National Council of Provinces - 14 April 2005
THURSDAY, 14 APRIL 2005
____
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
____
The Council met at 14:02.
The Chairperson took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.
RULING
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, during the plenary session on 13 April 2005 I indicated that I would give a ruling on a notice of motion moved by hon J Terblanche. Before I could formulate a ruling there was a request from the hon K Sinclair that, since the content of the motion infringed on the dignity of the House and that since the matter was of public importance, as provided for in Rule 84, the motion should be brought before the House. I have considered the matter and I have agreed that it should be brought before the House as a subject for debate.
But, before we proceed, I have decided that since the matter affects the Chair I should recuse myself from presiding over the matter. I, therefore, in terms of Rule 11 of the NCOP Rules, request the hon B J Tolo to take the Chair. [Applause.]
UPHOLDING THE DIGNITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE PRESIDING OFFICERS OF THE NCOP AS THE EMBODIMENT OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE
(Subject for Discussion)
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chair, the matter before us today is a very important issue and I want to read the Subject for Discussion that is written on our Order Paper: Upholding the dignity and integrity of the presiding officers of the National Council of Provinces as the embodiment of the authority of the House.
I can proudly say today that I was sworn into this august House in 1994. I am also the longest-serving member in this House and I am quite familiar with how the procedures and the Rules work in this particular House. A motion that was moved by the hon member Terblanche was uncalled for and unnecessary. We see that as a blatant attack on the ANC. If you read through that motion properly, you will find that it undermines the authority of the presiding officers of this particular House.
I want to deal with that motion piece by piece. She said that she was expressing her concerns that the ANC members, in their capacity as presiding officers of this House, are unable to act impartially and in the interests of all the members. Our current Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces has a track record in this Parliament. He served in the National Assembly as Chairperson of Committees where he presided over so many plenary sessions in that particular House. All of us can bear testimony to the fact that he has done a good job. Never ever in the history of this Parliament was our presiding officer there just for a particular party. He was there for all of us in this House.
Regarding the second issue, namely that the Chairperson failed to recognise Mr Krumbock when he rose to object to our ANC motion, Mr Krumbock only raised his hand when we were already busy with the third motion. They had been busy chatting there, having their own little private caucuses and were fast asleep in the Chamber. [Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Order, please! Order!
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: Chairperson, on a point of order: Mr Sulliman is well aware that I was sitting over there with my provincial delegation yesterday. He cannot say that I . . .
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): What is your point of order, sir?
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: Chair, I would like to know: Is it parliamentary for a member to knowingly mislead the House? He knows I was sitting with my parliamentary delegation. He knows I was not having a private chat and yet that is what he states anyway.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): That’s not a point of order; it’s a debate.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I think it’s very evident that even now Mr Krumbock is not sitting with his delegation. He has not risen on a point of order.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): I have ruled Mr Krumbock out of order, because what he said was not on a point of order. Continue, sir.
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chairperson, I am glad that this is happening today, because here is a clear indication of the fact that, as the Chief Whip has brought to our attention, the hon member does not associate himself with his delegation from his province. [Interjections.] This is the NCOP and we are the custodians of our provinces. We are here to work together in unity in order to assist our provinces, but he prefers his party above provincial matters.
The hon member Terblanche said that she condemned the abuse of power by ANC presiding officers and that there is no fair democracy in this particular House. I have something to share with this House. It is because of the ANC that we have democracy in South Africa today. [Applause.] Nobody can teach us about democracy. [Interjections.] It’s because of democracy, hon member, that you have a seat in this particular House today. It is because of the ANC. [Interjections.]
It is clear that there is also a racial connotation to this kind of conduct. They act in that way because our presiding officers are not white, they are black. That is in their subconscious minds, and we all know this.
Allow me to say that the Council Rules state that no member must use offensive or unbecoming language in the Council . . .
Ms S J LOE: Mr Chair, on point of order: I would like to know from you whether you would not regard what Mr Sulliman has just said as hate speech and unparliamentary to boot?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Continue, hon member.
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chairperson, Council Rule 46 states that no member may use offensive or unbecoming language in the Council or deliberately make a statement in the Council that a member knows is false. Our Rules are clear on these kinds of issues. I think it’s important for me to highlight some of these issues that we need to adhere to in this particular House.
The role and function of presiding officers date back to the 14th century. It derives from the role of the early speakers in the Westminster system in those days. The code of conduct is quite clear on this kind of matter. But it is unbecoming to come and use this platform here in this House to insult our presiding officers. We are not going to tolerate that. When a member uses insulting language to the Chairperson, such conduct is regarded as being grossly disorderly. We cannot accept that, definitely not.
Our Chairperson of this Council and the rest of our presiding officers are familiar with the Rules of this particular House and they apply them in a professional way. Never in my history have I heard that they are there just for the ANC or just for any other party. There is no such thing. The powers accorded the Chairperson are due to the fact that the House elects the Chairperson, and those powers are therefore embodied in the dignity and authority of the House. The point is that you don’t recognise that authority. That is the problem that you have. Let me tell the hon member Terblanche something: You are still very green. You just started in this Parliament last year. Some of us are experienced and we know how these things work. To utter these kinds of words and to undermine the authority of the Chair is not going to bring you anywhere. It won’t even bring you more votes in the next elections. You are busy destroying yourself. [Interjections.] They are making a noise. They don’t take this debate seriously.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Order!
Mr M A SULLIMAN: It just shows that they undermine the authority of this House. [Interjections.] They are even undermining the authority of the acting Chair who is chairing this House right now. [Interjections.] They don’t have respect.
I think what we need to do in future is to take them on a workshop and teach them about the procedures of this particular House so that we can help them to be productive at the end of the day. I thank you. [Applause.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Before I call the next speaker, I want to make this appeal, once again – and our Chairperson does so every time he gets an opportunity to do that: Please, let’s respect the decorum of the House. You may not agree with what the speaker is saying, but please, listen to the speaker. Be quiet and be orderly so that everybody can be in a position to hear what the speaker says. It does not help this House in any way if we drown his or her speech in a lot of noise. Please, let us behave as hon members.
Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Hon Chair, today, 14 April, marks the first anniversary of the final death throes of the NNP. On this day last year the DA solidified its place as the real opposition in SA, recording the biggest growth of all political parties in the land: 400 000 votes. On the same day the voters of SA confirmed the NNP’s place as the ANC’s praise singer.
This debate is about the very unfortunate evidence that the conduct of the person who chaired this august House on the afternoon of 12 April was not a credit to this institution and, in fact, denigrated this House and all it stands for.
I have distributed copies of the draft Hansard, which prove that the DA’s motion under discussion is completely justified. The hon member Oliphant, who chaired the House at the time, said the following and I quote:
The ANC is the party that is fighting corruption more than any other
political party in the country. It is untenable, Mr Chair, that a presiding officer of this House openly displays her partisanship and then proceeds to give substance to her prejudice by answering for the Deputy Minister and speaking for her. I have no doubt that the hon Deputy Minister could and would have provided her own reply to my question.
Just yesterday the Chairperson appealed to us all to maintain the highest standards in this House, to respect all members in spite of differences of opinion and to treat each other in the manner expected of parliamentarians. I would suggest to the members that the leaders of this House should provide the example of the behaviour for which he was appealing.
That is not the only example of bias of which I am speaking. During the week in Empangeni, when the National Council of Provinces took Parliament to the people, a very unfortunate public row erupted when the DA was prevented, by the then Chairperson of this House, from participating in the debate. Firstly, we were stopped from objecting to the fact that provincial votes were cast by delegates who had no mandates. May I remind this House that this specific incident revolved around an attempt by the ruling party to change a DA motion unanimously agreed upon in this House, and secondly, and to stop us from speaking on an issue of moral regeneration led by Deputy President Zuma.
This is not the only example of partisanship from a presiding officer of this House. On numerous occasions, including an incident involving hon DA member Robinson this week, DA members have been stopped from having their say or asking follow-up questions. The hon member Watson has also been blocked when trying to record objections in this House. This lack of protection from the presiding officers has become a common occurrence when the DA takes on its opposition role. Officers have repeatedly allowed the opposition to be drowned out by catcalls and insults. It is interesting that all are very quiet today, maybe they were told to be quiet.
The only time the DA is allowed to speak is when we are making uncontroversial speeches that do not challenge government. All opposition parties should be able to hold government to account and be heard. The debate today is designed to stop this basic principle of democracy, but we will not be silenced. It is monstrous that this motion before us refers to upholding the dignity and integrity of the presiding officers of the National Council of Provinces, when my motion, which is being challenged today, sought to uphold those very democratic principles.
It is equally ironic that the ANC Chief Whip’s motion talks glibly about accepted parliamentary practice and rules of debate. The fact is that the DA has taken this House to task about transgressions of parliamentary practice and rules of debate. Through this motion, which the DA rejects in its entirety, the ruling party is once again displaying its utter contempt for democracy and freedom of speech and its tendency to abuse power. Undoubtedly I will, once again, be subjected to abuse and untruths during this debate. I can live with that, as long as the truth is known. My party and I will not be intimidated by bullies and tyrants. [Applause.]
Mr K SINCLAIR: Hon Chair, today when I am going to speak, I am also going to speak the truth. It is quite interesting that we on this day debate the issue of democracy and the privileges that go with it. And when we look at the motion that we are debating today, there are three issues that I believe we must address. The motion of the hon Terblanche says:
I hereby give notice that I shall move the following substantive motion on behalf of DA: . . .
Now who is this DA? In terms of the support that they got, although it was much less than they anticipated, they are the opposition of this country. [Interjections.] I went to the Oxford English Dictionary and I see in terms of that definition, if you use it as a noun, it refers to antagonism. It further goes on to say, and there are various words for that: it says, “action”; it says, “brash”; it says, “civil disobedience”; it says, “clash”; it says, “combat”; it says, “competition” - and it goes on! And that is what the DA in this country and this House purports to be. [Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Hon members, can you please give the hon member a chance to speak. I will name somebody and that person will be taken out, and this is not a threat. I will name you and you will be taken out if you continue shouting.
Mr K SINCLAIR: Chairperson, I hope that happens sooner rather than later. [Laughter.] It goes on to say that the definition of opposition can also be “defence and defiance”, and this is the role that the opposition in this honourable House is playing. In the first paragraph it says: “The Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces failed to recognise Mr Krumbock.”
With due respect, I do not blame the hon Chairperson for not recognising the hon Krumbock, because he is so seldom in the House. He is never here. And maybe when the hon Chairperson was looking he could not see him. [Laughter.] And that is part of the problem of the DA. Some of them purport to speak on behalf of the province and they are supposed to sit in Mpumalanga. Mpumalanga is here, but they click together there where it is nice and comfortable and they can brood on their negative thoughts. [Laughter.]
But I picked up something in this debate and what this debate is about. It is about the arrogance of the DA - the arrogance. Now I am a very good student and I like to go to the dictionaries and when I read there I read they say that “arrogant” is synonymous with “aloof; bossy; bragging; cheeky; cocky” - and I can continue. [Laughter.] [Applause.] That is exactly the role of the DA. And maybe, as part of addressing these issues in this House, which is looking at the interests of the provinces, we must look at our Rules. And maybe we must get to the point where we say, let us, in the interest of this House that is serving the interests of the provinces, address those issues.
My last remark is: The NNP, as part of the ANC, believes that the hon Chairperson of this House, Mr Mahlangu, is doing an excellent job. [Applause.] I cannot remember when during this last year the things happened that are speculated about in this motion by the hon Terblanche, and I want to plead with this House to reject this motion. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr J O TLHAGALE: Hon Chair, hon Ministers present, I stand here to express my full confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the presiding officers. On the allegation that the Chairperson did not recognise Mr Krumbock when he rose to object to an ANC motion, my observation was that the Chairperson’s attention was directed at the mover of the motion, who was seated at the far end of her left-hand side and she may probably have not seen the other two persons who stood up at the same time, but at different positions.
Further, a motion of no confidence that the hon member was trying to move cannot or should not be based on the one, isolated incident of 12 April.
Regarding the other issue, namely that the Chairperson of Committees abused her position as presiding officer by making gratuitous remarks, it is completely different from my observation of the events of that particular day. The Chairperson was inaudible, owing to the heckling; the whispering and murmuring that were going on in the House. And it was difficult for everybody to hear clearly what was being said. This situation cannot be attributed to the Chairperson.
As regards the concern for real democracy and fairness in the House, this statement leaves me cold, because we hail from the situation of a tricameral parliament, where people were categorised according to their national groups. I thank you. [Applause.]
Nkskz A N D QIKANI: Sihlalo, isehlo sangomhla we-12 kuApreli ka- 2005, sokuba uSihlalo angamboni uMnu Krumbock ngexa wayephakamise isandla, siya kusithatha njengesiphoso. Nangona kunjalo, ilungu elibekekileyo belifanele ukuba alenzanga sindululo. Belifanele ukuba liye kufaka isikhalazo kuSihlalo ukwenzela ukuba kubekho uxolo. Ukuthetha rhabaxa kubangela ukuba iNdlu le yethu, siyixabise kakhulu, ingabi nanzolo. Ke Sihlalo, asikwazi ukuyinyamezela into enjalo. Asinakukunyamezela ukujongelwa phantsi kwamagosa ethu ongameleyo kuba okwangoku sisanela kakhulu ngawo, akukabikho nto isixakanisayo. Ingxolo ethanda ukwenziwa kulaa kona ingabangela ukuba bangeva nento eqhubekayo eNdlwini. Enkosi, Mhlalingaphambili. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa speech follows.)
[Mrs A N D QIKANI: Chairperson, I think that we should take the incident that occurred on 12 April 2005, when the hon Chairperson did not see Mr Krumbock’s raised hand, as an error. The hon member should not have moved a motion against the Chairperson. He should have approached the hon Chairperson and tabled his complaint to him for purposes of peace.
Unparliamentary language causes unnecessary tension in this House that we so much respect. We will not tolerate such behaviour here, Chairperson. We are satisfied with our presiding officers’ manner of handling things at this point in time and will therefore not tolerate it when people display a conduct and attitude that undermines them. The noise that comes from the corner where hon members are seated is sure to cause them not to hear and follow the proceedings in the House. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]] Rev E ADOLPH: Hon Chairperson, according to our Constitution, all political parties have a right to participate in our democracy in South Africa, and that is an underlying principle.
I have to put it on record, however, today that we have a problem with the meaning and redefinition of the term “democracy” in this distinguished House. Some may interpret it as “participatory democracy”. Others have a more subjective interpretation, calling it “real or true democracy”. However, democracy is determined by the voice of the people of this country, who put people in power to rule on their behalf.
I don’t want to be just judgmental today, but let’s be fair and just, even it means that we have to participate in a robust debate on this issue. We should not jeopardise the dignity of others in this House. We should respect the presiding officers for the position of authority that they hold.
I cannot agree with the DA that there is blatant abuse of power by ANC presiding officers; that is not true. I had to come to terms with what it means to have majority rule. It is true that the ANC, as a majority party, has the right to rule and thereby reflect the voice of the people.
I had to come to terms with defining myself within the parameters of democracy. The ANC did not have to accommodate us, but they gave us participatory democracy. As minorities we were not being excluded totally. In fact, what they did was to allow us to voice our grievances and be part and parcel of decision-making processes.
What happened on 13 April was out of pure frustration . . .
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Order! Are you rising on a point of order, hon member?
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: No, no! I’m asking whether the hon member will take a question.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Do you want to take a question, hon Adolph?
Mr E M SOGONI: The member does not usually sit there, so he can’t ask questions from somebody else’s seat.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Mr Sogoni, please sit down. Will you take a question?
Rev E ADOLPH: Chairperson, if it infringes on my time, no.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): He says no, if it’s going to infringe on his time. Continue, sir.
Rev E ADOLPH: Thank you. I said what happened on 13 April is not acceptable . . .
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Hon member, I’m afraid your time has expired.
Rev E ADOLPH: Please allow me to say this, I have to get it off my chest, with due respect . . .
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): The Rules do not allow for that, hon member, I’m sorry. Your time has expired.
Rev E ADOLPH: But, I just need to state this . . .
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Your time has expired, hon member, please. I don’t want to create a precedent here, please. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, friends, comrades and compatriots, I want to start my speech today by reaffirming my pride in being a member of the ANC - a custodian of democracy, an organisation of hope and an organisation of the future.
The debate in this august House this afternoon is a critical test for our maturing democracy. At worst it is unprecedented in the history of our parliamentary democracy in that it responds to a subtle motion of no confidence against the presidium of this House by the DA. This is a motion of no confidence. Unprecedented and critical as this debate is, it will, however, afford millions of the people of South Africa an opportunity to judge whether their glorious movement, the ANC, as the ruling party has departed from its democratic culture and tradition, evolved over more than nine decades of struggle, as claimed by the DA.
On the other hand, it will put to the test the authenticity of the claim by the conservative right-wing forces represented by the DA about the abuse of power and lack of impartiality and democracy in the manner in which the business of this House is conducted. Accordingly the ANC views these preposterous and reckless attacks on its integrity in a serious light and will spare no effort to defend itself. It is against this background that the ANC has welcomed this snap debate on the motion by hon Terblanche.
Before dealing with the ideological and political underpinnings of this motion, allow me quickly to point out that the motion has nothing to do with procedural unfairness of the Presiding Officers, but is a calculated, political and ideological offensive against the ANC to achieve two broad objectives. The first objective of this motion, and the agenda of the DA, is to set the agenda for the NCOP on the basis of neoliberalism, and we are not going to allow that, I want to assure hon Terblanche. The second objective is to distract the ANC, the glorious movement of the people, from discharging its historic mission of uniting and leading the people of South Africa in the struggle to create a better life for all. These are the objectives of that motion.
The record of the ANC in the promotion and defence of democracy is unassailable, and to suggest that ANC presiding officers, as is alleged by the DA, are partial and undemocratic is an insult to the millions of South Africans who freely reaffirmed their confidence in this glorious movement on 14 April 2004. Hon Terblanche is telling us about 400 000 people who have voted for the DA. That number has not even decreased by the slightest margin the support and confidence of the masses of this country in the leadership of the ANC.
If the ANC is undemocratic it means that more than two thirds of the electorate, who have voted it into power, have never cherished democracy, and I don’t think that is so. It would mean that Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani, Joe Slovo, Solomon Mahlangu, Joe Qabi and others did not die for democracy and freedom. We are told with cheek and audacity by hon Terblanche that they are not going to succumb to bullies and tyrants. We, as the ANC, have done that for more than nine decades, and we are torchbearers, not only in South Africa, but on the entire continent of Africa and beyond the borders of Africa. So we as the ANC are not going to be intimidated by that cheek and audacity.
On the contrary, by casting doubt on the integrity of the presidium of this august House, the DA’s Juanita Terblanche is telling South Africa and the world that she will never accept being led by a democratically elected party in government, which is the highest form of antidemocratic expression
- and she aspires to being a democrat!
The motion under discussion is not isolated from the persistent patterns of behaviour and attitudes displayed by the DA since last year. They have never contributed constructively during the life of this House. I think Mr Sulliman has said this. They are like sniffer dogs that search for faults and mistakes, and if they don’t smell any fault they fabricate one. [Laughter.]
Because hon Krumbock was asleep, he did not raise his hand and the Chairperson of Committees had to proceed with two other motions. When he woke up, he wanted to fabricate that he had been awake all along and had raised his hand, and that the Chairperson was not impartial enough, was partial and did not recognise him. Those are blatant lies that we need to expose in this debate today.
For the record, it should be mentioned that the white section of the DA has not only shown contempt for the presidium, but also for Ministers who represent government in this House. I will put it on the record. You can go to Hansard. At one stage a senior member of the DA, whom I can name, was seen playing cards on the computer whilst the Deputy Minister of Health was speaking. That was in KwaZulu-Natal. On a second occasion a senior of the DA, who has a tendency to heckle and put questions to Ministers, when the answers did not suit her, walked out. That is despicable. This is the trend they have displayed and we must set the record straight today, with due respect.
The behaviour of the DA borders on blatant disregard for black persons. This is racism at its worst, and I’m not apologetic about making that charge. On the occasion of the maiden speeches by all white DA members their leader Tony Leon came to give them all his support in the public gallery. This didn’t happen for the poor black hon member Thetjeng. [Laughter.] When hon Thetjeng took the podium to speak, Tony Leon and Douglas Gibson of the DA left the public gallery. [Applause.]
Ms S J LOE: Mr Chair, may I rise on a point of order?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Hon Setona, I am afraid your time has expired. Thank you. Order!
Ms S J LOE: Mr Chair, may I rise on a point of order?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Who is out of order?
Ms S J LOE: I beg your pardon, Chair?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Who is out of order?
Ms S J LOE: Chair, no, I asked if I could rise on a point of order? I have risen on a point of order.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): I am asking: Who is out of order? There is no speaker here.
Ms S J LOE: You are ruling me out of order?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): OK, come say what you want to say.
Ms S J LOE: Chair, on a point of order: The previous speaker was out of order. He has stated an untruth here and I want to rectify it for the record. He said that our leader had come for every single person making a speech. In fact, I was the favoured one.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Please, can you sit down. Could you sit down, Madam.
Ms S J LOE: I am the only person who delivered her maiden speech in front of the leader. Thank you, Chair. [Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Please sit down. Now, hon members let’s not make speeches under the pretext of a point of order. And when we rule you out of order, please sit down. Don’t despise the Chair here, please. Order!
MOTION OF CONFIDENCE IN NCOP LEADERSHIP
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper as follows:
That the Council –
1) notes with concern the content of the notice of motion given by
the hon J Terblanche at the plenary on 13 April 2005;
2) (2) believes that the content of the notice of motion is
contrary to accepted parliamentary practice and rules of
debate;
(3) further notes that the Chairperson of the NCOP had
explained to the Council that -
a) he had not failed to recognise the hon G Krumbock, but had not seen the hon member when he objected to the motion that was moved in the Council on 12 April 2005; and
b) by the time the matter was raised the council had already
taken a decision regarding the motion;
3) (4) reiterates that the presiding officers of the NCOP
are elected in accordance with the provisions of the
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 180 of 1996,
and the Rules of the NCOP;
(5) and resolves to reaffirm the support and confidence
of the Council in the leadership of the Chairperson of the
NCOP and its other presiding officers.
I thank you.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): As there is no speakers’ list, I shall now put the question. [Interjections.] Is that a point of order?
Mr E M SOGONI: Chair, I want to move an amendment to the resolution that has been read by the Chief Whip, that the following be added to the resolution:
4) the NCOP further resolves that the notice of motion
given by the hon Terblanche be expunged from the record of
proceedings of the NCOP.
Thank you.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Does the author of the motion agree?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chair, I think the amendment is in order. I do agree. Thank you, sir. The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Thank you. As there is no speakers’ list, I shall now put the question, and the question is that the motion, as amended, be agreed to. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their province’s vote. Are all delegation heads here? They are here.
In accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Any province? None.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. I shall do so in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour, against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Eastern Cape fully supports the motion.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Free State?
Mr T S SETONA: Free State fully supports the motion.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Sihambisana nayo. [We vote in favour of it.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: IKwaZulu-Natal ithi elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal agrees.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Limpopo?
Ms S C N SITHOLE: Limpopo Re thekga tšhišinyo. [Limpopo supports the motion.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Mpumalanga?
Ms M P THEMBA: Mpumalanga e o tlatsa go menagane. [Mpumalanga supports fully.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Northern Cape?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: We support.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: Ke ya rona. [We support.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): Western Cape? Ms M VANTURA: Supports.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr B J Tolo): All nine provinces voted in favour, I therefore declare the motion agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you, hon members. May we all sit down please. Can we all take our seats and keep quiet please. I would like to congratulate all the members who participated in this debate, because I think it’s quite an important debate. We will never be in a position to reach our democracy and discuss freely if we do not discuss some of these things. I am happy that you have taken part in this debate, and I want to thank you all that you are reaffirming our positions as presiding officers.
We will do our jobs in terms of the Rules of this House, and we will not deviate from the Rules and we will do our work in terms of the Constitution of this country. I wish to thank you all.
FRAUD AND CORRUPTION
(Draft Resolution)
Ms J MASILO: Ke a leboga motlotlegi, modulasetilo o tlhomphehileng. [Thank you hon, Chairperson.] I move without notice on behalf of the ANC:
That the House –
(1) recognises that fraud and corruption is costing the state
approximately R1,5 billion per annum;
(2) notes that this inherited problem is being addressed by a
nationwide campaign that is intensively and systematically
identifying corrupt officials and irresponsible citizens;
(3) further notes that more than 76 000 South Africans have
voluntarily removed themselves from the network of fraud and
corruption through the government’s amnesty offer that has now
closed;
(4) commends the efforts by the government, and especially the
Departments of Social Services and Public Service on their
attempt to clean up our government;
5) urges all South Africans to intensify and join the collective
attempts by government to rid our society of fraud and
corruption that only intensifies inequality. I thank you.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONTRIBUTION OF DR M G BUTHELEZI TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN KWAZULU- NATAL
(Draft Resolution)
Mrs A N T MCHUNU: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I will move on the next sitting day of this House:
That the House –
1) notes the sterling contribution of IFP leader Dr M G Buthelezi
in advocating . . .
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order, Mama Mchunu, order! Just a little bit.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I just want to draw to your attention to the fact that we are currently dealing with motions without notice. If I heard the member correctly, it would seem she is rising on a notice of a motion.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: We are dealing with motions without notice, MaMchunu. We have passed the stage of notices of motion. PRAISE FOR DR BUTHELEZI’S CONTRIBUTION TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN KWAZULU-NATAL
(Draft Resolution)
Mrs A N T MCHUNU: It was a slip of the tongue.
Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes the sterling contribution of the IFP leader, Dr M G
Buthelezi, in advocating and proposing the principles of
sustainable development in KwaZulu-Natal;
2) further notes that as a champion of the poor that the poor of the
world are the most vulnerable because they are least able to deal
with the resulting change in the environment and cannot afford hi-
tech solutions for their problems;
3) further notes that the principles of sustainable development are
as follows: to satisfy human needs, to conserve biodiversity,
social justice and equity, and community participation;
4) therefore applauds his efforts and the principles of self-help and
self-reliance to help communities to empower themselves and protect
their precious heritage; and
5) calls for a debate on the issue of the environment and community
participation.
I thank you.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
(Draft Resolution)
Rev E ADOLPH: Hon Chairperson, I move the motion without notice on behalf of the ID. I think it is appropriate as I notice that the national Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism is present here, and was the recipient of this international award. The motion is all about South Africa receiving international recognition for environmental protection.
That the Council –
1) notes that the sterling work that South Africa has been
doing under the capable leadership of President Thabo Mbeki
to further its environmental protection has been recognised
and commended by two international agencies, namely the World
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and Unesco;
2) further notes that the World Wide Fund has awarded the South
African government its highest honour by bestowing the Gift to the
Earth award upon it in recognition of its commitment to making 20%
of our coastline into marine protected areas;
3) commends the hon President Thabo Mbeki, who signed into law the
Biodiversity Act earlier this year to protect our vulnerable
biodiversity, notes that the Act is considered by many to be the
most important piece of environmental legislation passed in
decades, ensuring among other things that any development that
takes place is done so in accordance with strict environmental
guidelines;
4) acknowledges that South Africa achieved 15%, and is one of the
first countries in the world to come close to meeting the
international goal of protecting 20% of the world’s coastlines by
2012;
5) further notes that the government is looking at various other
options and possibilities;
6) recognises that we are proud and encourage South Africa to work at
ensuring that our rich biodiversity, apart from its enormous
international significance, also has important implications for the
success of tourism; and
7) notes that it is significant that South Africa is ranked as the
third most biologically important nation in the world after, Brazil
and Indonesia.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
APPROPRIATION BILL
(Policy debate)
Vote 27 – Environmental Affairs and Tourism:
The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Hon Chairperson and all hon members, it was environmentalist Richard St Barbe Baker, known in Kenya as “Baba Wya Miti”, the Father of the Trees, who said that our generation may either be the last to exist or the first to have the vision, the daring and the greatness to play no part in destroying our world.
As we examine the achievements and the advancements of our first 10 years of freedom and as we celebrate 50 years of the Freedom Charter, we must closely consider the question of our shared future and how best to ensure that the legacy of our democracy, and also development, is not one of irreparable harm to our natural environment. The most pertinent question in this year is not what has been achieved but rather what are the conditions that we must create to sustain and to extend to our freedoms in the second decade. Our department aims to answer this question through action, bringing together the interests of people and also of the environment.
Although the budget debate in the National Assembly last Wednesday was both a positive and a constructive one, there was one member who chose to question the value and the importance of our department’s poverty relief programmes, and he said that we remained too focused on job creation and empowerment. Allow me to say that we will never apologise for creating jobs, and we will never falter in our efforts to use conservation and tourism to lift people and communities out of the wilderness of the second economy.
I would very much like such people to leave behind their comfortable desks and journey to the real South Africa to meet real South Africans who are facing the realities of life. I would like them to meet amazing individuals, somebody like Rosinah Moagi from section MM in Shoshanguvhe. She is unmarried, but she supports her own child as well as six adopted children as a contractor at the Dinokeng wetland rehabilitation project. With only Grade 11 behind her, she now employs 11 other people; she has built a house for her family and she is a hero in her own community.
I would also like those people to meet people like Pilot Malele from Casteel in Bushbuckridge, in Limpopo. Mr Malele is a contractor in our Save the Sand project. He employs 12 other people and he has also built a house, he has bought a car, and he is now able to pay for the school supplies to give his children a brighter and a better future.
I would like those who argue against our poverty relief programmes to tell these people why they should not directly benefit from the work of our department and this government. I am very pleased to announce that far from taking the advice of people like that, we will be intensifying our participation this year in the Expanded Public Works Programme. In addition to the R370 million spent last year, we will spend another R385 million in the 2005-06 year on our poverty relief and social responsibility projects.
In doing so, we aim to create more than 1,38 million temporary job days, 12 000 job opportunities, 120 000 training days, and more than 300 permanent jobs. These employment opportunities will, at the same time, directly promote and benefit our environment. This is the power of delivery and the true embodiment of democratic freedom.
Die inwerkingtreding van die wetgewing oor luggehalte, die Air Quality Act, moet uitstaan as een van die belangrikste omgewingsmylpale van hierdie Parlement sedert 1994. Vir die heel eerste keer in ons geskiedenis het Suid- Afrika die wetenskaplike basis in plek vir die vestiging van minimum luggehaltestandaarde en vir die vervolging van diegene regoor die land wat voortdurend die longe van mense besoedel en hulle gesondheid benadeel. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[The coming into operation of the legislation regarding air quality, the Air Quality Act, must stand out as one of the most important environmental milestones of this Parliament since 1994. For the very first time in our history South Africa has in place the scientific base for the establishment of minimum air quality standards and the prosecution of those right across the country who continually pollute the lungs of people and jeopardise their health.]
As hon members are aware, the next important challenge is to create the capacity at provincial as well as local level to implement and to enforce these new standards. Another challenge is to create awareness and understanding about these new laws in local communities. I am therefore pleased to announce that our department will this year be launching a new series of community fresh air izimbizo.
Starting in National Environment Week in June, we will travel to the communities across South Africa that are worst affected by air pollution: the Durban South Basin, Vereniging-Vanderbijlpark area, the Highveld, Mpumalanga and other areas.
We will, together with our provincial and local colleagues, meet with communities to hear their specific air quality concerns, priorities as well as suggestions. We will be guided by them, and we will share with them our plans for local implementation. Today I would like to extend an invitation to members to join us at these events in their respective constituency areas. I have asked the department to make sure that in organising these events we will invite members from all parties from those affected areas.
The environmental impact assessment process remains government’s most important tool for ensuring that development is environmentally sustainable. Although government has been streamlining and fine tuning this tool to increase its efficiency and effectiveness, environmental sustainability is being undermined by developments that have not properly been assessed and authorised.
Since 7 January 2005 these developments are officially illegal and the developers may face fines of up to R5 million, but in the interest of compliance promotion, we have, together with the provinces, provided a six- month window period for these illegal developments to make application without fear of prosecution, and to come into compliance. However, should this opportunity not be taken we will crack down on illegal developments negatively impacting the environment with the full force of the law.
Cutting-edge laws and standards mean little without the muscle to enforce them. South Africa is about to take a major stride forward in protecting and enforcing the necessary conditions for freedom in our communities. The National Environmental Management Act - one of the members referred to that in a motion a minute or two ago – is anticipated to come into force within weeks.
It empowers us to designate officials in all spheres of government as environmental management inspectors, EMIs. They will also be given the power to . . . Let me rather explain it in these words: We refer to them as the “Green Scorpions”, and they are about to be unleashed on polluters, poachers, illegal developers, but also on all other environmental criminals. I would like to take just a minute to recognise the presence in the gallery up there, today, of a group of very special individuals. Allow me to introduce you to the first “Green Scorpions”. [Applause.] These men and women will be designated with a wide range of enforcement powers, from routine inspections to powers of search and seizure, establishing roadblocks, but also the power to arrest suspects. They will also be given the power to issue formal notices to individuals or corporations breaking our environmental laws or not complying with the terms of their licenses. Failure to comply will bring severe criminal consequences.
They will come from our department, from SANParks, from all provincial environment departments and all the provincial parks boards and municipalities; the “Green Scorpions” will be everywhere. What makes the “Green Scorpions” so effective is that for the first time they will be part of a national network, including the park rangers, conservation and air quality officers, marine and coastal enforcement officials, pollution and waste enforcement officers and officials monitoring urban developments.
I would like specifically to thank our provincial and our local authorities for the enthusiasm and support that they have already given to this important enforcement partnership. Not only will our EMIs, the “Green Scorpions”, co-operate closely with the other enforcement bodies such as the SA Police Service, the NIA, the Asset Forfeiture Unit, as well as the Scorpions, but we are also working in partnership with the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the UK Environment Agency to develop an intensive training course.
This will focus on environmental law, human rights, investigation and evidence gathering, as well as effective legal skills. If there is anything on this issue I will again in my reply respond to that.
The freedoms guaranteed to all our people by the Constitution and the legacy of the Freedom Charter mean little unless there’s economic growth and job creation. Tourism may well be the silver bullet for poverty, but only if we can grow the industry sustainably, spread the benefits to all provinces and expand ownership into all communities.
This is one of the reasons our BEE scorecard for tourism is so important. It was approved by Cabinet yesterday and it will be unveiled officially at an indaba this year in the first week of May.
Ukhenketho lolomntu wonke waseMzantsi Afrika; omnyama, omhlophe, owebala nowoMndiya, abafazi namadoda. Kufuneka sivule amathuba okhenketho kubo bonke abemi boMzantsi Afrika. [Tourism is for everybody in South Africa, black, white, coloured and Indian, men and women. We need to create tourism opportunities for all South African citizens.]
I am therefore very pleased to announce that the official tourist arrival figures for 2004 are in fact higher than we had expected. Members may recall that we anticipated growth of about 2%. In fact, our total international arrivals grew by 2,7% last year.
Although our European arrivals did drop to 2,4%, we attribute that to local economic factors in countries such as Germany; arrivals from North America were up by 10,4%; from Central and South America by more than 12%; from Australasia by 4,4%, from Asia by 3,1%; and from other African nations by 4,2%.
For a year in which our currency outperformed the dollar, the euro and the pound, and also saw slower economic recovery in our major markets, this performance is noteworthy, especially considering that it occurred without the benefit of hosting any major global events. However, it is not outstanding.
In 2004 the global tourism industry grew by 10% after experiencing negative growth for years. That reached a total of 760 million arrivals worldwide for the first time ever. But Africa as a whole saw arrivals grow by a very impressive 7%. Even working off a strong growth base, we clearly have our work cut out for us to take maximum advantage of this international growth; and I outlined some of our strategies last week.
In this regard let me also announce some good news, because competition is always good. Suddenly we are faced with a situation where other African countries are, for the first time, credible competition to South Africa. Kenya has a growing tourism industry. It is good for them, for the continent and for us. This is because we will be forced to improve our standards.
The year 2005 will see our department focusing strongly on the development of tourism infrastructure in all nine provinces. We aim to increase the levels of both public and private sector investment in such infrastructure by 5% this year.
We have just completed, together with the Department of Trade and Industry and provinces, a national investment framework to guide provincial authorities on how to attract foreign investment into the tourism sector. We have also prioritised outward investment missions to target key international markets, with 19 tourism nodes or priority areas for tourism infrastructure investment identified.
Last month we completed the second phase of our global competitiveness study aimed at developing a customer-driven approach to product development. Three areas were initially selected as pilot projects, namely the Wild Coast, Greater Durban and Pietermaritzburg and the Drakensberg.
I am pleased to announce that we have now expanded that study to include six new areas. These are Port Elizabeth and its surroundings, Pilanesberg, Madikwe and Mafikeng, central Limpopo, Panorama, St Lucia and Maputaland, as well as Zululand.
Our fourth national tourism conference will be held in October in the North West Province, in partnership with SA Tourism and our provincial partners. Tomorrow we will be launching the third phase of our domestic tourism marketing campaigns, the Sho’t Left III. Representing more than three times the investment made in 2004, this campaign will aim to further unlock the R47 billion domestic tourism market.
In addressing the protection and the expansion of freedoms, it is sometimes necessary for government to create regulations that drive change. The issue of industry regulation came up in the National Assembly in the context of our concerns about environmental impact assessment practitioners.
Two other sectors that need to move more rapidly towards better regulated and more equitable practices are the hunting industry and the owners and users of inland 4x4 recreational driving tracts.
This year our department engaged with hunters to analyse thoroughly the sector, especially in terms of ownership, management and very importantly, in terms of skills development. Amongst the possible options that we may need to consider is a code of conduct and a BEE scorecard for the hunting industry. This will form the basis for our discussions in 2005. We will also move to fulfil our undertaking to structure more regular interactions between hunters and our department.
There are also some irresponsible 4x4 vehicle and track owners whose activities continue to damage sensitive sections of our inland environment. When we banned them from the beaches, some of them simply moved inland and they are destroying very sensitive mountainous and other areas.
We were, therefore, pleased to note the recent announcement that a national off-road workshop will be convened by the industry itself in October. A grading system for 4x4 tracks, including environmental grading and the creation of a representative industry body, would be a very positive step. However, regulations will still be required. If there are not concrete proposals forthcoming from the industry within the next six months, government will have to issue these unilaterally. This would not be our first choice, though.
In conclusion, I would like to thank my provincial colleagues. Some of them are here today and others have business to attend to in their provincial parliaments. I would like to thank them for their support and the energy that they have invested in our portfolio during the past 10 months. It has been a pleasure to work with MECs whose understanding is matched by their enthusiasm.
I would like to express my own and the department’s appreciation to Rev Moatshe and to all other members of the select committee. I have also been requested to convey to the House the greetings of our Deputy Minister, Rejoice Mabudafhasi, who sincerely regrets not being able to participate in this debate today. She is currently attending a very important international meeting in Dubai.
The President and I will soon join her there shortly. It is a very important conference of all African environmental Ministers and some heads of state.
Last but not least, I must again thank our statutory bodies, our department under the leadership of our Acting Director-General, Pam Yako, and our Ministry for the hard work and dedication that has enabled the achievements of the past year.
What we are debating today, namely the budget policy for Environmental Affairs and Tourism, is not only about the wilderness, forests, mountains and rivers. We are talking about people, their lives and their freedoms. To answer questions about the necessary conditions to sustain and grow these freedoms, our development today must meet the needs of our present without destroying the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
There are quite a number of issues that I have not had time to refer to, such as the expansion of national parks, the consolidation of those parks and the improved relationships with provinces. I hope that the MEC for the Western Cape will refer to that. This year we will add tens of thousands of hectares to our national parks. We will see major strides forward.
One of the members referred to the 18% of our coastline that has already been declared a marine protection area. We will make major strides forward this year. It is the year of the allocation of long-term fishing rights. We want it to be a process of integrity that every South African can trust and understand how it works. If all these issues come up during the debate, I will respond to them during my reply. I thank you. [Applause.]
Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, I was so disturbed during the previous debate because I was cut off since there was no interpretation.
Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, government officials, MECs, special delegates, I am glad to participate in this debate. When we look at environmental issues, obviously it reminds us of the book of Genesis in the Bible, where God was the Creator and the Author of all things. When He created things such as fish, trees and birds, He said that everything was fine. But, unfortunately, because of the sinful nature of man, everything was cursed and everything was ill and was growing old and wearing out.
But we are co-creators. Hon Minister, you have been elected to lead as a political head for this society to maintain the heritage for ourselves and our children, so that the environment that we enjoy should continue to exist for generations to come. As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Freedom Charter this year, we do so fully conversant with the unwavering support and commitment of the majority of our people to steadfastly bringing about a better society in South Africa founded on dignity and equality for all, which is in principle what the Freedom Charter was adopted for 50 years ago.
As public representatives we are fully aware of the fact that this democratic government, amongst other things, must ensure that all South Africans, present and future, have the right to a decent quality of life through sustainable use of resources, and we should therefore facilitate equitable access to natural resources, a safe and healthy living and working environment, and a participatory decision-making process around environmental issues, empowering communities to manage their natural environment.
Commenting on the extraordinary story of South Africa, President Mbeki amongst other things, says, I quote:
As we campaign for the democratic renewal of our mandate and the consolidation of our people’s contract, we must continue to tell the truth about yesterday, today and tomorrow, in a fair and balanced way, as we pursue our quest to build a better life for all.
Yes, we must tell the truth. We must mention that today we are the 25th largest economy in the world; that today we boast of having the third cleanest tap water in the world; that today we are proud of having the world’s most progressive democratic Constitution; that today we are the world’s fastest-growing tourism destination; that today we are the second- largest exporter of fruit in world; that today we boast of having in excess of 403 protected areas; and that today we have two environmental courts - one in Hermanus and another launched early last year in Port Elizabeth. The list is long; so, long live the ANC-led government, long live!
The process of the long-term allocation of fishing rights under the marine and coastal management branch of the department happens ideally at a time when we celebrate the living wisdom of the clauses of the Freedom Charter since its adoption in 1955. It is also ideal, because in this term our work is being guided by the clause stating that the national wealth of our country, which is the heritage of South Africans, shall be restored to the people.
In its consistency, the ANC introduced the Reconstruction and Development Programme in an inclusive approach towards policy development and implementation, which directed that the marine resources must be managed and controlled for the benefit of all South Africans, especially those communities whose livelihood depends on resources from the sea.
These guidelines and principles of this ANC-led government should guide this process of long-term fishing rights allocation until the sharing of the wealth of the nation by all is seen to be done. Cognisance should also be taken of the fact that the RDP also directs that the democratic government must assist people to have access to these resources.
Adhering to effective environmental quality and protection ensures the adherence to the constitutional rights of all South Africans to an environment that is not harmful to their health. The passing of the Air Quality Act is in full compliance with the Kyoto Protocol of which our country is a signatory. We must be proud in South Africa to have clean air; wherever you go, you inhale clean air.
We happened to visit an overseas country last year, and realised that you had to go around covering your nose, because the air was so polluted. The emissions of highly industrialised countries have damaged the environment; there is no fresh air that people can inhale and therefore we should be proud as South Africans that we have clean air. Even in this House, there is clean air. We don’t have to use technology to provide us with clean air, because there is clean air in this part of the world.
Similarly, the same applies to clean water. You can go out and draw your water from a tap and drink it without any doubt. But when you move out from this country you must be careful, because you might drink water that is already polluted, and there is no way that polluted water can be cleaned so easily.
We are going all-out with the former Minister and with our current Minister. The recycling of plastic has led to a clean-up campaign throughout the country. South Africa is becoming cleaner and cleaner by the day.
We must be happy that recycling of plastics and papers was introduced to South Africa. Obviously, recycling of tyres is in the pipeline; it will be introduced not long from now so that tyres that are detrimental and which are lying all over the country will be recycled to be utilised in other ways. It is pleasing to know the budget allocation for the department and its programmes and projects are adequate and progressive. The rapid growth of the social responsibility and projects branch, which has grown at an annual average growth rate of 7%, reflects the needs of a developmental state and fully adheres and complies with commitments made at the WSSD, the World Summit on Sustainable Development.
It should further be noted that the total real change and growth in this year’s budget is 4% and that the budget, expansionary as it is, is also a fully engendering budget. The ANC supports this budget.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the Minister for co-operating with the select committee. Also, I thank the department for co-operating with the select committee, and informing us on issues timeously. I want to thank the members of the select committee, the MECs from provinces, chairpersons of this important portfolio and everybody and all stakeholders for participating.
Let’s go all out to make South Africa a real tourist destination; where countries of the world shall be envious to come to South Africa and enjoy the clean air and clean water that we have. We are most privileged and we want to thank you heartily. We support this Budget Vote. [Applause.]
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members, in one of the state of the nation addresses, President Thabo Mbeki once said:
We have entered the 21st century, having resolved and declared to
ourselves, as Africans, and to the rest of the world, that primarily,
none but ourselves can extricate us and our continent from the curse of
poverty, underdevelopment and marginalisation.
We have worked together for a decade to make of our country what for 300
years it was not. As a country, undoubtedly, all of us would have made
mistakes, but we were right and did not make a mistake when we agreed
together that we will transform this common troubled motherland and set
about the task of transforming it into a country of democracy, peace,
equality and prosperity.
A fully transformed tourism industry can considerably contribute to the social transformation of this country and result in all and sundry sharing the country’s wealth; and by so doing, create many work opportunities in a secure environment and thus alleviate poverty.
Long ago, our government displayed a commitment to the transformation of the tourism industry and put in place, amongst other things, instruments to assist in doing exactly that such as the Tourism White Paper, restructuring of the SA Tourism Organisation, key programmes aimed at promoting small business in tourism, building capacity and creating awareness. Now we have the most innovative Tourism Black Economic Empowerment Charter and Scorecard.
The Tourism BEE Charter and Scorecard, amongst other things, expresses the commitment of all stakeholders in the tourism sectors to the empowerment and transformation of the sector and its commitment to working collectively to ensure that the opportunities and benefits of the tourism sector are extended to black South Africans as well. If this could be seen to be happening, ie a big business buy-in in the sector, hon Minister, we would not still have areas in this country where there is stark poverty, gross underdevelopment and marginalisation.
This tourism BEE charter is in line with the sentiments as expressed by the President in his state of the nation address when he said:
Success in the growth of our economy should be measured not merely in terms of the returns that accrue to investors or the job opportunities to those with skills. Rather, it should also manifest in the extent to which the marginalised in the wilderness of the second economy are included and are at least afforded sustainable livelihoods. South Africa belongs to them too. Go to Xolobeni in the Eastern Cape and you will think that you are not in South Africa but in another country, and yet the area has huge tourism potential. South Africa belongs to those people in Xolobeni and the other surrounding villages there too.
The above assertion and policy guidelines was made in full cognisance of the fact that the struggle against poverty and underdevelopment rests also on encouraging growth and development of the first economy to enable it to increase the possibility of creating more jobs for the underdeveloped and less skilled, and not a survival of the fittest and the wealthiest principle at the expense of the have-nots. Therefore, we applaud the progress made by the department and the tourism branch in particular, which resulted in the formation and launch of the federation of tourist guides.
You will agree with me when I say tourism is indeed changing the image of our country. Due to the change in government, the tourism industry in South Africa has made significant strides recently. Tourist numbers have grown in leaps and bounds from three million in 1994 to the nearly 10 million tourists that we now have annually.
The winning of the 2010 Soccer World Cup bid provides us with a rare opportunity to showcase the unique combination of who we are exactly, what we have and how we do things. This makes South Africa alive with possibilities. Therefore, we should all play our part to ensure a successful Soccer World Cup event and enhance the climate for a favourable positioning of our country in order to boost investment, tourism and international relations.
Be that as it may, we have a vibrant identity as South Africans – a South African brand which resulted in the Sho’t Left tourism campaign. It encourages South Africans to travel more in their own country. This is also a programme that intends to give advantage to the disadvantaged operators in the industry. One begins to wonder as to whether it is also not the right time for the taxi industry, in all nine provinces, to launch the campaign and be part of it? This campaign binds all nine provinces and our national government in convincing our people that holiday travel in South Africa is both affordable and worth exploring.
It was pleasing to note the achievements of the Cape Town International Airport as the best in Africa, with Durban capturing the second place, in the survey conducted by the International Air Transport Association, Airport Council International and Aetra – an airport monitoring programme. Cape Town was also rated the third best in the world in its passenger volumes category, coming behind Helsinki and Athens. The best airport in the world, according to the survey, is Hong Kong followed by Seoul and Singapore.
I support the budget for the department and the allocation to the tourism branch of the department because, amongst other things, it will be able to accelerate progress regarding the training package for black tourism entrepreneurs so that they can enter the more lucrative mainstream tourist sector, and we could reach the target of 20 000 being graded in the tourism business this year, which would enable the country to be coined as a relatively safe destination not vulnerable to the vicissitudes of global events and hold a position as value-for-money destination.
During the world summit it was said that in South Africa we are so unique that when you look for directions, we don’t say, “You should go there”, we say, “Let me take you there”. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: Chairperson, anyone driving to town this morning cannot have failed to notice the pall of pollution completely obscuring Parliament, and the entire City Bowl. It indicates one extent of the challenges that remains for our environment, notwithstanding Nema and the passing the Air Quality Act towards the end of last year. Perhaps it explains the coughing, wheezing and gasping for breath by members of this House, although that might be attributable to certain motions that have been tabled recently.
At the risk of being quoted out of context, allow me to be magnanimous with respect to other progress made by the department in the last year. The proclamation of five other marine protected areas, the linking of Addo to the sea to create a big-seven park, the launch of the Mapungubwe Park and the inclusion of the Southern Cape Forest Biome under SANPark management, are all progressive steps in the right direction.
Challenges, and therefore funding requirements, however, will grow. Our land mass is finite, but our population and tourism are growing and we have much to protect. It is therefore, a source of disappointment that your department only receives 0,78% of the departmental appropriations in this years’ budget. We can only hope that this is dramatically increased in future.
I would like to focus my address today on the growing problem of deficient EIAs. On the N2 toll road to Pondoland, Minister, there was only one possible decision, which you correctly took. However, far removed from the public gaze are multiples of EIAs at local government level, which sometimes both undermine the environment and short-change local communities.
I would like to illustrate the problem of just one such draft EIA from our constituency of Howick. The issue involves a proposed footbridge across the Umgeni River below Midmar Dam, to allow residents of Siphulele Howick West to cross the river at a point known as Mills Falls. The Umgeni Municipality have commenced with this project which is based on a relevant draft EIA and conditions as set out in a recorded decision.
The entire process has been severely flawed from inception; as a result very little credence can be placed on the findings contained in the draft EIA. In the first instance, when local residents met with the author of the draft EIA in the area affected, objections were put to him in the strongest possible terms. These objections are not reflected in the draft EIA, and the residents are of the opinion that the draft EIA is biased exclusively in favour of the site at Mill Falls, favoured by the Umgeni Municipality, where the borough engineer has openly stated his preference in this regard.
Similarly, the public meeting held at the Howick West Hall produced inadequate minutes and despite assurances that residents’ objections had been noted, nothing was recorded by the borough engineer.
It is quite clear that residents’ objections have been flagrantly disregarded in this process. The draft EIA, similarly palpably flawed with respect to qualitative considerations, indicates that approximately 700 persons cross the river at the Mills Falls site per day. This figure is undated and unsubstantiated, and individuals who are living in the area arrived at more realistic figures of only 90 persons per day crossing the river.
The EIA’s assessment of road conditions in the vicinity is at complete variance with the facts. The pedestrian crossing situated at the confluence of Lakeview and Prospect Roads is described as straight, but in fact is a dangerous S-bend, where vehicles travel at high speed. This is acknowledged by the municipality, which has constructed a crash barrier and rumble strips in recognition of this fact.
The draft EIA is seemingly deficient in its treatment of the potential increase in crime levels associated with the Mills Falls footbridge, as well as the consequential property value impacts. In the case of crime, the matter was dealt with by a SAPS police captain, who had only been in the area for a short period and was therefore unqualified to comment, compounded by the fact that previous records and statistics were not consulted.
With respect to the impact on property values, the information was sourced from estate agents who do not deal regularly in the area and not surprisingly provided information contrary to that supplied by estate agents who are more familiar with the streets in question. Notwithstanding the procedural and factual deficiencies of the draft EIA in question, the draft EIA quite bizarrely states that there is no vegetation of conservation significance present. In fact, a number of protected and specially protected floral species occur on both banks of the Umgeni, including Scilla natalencis, Dierama species, Erythrina humanea, Crinum lilies and a number of aloe species. The previous Principal Scientific Officer of the Natal Parks Board has further reported that Red Data species are endemic to the area in question, a significant fact which has been inexplicably omitted from the record of decision.
If the Mills Fall footbridge goes ahead it has been submitted that pedestrians will create random paths with consequent riverbank erosion and degradation of the riverine environment. The draft EIA failed to address this issue at all. It must further be noted that a nature conservancy exists on the banks of the Umgeni River, and that its objectives are incompatible with the proposed Mills Falls footbridge. The lack of due process and palpable ignoring of the facts in the draft EIA is highly questionable. What beggars belief is that a perfectly acceptable alternative crossing point at a more suitable site exists at a point below the old treatment works.
A footbridge existed here before being washed away in the floods of 1987. However, a concrete pathway on the south side as well as 198 concrete steps in excellent condition still exist. This contrasts sharply with the Mills Falls crossing, where there’s only a steep and occasionally extremely muddy bank at the crossing point, which will become dangerous in wet weather and contribute further to erosion.
Incredibly, the draft EIA indicates that there is no intention of building steps, and yet the Mills Falls crossing point is preferred even when there is a far more suitable and safe crossing point with steps at the old Treatment Works.
The draft EIA is at least consistent in one regard. It is also incorrect with respect to the distances from Siphumelele to the Howick CBD, when comparing the two alternatives. It concluded that the shorter route from Siphumelele to the Howick CBD was via the Mills Falls crossing, whereas local residents have established that the Treatment Works crossing point is in fact shorter by 983 paces to 1 195.
The decision to construct the footbridge across the Umgeni River at Mills Falls is wrong, Minister. It is wrong for the residents of Siphumelele, because they have to cross a dangerous road when the alternative is safer; wrong, because there are no ablution facilities at Mills Falls, and wrong because the river banks are dangerous when wet, and a safe crossing exists at the old Treatment Works.
The decision is also wrong for the residents of the Oakley Drive area, who will see their property values diminish and an area, which they have in the best traditions of our new democracy taken personal responsibility for and beautified, become degraded by river bank erosion and degradation of the riverine environment. The decision is wrong for the environment with its protected fauna and flora species, and a functional wetland at risk; and it is wrong for our young democracy to flagrantly disregard legitimate objections when there are far more suitable alternatives available.
The communities involved have participated fully in the process and have acted in a responsible manner. Having been disregarded by the Umgeni Municipality, they have appealed to your counterpart in Kwazulu-Natal, the MEC for agricultural and environmental affairs on 7 March 2005. They have received no response that I’m aware of.
The DA respects the idea of co-operative governance, as well as the autonomy of the three spheres of government. However, Minister, there surely cannot be a more compelling case than this, which requires your intervention. I hope you will do so, and I look forward to a positive resolution to this problem. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M MASUKU (Mpumalanga): Hon Chairperson, members of this House, Minister and colleagues, let me start on a negative note. Yesterday when I came here I read an article in The Star newspaper, which was entitled: “UN Environmental Award for Mbeki not deserved, says analyst”.
When you look at what environmental management is all about from the view of this specialist, it says that we need to restore. Our focus should be on the management of biodiversity, on waste management, on pollution, and also on taking care of marine species.
I have read a lot about other people and other countries and try to understand what it is we are required to do, as I am an incumbent in this position. When I look at what other countries do, those that are advanced, and at our National Environmental Management Act in South Africa, passed under the leadership of the President, I find this a strange comment to be made by any person. This is because when you look at the Act, it covers all these areas – biodiversity, waste management and waste pollution. It is in this spirit that I want to support the Minister and welcome the fact that the national government has actually set out this Act to guide us in the daily performance of our duties.
We also want to welcome the changes made to the National Environmental Management Act, which provide for environmental management inspectors. We want to assure you that in our province we have adjusted our structures and budget to take care of the environmental inspection as well. We believe that the inspectors will ensure that the legislation is complied with, the EIAs are done and records of decision are issued before the commencement of any project. We will work hand in hand with different interest groups and stakeholders to find better ways to deliver energy from renewable resources such as solar energy.
Also, we are not going to look at enforcement in terms of punishment, but we do have a programme in the province, an environmental education programme, that is run to assist in ensuring that communities at all levels understand what this Act is all about. I want to welcome, Minister, the issue of your imbizo. We are going to work very hard to make this a success.
Beyond this, we have also realised that municipalities are at the cutting edge of environmental management as they are under pressure to deliver infrastructure, sanitation, clean water and sustainable livelihoods. To this end we have been continuing over the years to assist municipalities in dealing with environmental management challenges and in ensuring that they are capacitated.
This year we are focusing on building capacity to manage the Air Pollution Act and the Waste Management Act. Within these we are going to make sure that we exchange knowledge skills and have in-service training and short courses in partnership with NGOs, such as the GTZ. Bursaries for staff and full-time students are also going to be awarded. We will offer technical support on integrated waste management and on the strengthening of IDPs. On hazardous waste management, a wide spectrum of scientists says that we live in the most difficult of times. The technological advances made in the modern world have far-reaching implications for our environment. In our province we have realised that the issue of hazardous waste management has become a key issue, because we are in a worse situation. What we are going to do, in partnership with the DBSA, is draw up a plan on waste management in the province. We believe that this will go a long way in terms of addressing the issues that the Minister has actually raised.
On the issue of biodiversity, the national spatial biodiversity assessment highlights the critical state of biodiversity in the country. In response to this pressure exerted on biodiversity in our province we have commissioned the development of yet another plan on biodiversity. We believe that this plan is going to assist us to identify more areas that have to be protected and also more and more areas that we have to put emphasis on, and to assist all communities in the province in order to ensure that biodiversity management is co-shared with the National Environmental Management Act.
Our parks board has been capacitated and is ready to take the challenges. We welcome the Songimvelo-Malolotja discussion with Swaziland very much because it is also going to assist us in terms of ensuring that that area is conserved sustainably.
The partnership to manage the Blyde River and Blyde Park is for us an advantage because it is going to ensure that there are sustainable ways of managing biodiversity in Mpumalanga. We are not doing this in a vacuum.
Two days ago I stood before this House and made reference to the sacrifices that our people in South Africa have undergone in order for you and me to be in the situation we are in today. I quoted one of the martyrs, Comrade Solomon Mahlangu. I want to mention this again because it is so relevant to what we are doing today, as this Budget Vote was presented to the National Assembly on 6 April, the same day 29 years ago that Comrade Solomon Mahlangu was executed.
We say this is relevant because, secondly, Comrade Mahlangu made reference to the tree that would be nourished by his blood in order for us to bear the fruits of freedom we are enjoying today. I have also outlined how we in agriculture are going to ensure that the people of South Africa do indeed continue to access this fruit.
However, access to this fruit may not be possible if the goose that lays the golden egg is not taken care of and gets killed. We have to sustain the tree in order to produce more and more for the benefit of our future generations. The only difference here is that we are fortunate that we don’t have to die so that our blood nourishes this tree. We just have to use our brains, knowledge, skills and power in a responsible manner to ensure that this tree does not disappear in our generation.
It is for this reason that I stand before this House today and thank the Minister and the national government for having come up with the Act I have mentioned that is meant to sustain the usefulness of providing this fruit.
In my province this tree I am talking about doesn’t only provide fruit, but sells its beauty to the people and creatures of the world. It is a tree that provides habitat and food to the land and water to animals. It anchors and blends into the land in my province, and into landscapes whose attractions cannot be ignored by the eye of the passing stranger. It is the tree that serves as food for the colossal elephant and the giant giraffe, and the black rhino, hippo and buffalo in the Kruger National Park. It is the tree that provides food for the waterbuck, a common beautiful sight in my province, and food for the majestic lion pride and for the leopard whose home is the tree.
Millions and millions of people from all walks of life visit my province to marvel at these beautiful creatures nature has bestowed on us, at the landscape, and at the rivers that change form from glistening streams in the midst of green to potholes, waterfalls and canyons. Such is the beauty of my province. They travel the length and breadth of my province in search of peace and the beautiful music of the birds that roam the Wakkerstroom and Verloren wetlands; and the fish that grace our crystal-clear water that requires no artificial purification, because the natural processes have been left to themselves for many years.
However, today we are doing this because my tree is under pressure; because the land in which it grows is also rich in agriculture and houses a variety of minerals, which includes coal and steel. Seventy percent of the country’s electricity is generated through burning coal in my province. The largest oil-producing company in the country, Sasol, is in Secunda, Mpumalanga. There are other heavy mining and industrial activities that compete for the space of this tree. The pressure is now on the people of Mpumalanga and government, in particular, to ensure that there is space for the coexistence of these two.
While there is significance in the realisation of people around the world of the need to protect and conserve the diverse natural environment through sustainable living, my call has the concern that the exclusion of the environmental cost from the calculation of GNP is largely responsible for the historical absence of environmental considerations from development economics. [Time expired.]
Mr M MASUKU (Mpumalanga): Chairperson, with that I support the budget of the Minister, and say that we are going to support it, because it is going to go a long way towards nurturing the tree that the martyrs have left us. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr G MASHAMBA (Limpopo): Chairperson, hon Minister, comrades and colleagues it is a great honour for me to be amongst you today. Firstly, I would like to thank the Minister for having taken cognisance of the fact that historically black people in South Africa have not been part of the natural environment. The fact that he has taken cognisance that the creation of awareness and capacity within the communities in our country is important is something that is going to make black South Africans become part of our population in the true sense of the word. His approach does accord with the people-centred and people-driven approach to the reconstruction and development of our country.
I think the National Environmental Management Act is important because when we talk about poachers and polluters and environmental criminals, we should take cognisance of the money activities that take place in all our provinces. Because many times you find that the money magnates don’t care about the socio-economic impact of their activities on the environment. I think the environmental Scorpions will go a long way towards addressing this concern.
I will also like to say that the award accorded to the President is actually appropriate, because the imperial arrogance of the Bush regime is not only a threat to world peace, but also to environmental health, because America refuses to sign the relevant protocols. We in South Africa are actually providing the lead and so the award is actually befitting.
I would like to say that we in Limpopo appreciate the Minister for having appointed a team of experts to look into the situation of trophy and canned hunting. However, we would like to say that the terms of reference should indeed take into account the question of transforming the whole industry, because as it stands right now trophy and canned hunting is a rich man’s business. In terms of racial terms is actually a white man’s business.
If we want to create a new South Africa it will mean that we must make this a nonracial issue. I am happy to see that the Minister in his input has indicated that he is going to deal with these issues in making sure that the BEE becomes broad-based. I hope that we will have, along with the game reserves, the whole issue of community co-operatives, because BEE in the narrow sense doesn’t go very far in deracialising our society. But I think that if we have a collective community which co-operates along our game reserves it will assist communities to benefit more in the process.
This industry is actually worth billions of rands, and if you can regulate it along the policy of our government we can go a long way towards alleviating the poverty of our people and the country. However, our major concern in Limpopo is that hunting activity actually takes place in the buffer zones, because for a stretch of over 60 kms along the Kruger National Park the fence is down, although we are trying to repair it. So that when people who do hunting tell us that they are doing scientific hunting, we cannot be convinced about that or that they are only hunting on their game farms. They go right into the Kruger National Park and that is a national treasure, it is not for private activities.
We would like to say that it is important to make sure that in that team the whole issue of canned hunting is looked into carefully, because I think there is a lot of cruelty to animals that is practised in that activity. Canned hunting for trophy hunting of defenceless animals where a person breeds animals, lets them free into the wilderness and then gets foreigners to come and do target shooting at those poor animals that are not used to the wild, we think is not something we as South Africans can stand up for. We think that is not correct.
We would like also to deal with the question of animal rehabilitation centres in our province, and I think it applies to all provinces because that too is being abused. Instead of people actually dealing with the rehabilitation of animals, they make it a money-making game. Where you find that funds are raised, animals are taken in but they are never released into the bush as it is supposed to be. In our province some of these people actually import animals from other provinces and we are afraid that in doing so they might even create a risk for the animals in our province by spreading diseases across provinces. We think that with the Scorpions that you are creating we will be able to actually monitor the process in this area.
In the province we have also entered into a partnership with the Peace Park Foundation in establishing an international biodiversity research station, which we hope will play an important role not only for South Africans but for the whole sub-region of the SADC. And we hope that when we all participate in the process that this initiative will actually enhance the activities of Nepad in our region.
We are also proud once more to inform you that, as we usually do in Limpopo, this year we have been able to produce a winner in the national emerging tourism entrepreneurship programme. That was in 2004, sorry, not this year, and the winner was a female called Nyeleti Mushwana. This I think shows how committed we are to the whole question of gender which includes tourism and business.
We have also initiated in our province a broad-based BEE scorecard as a tool to measure the overall transformation of the industry. We have also capitalised on our unique icons, like the Mapungubwe transmission a year earlier, the Makapan caves, and the spiritual home of so many millions in our country and in the neighbouring states - I am referring to the ZCC Christian Church in Moria in Polokwane. We will exploit that environment, so that when people come there for spiritual purposes we are able to pull them into tourism, because in our province we also have a lot of things that people can benefit from when they visit.
We would like to thank the department for having focused on domestic tourism, because in the past tourism for no reason other than racism has been a white man’s business. You found that even rich Africans did not know where to go. In creating capacity and awareness I think it will be important to focus on black communities to make them aware that when you have leisure time there are places in our country where you can go to. I think that with your imbizo this consciousness will be developed within our people so that they will be able to make full use of the opportunities that are available, not only in our province but throughout our country.
We think that in dealing with the environment and tourism we will be able to deal not only with the natural and social issues, but also the spiritual discourse that has been created by our history in the past. We hope that in this sphere, like in all other spheres, we will be able to move in such a way that those that have sacrificed their lives to enable us to be where we are today, will as the saying goes, rest in peace, because we cannot have a prosperous, peaceful South Africa if we don’t care about our environment.
One does hope that the hon Minister will fight for the whole issue of the environment to be included in our schools as a key subject, because you cannot do all these wonderful things if your environment is not healthy. As Christians say: You can’t have a healthy soul in an unhealthy body. In the same way you cannot treat the Christians and all religious people without due respect.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mr G MASHAMBA (Limpopo): Hon member, your time has expired. Thank you for the opportunity that you have accorded me, I think I am ending the speech on the right note: a religious note. [Applause.]
Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Chairperson, as I have indicated yesterday, today and tomorrow’s contributions from my side will be in Afrikaans, and I will therefore address the House in Afrikaans.
Die beleid met betrekking tot viskwota’s, naamlik, om van die groter, gevestigde besighede in die visbedryf se kwota’s weg te neem en aan bestaansvissers te gee, het bepaalde positiewe en negatiewe gevolge. Sea Harvest sê byvoorbeeld dat 900 werkgeleenthede verlore sal gaan as hulle 30% van hul kwota aan transformasie en 10% aan klein- en mediumondernemings afstaan.
Oceana daarenteen sê ook dat die onderhandelings om van hul kwota’s aan swartbemagtigingsgroepe te verkoop, gesneuwel het as gevolg van die feit dat die regering se konsepbeleid die lig gesien het. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The policy with regard to fishing quotas, namely, to take away some of the quotas of bigger, established companies in the fishing industry in order to give them to subsistence fishermen has certain positive and negative results. Sea Harvest, for example, claims that 900 jobs will be lost if they have to forfeit 30% of their quota to transformation and 10% to small and medium enterprises.
Oceana, on the other hand, claim that their negotiations to sell off some of their quotas to black empowerment groups has been dealt a death blow due to the fact that the government’s draft policy was introduced.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: There is no interpretation for an English version. Hon member, you may continue.
Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Madam Chair, I can continue in English. I am not going to repeat myself as I did last time, because you did not allocate additional time to me. However, I will proceed in English. However, I must raise my objection, as I clearly indicated yesterday that I was going to address the House in Afrikaans today and tomorrow. And I once again state it clearly today that in tomorrow’s debate I will again be addressing the House in Afrikaans; and I insist on interpretation services being available. Thank you, Madam Chair.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon member! Hon Chief Whip?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, on a point of order: The member is correct. He raised it yesterday, and besides, he is not required to inform the House in advance, we should have interpretation services ready at all times so that we promote our mother tongues in this House. And this is really unacceptable; it should come to an end. Thank you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Continue, hon member.
Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Madam Chair, I would like to thank the hon Chief Whip for coming to my rescue in this regard. But I will then continue in Afrikaans. [Interjections.]
Ja, ek dink so, mnr Saaiman. Verder is daar ook ’n ander siening wat dié week deur Fawu geuiter is, naamlik dat die toekenning van langtermynviskwota’s die werkers benadeel as die kwota van groter maatskappye weggeneem en vir kleiner maatskappye gegee word. En dan sê ene Sharon Booi: “Ons vra eerder dat kwota’s aan ons as werkers gegee word, waar die vangste by die maatskappy verwerk kan word”.
Ek glo dat die agb Minister die nodige ondersoek sal doen; dit is nog net ’n konsepbeleid – ek neem so aan - en niemand kan die toekenning van kwota’s aan bestaansvissers teëstaan nie, inteendeel, die VF Plus ondersteun dit. Maar, dan is die gedagte wat gelug moet word teenoor die agb Minister en sy departement, sy Ministerie, dat daar net weer ’n maal gekyk sal word na wat die effek daarvan sal wees.
Ten slotte, dit mag vir die Minister vreemd wees dat ’n Vrystater praat oor viskwota’s, maar ter inligting vir die Minister, ek weet nie of hy bewus is daarvan nie, maar perlemoen kom van tyd tot tyd in redelike hoeveelhede in die Vrystaat voor. Ek sien hulle is heelwaarskynlik nog daar, die sogenaamde Groen Skerpioene. Ek merk dat hul geledere uitgedun het. Ek glo dit gaan werk, en ek glo dat ons paaie weer sal kruis; dit mag in ’n ander forum wees, maar my beste wense in iedergeval aan die Minister en die nuwe, Groen Skerpioene.
Ons, as die VF Plus, glo dat die ministerie goeie werk doen en ons sal die Begrotingspos ondersteun. Dankie. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Yes, I think so, Mr Saaiman. Furthermore, there is another view that has been aired by FAWU this week, namely that the granting of long-term fishing quotas will adversely affect the workers should the quota of the bigger companies be taken away and handed to smaller companies. And a certain Sharon Booi then stated: “We are asking that quotas rather be given to us as workers, where the catches can be processed at the company.”
I believe the hon Minister will launch the necessary investigation: it is just a draft policy – so I take it – and nobody can oppose the granting of fishing quotas to subsistence fishermen. On the contrary, the FF Plus supports this move. But then the idea that has to be put to the Minister and his department, his Ministry, is that they will just look once again at what the affect of doing so would be.
In conclusion, the Minister might find it strange that a Free Stater is talking about fishing quotas, but for his information, I do not know whether he is aware of the fact, but abalone makes an appearance in the Free State from time to time in moderate quantities. I see that they are probably still there, the so-called “Green Scorpions”. I notice that their numbers have dwindled. I believe it will work and I believe that our paths will cross again. It might be in another forum, but, in any event, my best wishes to the Minister and the new, “Green Scorpions”.
We, as the FF Plus, believe that the ministry is doing good work and we support the Budget Vote. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Ms L BROWN (Western Cape): Chairperson, Minister van Schalkwyk, colleagues and members, in fact, in many respects, the Western Cape probably has the most incredible and the most extraordinary contrasts. We have an economy that grows very strongly, before 2005-06 we will see this economy growing over 4%. It is higher than the national average.
On the one hand there is great optimism in the Western Cape, because we are able to grow the economy, and growth will help us to do what we need to do and that is to create jobs and fight poverty. On the other hand, though, for those who are not employed, the 26% of the population, it is not such an optimistic view - it’s a bleak one.
Tourism in the Western Cape is a very large economic driver. It contributes 9% to the GDP; it contributes 9,2% to employment in the whole province. In my budget speech I committed myself to making sure that it is through tourism that we are going to do what we see best to do in the Western Cape; and that is to create a home for all our people, where we are able to start creating jobs in the economy and we are able to start dealing with the issues of poverty.
We are very grateful to this department for the very close working relationship that we can embark on to make sure that we bring about the kind of change that is important to the overall development of the Western Cape. The BEE charter and scorecard help us. They help us to bring together large industry with small industry. They help us to create a sense of entrepreneurship within our community, and that’s very important. And I see many Western Cape people in the House who used to work in our department.
Our efforts in trying to bring together that transformation has shown in the last year the incredible changes. We have been able to bring together and integrate the tourism-marketing organisation, called Cape Town Roots Unlimited, and this has brought together all the tourism-marketing resources inside Cape Town, extending to all of what we have within the Western Cape.
It is a first in this region, and from what it has shown us, it is already bearing fruit. We are able to increase tourism numbers by 3%, both domestic and international tourism, year on year. And what that means is that the economy grows and we are able to employ people within the industry. You will see very shortly, in a week’s time, that we will be rolling out the integrated tourism development framework, which maps out our tourism development agenda for the next 10 years. I am pleased to inform this House that many other departments are involved in helping us to create that infrastructure that the economy needs within tourism. For example, the Department of Transport sees as an important part of their plan, the roll out of the Agulhas road – the one that takes you to the most southern point of Africa.
It’s also laid the foundation for us to start talking to the Eastern Cape about how we can create an integration that brings that Eastern Cape gateway through the Storms River, so that we are able to share, and we can use both our province and the Eastern Cape province as catalysts or hooks to start creating the kind of environment we are talking about. We are also looking at the possibility of creating that same link with the Northern Cape. So that it’s a route we can develop from Cape Town, all the way up to Namibia. It’s one that gives us the opportunity to showcase all that’s good and all that’s beautiful, and all that makes money for the people of South Africa.
One of the first gateways that we have opened is the one at the V&A Waterfront. And that has to become some form of catalyst or hook that helps to hook into the rest of South Africa.
Cape Town Roots Unlimited has embarked on a tourism enterprise development programme, which helps to create a platform for SMMEs. It helps through our red door, which is the real enterprise development programme, to make sure that we are able to take small tourism enterprises in local communities and to grow them, to make sure we are able to finance them, to make sure we are able to look at new markets, and to make sure that we are able to migrate small business to medium and larger business; thus, to create the kind of joint ventures that makes it possible for us to share the growth within the Western Cape. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mnr C J VAN ROOYEN: Agb Voorsitter, agb Minister, LUKs, agb lede, toe die Vryheidsmanifes in 1955 in Kliptown deur die ANC aanvaar is, is ’n onderneming aan die mense gegee dat wanneer die demokrasie van die mense aan bewind kom, die rykdom en erfenis van Suid-Afrika aan alle Suid- Afrikaners beskikbaar gestel sal word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister, MECs, hon members, when the Freedom Charter was adopted by the ANC in Kliptown in 1955, an undertaking was given to the people that when the people’s democracy came to power, South Africa ’s wealth and heritage would be put at the disposal of all South Africans.]
The marine and coastal management branch of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism is committed to redressing the imbalances which continue to exist in terms of access to benefits by the historically disadvantaged people through a range of initiatives that include the following: The establishment of a fair and equitable basis for the allocation of fishing rights and quotas; black economic empowerment and the awarding of rights to subsistence fisheries for the collection of rock lobster, mussels and abalone.
The total benefits derived from the harvesting of marine and coastal resources are worth about R186 billion annually. However, these benefits are not equitably distributed. South Africa’s commercial fishing industry employs approximately 27 000 people directly and another 60 000 in casual and indirect jobs. The industry is worth approximately R1,6 billion per year.
The approved budget of R278 million for the branch for the 2005-06 financial year will make a positive impact towards activities and goals set by the Marine and Coastal Management Branch, which include the allocation of rights in a further three new fisheries - potential fisheries envisaged for the future harvesting include East Coast rock lobster, East Coast abalone, red-eye and limpets, and to increase a number of blue flag beaches. The Blue Flag Campaign is an international programme that rewards local authorities for providing safe and clean beaches. Furthermore, the department also intends to declare new marine protected areas to increase the percentage of the coastal and marine areas. The percentage of coast already under protection is close to 20%, which is in line with the target agreed upon at WSSD in 2002.
It is important to recognise the achievements made by the marine and coastal management branch. Since 1995 we have witnessed good progress in the transformation and restructuring of the fishing industry, not only in broadening participation, but also in ensuring that our marine living resources are protected and harvested in a sustainable way.
Die ANC verwelkom dus die aankondiging deur die Minister van Omgewingsake en Toerisme op Dinsdag 5 April 2005 dat die aansoekgelde vir langtermynlisensies vir bestaansvisserygemeenskappe verminder word. Tans betaal alle bestaansvisserygemeenskappe, vanaf Saldahnabaai tot by KwaZulu- Natal, dieselfde nie-terugbetaalbare aansoekfooie van R6 000; dieselfde as ’n groot kommersiële maatskappy met kwota’s ter waarde van miljoene rande. Die nuwe inisiatief beteken dat die koste van aansoeke met tot 83% verminder. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[The ANC therefore welcomes the announcement by the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism on 5 April 2005 that the application fees for long-term licences will be reduced for subsistence-fishing communities. Currently all subsistence-fishing communities, from Saldanha Bay to KwaZulu- Natal, pay the same non-refundable application fee of R6 000,00; the same amount as a big commercial company with quotas to the value of millions of rands. The new initiative means that application costs are reduced by up to 83%.]
We are happy to note that there is a decrease in the rate of poaching as a result of the commissioning of the patrol vessels Sarah Baartman en Lilyan Ngoyi. A further two new protection vessels are being built locally in Cape Town and are named after prominent women in the struggle for freedom in South Africa. The first vessel, Ruth First, was put to water yesterday and will undergo sea trials for about three weeks before being launched in May. We further hope that with the sterling work of the “Green Scorpions” and the further commissioning of the outstanding patrol vessel, poaching will be a thing of the past in our country.
Any suggestions by the DA that the new proposed allocation of fishing rights is an attempt to buy votes for the ANC for the coming local government elections, is another example of their lack of understanding of the issues that affect the poor and the vulnerable. It should therefore be rejected with the contempt it deserves. I would again remind them of the Freedom Charter that states: “The people shall share in the country’s wealth.” Transformation of the fishing industry is not a political matter, but it is a constitutional requirement. It should therefore be seen as the extension of the people’s right to access resources and to make a living, as envisaged by the people’s contract to which the ANC is committed.
Listening to the debates of the DA members in the House, it’s clear that this is a party without direction. [Laughter.] Their argument defies the laws of logic and is without substance, which makes them totally irrelevant within the context of progressive politics. I call this “Red Bull politics”, they try to fly without wings. [Laughter.]
We congratulate the Minister on this budget, which shows the real growth of 4%, which is really expansive. We fully support his and the department’s endeavours to make this country environmentally friendly and a better and transformed country. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Dr B T BUTHELEZI (KwaZulu-Natal): Chairperson, hon Minister, MEC and hon members of this august House, South Africa is the fastest-growing tourism destination in the world and is rated as the world’s 25th most popular tourist destination. Tourism generates 4,5% of the GDP and this is expected to climb to 9% by 2014. During this period a million-odd jobs are likely to be created. We say that tourism should and must be used as a tool to redress past socio- economic imbalances, encourage capital investment, encourage productivity, facilitate the breaking down of the urban-rural divide and be aimed at fostering growth in wage employment.
The role of government is to create an environment conducive to tourism, so that tourism can succeed and provide strong cushioning support for black SMMEs. In a major policy statement in May 2004, Mr Minister, you announced that SA Tourism would be finalising its BEE scorecard by the end of last year, which would form the basis of the efforts to transform this industry. We are glad to hear that this will form part of your discussion tomorrow in the Cabinet, and we support you and strongly believe that the outcomes from such efforts will range from the maximisation of economic benefits to our people to also leading to a wide distribution of public resources, and it will ensure equal access to tourism opportunities. It will also have a myriad spin-offs for the whole community, including socio-economic and political stability for our people, especially in the province I come from, KwaZulu-Natal.
We recommend that community-based tourism be incorporated and treated as a developmental and planning priority for this department. Government has a critical role to play, among other things, firstly, in supporting the informal sector, ensuring that local entrepreneurs have access to capital training and market information. Secondly, it should create incentives for big business to use local goods and services, for example, by making this a criterion when allocating leases for tourism developments. Thirdly, it should maximise the use of local products inside our national parks and game reserves. Fourthly, it should assess how any change in fees or policy affects visitor patterns, and discourage overpricing and overcommercialisation of local resources and cultures.
Lastly, it should explore the idea of starting a police task force in conjunction with the Department of Safety and Security, which will focus specifically on protecting tourists - as suggested by the KwaZulu-Natal MEC for arts, culture and tourism - just as the department has done with the “Green Scorpions” in enforcing the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act and other laws in the department. This department can also adopt development of economic linkages as a key objective in addition to its promotional functions.
I will now focus my speech on environmental affairs. We join the chorus of those who have congratulated both the President and this country on the occasion of their election to receive the prestigious Unesco award as the champions of the environment in Africa. KwaZulu-Natal is the environmental jewel of South Africa. It boasts a rich endowment with its rare diversity of flora and fauna, unique landscapes, its coastal belt of clean beaches, wetlands, the Drakensberg range and natural forests. However, there should be a political commitment to sustain this spectacular environment.
With the province’s myriad challenges, environmental concerns are interrelated with human and socio-economic developmental issues. The province continues to face pressure to fully address energy-related environmental issues including access to clean water, safe food and improved air quality. At the same time, as a developing province, we aim to promote rapid industrialisation and manufacturing for exports.
The successful implementation of the national environmental policy and the enforcement of the corresponding laws are critical in revising energy production and consumption trends that have a deleterious effect on human health and the environment. The challenge lies in adopting viable pollution control schemes that will not preclude development of energy infrastructure in KwaZulu-Natal.
Environmental sensitivity and understanding are directly related to the health and development of our people. For this reason we applaud the strides that have been made by this department in introducing the necessary legislative steps to ensure that we breathe quality air. The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act is one of the most important pieces of environmental legislation. It links up directly with our government’s efforts to improve the lives of our poorest communities. The introduction of this Act will provide for the setting of standards, both for the quality of air that we breathe and for what may be released into our air.
The standards in turn will provide the benchmark of air quality management in our communities. The enforcement of this Act will be extremely beneficial in many areas of KwaZulu-Natal, such as the Durban South Basin, Richards Bay and Newcastle.
In conclusion, as cavernous environmental crises plague the world, such as the Tsunami disaster we saw late last year, and every corner of our country, such as the floods and storms in the Western Cape, it is met with an instant political response. We would recommend that the South African Weather Services educate our people, especially on the East Coast of this country, on the warning signs and expected response should a catastrophic disaster such as the one in South East Asia strike this country. We fully support the budget. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr J BOERS (Gauteng): Chairperson, Comrade Oliphant and leaders of the NCOP . . .
Kameraad Minister van Schalkwyk, as ’n Afrikaanse lid van die ANC gee dit vir my ’n warm gevoel op die hart om so met u te praat. Doen so voort! [Comrade Minister Van Schalkwyk, it warms my heart, as an Afrikaans member of the ANC, to speak to you like this. Keep it up!]
I wish to thank all of you for the opportunity given to me to address this House on such an important Budget Vote debate. It indeed is an honour to rise in this august House to join my comrades and colleagues in support of the Budget Vote speech that aims to further entrench our government in practical and consensual steps towards the historical mission of delivering a better life for all our people.
The essence of the Budget Speech, which is also consistent with our constitutional obligations, seeks to protect our environment for the generations yet to be born; not only for South Africa, but also for the entire world. Addressing itself to the threat of mankind’s impact on the environment through sheer greed and blatant mismanagement of the environment, the March 2005 report of the United Nations Environment Programme, Unep, warns that human security is at risk due to the ecosystem’s decline.
The report further observes that the severity and the frequency of floods and fires have been aggravated and have damaged the earth’s natural capital; for example, between 1990 and 1999 more than 100 000 people were killed by floods, causing damage totalling R1 418 million. The research of Unep further reveals that 60% of ecosystem elements that support life on earth, such as fresh water, clear air and a relatively stable climate are systematically being degraded, and this situation could be very significant during the first half of this century.
The droughts and the floods that wreak havoc in our country, including the recent floods in this province, confirm that our country and our people are not immune to these disasters. Because of this likelihood we must welcome and commend the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Deat, for finalising the air quality legislation. It definitely helped the Gauteng provincial department of agriculture, conservation and the environment to deal with major industrial pollution.
We are, however, reminded that implementation of the Act will require a substantial quantity of resources both in terms of personnel and finances if we hope to achieve the objectives of this Act. We hope that the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism will be sympathetic towards provincial requests for budget support if it is or becomes necessary. We also are aware that the department is negotiating with the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry at present to transfer the authorisation and monitoring of landfill sites, firstly to the department and then to the provinces. Authorisation and monitoring may sound relatively straightforward, but they require specialised human resource capacity in different engineering fields, which currently does not exist in the provincial department establishments. We hope that the department will take note that such transfer will require additional resources, which currently are not accommodated by provincial budgets.
Inspired by our provincial strategic objective, and contributing towards building a safe, secure, sustainable community, we have embarked on a vigorous campaign aimed at the operationalisation of the second amendment of the National Environmental Act, which came into force on 7 January. Comments on the new regulations regarding this Act have been forwarded to the department. We eagerly await the promulgation of the new regulations. We understand and we fully support the setting of minimum standards for streamlining the environmental impact assessments in all provinces.
Gauteng, which has the smallest landmass of all the provinces, the highest DGP and the highest population density, faces unique environmental challenges. It will therefore be necessary in Gauteng to pass specific regulations to complement the national regulations.
We believe that South Africa has the most progressive environmental legislation of all middle-income and low-income developing countries. The concern that we have, like the national department, is to what extent all our people will comply with this legislation. This is of special concern to us, especially where profit is the main motive in Gauteng in the current urban residential housing boom.
In order to counter this threat of noncompliance, our provincial department is creating an enforcement and compliance chief directorate. It is envisaged that this directorate will augment the capacity of the national department. Gauteng, however, is a major waste generator. Our provincial government contends that we should focus on waste minimisation. The current Waste Bill addresses some of these issues, and Gauteng will continue to interact with Deat on the finalisation of this piece of legislation.
Gauteng supports the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism in its commitment to sustainable development, and we recognise the necessity of having the national framework supported by provincial strategies. This will further support the World Summit on Sustainable Development and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. This is in particular in the interest of Gauteng province, which faces extreme development pressures to meet the needs of the accelerated inward population migration.
Our province has also eagerly been awaiting the national biodiversity framework, as informed by the recently completed National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment. The unit’s report confirms that climate change is one of the major threats to biodiversity. Although it is projected that Gauteng will fall within the eastern side of this zone, it will not be significantly affected by the drastic climate changes. The concern, however, remains that the population migration patterns may escalate should agriculture fail in the other provinces.
We are also aware that Gauteng is one of the major greenhouse gas emitters in South Africa. In this regard we wish to work with Deat in compiling a greenhouse gas inventory as well as in implementing the climate change response strategy.
Our province welcomes the appointment of a panel of experts, which will make recommendations to the national Minister on hunting in buffer zones and the canned hunting of large predators. It is perhaps not an issue that affects Gauteng directly. We, however, note that the same hunters will, in most case, rely on our facilities to export those trophies. In this regard they will require permits.
While eager to contribute directly to the Gauteng provincial government’s strategic objective of enabling faster economic growth, we also remain vigilant in support of sustainable growth and development. The country has been euphoric about the hosting of the 2010 Soccer World Cup. The department has taken the initiative in utilising this to boost tourism. Soon we will start building stadiums and additional infrastructure. We must not, however, forget that for these developments to take place some of them may require environmental impact assessment approvals. We stand ready to contribute to the goal in order to ensure that this sporting event takes place smoothly in our country. To ensure this, applications for construction of stadiums and other relevant infrastructure should be lodged timeously.
We also want to echo the compliments to the President about the award. On behalf of the Gauteng government, and in my personal capacity, I wish to thank our President, Minister Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, his deputy and our colleagues for their foresight and political leadership.
Understanding the complex link that exists between the environment, wealth, poverty and our historical mission of contributing towards a better life for all our communities and towards a better world, we commit ourselves to working in closer interaction with all those who are working to advance this noble idea. I thank you, Chair. [Applause.]
Ms T ESSOP (Western Cape): Hon Chairperson, hon Ministers, fellow colleagues, hon members; our Premier, Ebrahim Rasool, has announced our government’s intention to build the Western Cape as a home for all.
In line with this, my department’s mission is to create a sustainable home for all, forever. There is a Native American saying: We do not inherit the earth from our forefathers; we borrow it from our children. As political leaders, it is our duty to ensure that our policies and our decisions will not have a negative impact on our future generations, our children.
The Western Cape with its unique characteristics - our wonderful and unique biodiversity, the Cape floral kingdom, our amazing coastline and our cultural heritage and diversity, especially our indigenous heritage - together with the challenges of its being a water-scarce province, the pressures on prime agricultural land and, of course, the impact on our ability to implement land reform programmes and the growing polarisation between rich and poor in this province and the fact that about 95% of our rivers in the Western Cape are in a critical state, as identified by our state of the environment report, implies that we have to intervene as government and provide responsible leadership.
It is in that context that my department has embarked on two key programmes that will set a sustainable path for the Western Cape. The first, of course, is the development of our Provincial Spatial Development Framework. Taking our lead from the national spatial development perspective and informed by our provincial growth and development strategy, this particular Provincial Spatial Development Framework will go on to inform our municipal sustainable development frameworks.
The Provincial Spatial Development Framework is informed by the triple- bottom-line approach of sustainable development, and we have clearly defined areas that can be developed in the Western Cape, and even address ourselves to what forms of development can take place in those particular spaces. It will clearly define the areas that need to be protected, and it will also clearly define the areas that require massive intervention in terms of human development and promoting social equity.
The PSDF will also be geared towards redressing the spatial legacy that apartheid has left us in the province specifically. One of the other programmes that informed our PSDF has been the investigation into golf estates in the Western Cape. There has been much publicity around this investigation. We have completed our review, we have had the findings, and we have now developed our proposed guidelines. Those guidelines have been finalised and have been put out for public comment, and it’s critical that the public voices have been heard and contributions made to those guidelines.
We have embarked on this particular road in the Western Cape because we believe that if there had not been any intervention we would have taken our province down an extremely unsustainable path, and as one of our hon members said earlier, we would have killed the golden goose that lays the golden eggs. Is that correct? Sorry, not the golden goose, but the golden eggs or the silver eggs or the green eggs!
It was critically important that this particular approach be looked at. Over 82 golf estates exist in the Western Cape, and especially in the Southern Cape, our Garden Route. We popularly say that it could have turned into the golf route and not been the Garden Route any longer if we had not intervened.
We had on our desks over 33 new applications for golf estates in the Western Cape, again mainly for the Southern Cape. It was in that context that we believed that we should make an intervention as government. I think that the path we will be following now will prove to be far more rational, responsible and sustainable, and that any future golf estates will be measured in terms of sustainable development principles.
Linked to our Provincial Spatial Development Framework is our initiative around an integrated law reform process. My other portfolio is of course development planning. So, it’s very exciting to see that in order to achieve the government’s challenge to cut red tape, in the Western Cape we are looking at integrating environmental legislation, planning legislation and heritage legislation with regard to the applications processes so that we streamline those processes, cut the red tape, and ensure that there is effective public participation, but not a duplication as there currently is.
The fragmented approach to planning approval and environmental approval has been very cumbersome, and has not encouraged growth and development in the province. We support the budget. [Time expired.]
Rev E ADOLPH: Hon Chairperson, it does not take a genius to understand that the tourism industry which is a multifaceted industry is still in the hands of a small, white minority. We are obliged to break this monopoly and the imbalances of this tourism industry in no uncertain terms. The assumption is correct then if you say that since 1994 we have made a lot of inroads in terms of relational research and intellectual engagement to deracialise and democratise our tourism industry.
Our agenda therefore should be very deliberate. We need to declare war against poverty and use our viable tool, which is called the tourism industry tool, to unblock the deadlocks and bottlenecks of intolerable exploitation of the poorest of the poor.
Ordinary people need to be engaged in the fight and become partners. [Interjections.] Excuse me, hon Chair, I am being disturbed here. I have to commend the Minister who mentioned that certain people should be part and parcel of the tourism industry – the garbage collector and the domestic worker should be part and parcel of the economic growth of this country using tourism. There are little effects of economic spin-offs for tourism in Khayelitsha, Langa, Guguletu and places such as Mitchell’s Plain and others.
What we need in our approach is to make these underdeveloped indigenous tourism attractions, especially community tourism and township tourism, more attractive under the BEE charter and scorecard and programmes like Sunwe.
Everyone will agree with the ID that tourism has great potential. We in South Africa have a beautiful country. It’s the gateway to the world’s niche of tourism destinations. What we need to do is to ensure that we take advantage of this golden opportunity. I would urge government to break the backs of things like crime and maybe illegal trade in human organs in order to move away from negative publicity and rather focus on the issue of poverty eradication using tourism to sell our product as human beings. We have examples such as the former President.
Tourism is like the air that we breathe. We all are surrounded by air. Sometimes we are not aware that some of the air might be polluted, but we all are affected by it. We all are affected by tourism.
We support government in its collective responsibility and support all programmes with the public and private sectors to make tourism one of the most effective quality products, and to promote internal as well as external tourism. What we need currently is aggressive marketing for our tourism industry. Fishermen should also be part of the tourism industry.
We have all the resources in South Africa. We’ve got diamonds, we’ve got gold, we’ve got clean air, and we’ve got wind energy and solar energy as an alternative to electricity. What we need is a skills mix to build and unblock this potential of South Africans.
We also need government to make more money available and venture capital must be made more accessible to people in the street. You might be surprised at how the entrepreneurship of ordinary people can develop and create spin-offs for economic growth. Government made it possible and created opportunities. We all need to work together as a team. The ID supports this Budget Vote, and we also declare our support for the collective responsibility for helping this envisioned reality of South Africa, as a tourism destination of the global scene in terms of competitiveness, to be realised. [Time expired.]
Mnr F ADAMS: Agb Adjunkvoorsitter van Komitees, Minister, LURe, lede van die Huis en kollegas, daar is ’n bekende alledaagse uitdrukking dat mense nie behoorlik weet waarheen hulle op pad is tensy hulle weet waar hulle vandaan kom nie.
Dis nie verbasend dan dat op een tydstip Suid-Afrika se toekoms heel onseker gelyk het nie. Baie het in die nuwe demokrasie getwyfel, en hulle het gewonder of ons land sou oorleef. Baie doemprofete ondermyn steeds die veggees en vasberadenheid van Suid-Afrikaners om te slaag en om hulle land van geboorte ’n sterk en lewensvatbare land te maak.
Ons is nou in die elfde jaar van demokrasie en baie suksesse is vermag deur die regering. Dit is vir my verblywend om te sien dat die Minister en die departement daadwerklik aandag gee en werk maak van die oproep van die President om dienslewering daar te stel, en om die lewensomstandighede van alle Suid-Afrikaners te verbeter.
Terwyl ons trots kan wees op hierdie suksesse, moet ons sonder twyfel die hope uitdagings aanpak wat in die tweede era van demokrasie vir ons wag. Ons durf nie ons toekoms oorlaat aan die noodlot nie. Dit is iets wat ons moet bou met deursettingsvermoë, visie en insig. Die korttermynoplossings van die populiste mag vir baie ’n opsie wees, maar dit sal nie ons mense verenig en voed nie.
Hierdie regering verstaan en weet dat die pad na ware ontwikkeling ’n veeleisende een is wat korttermynoplossings, koersvastigheid en soliede beplanning benodig. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr F ADAMS: Hon Deputy Chairman of Committees, Minister, MECs, members of the House and colleagues, there is a common expression that people do not really know where they are going unless they know where they come from.
It is no surprise then that South Africa’s future looked quite uncertain at one point. Many had little belief in the new democracy and wondered if our country would survive. There are many prophets of doom who are still undermining the fighting spirit and determination of South Africans to succeed and to make the country of their birth a strong and viable country.
We are now in the eleventh year of democracy and the government has achieved many successes. I find it heartening to see that the Minister and the department are actively giving attention to and heeding the President’s call to establish service delivery and to improve the living conditions of all South Africans.
While we can be proud of these successes, there is no doubt that we have to face the many challenges that lie ahead in this second era of democracy. We dare not leave our future to fate. It is something that we have to build with determination, vision and insight. The short-term solutions of populists may be an option for many, but it will not unite and feed our people.
This government understands and knows that the road to real development is a demanding one that requires short-term solutions, resoluteness and solid planning.]
I want to quote a poem by Prof Sizwe Satyo:
We destroyed ourselves by undermining ourselves; Until we realised ourselves that we were depriving ourselves in a world that belongs to us in the first place; We realise this fact already battered, Battered as we were, we volunteered proudly.
During the imbizos that I have attended that the Minister and the department held, I listened to our people as they praised the government for its achievements and cried out for relief from those things that continue to make their lives difficult. All of them want a better life. All of them want the contract with the people to create work and fight poverty. The Minister and department heard the cries of parents struggling to care for their children.
Hulle het gehoor hoe Josie, Boeta Gakkie, Maria en Auntie Galiema opstaan en sê: “Gee vir ons ook ’n “fry” uit die see uit.” Ek spreek my dank en my waardering uit teenoor die Minister en sy departement vir die daadwerklike optrede om Josie, Boeta Gakkie, Maria en Antie Galiema se lewe vir hulle weer terug te gee. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[They heard Josie, Boeta Gakkie, Maria and Auntie Galiema get up and say: “Give us a fry from the sea as well.” I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to the Minister and his department for taking decisive action to give Josie, Boeta Gakkie, Maria and Auntie Galiema’s lives back to them.]
It is good to notice that this department is geared up for delivery, and to make things work and to make a success of the transformation process. The responsibility and willingness that is shown by the government must be applauded. The process cannot stop now. All role-players, be it the communities, the private sector and government, must maintain the momentum. As the people did in 1955, when they drew up the Freedom Charter, I want to end by quoting one of the members that was present at the event. I quote:
I could feel the strength and indomitable purpose of these people as they marched in. They had come to this congress to hear, to discuss and to adopt their own charter for the future, born of their heartaches and their hopes.
It was a simple beginning for a charter, which has proved indestructible, which refuses to die, despite sporadic bannings of sundry editions of it. A printed piece of paper can be banned, but not the idea expressed in it.
Today we can say in South Africa that the ideas expressed on a piece of paper in Kliptown 50 years ago will find resonance in the shared growth of our country. The NNP supports the Budget Vote. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr P W SAAIMAN (Northern Cape): Hon Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, conservation, yes, and environmental affairs are the basis of a successful ecotourism culture. We believe that the Northern Cape is the province with one of the most famously conserved heritages and natural environments. Broad-based involvement and knowledge will empower our people and communities to conserve and protect our valuable heritage for generations to come, and for thousands to come to experience.
It is in this spirit and with great pride that we also convey our congratulations to our President who, with South Africa, has been lauded by the United Nations Environment Programme for outstanding leadership in the field of environmental conservation, and for setting an example for the world to follow in the implementation of the recommendations of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development. The lead department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism must be acknowledged for their role in this success story.
I also wish to announce that a delegation from Malaysia Airlines visited the Northern Cape this week. They have decided to introduce South African rooibos tea as a standard feature on their airline with immediate effect. In addition to that, they shot a 20-minute video of the Khoisan people and the tourist attractions of the Northern Cape in general to illustrate the original users of rooibos tea. The video will be aired on Malaysia Airlines, which annually transports more than 40 million passengers worldwide. We believe this initiative could further boost our tourism industry as a whole.
On the subject of delivery, during last year’s debate in this Chamber I impressed on the Minister the need for the Northern Cape coastal communities to be fairly treated with fishing quotas where allocated. I am pleased to report that since then there has been substantial movement in this regard, and we are bringing our thanks to you.
Minister, you promised to deliver and you did. Your department recently published the draft fishing policies for comment, and I wish to address several issues that have been raised. We appreciate the fact that it will be easier and cheaper for our disadvantaged communities to enter the industry now. There is, however, much more that needs attention if we are to ensure that these communities are able to receive a decent living from the sea.
The Northern Cape has a history of not receiving its fair share of fishing rights and, in addition, where rights are allocated, rights holders have, despite their permit conditions, been allowed to land and process fish in other provinces such as the Western Cape. This has contributed to the decline in the fishing and fishing-related sectors in the Northern Cape and to a subsequent loss of jobs.
It is crucial that the situation in the Northern Cape be turned around, especially in the light of the rapid decline in the mining sector, which was the former mainstay of the economy in Namaqualand specifically. Comments on other areas we have been included in our official comment to your office, Minister. When I last appeared in this House I referred to the need for further development in the mariculture and aquaculture capability of the Northern Cape in order to benefit the community. Since then, the Provincial Growth and Development Strategy of the Northern Cape has been launched and it has identified anchor projects for implementation, one of which is the Namaqualand Mariculture Industrial Park in the town of Port Nolloth.
The broad concept of the park is to provide a facility where seawater is pumped ashore and stored in reservoir dams. This seawater, in turn, is made available on tap for potential operators from the park. The operators could include abalone farmers, oyster farmers, scallop farmers, fish farmers and a multipurpose hatchery operator.
All endeavours will be made to employ as many as possible of the local community. The initial projections are that between 250 and 500 jobs will be created. This project has the full support of the Northern Cape government and will be implemented in partnership with the local Richtersveld Municipality. More poverty relief allocations can go a long way to further rolling out this project for those people.
It is also extremely possible that the first offshore tuna farm in South Africa will be established in the Northern Cape. The development of the first offshore tuna farm in South Africa is being pioneered by AquaStel (Pty) Ltd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the University of Stellenbosch. AquaStel made a presentation to the Northern Cape cabinet yesterday. The Northern Cape subsequently pledged to co-operate with the project and undertook to engage in the facilitation and its implementation to the benefit of this region.
This is an opportunity that becomes the Northern Cape, given the fact that marine resources will be exploited along our coast and that local companies will gain access to the technologies and the related benefits. But again, hon Minister, we need the support of your department to create with us – you and your department – the necessary environment to make a success of this project.
As far as tourism is concerned in the Northern Cape, we are particularly proud of the initiative linked to community tourism, especially as it relates to the historically disadvantaged communities. The Northern Cape has a rich history of cultural heritage that can and has to be exploited for the purpose of growing this tourism sector. The Galeshewe township tourism development route will see many significant buildings and sites linked to the political struggle of the people of Galeshewe, linked to showcase this as never before, including the offices and buildings occupied by Robert Sobukwe. Further routes will be explored to open the broader Northern Cape heritage of the various indigenous communities. In this regard, the heritage of the Waterboer Griquas, the Korana, the Nama and Kimberley Malay camps communities needs to be developed in specific tourism and cultural routes.
We are also challenged dramatically and speedily to increase the numbers of tourists from the historically disadvantaged communities visiting tourist attractions. In particular, the historically disadvantaged communities and people living in the rural areas must be involved in tourism, environmental affairs and conservation. Historically disadvantaged persons and communities must not only be employees, but also become shareholders in tourism.
Community-based tourist attractions in our townships and rural areas need more support, assistance, development and integration in the total tourism package. And, again, I think the Northern Cape did enough to be part of your special nodal intentions. I felt very unhappy when I didn’t hear our province’s name when you announced your interventions in the others.
Tourism in the Northern Cape is also seeing an increase in public- private partnerships, including a R50 million expansion of the Big Hole Project in Kimberly. With a link to the Galeshewe tourism route, we will elevate this historic destination to an international flagship destination.
We live in a province known for its diamonds, a product of charcoal subjected to enormous pressure and temperature over time. We, in the Northern Cape, live for the sun and know the high temperatures. We are under enormous pressure ourselves to leave a rich and glittering heritage to our children. The Northern Cape supports the budget. [Applause.]
Mr N MACK: Hon Deputy Chairperson, hon Minister, hon MECs, ladies and gentlemen, before I start my speech I would like to allude to something that the Minister mentioned.
Minister, in u inleidende toespraak het u verwys na ’n agb lid in die Nasionale Vergadering wat sê ons fokus te veel op werkskepping. Ek weet nie waar die agb lid woon nie, of hy op die maan woon nie, want daar is armoede in Suid-Afrika en die beste manier om dit te hanteer is om werk te skep. Nie net gaan ons armoede uitwis nie, maar ons gaan ook ’n integriteit in ons mense inbou wat van hul goeie burgers sal maak.
Ek is baie jammer dat ons nog steeds mense in die land het wat ’n inkomste het en dan onsensitief staan teenoor dié wat nié ’n inkomste het nie, want ’n inkomste is kos op die tafel, en ek praat van die basiese kossoorte – brood – nie ‘n luukse nie. En dit is veral op ons plattelandse dorpe, en in die stedelike gebiede, veral in die townships. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Minister, in your introductory speech you referred to an hon member in the National Assembly who said that we were focusing too much on job creation. I do not know where the hon member lives, whether he lives on the moon, because there is poverty in South Africa and the best way of handling it is by creating jobs. We are not only going to eradicate poverty, but we are also going to inculcate integrity in our people that will make them better citizens.
I am very sorry that there are still people in the country who have an income and are then insensitive to those who have no income, because an income is food on the table, and I am talking about the basic foodstuffs – bread – not luxuries. And this applies especially to our rural towns, and in the urban areas, especially to the townships.]
Allow me to continue with my speech. President Thabo Mbeki in his state of the nation address alluded to the fact that this year our programme should include, amongst other things, the intensification of the programmes we identified last year.
We need to meet the country’s and the government’s long-term objectives, such as the provision of clean running water to all households by 2008, decent and safe sanitation by 2010, and electricity for all by 2012. This is in line with section 24(a) and section 24(b) of the Constitution, which prescribe that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing, and to have their environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations through reasonable legislative and other measures.
These measures should, firstly, prevent pollution and ecological degradation; secondly, promote conservation; and, thirdly, secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources, while promoting justifiable economic and social development.
It is because of these constitutional imperatives that the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act was passed, which has already been assented to by the President, and that South Africa is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol. The said air quality Act is definitely going to protect the health of our people, who have been victims of pollution and unnecessary emissions from some of the big companies in the country.
Again, because of the same constitutional directives the White Paper on Integrated Pollution and Waste Management for South Africa was developed. The White Paper sets out seven strategic goals with respect to pollution and waste management in our country. These include an effective institutional framework and legislation; pollution prevention, waste minimisation, impact management and remediation; holistic and integrated planning; participation and partnerships in integrated pollution and waste- management governance; empowerment and education in integrated pollution and waste management; information management; and international co- operation.
The White Paper further delineates waste management functions for all three spheres of government, with national government being responsible for the development of a national framework, legislation and policies. Provincial and local governments are expected to implement national strategies addressing waste and pollution management.
In 2003 plastic bag regulations were promulgated. In the same year, the Environment Conservation Act, Act 73 of 1989, was amended to give effect to the development of economic instruments, which would facilitate the collection, the reuse and the recycling of waste streams. Furthermore, it was through the Environment Conservation Act amendments that landfill site functions were transferred from the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Provinces played a vital role in this regard.
The ANC introduced the Letsema campaign to involve communities in various aspects of life. One of these aspects is that communities start to assist government to keep our streets and parks, etc, clean. We acknowledge the great enthusiasm from the NGO and CBO sectors, as well as from individuals who recognised the importance of “Don’t only ask what government must do, but also ask what you as an individual or a nongovernmental organisation can do”. This campaign should and must be intensified to bring about a better life for all.
In an effort to give effect to the White Paper on Integrated Pollution and Waste Management, the National Environmental Management Act and the Environment Conservation Act, engagements are continuing with the tyre and glass industries. The purpose of these consultations is to facilitate the collection, reuse and recycling of these waste streams.
With respect to the waste tyres, we are of the opinion that regulations should be made whose focus will be the prohibition of illegal dumping and stockpiling. We are grateful for the attempts currently in process between the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism and the industry, which are likely to result in the signing of a memorandum of agreement regarding targets for the recollection and recycling of waste tyres; as well as the agreement and understanding in principle that at present there is no need to develop legislative interventions in relation to the glass industry, but a memorandum will be centred on the facilitation of the collection and recycling of the glass in the country.
Before the advent of the current democratic dispensation in South Africa, nature conservation was an instrument of oppression. It was primarily used as a means to maintain control of Africa’s natural resources, firstly, against the indigenous African communities and, secondly, it was used by the forces of oppression as they sought ways to keep natural resources, including minerals, for the benefit of a few.
Since 1994 South Africa has pursued a path of sustainable development, focusing on meeting the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. As an ANC-led government, we believe that environment management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern and serve the physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably.
I wish to thank the Minister and his department for their sterling work done to date. The ANC supports this budget. Thank you. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM: Chairperson, I would like to thank all hon members for their contributions. In the limited time I have I will respond to some of the issues raised, but unfortunately it is not possible to respond to every individual member.
I would like to start off by thanking all those who specifically informed the House about the initiatives taken by provincial governments to achieve our aims, such as hon member Boers, MEC Masuku, Mr Saaiman, MEC Tasnim Essop, MEC Brown, Mr Mashamba and others.
I must say that when MEC Brown stood up here to speak, she started off by saying that the Western Cape offers, in her words, “the most incredible contrast.” Then she repeated herself and said, “the most extraordinary contrast”. I sat there, looked around and thought that she was referring to the fact that the only female MECs are from the province of the Western Cape, yet indeed she was referring to something else. It was only then that I realised that we are quite unbalanced in terms of our MECs.
In that regard, let me inform the House that in the department we’ve made a number of key appointments over the past few months to address that imbalance. We appointed people to key positions not because they were women, but because they were extraordinarily competent. A number of chairpersons of some of the public entities are women, and women occupy other positions in the department as well. [Applause.]
Let me, secondly, deal with the issue of the long-term fishing rights. We started off last year with a series of izimbizo, that is, public meetings. We’ve now made available for public comment a number of proposals and are still considering the origin of those ideas for which we now get praise and credit. Some ideas did not originate with us, but actually originated from those imbizos.
People came forward and asked us please to reconsider the application fee system and to please consider that. So what we are actually doing now is what people proposed that we should consider. [Applause.]
In that regard, we have published an overarching fishing policy. We published 19 fishery-specific policies, because one size does not fit all in this industry. I think it is a good idea that we are moving in that direction.
Let me deal briefly with some of the issues raised by the member from the FF Plus, Dr Van Heerden, and by other members. One of those issues is our proposal to set aside a certain percentage for small and medium business.
We do not want to create economically unviable companies and vehicles, not at all. What we want to make sure of is that we do not forever limit access to those lucrative fisheries in category A and B to only the five or six big companies. We must create opportunities for other people also to get access and become medium and big players, if they have the ability to do that; and we think some of them actually do.
I think it is good that people always understand that there is competition, that the door must be open and that there is access for them through that door.
Let me also deal with the issue of transformation. Yes, it is a difficult issue. What we will not do this time around is to again accept anybody’s word, like we did the previous time. If they say to us: “We will do this”, this time we are going to hold them to their word.
I’m talking about established companies and interests. We will say to them: What did you do? Tell us about your record. Because, the previous time many companies promised that they would have the worker-share scheme for our workers. It never happened, and in many instances where it happened, it did not really make any change to the lives of those workers. So when we talk about previous track records, we want to see what interest those individual companies put on the table.
Let me just deal with the issue of the huge challenge in the fishing industry. In some of the meetings that we had with the fishing industry I said to some of the bigger companies: Now, please tell me, what are the weekly wages? Those of you who visited these fishing companies know that when you go there you see mostly women in white jackets, standing in long queues from early morning until early afternoon.
I said: Tell me, what are those people paid? They said the cost to the company is R900. I said: No, no, no, tell me what they take home on a Friday. They said: Anything between R400 and R480 a week. Then in one of the meetings I said, you know, you are getting paid. You earn R5 million a year, where is the balance?
Of course, we understand that when you have businessmen with initiative they must be well paid, and there is an international dimension to it. But really, we do need a better balance here. Therefore, with regard to worker- share schemes, I would like to say that we are going to take that very seriously; because we see many people who work in these factories their whole lives, and when they are old they have nothing to show for it. So this is something that we take seriously and that we will continue to take up further with the fishing industry. [Applause.]
Let me just deal with the issue of application fees. Up to now basically the system has been that in categories A and B, the very capital investment lucrative fisheries, the application fee was R6 000 and later on increased to R7 000. In categories C and D, the smaller fisheries, the fee was R500, sir, and it was later increased to R585.
But what happened is that everybody paid the same application fee; I&J paid R7 000, and so did much smaller companies. But we said, you know, that cannot be fair because it’s not right for the smaller person and the smaller company to subsidise the huge companies. Let us get a fairer system where you pay for what you actually get out of the system.
One of the very good proposals from one of the imbizos came from one person in Hermanus, who stood up and asked why we didn’t consider a two-phase system, and we accepted that proposal. We are now considering it where everybody pays a lower application fee, but only the people who are successful, who get the right or the quota, pay the full application fee. That is one proposal.
For example, previously in traditional line fishing the application fee was R7 000, and now we have reduced it to only R400. However, only the successful applicants, not the crewmembers, will now pay. They will pay R204 per crewmember, and that is a much fairer system. We have reduced the fee, for instance, for the smaller white mussels and oyster fisheries, from R585 to only R100.
I have referred to traditional line fishing. For hand-line hake the fee has been reduced from R7 000 to R1 300; for the West Coast rock lobster offshore the fee has been reduced from R7 000 to R2 000 and for near shore from R585 to R300. What we are saying with this is that we cannot have application fees so high that you already cancel out many people before they even start running. So this is a much fairer system.
I now come to the issue of tourism, which was raised by Mr Mashamba. I was born close to Soekmekaar, Mr Mashamba, up in Limpopo. I’m a newcomer to the Western Cape. So I know the province very well as I grew up there.
You referred to tourism and used the words: “With regard to hunting, it is a white man’s industry.” To a large extent it is true, and that is the reason why, as you said, we will be announcing the BEE scorecard in May at the Tourism Indaba.
Tomorrow morning we will be launching the Sho’t Left Campaign, related to domestic tourism. Our estimation is that there are 6,3 million South Africans who can already afford to go on holiday in our own country, but they do not do so. Why don’t they do so? Going on holiday was not the part of their upbringing.
Well, I know because I also grew up that way. I never used to go on holiday. You know, when people go to . . . , what is that place on the other side of Middelburg called? Is it Badplaas? It is a nice tourism facility, but many people say: You know, when I go to Badplaas, will I be treated well? Will people treat me with respect? That is another emotional barrier. As part of this campaign we say to people: You know, you can go there. Let us tell you what you will get when you arrive at Badplaas, or wherever.
Domestic tourism, as I have said, is already worth R47 billion. What many people do not know is that apart from domestic tourism, foreign tourism is already earning us more in terms of foreign earnings than gold is earning this country. So foreign tourism is our new gold.
The second last issue that I would like to refer to is the issue that the hon member Krumbock raised with regard to the EIAs, the Environmental Impact Assessments. We are taking two initiatives in that regard. The one is the new EIA regulations. It has been published for public comment and we are finalising it. It will come into force during May or June.
We have almost finalised the regulations. The regulations will bring about streamlining, cut some red tape, bring about what I think is very necessary, namely time frames. It is unacceptable that people apply and wait in some provinces for two or three years before they get an answer. If the answer is no, people must get that “no” answer. You cannot expect people who apply to wait for two or three years; it’s unfair.
But, there is another dimension, and that is the Environmental Impact Assessment practitioners. We invited representatives from the industry to meet with us a few weeks ago, because that is where many of the problems arise that the hon Mr Krumbock referred to.
What do you need to be an EIA practitioner in this country? It’s like a politician or a journalist. If you are not successful somewhere else, you become maybe a politician or a journalist. When I was an academic they always said that professors are practical examples of people who have failed in life. Sometimes I get the impression, with regard to this industry, that some of the people there are only there because they are not successful somewhere else. We must raise the standards in that industry. We should say to them: We give you six months to come back to us and tell us how you are going to regulate this industry. If you do not do it, we are going to do it for you. You know, as government we do not want to unilaterally regulate for them, but if they do not, we will do it for them.
We also met with the chairperson of the interim certification board and with other representatives. I’m quite sure we will take this matter forward and we will start addressing what I think is a huge problem in this industry.
Maybe the last issue that I should refer to is the national parks - some members referred to that - and also to the transfrontier parks. We will continue to make announcements with regard to the national parks and the transfrontier parks.
We are working very well with our neighbouring countries to make sure that we give content to that vision that President Mandela announced and President Mbeki is now taking further. But if you think about it, we promised Africa and the neighbouring countries to host the World Cup in
- It is not only a South African World Cup, but it is an African World Cup.
What are we going to do to convince other people on this continent that those were not only empty words? The one mechanism that we have available is these transfrontier parks. We must get to the games all the tourists coming here, and then out to the national parks and the transfrontier parks. These parks will be a very important mechanism to make sure that our neighbouring countries also feel that it is their World Cup and that they share in the benefits thereof. I thank the members for a very good debate. Thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Before I officially adjourn the House, hon Minister, I would like to thank you on behalf of this august House for the interest that you have shown, not only by coming to present the Budget Vote, but with respect to all other activities that relate to the constitutional duty of this House. We are very thankful for that.
Debate concluded.
The Council adjourned at 17:28. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The Minister of Transport
Report and Financial Statements of the Road Accident Fund for 2003-
2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 33-2005].
- The Minister of Social Development
Report and Financial Statements of the National Development Agency
(NDA) for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2003-2004 [RP 157-2004].
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Council of Provinces
-
Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Desirability of the Restoration to the Office of Magistrate Mr PP Mkalipi, dated 10 March 2005:
The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs, having considered the report on the suspension from office of magistrate PP Mkalipi, tabled by the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development in terms of section 13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act 90 of 1993), reports as follows:
(1) The Select Committee noted from the report that the Magistrates Commission recommended that Mr Mkalipi be removed from the office of magistrate on account of incapacity to carry out the duties of his office efficiently.
(2) The Select Committee invited Mr Mkalipi to submit written representations to the Committee regarding the recommendation of the Magistrates Commission. Mr Mkalipi responded by indicating that he is ready to take up the office of magistrate again.
(3) The Select Committee noted that the report and the documents submitted in terms of the relevant regulations bear ample evidence that Mr Mkalipi is incapable of carrying out the duties of his office efficiently. There are numerous instances where case records kept by Mr Mkalipi were incomplete and/or reflected gross irregularities. Uncontested evidence exists that he committed gross procedural irregularities on numerous occasions and that he failed to furnish reasons for convictions and sentences on review or appeal in certain instances. Other uncontested evidence relates to nonobservance of official hours, lack of discipline, inadequate knowledge of civil adjudication and being inebriated whilst on official duty.
(4) In terms of section 13(4) (c ) of the Magistrates Act, 1993, Parliament must, as soon as is reasonably possible, pass a resolution as to whether or not the restoration of Mr Mkalipi to the office of magistrate is recommended. The Select Committee is of the opinion that there is no reason why the recommendation by the Magistrates Commission, namely that Mr Mkalipi should be removed from the office of magistrate, should not be followed and accordingly recommends that the Council resolve that Mr Mkalipi not be restored to the office of magistrate.
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Desirability of the Restoration to the Office of Magistrate Mr PW Phiri, dated 10 March 2005:
The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs, having considered the report on the suspension from office of magistrate PW Phiri, tabled by the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development in terms of section 13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act 90 of 1993), reports as follows:
(1) The Select Committee noted from the report that the Magistrates Commission recommended that Mr Phiri be removed from the office of magistrate on account of incapacity to carry out the duties of his office efficiently.
(2) The Select Committee invited Mr Phiri to submit written representations to the Committee regarding the recommendation of the Magistrates Commission. The Committee did not receive any response to the invitation.
(3) The Select Committee noted that the report and the documents submitted in terms of the relevant regulations bear ample evidence that Mr Phiri is incapable of carrying out the duties of his office efficiently. Mr Phiri repeatedly failed to send reviewable cases to the High Court timeously and repeatedly failed to respond to various queries by reviewing judges, resulting in failures of justice and causing prejudice to the accused persons concerned. He pleaded guilty to three charges of misconduct in this respect. His performance on the bench disclosed numerous, serious and profound irregularities. Numerous cases over which Mr Phiri presided had to be sent on special review and serious procedural irregularities were detected. Individual and formal training, guidance and counselling failed to achieve the desired effect and Mr Phiri repeatedly made the same mistakes and failed to adhere to time limits.
(4) In terms of section 13(4) (c ) of the Magistrates Act, 1993, Parliament must, as soon as is reasonably possible, pass a resolution as to whether or not the restoration of Mr Phiri to the office of magistrate is recommended. The Select Committee is of the opinion that there is no reason why the recommendation by the Magistrates Commission, namely that Mr Phiri should be removed from the office of magistrate, should not be followed and accordingly recommends that the Council resolve that Mr Phiri not be restored to the office of magistrate.
Report to be considered.