and called for greater awareness and less stigmatisation. Like many others, he showed remarkable bravery and a sense of social responsibility by sacrificing his privacy in order to strengthen society’s response to this pandemic.
Rest in peace, Brother. Our lives are the poorer for your absence but the richer for the legacy of your work. [Applause.]
GOVERNMENT’S FAILURE TO REACH ITS ANTIRETROVIRAL TARGET
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs P DE LILLE (ID): Madam Deputy Speaker, government originally stated that 53 000 HIV-positive persons would be on antiretrovirals by March 2004. President Thabo Mbeki then shifted this target to March 2005. This morning, Dr Rose Malumba from the Department of Health said on SAFM that the target set by President Mbeki would also not be achieved and it is not even clear when we would reach this target.
In the latest update report, less than 10 000 people are currently receiving antiretrovirals in South Africa. At this rate, the plan will fall short of the target announced by President Thabo Mbeki, of 55 000 people on antiretrovirals by March 2005; a target that is already more than 100 000 people less than the proposed plan.
Only the Western Cape, the Free State and Gauteng have made their rollout plans available. The question is: When will the other six provinces be in a position to make their rollout programmes available? It is clear to the ID that the government is not performing as a result of bureaucratic and financial bottlenecks, and the programme will rapidly lose credibility if these bottlenecks are not addressed.
The ID calls on the government to address these serious problems, so that the health professionals can perform their duties and South African lives can be saved.
CONCERN ABOUT YOUTH’S RAMPANT ABUSE OF DRUGS
(Member’s Statement)
Mr L M GREEN (ACDP): Deputy Speaker, the ACDP wants to express its concern in the House today about the rampant abuse of drugs in our nation, especially the rapid spread of the use of tik-tik in the Western Cape, especially in our schools.
We are concerned that not enough is being done to save the many young lives that are being destroyed by drugs. Our youth is the treasure of our nation and we cannot allow their lives to be destroyed.
The ACDP calls upon the government, the church, organs of civil society and the many community-based organisations to take a strong collective stand and root out the scourge of drugs in our nation.
UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL MEETING TO BE HELD IN NAIROBI, IN NOVEMBER 2004 (Member’s Statement)
Ms M P MENTOR (ANC): Hon Deputy Speaker, this statement is on the United Nations Security Council meeting that will take place in November 2004, in Nairobi, focusing on the Great Lakes region.
The ANC takes note of the meeting of the United Nations Security Council scheduled to take place towards the end of November in Nairobi, this very year. This will be the first United Nations Security Council meeting to take place in Africa, and among the important issues on the agenda will be the question of peace in the Sudan and Somalia.
Whereas the involvement of the United Nations Security Council in pursuance of lasting peace in the Great Lakes region is commendable, the ANC calls on the United Nations Security Council to augment its efforts, aimed at supporting the African Union, to deal with Pan-African challenges.
The ANC further calls on the United Nations to urgently seek permanent solutions to the human tragedies that continue unabatedly in other conflict- riddled parts of the globe, especially the Middle East and Western Sahara.
We call on the United Nations to urgently ensure the realisation of the state of Palestine, which is a legitimate demand and a right to the people of Palestine. [Applause.]
CENTRALISATION OF MUNICIPALITIES
(Member’s Statement)
Mnr W P DOMAN (DA): Geagte Adjunkspeaker, die DA verwelkom premier Rasool van die Wes-Kaap se standpunt Vrydag in die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies dat provinsiale regering uitgebou moet word om sy regmatige grondwetlike rol te vervul, en nie gereduseer moet word om maar net agentskapfunksies vir armoedeverligting te verrig nie.
Dit is president Mbeki en die regering se plig om betekenis te gee aan die grondwetlike rol van provinsies en om af te sien van die neiging om alles te sentraliseer. Die DA stem saam dat provinsies behoorlik gefinansier moet word om hulle in staat te stel om die rol van katalisator vir ekonomiese groei en sosiale ontwikkeling te speel.
Provinsiale regerings is in ’n groot land soos Suid-Afrika by uitstek geskik om streekontwikkeling te bevorder. Die DA wil ook hê dat provinsies munisipaliteite moet steun en bemagtig, en verwerp die aksie dat die sentrale departement nou by 12 munisipaliteite direk wil ingryp, in plaas daarvan om die provinsies te bemagtig om dit te doen.
Die mislukking van sekere provinsiale ANC-regerings moet nie as ’n verskoning gebruik word om provinsiale magte te sentraliseer nie. Daarom verwelkom die DA president Mbeki se onderneming in die NRVP om verder aandag te gee aan premier Rasool se toespraak. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Mr W P DOMAN (DA): Hon Deputy Speaker, the DA welcomes Premier Rasool of the Western Cape’s position in the National Council of Provinces on Friday that provincial government must be extended to fulfil its rightful constitutional role and not be reduced to merely performing agency functions for poverty relief.
It is the duty of President Mbeki and the government to give meaning to the constitutional role of provinces and to relinquish the tendency to centralise everything. The DA agrees that provinces should be properly financed to enable them to play a catalytic role for economic growth and social development.
In a large country like South Africa, provincial governments are notably suited to promoting regional development. The DA also wants provinces to support and empower municipalities, and rejects the fact that the central department now wants to intervene directly in 12 municipalities, instead of empowering the provinces to do so.
The failure of certain provincial ANC governments should not be used as an excuse to centralise provincial powers. Therefore the DA welcomes President Mbeki’s undertaking in the NCOP to pay further attention to Premier Rasool’s speech. [Applause.]]
HAVENSIGHT COMMUNITY FORUM FORMED IN CHATSWORTH, KWAZULU-NATAL
(Member’s Statement)
Ms S RAJBALLY (MF): A Havensight community forum has been formed in Chatsworth, KwaZulu-Natal, which was initiated by Dr Naidoo, who has a practice in the area. This forum works towards curbing crime in the area.
The forum comprises political parties, communities and various stakeholders. Highjacking, mugging, theft and housebreaking were rated the highest in this area, and I was also a victim. However, ever since this forum has been formed, crime in the area has been zero-rated.
The forum will soon be inviting our national and provincial Safety and Security Ministers to attend one of its meetings. The MF fully supports the forum and advises all our hon MPs to create similar forums in their communities, as this will help to curb crime and assist our police department.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM AWARDED A PRIZE (Member’s Statement)
Ms L L MABE (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, my statement is about an award that has been given to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. The ANC commends the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism on recently being awarded a prize for the best financial management report in the national departments category by the Southern African Institute of Government Auditors. The Southern African Institute of Government Auditors’ annual public sector awards recognise the pursuit of excellence in annual reports published by all national and provincial departments.
The ANC further congratulates other recipients of similar awards in other categories and encourages all departments, nationally and provincially, to ensure that high levels of financial practices are adhered to in compliance with the provisions of the Public Finance Management Act. These awards are further proof that the ANC’s commitment to clean, efficient and transparent financial management is taking root in our public institutions. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
EFFECTS OF GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS ON MEDICINE PRICES
(Member’s Statement)
Mr R COETZEE (DA): Madam Speaker, the government’s regulation of medicine prices has been a disaster for customers and pharmacists alike. Before the elections, when it was useful to do so, the Minister promised that medicine prices would drop by between 40% and 70%. In fact, for almost all customers, medicine prices have gone up.
Pharmacists simply cannot survive on the R26 dispensing fee. As a result, they have exploited the badly drafted pricing regulations to charge patients administration fees which medical aids refuse to cover. Patients are now paying out of their own pockets and indications are that medical aids will not pass on their savings to their customers. Moreover, almost all pharmacies have stopped supplying patients of the Compensation Commissioner for Occupational Injuries and Diseases because he takes too long to pay. As a result, these patients are no longer being serviced by the private sector and are now creating an additional burden on the public sector.
I am sure that the Minister of Finance does not approve and I wonder if he would care to make a statement on this. The Minister of Health should accept that the regulations have failed in their objectives. She should suspend them, and should begin again.
SPORTING ACHIEVEMENTS BY SOUTH AFRICANS AND NEED FOR EQUITABLE PROVISION OF FACILITIES
(Member’s Statement)
Mr M V NGEMA (IFP): Deputy Speaker, the IFP is proud to note that our sportsmen and women have always done well and brought great pride to the country when representing South Africa on the international stage. They are great ambassadors and bring recognition to South Africa whenever they compete.
This past weekend was no exception with South Africans competing and excelling in various sporting codes in countries around the world. Some of the achievements included the Springbok rugby team winning their test match against Wales and Retief Goosen winning a golf tournament in the United States, as well as Hendrick Ramaala winning the men’s title in the New York Marathon. Ramaala is only the second South African to win this prestigious race.
Whilst we applaud these achievements and hope that they will serve as a source of inspiration to all South Africans, we do, however, believe that if we are to continue to excel in the sporting arena and produce sportspeople of the calibre of the above-mentioned, there should be a more equitable provision of sporting facilities. We are particularly concerned regarding the provision of sporting facilities in rural areas and hope that the hon Minister and his department will take measures to rectify this. I thank you.
RENEWED CONFIDENCE IN SOUTH AFRICA
(Member’s Statement)
Ms P BHENGU (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, South African people, under the leadership of the ANC, continue the march to a better life for all. We continue to reach milestones on both political and economic fronts. With regard to the fiscal and monetary policy level, the inflation and interest rates are stable. The budget deficits are well within acceptable limits. The international rating agency looks set to upgrade South Africa’s status.
As a result of all the above, the confidence of foreign investors has grown over the past 10 years. Last April’s general elections were marked a resounding success worldwide. This is a positive sign for our young yet maturing democracy. In 10 years we have managed to hold three successful elections with greater efficiency each time. As we have consistently served our people over 92 years of our existence, the ANC recommits itself to working with the people through the peoples’ contract to create work and fight poverty. I thank you.
MINISTERS’RESPONSES
OUTSTANDING PAYMENTS FOR NUTRITION SCHEME IN EASTERN CAPE
(Minister’s Response)
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Deputy Speaker, we share the concern raised by the hon Zille in relation to the amounts outstanding to suppliers for the nutrition scheme in the Eastern Cape. We wish to share with the House that, as a result of the intervention by the hon Minister, all backlogs in the Eastern Cape have been paid for.
The amount that appears to be referred to by the hon Zille is in relation to the current cycle. The Department has been informed about these arrears and a member from the national offices will be going down to the Eastern Cape on Wednesday in order to ensure that this amount is promptly attended to. We share the same anxiety and concerns.
We would like to share information with the House that, in the previous cycle, there were difficulties that were experienced as a result of failures on the part of suppliers to provide the department with account numbers and the appropriate proof where requested by the department. Thank you.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Phambi kokuba siqalise ngoko, Sekela- Somlomo, ngingathanda ukukhe ndithethe ngokubhekisele kulo mba sizive sithukeka kakhulu ngawo singuKhongolo, wokurhuqwa phantsi kwesidima sikaMnu Dumisani Makhaye, nathe uMhlekazi lo usandula kuhlala phantsi uphakamela ukurhoxisa iindawo ezithile kwintetha yakhe. Kambe loo nto asikayiqwalaseli singuKhongolo.
Kodwa endifuna ukuyiqonda kukuba kulaa milomo mininzi yoobawo uGibson, yokuba masingathethi ngalaa mba kuba useza kugweba kuwo, ngaba emva kokurhoxa kwelungu siseza na isigwebo sakhe? Ndibuziswa kukuba ndingathanda ukuba ze sincedakale kwimiba enjengale kwixa elizayo.(Translation of Xhosa paragraphs follows.)
[The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Before we start with that, Deputy Speaker, I would like to say something in relation to the matter which made us, as the ANC, feel badly insulted, because of Mr Dumisani Makhaye’s dignity which has been assailed. In this regard, the hon member who has just sat down said he wanted to withdraw some aspects in his speech. In fact, we have not yet given our attention, as the ANC.
But what I want to know is, based on the noise made by the hon Gibson and others, whether we should not talk about that issue, because you are still going to give a ruling on it. After a member has withdrawn, is there still going to be a ruling? I ask this, because I would like this to help us, should we have similar problems in future.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Kuye kwasithatha isikhathi eside baba ukubhekana nalolu daba abelusho lapha eNdlini. Kunezigaba ezimbili ezivele esitatimendeni sakhe. Isitatimende sokuqala besikhuluma ngesikhangiso ebesisephephandabeni, ebuza ukuthi imali eyenze lesi sikhangiso iphuma kuphi na, futhi wathi ngabe kuthathwa le mali kwakhiwe ngayo izindlu.
Uma sibheka kule miThetho yenu yale Ndlu, ayikho into eyonakele ngokusho njalo. Into engasiphathanga kahle eyokuthi akhulume ngoBaba uMakhaye ngesikhathi iNingizimu Afrika isamkhalela. Ngakho, siye sakhuluma nabasizi bePhalamende ukuthi basisize ekutholeni ukuthi yini ayishilo engahambelani nemiThetho yePhalamende.
Kuye kwabonakala ukuthi ngempela uzwise izwe lonke ubuhlungu, hhayi thina sodwa beqembu le-ANC, kodwa wonke umphakathi uphatheke kabi ngale nto ayishilo. Njengoba ubonile nawe ukuthi akusibona abantu be-ANC bodwa abaye basukuma baveza ukungajabuli. Yonke imibutho ekule Ndlu isukumile, ngaphandle kwemibili nemithathu kuphela engasukumanga. Lokho kubonakalisa ukuthi le nto izwise wonke umphakathi ubuhlungu.
Kunokuthi asukume ahoxise amazwi akhe, sibona ukuthi kungcono asukume acele uxolo. Lokhu kuphuma kuKhongolose, angazi noma nifuna ukuthi lolu daba siluqhube yini. Kodwa siye sabona ukuthi kungcono acele uxolo futhi ahoxise amagama akhe ukuze idlule le ndaba. Asifuni nathi ukuthi ilokhu ikhulunywa ngoba ilokhu isizwisa ubuhlungu.
Ngakho-ke besiyibeke ngalolo hlobo-ke, kodwa uma ningavumelani nendlela esihambise ngayo ngineqiniso lokuthi yinto esingaphinda sibuyele kuyo. Ngizoke ngibuze kulaba basizi bethu lapha eTafuleni ukuthi uma indaba ime ngalolu hlobo kufanele ilungiswe kanjani.
Bayavumelana nami ukuthi udaba seludlulile kule Ndlu. Bacela ukuthi sicele yonke iNdlu yamukele ukuthi ubaba uxolisile, nokuthi nathi singamalungu aleli Phalamende singakhulumi amagama abuhlungu kubantu besebuhlungwini obungaka. Ngakho, sizocela ukuthola kini nonke malungu ePhalamende ukuthi niyakwemukela yini ukuthi ubaba uxolisile futhi wawahoxisa namagama awashilo? (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[It took us quite a long time to consider the matter that he spoke about in this House. His statement had two parts, the first one being about an advertisement published in a newspaper. He asked where the funding for that advertisement had come from. He further suggested that such funds should have been used for housing projects.
If we look at the rules of this House, we see that there is nothing wrong with such an utterance. What we did not like was that he spoke about the late Mr Makhaye at a time when South Africa was still mourning his death. Therefore, we have requested the Table Assistants to check for us what it was that the member said and whether it was in contravention of the Rules of Parliament.
It appears that he has caused grief to the entire nation. This is not felt by the members of the ANC only, but the entire nation felt aggrieved by what the member said. As you have noted, it was not the ANC members only, other members also stood up and expressed their sadness. Almost all the parties present in this House stood up, except two or three parties that did not stand up.
Instead of withdrawing his words, we feel that he should rather apologise. That is a proposal from the ANC, however. I do not know if you want us to take this matter further. Our view is that the member should apologise and withdraw in order to have this matter resolved. We do not want this matter to be discussed repeatedly because it arouses sorrow among us.
Therefore, we wish to resolve it in that manner. However, if you disagree with our proposal, I believe we can revisit it at a later stage. I am going to enquire from the Table Assistants as to the procedure to resolve a matter of this nature.
They concur with me that this matter is already off the table in this House. They request us to plead with the House to accept that the member did apologise, and further advise us as members of this House not to use words that will cause harm to other people while they are experiencing grief. Therefore, we want to check your feeling on this, to see if the hon members accept that the hon member did apologise and withdraw.]
UMBHEXESHI WEQELA ELILAWULAYO: Uxolo, Sekela-Somlomo. Besicela ukuba khe siphiwe ithuba kuba kusekho into erhuqa umrhaji kule nto. Xa yena esithi yeyani na le nkcitho? – nto leyo eyabuzwa nguJudasi – asilwamkeli olo xolo lunjalo kuba isesisithuko kuthi.
Ubomi bukaqabane abulingani nayo nayiphi na imali kuthi. Asimboni enyanisekile kolo xolo lwakhe. Sifuna ukuba ame kwinto ayithethayo okanye ayirhoxise yonke ngaphandle kwemiqathango. (Translation of Xhosa paragraphs follows.)
[The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: My apologies, Deputy Speaker. We would like to ask that we be given a chance, because there is still something provocative in this issue. When he says, “What is this expense for?” – that is what was said by Judas. We do not accept such an apology, because it is still an insult to us.
The life of our comrade has no monetary value to us. We do not regard him as being honest in his apology. We want him to stand by what he says, or withdraw it totally, with no conditions.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: May I address you on this matter?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just before you address me . . .
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: I want to be helpful, I don’t want to be difficult.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, you are always helpful, but let me seek the help when I need it, Mr Gibson. I would like to check with the hon member, just for his benefit, because the language spoken here was very tough. Even I, with my limited Zulu, was struggling. But the impression that you gave the House, or at least that I got – of course I stand to be corrected - was that you withdrew unconditionally. Mr Steyn, for the record, your withdrawal was unconditional?
Mr A C STEYN: Yes it was, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The withdrawal was unconditional, hon Chief Whip. I think it may not have come across that way in the initial statement, but now the matter is off the table. Does the House agree that this matter is now completely off the table? [Interjections.] Thank you.
NATIONAL ENERGY REGULATOR BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move: That the Bill, as amended by the Committee, be passed.
Motion agreed to.
Bill accordingly passed.
FINANCIAL SERVICES OMBUD SCHEMES BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Hon Chairperson, hon members, the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill we are discussing here today has been the product of much consultation and robust debate. I like that word, “robust”. Again, I acknowledge the hard work of the Portfolio Committee on Finance under the chairpersonship of Dr Rob Davies. Both the staff in the National Treasury and members of the Portfolio Committee on Finance have shared with me that the Bill was very closely scrutinised.
The FISOS Bill, as it’s called now, aims to protect consumers of financial services by expanding and strengthening the ombud scheme arrangements designed to resolve their complaints in a quick and cost-effective manner. It does so by regulating minimum standards for voluntary ombud scheme arrangements in the financial services sector, such as the Ombudsman for Banking Services, Long-Term Insurance Ombud and the Short-Term Insurance Ombud. It also ensures that each and every consumer is protected by establishing a statutory ombud to resolve complaints in those cases where a voluntary scheme does not exist.
The Bill outlines criteria for the recognition of an ombud scheme. Ombud schemes compliant with those criteria will be assessed by an independent council established under the Bill. The council will stipulate minimum criteria with which all ombud arrangements in the financial sector, both current and in the future, will have to comply. We have incorporated the transition mechanism to ensure that there is no disruption with regard to current ombud arrangements. Any schemes currently operating will have a period of 18 months subsequent to promulgation of the Bill in which to obtain recognition.
Though the Bill provides for a systematic and regulated approach to the establishment of an ombud scheme, at the nexus of the Bill - and indeed at the centre of all ombud arrangements - lies the ideal of consumer protection. An ombud exists in order to resolve a consumer’s complaint in an expeditious and cost-efficient way, applying the principles of law. Granting schemes recognition by the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill ensures consumers´ peace of mind. Consumers can rest assured that the ombud dealing with their complaint is independent, appropriately qualified and empowered to do so.
Let me assure this House that the regulatory architecture of the financial sector was carefully considered in crafting this Bill. In addition to the voluntary ombud scheme arrangements, this Bill also dovetails with the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, which created the Ombud for Financial Services Providers, who is fast becoming known in the market as the “FAIS Ombud”. This Ombud for Financial Services Providers is established by statute to deal with all advice-related complaints against financial services providers and intermediaries.
The Bill clarifies that voluntary schemes will deal with all other matters within their terms of reference for the particular industry sector they serve. However, it was acknowledged that if a consumer had a complaint that fell outside of the voluntary arrangement, and also outside the jurisdiction of the Ombud for Financial Services Providers, a gap would exist thereby prejudicing the consumer. The Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill remedies this deficiency by creating a statutory ombud to deal with these cases.
For the purposes of cost-efficiency, the statutory ombud will be the Ombud for Financial Services Providers operating under a different hat. Therefore, no consumer complaint will slip through the cracks. To avoid jurisdictional wrangles over which ombud should resolve a complaint, clear demarcation of jurisdictions is spelt out in clause 13 of the Bill. Moreover, ombud schemes and the council established under the Bill have a duty to educate consumers as to the appropriate dispute resolution form best suited and legally empowered to resolve their complaint.
Hon Chairperson, I hereby present the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill [B20-2004] for consideration. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr R H DAVIES: Chairperson, during the era of colonialism and apartheid the financial sector developed in this country was sophisticated in some respects, but also largely orientated towards providing services for a minority of corporate and high-income, mainly white, individuals.
The regulatory framework that emerged in tandem with this process was essentially prudential in nature and aimed at protecting the integrity of the financial system by prescribing things like capital adequacy ratios and reporting requirements to the central bank. It is only in the last 10 years, since the establishment of our democratic government, that we have seriously started to confront the challenges of laying the basis for more effective protection of consumer rights and also for the promotion of greater access to affordable financial services by low-income people.
The Bill before the House today, as the Minister explained just now, seeks to strengthen the protection of the rights of consumers involved in, what are very often, inherently unequal transactional arrangements with financial institutions. The timeousness of such a measure has, I believe, been underscored by the recent initiation of litigation in the United States against the world’s largest insurance broking firm March and McLennan. This firm stands accused of colluding with insurance companies to inflate premiums instead of helping clients to get the best cover for the lowest possible premiums. The 23 October edition of The Economist magazine reports that this case in the United States will be heard in the context of widespread concern that regulators have simply tolerated such dishonest and even illegal activities.
The FISOS Bill before us today seeks to build on a number of recent initiatives involving the establishment of both the voluntary ombud schemes and ombud schemes established by laws passed through this Parliament. Over the past few years - in the face of growing public awareness, community campaigns like the financial sector coalition campaign and a degree of, but not sufficient, consumer activism - voluntary ombud schemes have been established in the banking and long-term and short-term insurance industries.
At the same time the Pension Funds Act and the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act have established an adjudicator and an ombud respectively with powers in areas of responsibility prescribed in those Acts. All of these schemes have in common the provision of the service in which disputes between customers and financial institutions can be referred to someone who is supposed to be independent and impartial, who seeks to resolve them by way of mediation, conciliation, recommendation or finally by making a determination or a ruling.
Ombud processes cannot address the major structural challenges of transformation of the financial sector. It is beyond the capacity of ombud schemes to address issues like the generally high charges imposed by financial institutions, the exclusion of poor people, the high concentration in the sector and the lack of representivity in the ownership patterns. But they do potentially offer customers who feel that they have been, for example, wrongly charged, given incorrect advise or not paid what they are due in terms of their contractual agreements, an opportunity to take up these issues without having to resort to more costly litigation.
Generally, however, a consumer who is dissatisfied with an ombud ruling can exercise the option of litigation, but the ombud rulings are in most schemes binding on the industry players that subscribe to the scheme. The Bill before us establishes the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Council, which must confer recognition on any voluntary ombud scheme that is permitted to operate in South Africa.
The Bill lays down a number of criteria for recognition of voluntary schemes. These include the appointment of an ombud by a body that is not controlled by the industry concerned, participation by the majority of financial institutions in the scheme and the provision of effective enforcement mechanisms for determination of the ombud.
The Council is also required to promote education of clients about the availability of ombud services and, in terms of an amendment inserted at the committee stage, recognised voluntary ombud schemes are required also to contribute to such consumer education efforts.
One of the important principles entrenched in this Bill is that it establishes a clear demarcation of the areas of responsibility between the Pension Funds Adjudicator and the FAIS ombud on the one hand, and voluntary schemes on the other. Voluntary schemes are prohibited from encroaching on the areas of jurisdiction of ombud schemes established by statute.
In order to cater for cases which may not be covered by either of these Acts, or by voluntary schemes, the FAIS ombud is given the authority to act as a statutory ombud in any cases involving a financial institution defined in other legislation or declared as such by the Minister after consulting the Council and the Financial Services Board. This could potentially include microlenders or mashonisas, as they are more properly known. This is something I believe the Minister, together with his colleague the Minister of Trade and Industry, need to seriously consider: Would the inclusion of microlenders in the ambit of the scheme enhance protection of many of the least protected and poorest in our country?
While the Bill provides for a clear demarcation of jurisdiction between voluntary and statutory schemes, we have ensured that this will not create any additional bureaucratic obstacles to consumers who cannot be expected to know who has jurisdiction over what. The committee accepted proposals to amend the Bill by including clauses requiring any ombud scheme that receives a complaint on a matter over which it does not have jurisdiction, to submit that complaint without undue delay to an ombud that does have the requisite jurisdiction. In cases where there is uncertainty about jurisdiction, the ombuds concerned are required to consult with the statutory ombud who, if there is still disagreement, is given the authority to make a determination, which decides who will deal with the matter.
The basic architecture then is one in which the consumer can approach any ombud in the assurance that the complaint will, with his or her permission, be submitted to the appropriate ombud. In the committee discussions we heard from the Financial Services Board that there were discussions about establishing a single call centre which anyone with a complaint could contact. There is also the joint public education and awareness campaign, which I mentioned earlier. And these two factors could contribute significantly to promoting greater access to ombud services.
The Bill, I believe, will be an important step towards enhancing the protection of the rights of consumers involved in transactions with financial institutions. It will provide basic norms and standards for voluntary schemes and enhance the role of the statutory ombud to cover financial institutions not subject at this point to any other scheme. Ombud schemes, as I said earlier, will not be able to resolve many of the major structural challenges of transforming the financial sector, but they can provide individual customers with a way of resolving their complaints in a cost-effective and potentially much more beneficial manner.
The biggest challenge, I believe, in enhancing ombud schemes is probably in promoting greater consumer awareness, particularly among the large numbers of lower income customers of financial institutions. Those who have used the services of ombuds to date have been a very small minority of aggrieved clients. And although I do not have any precise information at hand, I will venture to suggest that few of them are coming from the predominantly lower income groups. This has to change, and I believe that this Bill offers us a way forward in this regard. The ANC therefore will be supporting the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms R TALJAARD: Madam Chairperson, Minister, before I highlight some of the concerns we have with the Bill, I would like to endorse the comments made by the hon Davies in respect of microlending. This is certainly an area that requires consistent and considerable policy work.
When we hear that the intention of a Bill is to protect consumer interests we all agree solemnly that this is a laudable goal of public policy. However, the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill – the FISOS Bill - before the House today claims to take great strides in protecting consumer interests and, at face value, appears to deserve a ringing endorsement. But public policy can never be interrogated merely at face value. There are clear conceptual, constitutional and principled concerns with the Bill before the House today.
When the FAIS legislation – the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act - came before Parliament to place financial advice-related complaints squarely in the remit of the FAIS ombud’s jurisdiction, there was no indication at that stage from either the Treasury or the FSB that the existing voluntary ombud schemes would therefore relinquish any jurisdictional authority that they had exercised over financial advice- related complaints in the past. And, it is quite clear that the concern would be that the proceeded good faith of the voluntary ombuds, in dealing with certain advice-related complaints, could be seen as ultra vires in respect of their exercise and jurisdiction.
While there is a clear jurisdictional dispensation debate here that engaged considerable time in the Portfolio Committee on Finance, as the hon Davies has highlighted - and one would wish to discourage forums’ shopping in a context of preciously few scarce regulatory resources - one can legitimately ask whether the ultimate jurisdictional balance struck in this Bill will be in the interests of consumers or not. This is an area of considerable debate. This legislation arguably takes away choice from consumers and imposes a rigid and near mechanistic dispute resolution and remedy route dispensation on consumers.
In respect of the voluntary ombud schemes, the FISOS Bill giveth and taketh away. It grants voluntary industry ombud schemes statutory recognition on the one hand, thereby arguably enhancing their legal standing to resolve consumer complaints, but, at the same time, it takes away clear areas of their existing jurisdiction by making certain complaints the sole preserve of the FAIS ombud. And, this is not simply because the FAIS ombud already had that jurisdiction - Clause 14 of the Bill takes the existing jurisdiction quite a bit further than only financial advice-related complaints. One saw this in the debate on amending the long title of the Bill.
While clear steps were taken by the FSB and the National Treasury to ameliorate some of the conceptual concerns raised by MPs, we believe that the National Treasury may have made the FAIS ombud’s new powers, acting under his second hat, perhaps too wide, and one needs to take cognisance of this particular fact in setting policy and watching the implementation of the legislation.
The FISOS Bill seeks to give statutory recognition not only to the three existing schemes, but also to the scheme that is to be created under the provisions of the Security Services Bill. While the FISOS therefore aims to enhance consumer protection, it could in fact achieve the exact opposite by reducing consumer choice of remedies and ombuds. This is an arena for debate, Minister.
The Bill not only takes all financial advice-related complaints and places under them under the sole jurisdiction of the FAIS ombud, but, as I indicated, it now makes them its sole jurisdiction and indeed widens the scope of FAIS under hat number 2.
The Bill creates the council, housed in the FSB, a merely nominally independent board that will set standards for the voluntary ombuds and, controversially, could also act and be seen as a quasi-regulatory authority beyond the mere setting of industry standards.
It is in this regard that the independence of the council is required at all three levels in respect of independence from the FSB itself, in respect of relative independence from the Minister and in respect of regulatory capture by the industry. While the Bill passes muster in respect of regulatory capture by the industry, the remaining areas of independence remain problematic and potentially constitutionally problematic.
Minister, I can assure you that we will watch closely the implementation of this legislation to see how this debate will pan out in respect of optimal arrangements to be made for consumer protection.
It is regrettable that despite some of the areas of constitutionality we were concerned with being addressed by the National Treasury and the State Law Adviser – and I would like to thank the department and the State Law Adviser in respect of the Minister’s delegated legislation – we are unfortunately unable to support the Bill. Thank you, Chair. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr T E VEZI: Chairperson, the Bill achieves the critical objective of ensuring that organisation and accountability in the ombud schemes industry is developed as part of the transformation of the financial sector. The Bill also promotes transparency and access in the industry through accountable ombud schemes. The challenge will be to ensure that through continuous education of the public key principles such as equity are continuously implemented and demonstrated in the interests of the clients.
The complainant’s right of redress is insulated from the prescriptive legal requirement. The complainant can also seek legal redress through judicial avenues before and after the ombud or ombud schemes process. The role and responsibilities of recognised schemes and statutory schemes is clarified. The historical problem of customer confusion is dealt with in the Bill. However, the organisation and the form of these arbiters or ombud schemes have posed several challenges for the industry and clients that they are meant to represent. One of the challenges has been their source of funding, which comes mainly from the industry. That raises questions of conflict of interest as well as the fact that most of these ombuds schemes are simply voluntary without any statutory obligations. Their relationships with other statutory ombuds have been unclear, for example on remedies that could be sought and their status. The IFP, however, supports the Bill. Thank you.
Mr Y WANG: Madam Chair, hon Minister, hon members, the ID would like to welcome and support this Bill. However, on that note, we would just like to address the challenge that comes after we have had the debates, namely the actual implementation of the Bill. Yesterday, when I talked to my neighbour, a 65-year old pensioner, about today’s debate, I told him we were going to talk about the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill. He said: “The uhm . . . what?” He doesn’t know what this Bill stands for.
The ID believes what is important is to educate the public. The accessibility of such an ombud to the poorer community is also important. I thank you all. [Applause.]
Mr K D S DURR: Chairperson, the Minister has confirmed that this is consumer protection, but there is a plethora of ombuds, also in the private sector. People use the word so often, it is beginning to make one’s head spin. In my view, Minister, there should be one free call number that the public can dial for consumer protection in each province and which is listed in the regional phonebooks. I’ve taken the trouble of looking at the phonebooks and you can’t find them. There is no number in the regional books. Sometimes one of them appears.
Usually consumer protection lies with the Department of Trade and Industry, and as a concurrent competence it is often devolved to provinces along with consumer courts. In the Western Cape, we have an Office of the Consumer Protector with a free-call 0800 number, and our consumer courts will be up and running by March next year. We now have about 26 offices in the rural areas and townships, and there will be 30 by the end of the year.
All these offices have the various ombuds’ numbers and consumer personnel, as well as information on consumer protection. These people who are known in the communities are the people that will promote consumer awareness. Soon they will publish an A-Z comprehensive consumer rights booklet.
Minister, the Micro Financial Regulatory Council is in Gauteng. The Banking Ombud is also there. The National Credit Regulator is in Johannesburg. If you’re in Umtata, or in King Williamstown, or on the East Rand, you just don’t know where to find these people. How does the public access this confusing maze? Some things are with the Minister of Finance, some are with Trade and Industry and some are in the provinces.
We need to urgently, in the interests of consumer protection, reassign the functions of the state departments and make the provinces the port of entry for complaints. There must be the consumer protectors that exist in each province. These, in turn, can direct complaints to the relevant ombud, or department, wherever they find themselves in South Africa.
We should have one service provider in each province as the office of the Consumer Protector. We support the legislation. [Time expired.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Malibongwe Igama lamakhosikazi! [Praise the name of women!] Madam Chair. The MF acknowledges that the interaction with financial institutions, such as commercial and mutual banks, as well as insurance companies, is extremely challenging for any client. The Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill aims to address and improve the situation.
However, there appears to be a number of glitches to this ombud that does not really seem to serve the client adequately. Thus, noting the necessity to ensure that clients’ interests are served and addressed effectively and efficiently, the departments have introduced this Bill.
From its provisions it is evident that the Bill serves to create an environment of organisational capacity, development and accountability of the ombud schemes industry. The MF acknowledges the necessity for these elements to ensure that the interests of clients are upheld by values that are in line with our democracy that supports it. It is hoped that this Bill will address this issue adequately to the benefit of all.
The MF supports the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr Y S BHAMJEE: Madam Chair, thank you for inviting me to participate in this debate. Since the construction of a democratic society it has been the centre of the governance and transformation process to aim at overcoming the political, social and economic problems of the past, but the challenges confronting us are too numerous to overcome in the short space of 10 years.
However, transformation goes beyond government. The values of transformation must impact on the links between government, commerce and industry, thereby deepening the ethos of the culture of the Freedom Charter in institutions of the public and private sectors. Thus, the process of transformation demands of us all an attitudinal change in style and mode of service delivery that will eventually lead to a better life for all.
We know for a fact that the financial sector and its institutions that a free South Africa inherited, were based on the values of colonialism, racism and sexism. In the main, it was assumed that only white males were able to exercise political, economic and social power in a system that denied black people, in general, access to such power and influence. They were only fit to serve and abide by the dictates of bureaucracy that served to perpetuate the dual economy.
In order to transform this abhorrent system, a variety of policies has been developed. However, at a practical level, we need to focus on inculcating a culture of socioeconomic education, challenging the nightmare of bureaucracy that was, and, in a significant number of instances still is, loyal to the values of the old regime - both in the public and private sectors.
Thus, interacting and engaging with financial institutions, such as commercial banks, mutual banks and the insurance industry has always been and remains a challenge for consumers or clients who historically were kept ignorant of their basic consumer rights. It is in this context that we welcome the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill that aims to make the financial services industry more user friendly, accessible, transparent and accountable.
In a financial industry there are three voluntary ombuds: the short-term ombud, the long-term ombud and the banking adjudicator. The Pension Funds Adjudicator is a statutory ombud and so are the FAIS ombuds. The ombuds in each of these sectors were created to champion the cause of the consumer. Yet, the majority of us either had no knowledge of their existence or did not know how to secure access to their respective services.
In unpacking the role and the Office of the Ombud, we established that an ombud is a person who is designated to an organisation or a scheme to investigate individual complaints, problems and conflicts, and to mediate their resolution or solution. An ombud acts independently, follows informal fair and cost-effective procedures, and, where appropriate, applies the principle of equity in resolving a complaint. Determination of decisions must be enforceable.
It is therefore obvious that the Ombud must be competent and of independent mind, so as to adjudicate complaints in a lawful and equitable manner. Therefore, I cannot see how the hon Taljaard argues that this Bill can backfire. It can only happen if there is a recognition by her that the existing ombuds are dishonest in the deliberation of their activities. And I dare say that she’s not saying so.
But why, when the ANC-led government is coming up with a Bill that will advance the cause of the consumers, is the role of the ombud seen to be a negative one? Does that mean that she too needs to go through a transition period as far as the mind is concerned? [Laughter.]
She further argues that there was no knowledge as far as the voluntary schemes were concerned, but the Chairperson of the Board of Short-Term Insurance says in his annual report:
The Board of the Ombud fully supports the basic premise of the FISOS Bill, which is to grant statutory recognition to the voluntary ombud scheme, which complies with certain minimum requirements.
So, effectively there is a track record of the board supporting it. But hon Taljaard informs this House that the voluntary scheme did not have any knowledge until the Bill was put forward to the House. I dare say, the hon Taljaard is misleading us. [Interjections.]
Some of the challenges, as I’ve indicated, have been their source of funding. Who have been funding the ombuds hitherto? It was the industry, and, therefore, if you are questioning the future, question the present, because it is as the hon chairperson of the portfolio committee had clearly indicated, the present suggests that human beings are vulnerable and therefore industry, to enhance its own position, will try to make inroads to get those ombuds to champion their own cause.
What sort of monitoring mechanism is there? The Bill in front of us provides checks and balances. It is presiding. Its aim is to do precisely that, namely to check and balance the way forward in terms of consumer protection.
Mr T D LEE: Chairperson, on a point of order: Did I hear the member say that Ms Taljaard was misleading the House?
Mr Y S BHAMJEE: Madam Chair, I simply said that Ms Taljaard indicated to the House that the voluntary ombuds had no knowledge about it. The board clearly said that they had knowledge and in-depth contact. Yes, I stand by my guns.
Mr T D LEE: Chairperson, could I address you further?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you may. Hon member, will you be seated, please?
Mr T D LEE: Chair, I’m definitely sure that I heard the member saying that Ms Taljaard was misleading the House. He used those words. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: Hon member, on the point of order, I think if it has been said that Ms Taljaard deliberately misled the House it would have been problematic, but unintentionally it would not. [Applause.]
Mr Y S BHAMJEE: Thank you, Madam Chair. So, let me continue. [Applause.] The relationship with other statutory ombuds has been unclear and it has caused client confusion, for example, on remedies that could be sought and their status. So, the debate is an ongoing one as far as the status and the credibility of an ombud is concerned.
The overall idea in the Bill is to create an environment of organisational capacity, development and accountability in the ombud scheme industry so that a client’s interests, within the financial sector, would be served fairly and in an accountable manner. In that context, you need to support this Bill, because the objective is clear, namely to try to protect the consumers. And more importantly, you and I, how often have we gone to the banks or to the insurance companies just to say that we did not read the small print? Is that not misleading?
When they are signing you on, they will tell you a world of beautiful things of how your future will be guaranteed. But when you decide to put in a claim, they will refer you to the small print. So, you and I also need to become very vigilant of this industry, because it is not in their interest to ensure that all of us are paid our dues, because in that way, where is their profit margin? So, I think we need to be very, very vigilant and move forward.
Therefore, let me clearly say that the person who is sponsoring the ombud must show where such person is to be found to empower the public on its existence and how it functions.
Some of us have only come to understand today that there is an ombud in the banking industry. The Bill makes consumers aware that there is an independent expert available to investigate and mediate when disputes occur. We need to be aware of this, and we need to take this message to our people. But, historically, the apartheid regime has ensured that there is no knowledge to be passed on to ensure that we can improve the quality of our lives.
The scheme is more cost-effective than addressing a dispute in a court of law. Often we go to the courts of law in a hurry, but if we make use of the ombud, and if the ombud is worth its salt, it will try to ensure that you do not use money as far as the law is concerned. It will try to intervene on your behalf. But that does not mean that if you are unhappy with the ombud you cannot go to a court of law. You can still continue. So, why don’t we take advantage of that opportunity before the legal fraternity exploits our back pocket?
Decisions are binding on subscribing members, but not on the consumer. So, even if decisions are not binding on us effectively, it means that we must take advantage of the loopholes. But it is not in the interest of the industry to make the clients aware of them, and that is what this Bill is all about. We must make sure that we take the message out to our people that they have certain rights and that those rights are protected.
In short, I simply argue that this is a Bill that a number of role-players have been fully aware of. There was an opportunity to make an intervention, and, as far as the documentation in front of us and the annual reports clearly indicate, all the voluntary groups have knowledge about it. Secondly, we welcome this Bill, because it clearly indicates that the aim is to make it easier for consumers to lodge complaints about the poor or misleading services by banks, insurers and other financial services providers. The ANC welcomes this Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, let me express appreciation to all members who have contributed to this debate. It is very clear that the Bill, which otherwise might get lost in the amount of papers alone, has evoked a lot of emotion and response. I am glad to see that the arguments have continued through from the committee, and I think that the richness of the debate is something that we must respond to going forward.
I would like to agree with the sentiments expressed by both the hon Davies and the hon Taljaard about the need to try and include the microlenders who are presently out there. We have now established a statutory ombud and it is very important that we offer protection to the poorest South Africans who need the cover. So, clearly it is an issue that we need to take up.
The second point I would like to draw attention to is the context. The hon Durr has raised concerns about, firstly, the contactability of the various protectors, but also about where we should vest consumer protection. I think it is very important to recognise that all financial regulation has one objective, which is the protection of the consumer.
So, whether we are talking about bank supervision, which presently is vested in the Reserve Bank, or whether we are talking about financial regulation of the nonbanking financial services industry, the objective of both of these functions must be consumer protection.
I would like to believe that, as is the trend around the world, those bodies would in some way continue to report to the Ministry of Finance. So, I think the objective of offering protection through sound legislation, sound regulation and accountable supervision is something by which we must set greater store than where we locate this in terms of Ministries, and it is important to see the statutory power against that backdrop.
I disagree with the hon Taljaard, in what is clearly her penultimate speech in this House. The arguments she has raised here are the same that she made in the committee. I think it would be a very sophisticated consumer who could shop as she suggests. What we have here are statutory powers. We have to ensure that the alignment primarily between the FAIS ombud and the FISOS ombud is appropriate and that we understand how these things work at all times.
I think she is also incorrect in asking that the supervision of the Financial Services Board be separate from the Minister and from regulatory capture. The Minister must remain responsible to this House for ensuring that consumers are protected. So, the extent of independence does not have to be the same.
Ultimately, I think that the issues raised by the hon Wang and hon Durr together must remain the objective. There is no point in us in this House knowing about the legislation. What matters is that consumers know. What matters even more is that the consumers know that they are protected.
What also matters is that the charlatans out there know that they are not going to get away with anything. The statutory powers given in the Financial Services Ombud Schemes Bill must have that objective, but I think the work of communication is what lies ahead. Thank you very much.
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S BOTHA: The Bill will be sent to the NCOP for concurrence. [Applause.]
STUDY VISIT TO KWAZULU-NATAL, MPUMALANGA AND LIMPOPO
(Consideration of Report of Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs)
Mr N H MASITHELA: Chairperson, pushing back the frontiers of poverty and improving the quality of life for South Africans have been the commitment and driving force behind the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs undertaking these visits. We wanted to ascertain whether the people in those areas benefited from the programmes and policies of government.
The report we are presenting today emanates from the journey we undertook in August to KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga and Limpopo. However, we hope to visit other provinces next year. The main purpose of these visits was to monitor projects funded by the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs. Our focus was on land care and land restitution.
We chose land care projects, because we believe land care is the centre of sustainable land use. It has also been one of the key rural development programmes of government since 1998. For me, land care is a vital element of an integrated sustainable rural development strategy for South Africa.
With regard to land restitution, we wanted to ascertain to what extent transfer of land to our people contributes to a sustainable livelihood and poverty reduction. Because the restitution process is entering its final stages, we also had to check the progress up to that stage, so as to make some suggestions to government, as we are doing now.
Let me touch on the socioeconomic contributions of land care programmes. Firstly, our land care programme is about encouraging and supporting sustainable land use and practices. It also involves promoting and raising awareness to develop resource conservation ethics. More importantly, for me, it is a community-based and government-supported programme, with its main intention to improve the sustainability of the agricultural productivity system in South Africa.
Our land care programme addresses environmental issues, and its main aim is to protect the future of environmental resources, with the specific objective of optimising productivity and sustainability of resources, and thus bringing about greater productivity, food security, job creation and better quality of life for all.
This has been experienced in most of the projects that we have visited. For instance, regarding the increase and yield of productivity, Mlondozi Management Project in Mpumalanga is a good example. There the use of lime resulted in increases from between 0,5 and 2 tons per hectare to between 5 and 6 tons per hectare. This increased productivity meant a high surplus of the product to be sold, which meant money in the pockets of the communities.
Regarding job creation, another good example is the Lewatlatshimu land care project in Limpopo where 1 029 were employed, and they were paid about R35 a day as an allowance.
Regarding training and capacity building, when implementing this project, opportunities arose to give informal and accredited training to communities. This training will provide them with skills, which will be to their advantage if they seek permanent employment. It should also assist with job creation, as well as entrepreneurial opportunities, thus empowering them to enhance their skills for life.
The project helps to build partnerships among the public sector, private sector and communities. In many of the projects we visited, communities were working together with government and commercial farmers. In this way they are creating opportunities for mentorship of new farmers. This shows that mentorship is not only about payment; it is also about creating a good relationship between commercial and emerging farmers for the prosperity of the agricultural sector and the economic development of this country.
This provides evidence that land care projects have the potential to halve poverty by 2015, thus enabling government or the country to meet the United Nations’ food security target. However, for this to be realised, there is a need for government to speedily address challenges that land care projects are faced with. I just want to mention a few of these challenges: a lack of infrastructure and equipment, a lack of finance and a lack of access to the market.
In addition to the comprehensive agricultural support, what I think is still needed is for the budget of land care to be increased, precisely because these land care projects should actually reach their potential to create jobs and reduce poverty. While we call for the increase of the budget, we also call on the national and provincial departments to ensure that all the monies allocated for these projects are fully utilised to avoid the R1,5 million rollover we experienced in KwaZulu-Natal.
Let me now address the issue of restitution. The beneficiaries of restitution we visited were involved in various businesses, such as dairy farming, livestock, citrus farming, game farming and many other farming activities. It was very impressive to notice that beneficiaries of this restitution have initiated and diversified their businesses so that they became sustainable. At the same time, it was heartening to recognise that some of these projects are not doing well because of a lack of postsettlement support.
This situation leaves the impression that the land reform programme is just about land transfer and not about sustainable productivity and land use. Even though the Department for Agriculture and Land Affairs has acknowledged that there is a need for postsettlement support, they can’t do anything, because most of their work is to hand over land to people, and the rest of the work has to be done by the Department for Agriculture and Land Affairs.
For me this begs a question, cognisant of the fact that government has Cabinet clusters. This situation suggests the following question: Wouldn’t it be appropriate now for government to reconsider, for the sake of sustainable agrarian reform, amalgamating the two departments - that is, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Land Affairs - under one Ministry? Anyway, they are under one Minister.
During our visit we came across a situation where some of the cases had not been finalised and had been delayed. A particular case was that of Sandford Farm in Mpumalanga, where owners and claimants were frustrated about this delay. However, the explanation we received from the Land Claims Commissioner was that the delays were caused by farmers who wanted to undermine the land reform process in this country by charging high prices.
Based on all the information we received on this particular matter, we requested the department, the officials and these farmers to meet and to report to the portfolio committee as soon as possible. However, we recognised that the problem was not only that. The other problem is that there is a lack of communication between the department, the sellers and the claimants. In my view, this matter needs speedy attention.
Because of the complexity of claims in rural areas, let me take this opportunity to caution all South Africans that while the commission is committed to meeting the deadlines of restitution, as dictated or directed by the President, there are, however, some realities that we have to take cognisance of. For instance, only 6 372 rural claims have been claimed so far, and 9 000 claims are yet to be finalised. This means that it may take the commission more than a year to settle the remaining rural claims. In the light of this and the complexity involved in settling the rural claims, it may be advisable for government to reconsider the deadline of particularly rural communities.
Having said this, we should applaud the announcement by the Minister of Finance with regard to the budget increase for restitution two weeks ago. In the same breath, we make an appeal to government to further increase the budget for the next financial year so that the commission can settle the remaining claims.
While on this issue, let me categorically say that it is unacceptable for the commission to be extravagant. For instance, the issues that we read about in the newspapers, namely that the government pays exorbitant amounts of money, particularly in Mpumalanga, will undermine the whole process of land reform in this country. At the same time, let me commend the government for reacting swiftly on such allegations by immediately conducting an investigation to check the validity of these claims. We hope to get a response in due course.
With regard to the high prices for land, the committee recommends that the government should ensure that a proper valuation is done to avoid excessive amounts of money being paid, particularly to land speculators. Let me plead to these people to stop doing what they are doing, because time is not on our side. We, in the agricultural sector, will not allow such people to drag the process of land reform in this country, because that might create a problem that will be difficult for us to deal with. Co-operation is therefore an issue that we all need and that we will all benefit from.
One critical issue we observed during the visit is that claimants opted for monetary compensation. For instance, at the Engadini project in KwaZulu- Natal 100 people claimed for land, but only 11 of them opted for land, whilst the rest opted for money. This is a huge challenge for the country. It does have a negative impact on the ownership patterns in this country. It leaves an impression that the ANC-led government is not delivering land to the black people in this country.
Therefore, our challenge is to persuade and re-educate our people to choose land, as opposed to financial compensation. The other challenge faced by the restitution process is that some landowners are not prepared to have the land reform process in this country. As a result, some of the farms acquired were in a very bad shape. An example here is the one in the Giba restitution claim in Mpumalanga, where out of 15 land claims that were handed over to people, only two of those pieces of land were in good shape.
The situation requires government to develop some mechanisms to prevent a recurrence of this problem, because we cannot allow the success we have achieved to date to be reversed in that direction.
From these three provincial visits it is clear that land care projects and restitution projects have the potential to alleviate poverty and create jobs in rural areas. However, it is to be realised that postsettlement support has to be prioritised, because it is very important for the projects to be sustainable, otherwise their collapse will undermine the government objective of sustainable land reform.
In conclusion, let me thank all members of the committees, claimants, government officials and stakeholders who gave serious inputs regarding the progress that we have made, and those who will ensure that all that we have talked about will be taken care of.
The ANC recommends that Parliament recommends, adopts or notes these recommendations, because we think they will advance our revolution as South Africans. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mnr A H NEL: Dankie, Voorsitter. Die studiebesoek van die komitee aan KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga en Limpopo was myns insiens baie waardevol. Ek wil ook net sê dat ek en die voorsitter oor ‘n klomp goed saamstem, maar ek stem veral met hom saam oor die voorstel dat die twee departemente geamalgameer moet word, want ek dink die koördinering tussen dié twee departemente is definitief nie van ‘n hoë gehalte nie.
Die doel van die besoek was, eerstens, om projekte oor grondbewaring wat deur die Departement van Landbou gefinansier word, te besoek en te evalueer. Pragtige projekte wat deur toegewyde persone bestuur en beheer word, is besoek, en dit was goed om te sien dat mense met soveel passie vir ons land en sy bewaring werk.
Dit was ook goed om die toewyding en harde werk van die departement se amptenare te sien. Iemand wat ek wil uitsonder, is dr Dudla - ek weet nie of ek sy naam reg uitspreek nie, hy moet my maar vergewe - die waarnemende hoof van die Departement van Landbou in KwaZulu-Natal. ‘n Man wat met vriendelikheid en entoesiasme sy werk doen, maar wat ook waarsku dat ons nie almal kan boer nie. Ons moet hierdie waarskuwing ter harte neem.
Boerdery is ‘n riskante besigheid. Dit is inderdaad ‘n besigheid, en die risiko strek baie wyer as klimaatsomstandighede, toegang tot markte en skommelende produktepryse. Langtermyntendense vir kommoditeitspryse, wat landbouprodukte insluit, is afwaarts, terwyl benodigdhede en insette vir boerdery ‘n opwaartse neiging toon. Hierdie internasionale feite se gevolge is dat boerderyeenhede groter moet word, óf die eienaar moet sy lewenstandaard afwaarts aanpas. Inderdaad kan ons nie almal boer nie.
In Mpumalanga in die kommunale gebied van Mala Mala Londolozi, het ‘n man opgestaan en Swazi gepraat. Ondanks die feit dat ek nie verstaan het wat hy gesê het nie, kon ek aan sy lyftaal sien hier is ‘n boer. Ek het na die tyd met hom gaan praat. Hy boer met mielies op 20 hektaar grond. Hy het sy produksie vanaf onder ‘n ton per hektaar tot ses ton per hektaar opgestoot met die hulp van voorligters van die Landbounavorsingsraad en die Departement van Landbou. Hy is ‘n lid van Agri Mpumalanga en wil aansluit by Graan SA. Sy grootste probleem is dat hy nie kaart en transport vir sy grond het nie, en daarom kan hy nie finansiering kry nie.
Hierdie man kan boer, en daar is nog baie soos hy. Dit is dié mense wat ons moet help om hul probleme op te los, want dan sal hulle na hulself kyk en dan sal hulle saam met ander kommersiële boere sorg dat daar kos op ons tafels bly.
In die tweede plek was die doel van die besoek om in al drie provinsies die proses van restitusie te ondersoek, soos toegepas deur die Grondeisekommissie.
In KwaZulu-Natal was ek beïndruk deur die projekte wat ons besoek het. Daar was nasorg, daar is toegesien dat mense opgelei word óf dat kundige mense ingespan word en daar was skakeling met kommersiële boere - óf as vorige eienaars óf as mentors. Dit is myns insiens hoe die restitusieprojekte bestuur behoort te word. Ons kan met reg vir mev Shange, die streekkommissaris van grondeise in KwaZulu-Natal, gelukwens met haar standpunt dat die volhoubaarheid van produksie die hoogste prioriteit is.
Ongelukkig kan dieselfde nie van die provinsiale kommissie van grondeise in Mpumalanga gesê word nie. Die frustrasievlak van beide eisers en grondeienaars is hemelshoog as gevolg van kommunikasieprobleme, soos, onder meer, briewe wat nie beantwoord word nie, afsprake wat nie nagekom word nie en amptenare wat nie bereik is nie. Van die kommissie se kant af is dit altyd iemand anders se skuld as iets verkeerd loop.
Ek kon ongelukkig nie die toer meemaak in Limpopo nie. Maar in Mpumalanga kry ‘n mens die indruk dat die amptenare die huidige grondeienaars verantwoordelik hou vir al die foute van die verlede en teenoor hulle optree asof hulle geen regte het nie. Die Wet op die Herstel van Grondregte maak dit baie duidelik dat ‘n grondeienaar ingelig moet word as daar ‘n grondeis teen hom ingestel word. Hierdie verpligting word geensins nagekom nie. Die optrede van amptenare in Mpumalanga, soos ek hoor en soos ek hoor ook in Limpopo, is totaal onaanvaarbaar. Al wat daardeur bereik word, is dat dit skietgoed verskaf vir linkse en regse ekstremiste om emosies op te jaag en welwillendheid af te breek.
Ek wil afsluit met ‘n paar gedagtes oor die besit en bestuur van restitusiegrond deur gemeenskappe. Die normale praktyk is dat waar ‘n gemeenskap grond bekom, dit deur ‘n trust besit word tot voordeel van die hele gemeenskap. Die grond word bestuur deur ‘n BK of ‘n maatskappy wat ook deur die trust besit word. Die gelde wat in die trust gestort word, word dan gebruik tot voordeel van die gemeenskap, soos skole, beurse vir kinders, klinieke, ensovoorts. Die individu kry dus direk geen vergoeding nie.
My voorstel is dat die trust die grond verhuur aan die BK of maatskappy en dat al daardie geld in die gemeenskap as geheel gebruik word, maar dat die individue in die gemeenskap deur aandeelhouding in die besigheid bevoordeel word. Dit sal hulle persoonlik laat voel dat hulle iets besit wat die moeite werd is.
Mevrou die Voorsitter, ek dink die portefeuljekomitee se oorsigbesoeke is ‘n goeie ding en dra by tot beter bestuur van ons land. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[MR A H NEL: Thank you, Chairperson. I think that the study tour by the committee to KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga and Limpopo was, in my opinion, very valuable. I would also like to add that the chairperson and I concur on many things, but I particularly agree with him about the proposal that the two departments should be amalgamated, because I think that the co- ordination between these two departments is definitely not of a high standard.
The purpose of the tour was, firstly, to visit and evaluate projects concerning land conservation that are financed by the Department of Agriculture. Beautiful projects managed and controlled by committed people were visited, and it was good to see that people with so much passion are working for our land and its conservation.
It was also good to see the commitment and hard work by officials of the department. Someone whom I wish to single out is Dr Dudla - and I don’t know if I pronounced his name correctly, he must forgive me - the acting head of the department of agriculture in KwaZulu-Natal. He is a man who does his work in a friendly and enthusiastic way, but who also warns that we cannot all farm. We must take this warning to heart.
Farming is a risky business. It is indeed a business, and the risk extends much further than climatic conditions, access to markets and fluctuating produce prices. Long-term trends for commodity prices, which include agricultural products, are on the decline, while the supplies and inputs for farming show an upward trend. The consequences of these international facts are that farming units need to increase in size or the owner has to adjust his quality of life to a lower level. Indeed, we cannot all farm.
In Mpumalanga, in the communal area of Mala Mala Londolozi, a man stood up and spoke Swazi. Despite the fact that I could not understand what he said, I could judge by his body language that he was a farmer. Afterwards I went and spoke to him. He grows maize on 20 hectares of land. He has increased his production from under a ton per hectare to six tons per hectare with the help of advisers from the Agricultural Research Council and the Department of Agriculture. He is a member of Agri Mpumalanga and he wants to join Grain SA. His biggest problem is that he does have a title deed for his land, and therefore he cannot obtain funding.
This man can farm – and there are many like him. It is these people who we must help to solve their problems because then they will look after themselves and along with other commercial farmers ensure that food remains on our tables.
In the second instance, the purpose of the visit was to investigate the process of restitution as applied by the Land Claims Commission in all three provinces.
In Kwazulu-Natal I was impressed by the projects that we visited. There was follow-up action, it was seen to that people were trained or that experts were used, and there was liaison with commercial farmers - either as previous owners or as mentors. In my opinion, this is how the restitution projects should be managed. We can rightly congratulate Mrs Shange, the regional land claims commissioner in KwaZulu-Natal, on her position that the sustainability of production is the highest priority.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the provincial land claims commission in Mpumalanga. The levels of frustration of both the claimants and the land-owners are sky-high because of communication problems, such as, amongst others, letters that are not answered, appointments that are not honoured and officials that cannot be reached. From the commission’s side, there is always someone else to blame when something goes wrong.
Unfortunately, I could not make the tour to Limpopo. But in Mpumalanga one gets the impression that officials hold present landowners responsible for all the mistakes of the past and treat them as if they have no rights. The Restitution of Land Rights Act is clear that a landowner must be informed if a land claim is instituted against them. This obligation is not fulfilled in any way. The conduct of the officials in Mpumalanga, as I hear it and also as I hear with regard to Limpopo, is totally unacceptable, and all it achieves is to provide ammunition for leftist and rightist extremists to incite emotions and break down goodwill.
I want to conclude with a few ideas about the possession and management of restituted land by communities. The normal practice is that when a community obtains land, it is owned by a trust to the benefit of the community. A CC or a company that also belongs to the trust manages the land. The money that is paid into the trust is then used to the benefit of the community, for schools, bursaries for children, clinics and so on. The individual therefore does not receive direct compensation.
My proposal is that the trust rents the land to the CC or company and that all that money be used in the community as a whole, but that the individuals in the community benefit from owning shares in the business. It would make people feel that they own something worthwhile.
Madam Chairperson, I think that the portfolio committee’s oversight visits is a good thing and that it contributes to better management of our land. I thank you. [Applause.]]
Mr M V NGEMA: Thank you, Chairperson. The central thrust of land restitution is the empowerment of landless people in order to address the negative impact of land dispossession. The delegation acknowledges the good work done by the Ministry and the Land Claims Commission in settling beneficiaries’ claims in line with the Restitution Act.
The transfer of skills, as part of the exit strategy, by previous owners remains, however, the biggest challenge to the success of land restitution, as was noted in the case of KwaXimba project in KwaZulu-Natal. Such lack of transfer of relevant skills to new owners certainly defeats the purpose of the Land Restitution Act, as optimal land utilisation cannot be achieved and sustainable development cannot take place.
Another critical issue noted with regard to restitution is the lack of streamlining of the land restitution process. The time lag between the farmer and Land Claims Commissioner agreement on the one hand, and the eventual land transfer to the landless on the other, is unacceptably too long. This impacts negatively on both the farmer, in his negotiation for his next business, and the landless, who wait too long before any production can resume on the land. This kills the business lifeline of both the previous and new landowners and creates an unacceptable state of limbo.
Streamlining of the land restitution process must be a matter of urgency if the deadline of December 2005, as imposed by the President, is to be met without further aggravation of the already desperate situation, bearing in mind that government has only managed to successfully transfer 3% of 30% of the land originally planned for transfer within the first five years of democracy.
In a briefing by the delegation of the Stanford Landowners Association in Mpumalanga, it was stated that the department’s inability to finalise land claims is causing massive backlogs. The Land Claims Commission still has to report to the portfolio committee on its response to the Stanford Landowners Association, which, in its briefing, complained of the slow pace of finalisation of land claims.
Regarding land care, we visited the KwaDindi Youth Fishing Project that has been said to have a few challenges, which include the sustainability of the project as well as the lack of a market for the fish. These challenges are serious problems with regard to embarking on projects that do not have a long lifespan in terms of sustainability and long-term empowerment.
If money is being pumped into short-term, unsustainable projects with products that have no market, then it ultimately leads to a waste of funds. It is imperative that the department involves itself with communities by assisting them to identify and embark on projects that are sustainable through assisting them to identify niche markets for maximum success of projects. The services of other agencies . . . [Time expired.]
Mrs B M NTULI: Madam Chair, hon members, allow me to start by quoting an article on J Tengo Jabavu, president of the SA Race Congress, which was published in April 1912 in Imvo Zabantsundu concerning the Squatters’ Bill:
He condemned the principle underlying it of rooting natives out of
farms and established locations under the specious title of
Crownlands, the tendency being to establish whites rather than natives
on the land. The policy is futile, since the native is naturally a
peasant, while experience has shown that the poor white cannot compete
with him – the native – on small allotments. He earnestly begged
government to desist from such a policy and rather follow General
Hertzog’s of endeavouring to raise the standard of comfort of the
natives until they are on competing terms with the poor whites.
Madam Chair, this is how far back the issue of land use was debated.
Ake ngithi ukukhuluma kancane ngalokhu esikubone kulezi zindawo esizihambele KwaZulu-Natali, eMpumalanga kanye naseLimpopo. Ngizokhuluma ngalokhu esithi phecelezi ama-LandCare projects. Kuye kwacaca ukuthi, yebo, abantu banayo le misebenzi kodwa kwabonakala ukuthi badinga ukuqeqeshwa, ikakhulukazi ekuphathweni kwamabhuku nasekusetshenzisweni kwezimali abazithola kuhulumeni.[I would like to talk about what we witnessed in the areas we visited in KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga and Limpopo. I will talk about what we call land care projects. It is clear that people do have these projects but they need training, especially in bookkeeping and using the money they received from the government.]
The issue of skills training should be looked at. I think the Minister of Labour should try and look into the Setas and how they can be used to assist emerging or subsistence farmers on communal land.
Kubonakele-ke futhi ukuthi izinsiza zincane. Kube nesililo esikhulu sogandaganda kuzo zonke izifundazwe esizihambele. Isililo besithi, “ogandaganda, ogandaganda, ogandaganda”! Okunye okuhle ukuthi kuyo yonke imisebenzi omama babambe iqhaza kanti nabantu abasha abazibekile phansi. Laphaya kwaDindi abantu abasha baqale umsebenzi wezinhlanzi ngokusizwa u- Eskom, futhi bazimisele ukwenza isimo sempilo sibe ngcono. (Translation of Zulu paragraph follows.)
[It was clear that the aid given to people was minimal. There was a great need for tractors in all of the provinces we visited. They were shouting, “tractors, tractors, tractors!” It was interesting to note that in all of the projects the level of women and youth participation has been high. The youth in the Dindi area have started a fishing project through Eskom funding and are eager to better their lives.]
The beneficiaries and people who work in the land care projects should be compensated reasonably for the duration of the project. I think labour laws should be taken seriously in these projects.
Lokho akwenzeki-ke. Noma kunjalo, kweminye imisebenzi bakhona abaphatha kahle amabhuku nemibiko yokuthi imali isetshenziswe kanjani. Zikhona nje izindawo ezinjalo njengalaphaya eHlanzeni LandCare project naseMawewe veld improvement project, eMpumalanga.
Sihlalo, ngivumele ngibeke isililo samanzi. Kuyacaca ukuthi indaba yamanzi ilukhuni. Laphaya eMawewe nje abantu baseduze nedamu elikhulu, i- Driekoppies Dam, kodwa abanawo amanzi ezinkomo zabo. Njengoba befuye izinkomo nje abanawo amanzi azo. Abanye abalimi behlukaniswe wucingo nje nomlimi omkhulu kodwa nguye yedwa onelungelo lokuthola amanzi. Abalimi abancane bahlupheka bewabuka amanzi. Akube nendlela-ke yokukulungisa lokhu.
Okunye, kubonakele ukuthi i-Agricultural Research Council iqalile ukusiza abalimi njengalaphaya KwaZulu-Natal kanye naseMpumalanga, eMlondolozi. Abalimi basizwe ngohlelo lokufakwa kwe-lime efanele emasimini abo. Lokhu kukhuphule isivuno sabo kuyo yonke imisebenzi. Lapho i-ARC isiza khona siyakhuphuka isivuno njengalaphaya eBergville, eMlondozi, eLwatshatshimu, eLimpopo; nakweminye imisebenzi i-ARC iyasiza. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[That is not happening. In some areas there are people who are doing well in bookkeeping and keeping financial statements. These areas are the Hlanzeni land care project and the Mawewe veld improvement project in Mpumalanga. ]
Chairman, let me raise my concern about water. The issue regarding water is difficult. In the Mawewe area people are close to a big dam, namely Driekoppies, but they do not have water for their cattle. They own livestock but no water for it. Some farmers are separated by a fence from an established farmer, but he is the only person with a right to water. The emerging farmers needed water, which they could not get. There must be a mechanism to correct this issue.
The Agricultural Research Council has started to assist farmers in areas like KwaZulu-Natal and Mlondolozi in Mpumalanga. The farmers were assisted by the application of the correct lime in their fields. That has increased their harvest in all spheres. Wherever the ARC is involved, the harvest increases, like in Bergville, Mlondolozi, and Lwatshatshimu in Limpopo. The ARC is also helpful in other spheres.]
The ARC is also helping incoming farmers with regard to the new ways of non- tillage technology and crop cultivation. The training of leader farmers that can train other farmers is also a good programme, but the land care projects can only contribute towards food security.
The lime that is suitable for Mlondozi farmers is only obtainable in Limpopo, and this causes a financial problem. Therefore, the formation of co-operatives can enable people to have buying power. They can buy in bulk and reduce transport costs. It is clear that in all the projects the level of women and youth participation has been high.
Yingakho ngizothi nje aboMsobomvu abasondele nabo ukuze babambe iqhaza, futhi baqeqeshe abantu abasha abangene kwezolimo, bese kwakhiwa amathuba emisebenzi.
Sibonile-ke izindlela eziningi ezisetshenziswayo ukuvimbela ukuguguleka komhlabathi njengokusebenzisa utshani okuthiwa i-vativa, okuwuhlobo oluthile nje lotshani - eLimpompo nje kukhona umama ongumpetha wokutshala lolu hlobo lotshani; nokusetshenziswa kwamatshe kwakhiwe ama-gabions njengalaphaya e-Koringkoppies LandCare project. Imithombo yamanzi ikhona, futhi bayakwazi nokuzakhela imisele yamanzi namadamu okugcina amanzi. Ngalokho-ke uMnyango wezaManzi namaHlathi awusize kakhulu nawo ungenele emisebenzini yemiphakathi ngoba lolu hlobo olusetshenziswayo lokuvimbela ukuguguleka komhlabathi nemililo luzosiza abalimi kanye nabahlali, nohulumeni imbala. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[I therefore call upon the uMsobomvu Youth Fund to participate and to encourage youth to take part in agricultural projects for the creation of job opportunities.
We have seen many methods being used to prevent soil erosion by using grass called vativa, which is a special type of grass. There is a woman in Limpopo who is an expert in planting this type of grass. Then we have the usage of stones in making gabions, as has happened in the Koringkoppies land care project. There are water springs and people are able to create water furrows and dams to preserve water.
Therefore Water Affairs and Forestry should also assist in community projects, because these methods of preventing soil erosion and veld fires will benefit the farmers and communities as well as government.]
Land care projects will also improve the sustainability of agricultural production systems and protect the natural agricultural resources.
Ubesephawulile-ke usihlalo wekomidi ngalokhu.
Angigcine ngokuthi noma bengabalimi abancane nje, uma bethole usizo olufanele bayawandisa umkhiqizo bese-ke beswela ukuthi bawudayisa kuphi, lokhu esithi phecelezi i-marketing, ngoba phela abathengi bombila bawehlisa kakhulu amanani ombila ngalesi sikhathi abalimi abancane bethengisa, bese- ke abalimi abancane bengayenzi inzuzo. Ngalokho-ke uMnyango wezoHwebo neziMboni, i-DTI, mayingene khona kuzoba namathuba okwenza ama co- operatives nama-agroindustries njengokuthi abantu bazigayele bona ngokwabo impuphu nesitambu nokunye. Lokhu kuzovula namathuba emisebenzi nempilo ibe ngcono, umoya kaVukuzenzele uphile. (Translation of Zulu paragraphs follows.)
[The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee has remarked to that effect.
In conclusion, though they are emerging farmers, if they receive the required assistance their production increases, but they would not know where to sell their produce, which we term marketing. Those who trade in grain would normally reduce the grain price during this period and the emerging farmers would not make a profit. Therefore the Department of Trade and Industry must assist in the creation of co-operatives and agro- industries so that people can build mills for producing samp, mealie-meal and other products. That will create job opportunities and a better life. The spirit of Vukuzenzele is alive.]
Let me end by saying: Let us promote the spirit of Vukuzenzele and the involvement of all communities. Let us develop partnerships with municipalities and commercial farmers to ensure ownership of the projects by all the communities, and further develop capacity within the provinces and municipalities to enable funding for land care programmes. [Time expired.]
Ngiyabonga kakhulu, Sihlalo. [Ihlombe.] [Thank you very much, Chairperson.[Applause.]]
Mr J BICI: Madam Chairperson, hon members, during the portfolio committee’s visit to the provinces of KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo and Mpumalanga, it was apparent that some very exciting work is happening in terms of new beneficiaries of land reform programmes. In part, these positive developments can be ascribed to the work of the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs, but in some other instances it is the sheer determination and enthusiasm of the people themselves who are the driving force behind these success stories.
It was also a common trend throughout this visit to hear requests for further and or more support for new beneficiaries. It will certainly be a mockery for the department to provide access to land and yet not provide the necessary support to the beneficiaries. Even those beneficiaries who have had great success speak of the need for further assistance on a wide range of matters – from infrastructure to training in specialised skills.
In the end, the success of land reform will not be measured simply by the number of beneficiaries or the amount spent within a certain timeframe, but the long-term viability of these ventures. Greater co-ordination and better monitoring of implementation among the various government actors in this sector is crucial. This will go a long way towards resolving many of the concerns that were raised during the visit.
Finally, may we implore the Minister to make sure that there are sufficient capacities and finances to carry on the projects. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Chair, the most important part of this report is the conclusion. The conclusion states the following, and I quote:
The pattern that emerges is that projects that the department supports
and funds need an exit strategy to ensure that the business or project
does not falter when it withdraws. The risks of collapse are very
clear in the land restitution projects. Their collapse would severely
undermine the government programme of land restitution and
redistributing land to meet the 30% target to transfer land to black
people.
Dít, Voorsitter, is die kern van hierdie verslag. As ʼn mens kyk na hierdie verslag, dan sal jy ook sien dat die probleme eintlik daaroor gaan dat baie van hierdie projekte juis in duie stort sodra kundigheid onttrek word en finansiële probleme ontstaan. Ons moet vir mekaar in hierdie Raadsaal sê, boerdery vandag vereis kundigheid en vereis ook finansiële kundigheid. Dit is nie ʼn geval van dat jy net vir iemand ʼn stukkie grond gee en dan sê hy gaan ʼn suksesvolle boer wees nie.
En dan wil ek ook sê as ʼn mens na hierdie verslag kyk, moet daarvan kennis geneem word dat dit nie die blanke boere se skuld is dat daar nie grond beskikbaar is nie, of dat daar alewig daaragter geskuil word deur te sê dat dit die boere se skuld is dat grondhervorming in Suid-Afrika misluk nie. Dit is nie korrek nie. Hierdie verslag sê vir ons baie duidelik dit is projekte wat deur die departement gelei word, maar aan die einde van die dag wanneer die departement onttrek, dan stort daardie projekte in duie.
Ons voer hier ʼn baie belangrike debat oor ʼn baie belangrike verslag. Ek sien nie die agb Minister hier nie; ek sien ook nie die agb Adjunkminister hier nie. Ek wil eintlik ʼn beroep op die ANC en Swepe doen dat wanneer sulke verslae hier bespreek word, ten minste die Adjunkminister hier teenwoordig moet wees.
Dan wil ek ook net sê dat ek voorstel dat hierdie verslag ook aan die SAKP gegee word, dat hulle kan sien wat in hierdie land aangaan wat grondhervorming betref. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[That, Chairperson, is the crux of this report. If one looks at this report, one will also see that the problems are actually caused by the fact that many of these projects collapse as soon as expertise is withdrawn and financial problems arise. We must say to one another in this Chamber that farming today requires expertise and also requires financial expertise. It is not a case of simply giving someone a piece of land and then saying that one is going to be a successful farmer.
And then I also want to say that when one looks at this report, one should take note that it is not the fault of the white farmers that land is not available and that people constantly hide behind this by saying that farmers are to be blamed for the fact that land restitution is not succeeding in South Africa. That is not correct. This report tells us very clearly that these projects are led by the department, but at the end of the day, when the department withdraws, then those projects collapse.
We are conducting a very important debate here about a very important report. I do not see the hon Minister here; nor do I see the hon Deputy Minister here. I actually want to call upon the ANC and Whips that when such reports are discussed here, at least the Deputy Minister should be present.
Then I also just want to say that I suggest that this report also be given to the SACP, so that they can see what is happening in this country as far as land restitution is concerned. I thank you.]
Mr T D H RAMPHELE: Ke a leboga Modulasetulo, maloko a khuduthamaga ya Puso e e fano, maloko a Palamente ya Aforika Borwa, motsing wa gompieno ke tlile go baya Puso ya African National Congress mainamafatshwa. Ke lebile manontlhotlho a ditiro tsa yone ka fa tlase ga kgatelelo e kgolo ya kgang ya lefatshe. Dipalopalo di bontsha gore komisi ya lefatshe e gatile kgatokgolo.
Ka ngwaga wa 1997 tekanyetsokabo ya yone e ne e le dimilione di le 43, tsamaiso e le bonya. Tekanyetsokabo ya 2005 e bontsha gore komisi e batla diranta di le bilione. Ke kgato e tona e e diragetseng.
Komisi e atlegile go busa dihektara di le dikete di le 590 mo ngwageng wa 2003-04 mme e buseditse malapa a le dikete di le 61 277 mafatshe a ba a lopileng. Go buseditswe mafatshe a Temothuo, a Dikgwa, a Merafo, a Bojanala le a Ditulo. Ke fela Puso e e eteletsweng pele ke African National Congress le Motlotlegi Mopresidente Thabo Mbeki e e fang Maaforika Borwa phitlhelelo eno.
Komiti e etetse KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga le Limpopo. Mo diporojekeng tse re di etetseng, go bonagetse gore komisi e itemogetse mathatha mo nakong e e fetileng mme e dira ka thata go tokafatsa matshelo a batho . . . there is a lot of people develoment that is happening in restitution projects…Batho ba Enkadini kwa KwaZulu-Natal ba dira mmogo le moagisani wa bone e leng lekgoa …(Translation of Tswana paragraphs follows.)
[Mr T D H RAMPHELE: Thank you, Chairperson, members of the executive of this government, members of the Parliament of South Africa. Today I am going to praise the government of the African National Congress. I am looking at the great job they did under pressure in respect of issues concerning land. Statistics show that the Land commission has done a great job.
During 1997 a budget of R43 million was allocated. The process was very slow. The proposed budget for 2005 shows that R1 billion is to be allocated to the Commission. This is a great success.
The commission successfully managed to give back 590 000ha in the year 2003- 04, and then gave back land to 61 277 families who had applied. Land, which was given back, is for agriculture, forestry, mining, tourism and settlements. It is only the government, under the leadership of the hon President Thabo Mbeki, that has given South Africans this achievement.
The committee visited KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, and Limpopo. In all of the projects we visited, we noticed that the Commission encountered problems in the past but that it was doing its best to better the lives of the people. There is a lot of people development happening in the restitution projects. The Enkandini community in KwaZulu-Natal is working hand in hand with its white neighbour …an established farmer who is mentoring them. The morale is very high. The mentorship involves both technical and material resources.
This is clearly a good indication that well-meaning South Africans can work together and succeed. We thank those who, like the Engadini mentors, work to make South Africa work. This assistance encourages the community to explore new possibilities and in this instance, they are exploring bakery, confectionery, tourism and vegetable production. There is assistance but also a strong development of self-reliance in this community.
Two other projects of KwaXimba and KwaMangethe are highly commercial, and the commission is entering into negotiations with experts and financial institutions, as well as municipalities, to join forces and develop, work and be productive in this land claim project. This shows how the government policy of public-private partnership is succeeding, and it is going to work for the benefit of South Africans.
In Mpumalanga we visited two projects, namely the Mashego-Mdluli restitution project and the Giba project. The Mashego project is a going concern that shows success. The communities have a lot of determination. They are involved in the forestry project and they are looking at piggery and other cash-producing projects.
The Mdluli project or community has received land almost in the CBD of Nelspruit, high-value land from HL Hall and Sons. For both projects, the department has spent more than R63 million in acquiring land. The Department of Agriculture is providing support and it is important that relevant departments such as Trade and Industry play a prominent role in ensuring the success of these projects.
Limpopo also has some of the projects that we visited. In Limpopo, two main projects that we visited are the Zebediela citrus project at Bjayatladi ba Moletlane and the game tourism project of Manavhela, in Makhado. The two projects clearly show the success of government in the restitution project. Partnerships in these projects are being negotiated and the communities are upbeat and working hard to ensure that they succeed.
The summation in respect of all the projects is that these projects are clearly on course to succeed. The government of the ANC, at both national and provincial levels, as well as municipalities, are determined to make sure that our people succeed in having a better life through land restitution. The commitment of the staff of the commission and politicians to find answers to difficult situations is an indication of the true path to development.
Land, as the hon Groenewald has just mentioned, is part of our history and it’s a challenge to a part of our history. During different times in history, assertions have been made on land. These assertions indicate both disputes and debates around uses, ownership and issues of distribution of land.
As far back as 1849, the Grey Land Commission had been established. One of the statements that were made in that commission, in reference to blacks, was: “These people should be placed in circumstances in which they should find regular industry necessary for their subsistence.”
Land was used as a tool to deprive people of free subsistence and to ensure that they remained subservient - actually servants, if not slaves of white landowners. In fact, one of the senators of the Cape, Stanford, even went on to say that if a person did not have land and technical expertise, then the only way in which you would be able to fight him was that he should come and work and be a servant on your farm. So, land has always been a political issue, and today it is not any different.
Actually, let me quote a statement that was made by King Moshoeshoe in 1856 when he wrote to Boshoff, regarding the issue of land. He said:
When we saw that the whites crossed the Orange River in 1836, we
wondered at it. They crossed by lots. They begged from the blacks for
pasturage everywhere - one by one, in very good soft manner. We did
not imagine that they would appropriate land to themselves and when
they were purchasing farms from each other, I hastened to issue a
proclamation: Do not batter land for it is not a custom of the
Basothos to do so. According to our custom, land belongs to all the
people. It is bequeathed to our posterity but it is not to be disposed
of by bargain.
[Time expired.] [Applause.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Chairperson. The MF would like to take this opportunity to thank the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs for undertaking this venture and bringing this matter of concern to debate. In view of the report, we compliment the committee on its compilation. Land care and land claims are both matters of great concern and it is hoped that we will be able to reach the deadline of 2005 in this regard.
The KwaZulu-Natal situation appears to have its loopholes but it has the potential to empower regarding proper facilitation of land restitution and so forth. We view the provinces of Mpumalanga and Limpopo in a similar light and we would like to focus more attention on the committee’s recommendation to say that we really can do something to better the situation in these areas. The MF supports the recommendation made regarding the Departments of Agriculture and Land Affairs.
It is found to be of crucial importance that beneficiaries and people employed in land care projects should be compensated adequately to ensure a strong, constant workforce. Further curtailing of land speculation and proper management of valuation are supported. The continued affiliation of the Department of Agriculture with the World Trade Organisation is also deemed beneficial, and we support it.
There are a number of factors to be dealt with by the department and the committee. Those factors need to be addressed to ensure proper facilitation in the sector. It is also very important that relations between sellers, claimants and the commission be adequately addressed to ensure efficient and effective delivery of land restitution.
It is hoped that the sector shall develop an efficient exit strategy so as to avoid failure. The MF supports land restitution. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr D M DLALI: Madam Chairperson, before I start, I need to raise two issues. I want you to listen, Comrade Ngema, as you raised one of the two issues. Firstly, in relation to the Stanford matter, you said that the commissioner still have to report to the portfolio committee. Maybe you forgot that that report was tabled before the portfolio committee and that you were one of those who endorsed the very report that you are suggesting that it has not been submitted to the portfolio committee.
Let me draw your attention to the fact that when dealing with land restitution, the land reform programme has three elements. In general terms, what we call the three major elements are: land redistribution, land restitution and land tenure reform. This, according to the land policy, is to improve the tenure security of all South Africans and to accommodate different forms of land tenure, including types of communal tenure.
On the basis of the above it is therefore more critical for those who possesses land, or landowners who got land by force or benefited from the then apartheid regime, or got land for free if they co-operated both by offering the land to government to purchase at a reasonable price and by not inflating the prices for the land they did not pay for, as well as for the improvements with the assistance of the Land Bank at very low interest rates. One should also not forget that these very improvements were made possible by the very same exploited farm workers; those workers whom government is now trying to protect through the Land Tenure Act against the very employers who exploited them.
They had to build the wealth of these white commercial farmers who now want to get rid of them, even force them off their farms. Some of these white commercial farmers are doing it in a very nice way, namely by suggesting that they, the farmworkers, are going to be given assistance to build their homes in the black township.
The Land Tenure Act is endeavouring to protect those exploited farmworkers, but the Land Tenure Act needs to be panel beaten as a matter of extreme urgency to close all the loopholes, because some of these commercial farmers have exploited or are successfully exploiting these loopholes to their advantage, to the extent that these farmworkers are very frustrated and disillusioned by these actions.
One of the problems that were mentioned by the beneficiaries, those who received their land back from the previous unlawful owners, is that they get this land that was productive, managed by the skilled white commercial farmers, with a specific market being supplied by these farmers. Then when the new owners took over, some of the previous unlawful owners refused to introduce them to the market or to the people that they were supplying, or they stopped that network. Then the new owners have to struggle for years to re-establish the same market of people to receive their produce.
The classical example here is the Mashego clan in Mpumalanga. They got their land from the previous owner with no assistance or mentorship, no marketing strategy, no farming expertise and no managerial skills, although they were in a joint venture with both the previous owners and another clan.
The other difficult market, which these new owners are struggling in, is the Forest Plantation and Supply Market. The mines, that used to order from the previous owners, after handover to the new owners stopped their orders from these new owners, and the previous owner, who is in a joint venture with them, is just not helping at all.
These people have to renegotiate with these mines, or look for a new market. It will take them a few years to be trusted by the market. But if they had been introduced by the previous owners, it would have been much easier and better for them.
Hon members like hon Nel, hon Van Niekerk and, I suppose, hon Groenewald, who is not here now, will complain that there is no production taking place on the farms taken over by these new owners, and say that these farms that were productive before are no longer productive. They forget, of course, that the unlawful previous owners are strategically and purposefully undermining the lawful new owners. Others also cut the network between the farm and the well-establish market that they were using or supplying. These matters need to be dealt with effectively, one way or another.
One is also aware that the government also has a role to play to make sure that the land that has been handed over through restitution is productive and sustainable to better the lives of those who own it and that of others who can benefit from the proceeds of those farms. The farms should be economically exploited to enable the second economy to also grow to the level of the first economy.
The condition of underdevelopment is understood to be the result of exploitation by the developed sector. Logically, therefore, the solution for underdevelopment lies within the developed sector, the first economy, rather than the underdeveloped sector, the second economy.
Only determined government interventions can assist the underdeveloped sector and create an environment where private enterprise will seek economic opportunities, which will increase employment and income for the poor people of South Africa.
The preferred option, even in the short term, is to introduce support and incentives to enable people to apply their existing capacities, human and physical, to unlock their potential for being economically productive. This requires a major effort by all spheres of government, the private sector and civil society to harness people in a coherent manner that will improve their lives.
We discovered another problem in the Community Partnership Agreements, what we call CPAs, in Limpopo, in an area called the Zebediela Citrus Farm. This place was officially owned by government. Then the community, because their forefathers had been removed from there, put in a claim. There was an agreement that was proposed by the commissioner, acting on behalf on the land claim, under the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs. He negotiated the CPA with the previous owners as follows: The strategic partner 53%, the Batladi CPA 30%, a workers trust 15% and the tribal authority 2%.
The government allocated to the community a settlement grant of R16 million. The strategic partner is supposed to contribute R30 million for the running capital of the company.
We then learned that the strategic partner has loaned the R30 million from the bank, and that it was loaned and paid back with interest by the company. That means it is the company’s debt and not the strategic partner’s debt. When we were there on 12 August 2004, we requested a copy of an agreement from the commissioner. To date, as we are debating here, we have not received the said copy. We are still waiting for the said agreement to get to the committee.
As the portfolio committee we felt that this was not a well-negotiated agreement with the strategic partners. Until we get the said agreement we will feel such.
The strategic partnership is meant to run for 15 years. The company is expected to pay back the R30 million within this 15-year period. This is very wrong.
These are merely one or two examples. There may be other land care projects where there are problems with water and other problems. For example, when we were in Mpumalanga at a place called the Ehlangeni land care project, we saw about 155 farmers who were farming an area of 3 000 hectares of land with 2 500 Nguni cattle. They had no water, but there was a dam next to them. They were not allowed to use that water. Instead, the dam was supplying water to the white commercial farmers and to other countries like Mozambique, instead of to black South Africans. These farmers’ livestock was dying and there was no South African water for them. They then built a windmill. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move that the Report be noted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly noted.
The House adjourned at 16:12. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 8 November 2004 in terms of
Joint Rule 161, classified the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 22 -
2004] (National Assembly - sec 77) as follows:
(a) In terms of Rule 162(1) of the Joint Rules, the JTM
classifies the Bill as constitutionally out of order and thus
the Bill may not be proceeded with.
(b) That the Bill be referred back to the Minister of Finance
to excise all non-money Bill provisions and that the excised
provisions be contained in a separate section 75 Bill.
- Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bill passed by National Assembly on 8 November 2004:
(i) National Energy Regulator Bill [B 9D - 2004] (National
Assembly - sec 75)
National Assembly
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 8 November 2004 in terms of
Joint Rule 161, classified the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 22 -
2004] (National Assembly - sec 77) as follows:
(a) In terms of Rule 162(1) of the Joint Rules, the JTM
classifies the Bill as constitutionally out of order and thus
the Bill may not be proceeded with.
(b) That the Bill be referred back to the Minister of Finance
to excise all non-money Bill provisions and that the excised
provisions be contained in a separate section 75 Bill.
- Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bill passed by National Assembly on 8 November 2004:
(i) National Energy Regulator Bill [B 9D - 2004] (National
Assembly - sec 75)
National Assembly 1. National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism:
(1) The Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) on 8 November 2004 in terms of
Joint Rule 161, classified the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 22 -
2004] (National Assembly - sec 77) as follows:
(a) In terms of Rule 162(1) of the Joint Rules, the JTM
classifies the Bill as constitutionally out of order and thus
the Bill may not be proceeded with.
(b) That the Bill be referred back to the Minister of Finance
to excise all non-money Bill provisions and that the excised
provisions be contained in a separate section 75 Bill.
- Bills passed by Houses - to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bill passed by National Assembly on 8 November 2004:
(i) National Energy Regulator Bill [B 9D - 2004] (National
Assembly - sec 75)