National Council of Provinces - 23 June 2005
THURSDAY, 23 JUNE 2005 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
____
The Council met at 14:03.
The Deputy 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.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Chairperson, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move:
That the Council –
(1) notes with concern the poor state of transformation of academic staff, in terms of the Employment Equity Act, Act 55 of 1998, by the Universities of the Free State, Stellenbosch, North West, Pretoria and Johannesburg; (2) notes that the majority of academic positions at these and other universities are still occupied by white males; (3) believes that the transformation of tertiary institutions is essential in transforming society, as these institutions shape the paradigms of the next generation;
(4) urges these universities to display their belief in their own graduates by identifying and actively recruiting them as academic staff; and
5) further requests the Select Committee on Education and Recreation
to conduct public hearings determining why this dire situation
exists 11 years after democracy, and what these institutions plan
to do about it.
Ms J F TERBLANCHE: I hereby give notice that I shall move:
That the Council –
(1) notes-
(a) the ANC’s attempts to portray the sitting of Parliament in
Kliptown for three hours next Monday as a non-party activity;
(b) that the information booklet on this event, given to MPs,
is in the ANC colours of yellow, green and black;
(c) that the logo used to symbolise this event is taken
from the ANC’s party logo;
(d) that the DA does not object to the Freedom Charter
itself, but to the manner in which the ANC has revived it at
the taxpayer’s expense to suit its own agenda; and
(2) therefore condemns the ANC’s plan to spend far more than R5 million of the taxpayer’s money to publicise its own election campaign theme.
[Applause.] [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, the People’s Assembly is not driven by the ANC but is driven by the presiding officers. That motion is very irrelevant and it does not hold water.
Mr D J BOTHA: Agbare Voorsitter, ek stel sonder kennisgewing voor:
Dat die Huis –
(1) kennis neem –
(a) van die sinlose, ongegronde aanval op die Vryheidsmanifes deur
lede van die DA in hierdie Huis en ook in die Nasionale
Vergadering;
(b) dat dit ’n direkte aanval is op die moraliteit en aspirasies van
alle Suid-Afrikaners wat 50 jaar gelede verklaar het dat Suid-
Afrika aan almal behoort wat daarin woon, wit en swart;
(c) dat die DA geen reg het om namens alle blanke Suid-Afrikaners te
praat nie, en nog minder namens die meerderheid van die
Afrikaners;
(d) dat dit nog ’n bewys is dat die DA steeds nie in voeling is met
die meeste mense in die land nie, en steeds poog om die
verlede te herroep; en
(2) die stelling van die DA verwerp met die minagting wat dit verdien. (Translation of Afrikaans motion follows.)
[Mr D J Botha: Hon Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move:
That the Council –
(1) notes –
(a) the senseless and unfounded attack on the Freedom Charter by
members of the DA in this Council as well as in the National
Assembly;
(b) that this is a direct attack on the morality and aspirations of
all South Africans, who declared 50 years ago that “South
Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white”;
(c) that the DA has no right to speak on behalf of all South
Africans, and even less on behalf of the majority of all
Afrikaners; and
(d) that this is further proof that the DA is still out of touch
with the majority of the people in the country and is still
attempting to recall the past; and
(2) rejects the statements by the DA with the contempt they deserve.]
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): Is there any objection to the motion?
Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Yes, Chairperson, the DA objects.
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): In the light of the objection, the motion may not be proceeded with. [Applause.] The motion without notice will now become a notice of motion.
PASSING AWAY OF INKOSI MTHOLENI MBUYAZI
(Draft Resolution)
Nk A N T MCHUNU: Sihlalo, ngiphakamisa ngaphandle kwesaziso:
Ukuthi lo Mkhandlu–
(1) uzwakalisa ukudabuka nokushaqeka okukhulu ngokukhothama kweNkosi uMtholeni Mbuyazi waKwaMbonambi, Empangeni;
(2) uzwakalisa ukudabuka ngokuzwa ukuthi inkosi kade igula njengoba isishiye emhlabeni namhlanje ekuseni;
(3) ukhalela umndeni nabangani, isizwe sonke saKwaMbonambi namakhosi onke aKwaZulu-Natali ngokulahlekelwa yinkosi ebikade isivuthwe kangaka, ikakhulukazi kulesi sikhathi lapho siwadinga kangaka amakhosi avuthiwe; futhi
(4) uthi emndenini: Lalani ngenxeba! (Translation of IsiZulu draft resolution follows.) [Ms A N T MCHUNU: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council –
(1) notes with shock and horror the passing away of iNkosi Mtholeni Mbuyazi of KwaMbonambi, Empangeni;
(2) expresses its sadness on learning that inkosi had been sick before passing away this morning;
(3) expresses its condolences to the family, friends, the whole nation of KwaMbonambi and amakhosi on their loss of an experienced inkosi, particularly in this period when we really need experienced amakhosi; and
(4) says to the family: May you be comforted!]
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
OLDER PERSONS BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, hon members, thanks for the opportunity to address the National Council of Provinces in the debate on the Older Persons Bill. The Older Persons Bill is a matter that is close to all our hearts because it speaks to an issue that is central to our self-determination and definition as a modern African society. The Bill is an opportunity for us to reaffirm the dignity of older people and thus to begin implementing programmes that fulfil the rights of older people, contained in our Constitution.
It is also an opportunity to reaffirm both the traditional esteem and status of older people, by promoting their independence, and active participation in society. I would therefore like to thank, upfront, all the concerned individual social service professionals, welfare organisations, government officials and members of the select committee, whose dedicated efforts have brought us to this point.
Age has never been a barrier to activism, and we will never forget that the current generation of older people were in the trenches of the resistance to apartheid. The Older Persons Bill is an overdue tribute to hundreds of thousands older people who, today, provide care and support to vulnerable and orphaned children. This testifies to both the strength and the challenges facing our society.
Three other features of modern South African society underline the importance of the Bill: the need to provide protection for older people, the operations of and circumstances in residential facilities for older people, and the need to provide more support for community-based care.
It is of critical importance that social policies recognise ageing as an integral part of life and human development. Policies on ageing cannot promote the wellbeing of older people if the premise is that ageing equals hardship and lack of opportunities to actively participate in community life. It is also important to acknowledge that many policies and programmes for older people are urban biased. The needs of older people living in rural and deep rural communities are often never addressed.
There is something else that I need to say at the beginning of this debate. The development of legislation has to take proper and full account of constraints in the capacity of provinces to implement desired programmes. A progressive and phased approach to implementing programmes that support active ageing, community-based services and monitoring and evaluation activities is imperative. The drafting and amendment of the Older Persons Bill has therefore paid due attention to issues of capacity and affordability.
We have, however, also borne in mind that, historically, services to older people have been deficient both in terms of actual service delivery and the allocation of funds. The process of drafting and amending the Older Persons Bill has also taken into account a number of other factors. Firstly, a significant percentage of the welfare service budget for older people has traditionally been spent on residential care for a minority of the ageing population, to the detriment of community-based services for the majority of our older people.
Secondly, historically, few or no services were provided to older people in rural and disadvantaged urban areas. Thirdly, there was the revelation by the ministerial committee of 2000 that the abuse and neglect of older people was widespread. Fourthly, it was reported that the proportion of people over 60 years of age is increasing, given the declining birth rate and the impact of HIV and Aids. Lastly, older people were increasingly taking on the role of caregivers.
The Older Persons Bill, in conjunction with other social development policies, is intended to ensure that the country begins closing gaps in service delivery. Those policies are intended to promote the active participation of older people in society, and also to provide them with the necessary care and protection. In addition, the Older Persons Bill especially addresses the regulation of facilities for older people, and specifies the various categories of older people in need of care and protection.
All of these issues, the intention of the legislation, the scope of service delivery, the capacity to implement and affordability, are canvassed and tested in the costing exercise that has been conducted by the Department of Social Development. Appropriate and approved budgetary provisions will be factored into the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework.
Older people are usually among the poorest groups in our society, and the Older Persons Bill, when passed by Parliament, will be implemented in the context of government’s poverty alleviation and eradication strategies. As announced earlier this year, government has now increased the old age grant to R780 a month. Further, as of April this year, old age grants were being provided to more than 2 million eligible poor people in our country.
Research studies have shown that these old age grants are usually used to meet the basic needs of all members of the household. All of this serves to underline the importance of dedicated programmes that address the developmental needs of older people. These programmes for the development of older people are specified in the Bill. Also specified are the community- based care and support programmes aimed at promoting and maintaining the independent functioning of older people in a community.
Further, in response to the work and recommendations of the ministerial committee on the abuse, neglect and ill-treatment of older persons, the Bill makes specific provision for the protection of older people. These provisions encompass a register of abuse, notification of abuse and enquiries into the accommodation or care of older people. The Bill thus places a substantial demand on social service professionals to investigate, report and take action when abuse occurs. This can only be done in a cost- effective manner if protection services are community-based.
I would like to conclude these opening remarks by highlighting the fact that the Older Persons Bill before the National Council of Provinces is the culmination of an extensive public consultation process. These consultative processes began in the build-up to our celebration of 10 years of democracy. We are now entering our second decade of democracy.
Although we have every reason to be proud of the historic achievements we accomplished during the first decade of democracy, the passage of the Older Persons Bill will enable us to extend the benefits of these achievements to many older people in our society. I therefore appeal to the members of the National Council of Provinces to support the Older Persons Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr B J TOLO: Deputy Chair, hon Minister, I would like to remind this House that the Chair of this committee is not well and therefore I am speaking here in her place, and not on her behalf.
This Bill has been with the NCOP select committee for quite some time. It is not because we were deliberately obstructing the passing of the Bill; nor is it because we could not comprehend the importance of overturning the widespread abuse of older persons that currently exist in our communities, across all the nine provinces. Our primary concern in this committee has been focused on how provinces will begin to effectively and efficiently implement all the provisions of the Bill. We did not wish to be in a situation where the very important imperatives of this Bill become irrelevant and gather dust on shelves because provinces could simply not afford to finance the Bill.
We have subsequently quite extensively consulted with the National Treasury, together with the Department of Social Development, and then waited for the costing exercise to be completed so that all of us from the provinces could fully comprehend what the impact of the passage of this Bill would be on the provincial budgets.
We do understand now that it will cost this government over R3 billion at 75% of unit cost and over R4 billion at 100% per unit cost for the 2005-06 financial year, with the cost estimates rising at a 5% inflation rate per annum in every subsequent year in the MTEF budget period. These estimates include programmes such as residential care, integrated community care, outreach, home-based care, poverty relief, economic empowerment, and capital and administrative costs at national and provincial levels.
We have also heard provinces expressing their concerns not necessarily with regard to the contents of the Bill but with the cost implications of the Bill. From the negotiating and final mandates, we understand that provincial budgets are not yet aligned to accommodate such a marked increase and will not be in a position to do so unless something is done by National Treasury to be able to help them.
The last thing that provinces need at this juncture is unfunded mandates that will put heavy pressure on the provincial fiscus that is already overburdened with social services needs. As this select committee, we pledge to monitor the implementation of this Bill and to alert provinces and the national department as soon as we pick up difficulties. We also invite provinces to bring any challenges to our immediate attention so that we can collectively solve blockages if they occur.
We are aware that the Aged Persons Act, Act 81 of 1967, is completely outdated and not in keeping with the transformation needs of our country post-1994. This Act addressed only 2% of the older persons in mainly white institutions, leaving the vast majority of our elder persons without appropriate state care. Older persons were viewed as passive participants in life and not valued for contributions they make and continue to make in the autumn of their lives.
The new Bill seeks to make a paradigm shift towards a developmental view on ageing. It recognises the dynamic role of communities and elder persons as an integral component within those communities, and not isolated from them. In addition, the Bill recognises our international obligations as outlined in the UN Declaration 46 of 1991, which makes provision for the protection of the rights and dignity of older persons.
The Bill also tries to incorporate much of the policy that was formulated through workshops, listening-to-people campaigns and other interactions with stakeholders at national government, provincial legislatures and at local level since 1999.
The role of older persons has changed fundamentally from the traditional roles. With the onset of the HIV/Aids pandemic in our country, many grandparents have increasingly become primary care-givers and, as a result, need adequate support from the state in their new role as second-time parents.
Through this Bill we demonstrate our commitment as government to building a caring and integrated system of social development services that will facilitate human development and improve the quality of life of older persons. The Bill seeks to increase and enhance the capacity of older persons to support themselves and to contribute to the wellbeing of those around them. The objectives of the Bill are therefore the following: firstly, to maintain, increase and promote the status, wellbeing, safety and security of older persons; secondly, to maintain and protect the rights of older persons as recipients of services; thirdly, to regulate the registration of facilities for older persons; and, fourthly, to combat the abuse of older persons.
All the provisions of this Bill demonstrate a zero-tolerance level for any abuse whatsoever towards elder persons, whether it be through discriminatory admission policies at private or public institutions, abuse by caregivers, operation of an unregistered facility and its linked pitfalls or unwarranted overcrowding and inhuman living conditions. All these are regarded as offences, and whoever contravenes these provisions will feel the full might of the law.
Clause 14 is of particular importance since it details the procedure for bringing a case before a court or judicial hearing to determine if abuse has occurred. This clause also anticipates refusal to testify by a person who is taking care of an older person, and as a consequence allows a social worker access to the facility to do an independent investigation.
In conclusion, this Bill is absolutely necessary to stop the abuse of older persons and to ensure that there is equity in the allocation of accommodation to all older persons, regardless of race, colour, creed or economic circumstances. Our only concern is with regard to its implementation.
We were persuaded by reports regarding the escalating abuse of older persons and the paucity of an adequate legislative framework when making our final determination on the passing of this Bill. We believe that this legislative framework offering comprehensive protection to our older persons far outweighed any other considerations.
The Select Committee on Social Services supports the Older Persons Bill, and persuades this House to pass the Bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. [Applause.]
Ms H LAMOELA: Chairperson, hon Ministers and hon members, I will start off by thanking delegates from Kwazulu-Natal for their valuable input regarding this Bill. It shows that they have given themselves enough time to look into the Bill thoroughly - its implications as well as some of its unintended consequences. It is my hope and belief that all other provinces will do the same.
I want to quote from the Madrid International Action Plan on Ageing, as follows: “Ageing is not simply an issue of social security and welfare, but of overall development and economic policy.” This statement says it all, and the DA concurs. We should not be limited to the concept of social security but adopt a developmental approach.
The Constitution outlaws discrimination of all types as previously encoded in our Statute Book. There is also a provision for lawful or fair discrimination, which is justifiable even before the Constitutional Court.
The definition of age in this Bill discriminates against men. It allows them to be classified as old when they attain the age of 65 years, while women reach old age at 60 years. The explanation provided by officials to justify this discrimination is based on the dynamics of a physiological or biological approach. The Constitution of this country does not provide for that.
There is also an argument that if age is equalled in either way, it will have implications with regard to the Social Security Act, which defines older persons in a discriminatory manner. This definition had been there prior to our democracy and is being perpetuated by the ANC-controlled government.
Women are fighting for their rights and they are gradually being accorded them. At the same time, men’s rights are being ignored. It is my submission that if a change in definition affects the Social Security Act it can be implemented in phases, just as happened with the child support grant that this department administers. It is appreciated that this Bill seeks to have these facilities inspected by social workers. The concern that I have is that there is still a critical shortage of social workers within the department and government as a whole. We have been told that new recruits will be brought on board to ensure that services are efficiently rendered.
Our grannies are abused physically, and sometimes sexually, every second, minute, hour, day, week or month without any help on site. They are taking care of our children on the little that they receive as a social grant. They should not be made to take on a responsibility that is not theirs on behalf of parents that shun their obligation. They have played their part and should be allowed to take the last walk of their lives with dignity. They remain an invaluable part of our society, because without them our country has no future and is poorer.
The rural areas hardly have any facilities. If they exist, they are of a very poor standard. A lot of infrastructural investment is needed in these areas to ensure that older persons are not transported to and fro, as this is very strenuous for them.
The costing of this Bill was done, but have provinces been given enough time to assess it? Health officers are needed to ensure that older persons’ health is taken care of. There is a general shortage of health officers in this country, and I just hope that these facilities won’t experience a lack of services as we find in the clinics in some rural areas.
Let us not take shortcuts through this Bill, but let us apply our minds and close all the loopholes that exist because the Bill strives to service our parents and grannies in a respectful way. The DA wants to see the Bill implemented in the manner that the Madrid plan provided for in terms of the definition of the concept of ageing.
We need to provide security mechanisms that will deter officials and other people that are so used to taking money from state coffers for their own use. There is a tendency that users or operators of systems bypass security mechanisms for their own benefit, yet they are paid a salary at the end of the month.
South Africa cannot and will not tolerate corruption of any kind. The President, hon Thabo Mbeki, has said it, acted on it, and we believe that he will continue in this direction for the good of our country, within and outside our borders. I thank you. [Applause.]
Ms A N T MCHUNU: Chairperson, hon Minister, Deputy Minister, hon MECs and provincial chairpersons - if they are present here - I would like to thank the Chairperson of the Select Committee on Social Services and the hon members of the committee for the great work that they have done in piloting this Bill. I would also like to thank the staff under the director-general for the great service they perform in order to facilitate delivery to our constituencies. I would also like to thank the hon members of this upper House for their presence.
Hon Ms Lamoela, I would like to thank you for the tribute you have paid to KwaZulu-Natal for our input regarding this Bill. We are one of two provinces where there is unity in diversity. We fight, but we work and monitor one another. If many parties participate, you know that the work will get done. So thank you so much for paying that tribute.
The Older Persons Bill has good principles relating to older persons in urban and rural areas. Under clause 1, the definition of “abuse” could cover older persons who are denied social security simply because they do not know their ages. These are sad cases of older persons who are referred from one department to another to ascertain their ages. They end up being referred to doctors who have to look at their teeth.
In one instance an older person, after being referred by the Home Affairs officials, was verbally informed that no doctor did such thing in that hospital. This older person was born in 1939, but quick-fix officials gave her the assumed date of birth of 1956 and she was issued an identity document. There has been no solution to her social security grant application up to now. Another older person was born in 1919 but she does not get a social security grant although people have tried to help her. These are the things that we need to look at, because they in fact constitute abuse of older persons.
The other abuse, of late, is that of young adults or the youth who return to their parents to be nursed by them when they get very ill from HIV/Aids. As such, quite a number of these older persons have died of Aids as a result of caring for their children. This type of abuse needs to be addressed by perhaps ensuring that a grant is given to people who care for those with a chronic illness, and it should be more than the amount of R150 that is given out at the moment.
Concerns have been raised regarding certain clauses of the Bill but the officials have incorporated those very, very well. So the work done by the director-general and the social welfare staff is greatly appreciated.
Unemployment has caused a baby boom, because active young men have nothing to do but to admire young beautiful women. In so doing, the older persons get the additional duty of looking after babies and children, as some of their mothers are still learners.
Provision of multipurpose community centres will be a great relief to older persons if provision for child care is to be included. Older persons are consultants, and they would like to be used as such. These services can be provided for free or voluntarily – older persons are very good volunteers. They can man our community centres and teach our youth crafts, as well as make an input regarding moral regeneration.
All said and done, the question of the financial implications for the state arises. As stated by the hon Minister of Finance, provinces and municipalities are at the front line of providing the many services required by our people. The department has an equitable share budget of R135 billion in its coffers, out of which R75 billion will be allocated as conditional grants by the national department. We have a question mark as to how much is going to be allocated for the implementation of this Bill. Therefore, the National Treasury needs to inform this House in the Medium- Term Expenditure Framework how much it is going to give us.
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): Hon member, your time has expired.
Ms A N T MCHUNU: The principles are okay, but the IFP does not support this Bill, simply because the funding mandate is not clear. Thank you very much.
Mr K SINCLAIR: Deputy Chairperson, old age is a time when a person’s contribution to society is acknowledged and valued. In poor communities, old people make a valuable contribution to households as caregivers and nourishers of children, people with disabilities and those affected by and infected with HIV and Aids. This Bill seeks to maintain and increase the capacity of older persons to support and take care of themselves and to contribute to the wellbeing of those around them.
This Bill commenced through policy processes and legislation during the International Year of Older Persons in 1999. The ANC-led government and a group of stakeholders agreed to commemorate the international year by developing programmes that would make a difference in the lives of older persons. However, the fact that we follow the vision of the Freedom Charter, which spells out that there shall be security and comfort for all our people, meant that these programmes had to continue after the International Year of Older Persons.
The more I listen to the DA, the less I understand them. This afternoon the hon member of the DA, who doesn’t know what stands in the Freedom Charter, tried to convince us that it was not necessary to have gone to Kliptown. [Interjections.]
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): That hon member is not interjecting but conversing. Continue with your speech, hon member.
Mr K SINCLAIR: Not very long ago, the same DA wanted people who support the Freedom Charter to vote for them. Now, I don’t know; I get confused. [Interjections.] Just a few minutes back, the hon Lamoela congratulated the hon President of this country, but yesterday they said that our President and our country were corrupt, and that we were bad. [Interjections.] That’s the reality. So, maybe for once the DA should start speaking out of one mouth. [Interjections.]
As part of the contribution to the International Year of Older Persons, stakeholders agreed on the development of legislation for older persons. [Interjections.]
THE PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): Order! You may not converse aloud while a member is speaking.
Mr G R KRUMBOCK: We were interjecting.
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): You were not interjecting, you were conversing. Thank you. Hon member, you may continue with your speech.
Mr K SINCLAIR: Chairperson, the national department, provincial departments and people from NGOs, faith-based organisations and CBOs involved in the field of ageing, as well as older persons themselves, prepared a draft policy and a draft Bill under the auspices of the national department.
In line with the ideal of our people’s government, as expressed in the visionary Freedom Charter, this Bill is the result of democratic policymaking and people’s participation in legislation. No one dares deny or refute this. Government and civil society organisations took part in numerous consultative processes at both national and provincial levels.
In conclusion, I think it’s necessary that, on behalf of the NNP, we also raise the concern in terms of the budgetary processes. If we want to achieve the very noble initiatives set out in this Bill, it’s necessary that we must make sure that the provinces can afford it. I thank you. [Applause.]
Ms J WITBOOI (Western Cape): Chairperson, Minister, Deputy Minister, members of the House, thank you for allowing us to participate in this important debate. As we continue to strive for the provision of a better life for all South Africans, we also have a constitutional obligation to look after and take care of our grandfathers and grandmothers. A nation that neglects its senior citizens is indeed bound to be doomed.
Last week, millions of South Africans, throughout our country, commemorated the important and historic day of June 16 in memory of those young people who were brutally murdered by forces of evil. The most significant aspect of this event is that the remarkable spirit and energy which young people rallied then should, 29 years later, serve as an inspiration for fighting for socio-economic matters affecting South Africa’s elderly.
As we all know, we committed the first 10 years of our freedom and democracy to the establishment and introduction of policy and a legislative framework aimed at transforming our country. Similarly, the next decade demands that we actually translate these pieces of legislation into reality for our people. One of these laws is the Older Persons Bill.
Our constitutional mandate is to care for, protect and develop our vulnerable people, including older persons. As a result, legislation to entrench the rights and protection of older persons has been in existence since 1994, but it has not been effective in protecting their rights in our society.
The Older Persons Bill, gazetted in August 2003, proposes a number of changes in order to redress the plight of older persons. In addition, the Bill seeks to shift services from an institutional model to a community- based model to ensure that older persons remain in the community, with their families, for as long as they possibly can.
Other changes proposed by the Bill are the promotion of the rights of older persons and ensuring that basic services are made accessible to those most in need. The Bill seeks to set up a register of abuse and to establish processes and procedures to monitor and assess the application of the legislation.
Vulnerable older persons are determined by their eligibility for social security benefits. However, according to social security statistics, only 86,9% of the eligible number of older persons received social security grants at the end of 2004. Older persons receive a host of services that are provided by the non-profit organisations sector, as well as government departments.
Broadly speaking, there are two major types of services, namely residential care services and community-based services. Depending on the frailty of older persons, services offered range from residential facilities, service centres, assisting, living programmes and luncheon clubs. Other types of community-based services, such as counselling and social stimulation, are rendered by government departments and NGOs.
The Western Cape is regarded as one of the wealthiest provinces with regard to residential facilities for older persons. At any given time, there will always be older persons who require residential care. A 2% target has been set for older persons to be accommodated in residential facilities as per government norm.
Presently, 3,4% of vulnerable older persons are being cared for in residential facilities in the Western Cape. The funding of older persons being cared for in these homes is currently allocated according to a slide scale, with the most vulnerable and frail ones receiving the highest amount of the unit cost. It is approximately R1 200 per month. The financing of basic care for residential care services, as determined by the costing of the Older Persons Bill, amounts to more than R1700.
While the Bill seeks to cover the total population of senior citizens through community-based services, the costing exercise of the Bill considers only 20% of vulnerable older persons due to affordability. The targeting of 20% of this category for community-based services is to ensure that the bulk of older persons remain independent and at the highest possible level of functioning, within a community, through promoting development and independent social functioning.
Presently, only 3,9% of vulnerable older persons is being cared for in community-based care facilities or service centres in the Western Cape. Community-based services have not developed at the pace at which it was anticipated. The development of such services will have to be accelerated by the department of social services, if poverty alleviation is to meet the challenges posed by a growing ageing population and past imbalances in service provision are to be redressed. This will also be in line with the international policy obligations adopted at the Second World Assembly on Ageing in Madrid in 2002, and is aimed at meeting the needs of South Africa’s older persons.
This programme is seen as a more viable alternative to institutional care for those older persons who require specific health and other specialised services, as they remain in the community. This programme allows such older persons to continue to enjoy family life. The targeted coverage of this programme is higher than that for residential care and is less costly than the latter – presuming that this will gradually become the programme of choice for older persons and government.
Presently, home-based care is primarily being implemented by the Department of Health in the Western Cape. Thus it is difficult to determine which percentage of vulnerable older persons is being cared for via this service in the Western Cape. The purpose of the introduction of this programme is to meet the provisions of the Bill to increase the longevity of older persons in terms of productivity and social functioning. The targeted numbers are not as high as that of all other programmes, as the outcome and impact of this programme is still unknown. Lessons learnt in the first years of implementation must inform the targeted coverage for subsequent years.
The first chapter of the Older Persons Bill deals with programmes for the development of older persons. This chapter was also specifically developed to align the legislation with the Madrid Plan of Action on Ageing. Programmes for development include economic empowerment programmes. The current reality in South Africa is that many older persons are fulfilling roles such as that of caregivers and second-time parents. These older persons can also be supported by the implementation of economic empowerment and development programmes.
The key consideration in the Bill is care, protection and development of older persons within a community setting. While government must continue to invest in non-community-based programmes and targeted services, the prioritisation of integrated, community-based programmes must drive its financing and implementation for years to come. This is the only means to redress historical inequities. Older persons should be kept within families and communities as long as possible. [Time expired.] I thank you. [Applause.]
The PERMANENT DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P Hollander): I would like to draw the attention of the members to Rule 31 - hon Mzizi has walked about thrice in the passages of this Hall. [Laughter.] Rule 31 says:
A member of the Council may not pass between the Chair and a member
addressing the Chair, pass between the Chair and the Table, or stand in
any of the passages in the Chamber.
I thank you. [Laughter.]
Ms N M MADLALA: Chairperson, Minister, hon members, distinguished guests, in South Africa, during the apartheid era, gross injustices were practised through the brutal dislocation of vast numbers of people, especially black, coloured and Indian communities, from their places of birth to wherever the government of the day decided to relocate them. Families were broken up and older persons were forced to leave areas where they had worked and lived all their lives, and moved to areas where basic services and support systems were nonexistent or inadequate.
While there was little or no provision for these older persons, white older persons had access to a wide range of quality services. The excuse given for this gross injustice was that in black communities older persons were cared for in the extended family system. This kind of discriminatory practice has changed since the ANC government took control in 1994.
This Older Persons Bill continues in the ANC tradition of correcting the imbalances of the apartheid past. This is a process which begun with our Freedom Charter in 1955 and was taken further in our Reconstruction and Development Programme. It is contained within our 1996 Constitution and is followed through in all legislation, particularly those pieces of legislation pertaining to the Department of Social Development.
Our Freedom Charter states unequivocally that there shall be houses, security and comfort. This means that all people shall have the right to live where they choose, the right to decent housing and to bringing up their families in comfort and security. Additionally, the Freedom Charter meant that the aged, orphans, disabled and the sick shall be cared for by the state. Even the South African housing policy is guided by section 26 of the Constitution, which states that everyone has the right to adequate housing.
The White Paper on Housing, 1994, recognises special housing needs, including those which are required by older persons. This Bill therefore continues to fulfil its ANC-led government’s mandate of caring for the most vulnerable of our citizens through the provision of support services for older persons, which range from independent living at one end to institutional care at the other end.
The support system envisaged in this Bill includes targeting those in sheltered or assisted living conditions and those dependent on community and home-based care. The idea of the Bill is to be as inclusive as possible and in so doing create a wide safety net which homes in on vulnerable older persons, wherever they find themselves.
The ANC knows that this is a mammoth turnaround task for the Department of Social Development, especially given the current reality of retirement villages that were built for those with higher income or with investment portfolios, which crudely translates into exclusively white retirement villages. Our people, who fall into the low or no-income bracket, never had a snowball’s chance in hell of being accommodated in these institutions; so none was ever provided by the previous regime.
The consequences of the continuing shortage of public sheltered accommodation for older persons has led to the unfortunate mushrooming of private unregistered homes for elder persons in some urban areas. In these institutions food and accommodation are provided, subject to the older persons handing over their old age pensions. However, living conditions in some of these homes are far from satisfactory; although, in terms of existing legislation, they should be registered and inspected.
UN Resolution 46/91 says that there is a need for community-based services for older persons to enable them to remain independent for as long as possible. These community-based care services should include meals on wheels, home help services to assist with household needs, laundry services in cases of incontinence, day care for older persons, transport to clinics and hospitals, and comprehensive health care.
The Department of Social Development is indeed faced with the major task of providing such services to a very large number of vulnerable older persons, especially those vulnerable ones who already qualify for the older persons grant. It is imperative therefore that the department ensures that existing facilities for older persons are utilised and managed as multipurpose community centres in collaboration with other sectors.
Poorly serviced communities should be identified and assisted so as to develop services and upgrade facilities. Caregivers should be trained in giving appropriate care for older persons, based on sound Batho Pele principles. Provinces reported that in 1998-99 some 474 homes were subsidised and the overall capacity equalled 42,9 persons for each home. There were a further seven state-run homes with a capacity to house approximately 1 000 older persons.
If one considers that according to the Department of Social Development’s table regarding distribution of vulnerable older persons, which indicates that by 2001 we had 2,8 million persons falling into this category, then it becomes clear that with the status quo we are only reaching a very small number of older persons. The guesstimate for this year is 3,3 persons and the social security statistics indicate that we were reaching 86,9% of the vulnerable older persons by 2004. So while we are reaching a significant number of older persons, we are not reaching them in terms of our additional support and care services.
The distribution of old age residential facilities is predominantly in the wealthier provinces like Gauteng and the Western Cape, with the biggest lack of facilities in the poorer provinces such as Limpopo. In 2002, over R11 million had been paid out of lotto proceeds by Uthingo to old age facilities mainly in Gauteng, the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. In Gauteng we have 197 facilities, 110 subsidised facilities and the total capacity is 14,200. This number represents a drop in the ocean when one considers that Gauteng has approximately 500 000 identified vulnerable older persons who qualify for social security grants.
Gauteng’s department of social development has allocated R101,3 million to this programme for the financial year 2005-06. With this money it aims to fund the following: establish 15 programmes to support the elderly; establish 120 service centres; and attend to 100% of all reported cases of abuse of the elderly. Gauteng is striving towards balancing the spread of resources in terms of distribution of old age homes, as only 12 of the 90 frail-care residential facilities are located in disadvantaged areas.
The ANC supports the Older Persons Bill, but we believe that the implementation of this Bill needs to be carefully monitored and supported by the National Treasury. I thank you. [Applause.]
Rre J O TLHAGALE: Motlotlegi Modulasetulo, Tona le ntlo e e tlotlegang, Molaotlhomo o re o sekasekang gompieno ke wa botlhokwa mo matshelong a bagodi ba rona. Maikemisetso a one jaaka o tlhagisiwa mo setlhogong se se leele sa ona, ke go matlafatsa le go sireletsa bagodi, go tlotla maemo le ditshwanelo tsa bona le go tlhokomela gore ba bone pabalesego le tshireletso e e ba tshwanetseng.
Ga se bagodi botlhe ba ba palelwang ka ntlha ya bokoa jwa mmele. Bangwe ba bone ba santse ba itekanetse mme ba ka thusa mo go tlhokegang teng jaaka mo malapeng le mo makgotlheng. Mokgatlho wa tsosoloso ya maitsholo o tshwanetswe go engwa nokeng thata le go tshegediwa gonne ke ona o bopang tlotlano mo gare ga batho, mme motho yo o sa tlotleng bagodi ga se motho.
Ke rata go akgola Lefapha la Social Development le Tona ka go tlhama Molaotlhomo o, le ka ditshiamelo tsotlhe tse di tlisediwang bagodi ka ona. Re dumela gore matshelo a bona a tla tokafala ka ona. Re itumelela gore mo Molaotlhomong o, go na le thulaganyo ya dikotlhao tsa batho ba ba sotlang bagodi le gore maina a bona a tla kwalwa mo registareng e e tla tswelelang go ba latofatsa. Rona, ba UCDP, re dumalana le Molaotlhomo o. Ke a leboga. [Legofi.] (Translation of Setswana speech follows.)
[Mr O J TLHAGALE: Hon Chairperson, Minister and the honourable House, the Bill under discussion today is a very important document relating to elderly people. Its objectives, as outlined in its long title, is to empower the elderly and to show respect for their conditions and rights and further to see to it that they get the protection and security they deserve.
Not all of them are unable because of their physical condition. Some of them are still strong and fit, they can still assist where needs arise, like assisting with family responsibilities and in the tribal courts. Moral regeneration must be supported because it is the source of respect amongst people, and one who does not respect others is not regarded as a human being.
I would like to congratulate the Department of Social Development and its Minister on introducing this Bill, and on all the services rendered to our elders. We believe that this will better their lives. We are also happy that the Bill provides for the procedure to be followed in respect of punishing those who abuse the elderly, including that their names be noted in a register, which will be accessible to those who try cases. We, the UCDP, support this Bill.] [Applause.]]
Rev E ADOLPH: Chairperson, all of us in this House will have to acknowledge that it is inevitable: every day we come closer and closer to being defined as older persons. We will all become old, it is inevitable. And that is why it is imperative that ageing be part of human life. I am so thrilled with this Bill. It is long overdue that we protect and care for the elderly in this country, where we claim that we care for the elderly and the vulnerable.
This Bill is long overdue, and we are mindful that its purpose is to restore the dignity of the lives of our elderly. We all have to remember that it wasn’t so long ago that there was a great difference between money allocations for the elderly. Care was only given to white South Africans. The people in the rural areas suffered most. They became the poorest of the poor older persons. They suffered from malnutrition. They suffered because they didn’t have the basic community services such as running water and sanitation.
Now these basic services have been given to them, and the Bill protects their freedom as well. Our fathers, mothers and grannies suffered in silence. But, since 10 years ago, they have come into the main playing field of being taken care of because more than 2 million elderly people now benefit from pension and will benefit from the Older Persons Bill.
We are, however, mindful that there are certain challenges facing this Bill. It is not only the representatives of KwaZulu-Natal who objected or who were concerned about the financial predicaments regarding the Bill, we all were. But we said that despite the financial constraints within the MTEF, we needed to start somewhere to implement this Bill because we are obliged to protect our elderly people.
We are also mindful that this Bill is not clear with regard to discrimination against men, because men will be defined as having reached old age after the age of 65 years. We need to work on that as well because there is no discrimination in our Constitution. This Bill paves a road for taking care of and opening up facilities for all the people who live in South Africa, not only for whites. That is why we are becoming a caring society.
The Bill is also very clear about the abuse of elderly people. Regarding this issue, we have to teach our children to take care of the elderly people. In many instances, I have watched the pay points and there are vultures. When the elderly people get their pensions, they are immediately tackled by those people who want to grab their R780 concerning debt and so forth. We need to teach our children to take care of the elderly. If we don’t teach and transfer those values, we are bound to be poor elderly people. I thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister Dr Zola Skweyiya, distinguished special delegates, hon members, friends, colleagues and comrades, in the next three days South Africa and its people will be poised to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Freedom Charter: A programme outlining the socio-economic and political framework on the basis of which a free democratic, nonracial, nonsexist and prosperous South Africa is to be constructed.
I am happy and I welcome hon Terblanche’s acknowledgment that they are not necessarily against the Charter, but I am not sure what exactly it is that they are against as the DA.
This people’s Charter, which has become a touchstone for the fundamental transformation of our society from the legacy of apartheid colonialism, has proclaimed that, amongst others, and I quote: “There shall be houses, security and comfort!” Under this noble principle arises another fundamental proclamation, which essentially relates to the Bill before this august House this afternoon. It says, and I quote: “The aged, the orphans, the disabled and the sick shall be cared for by the state.”
Hon Minister, the 27 April 1994 democratic breakthrough ushered in a new democratic dispensation under the leadership of the ANC. This new democratic state took the injunctions of the Freedom Charter further by adopting the Constitution that entrenches fundamental human rights.
Against this background, I therefore rise on behalf of the ANC to welcome and support the passage of the Older Persons Bill which is before this House. Central to the mandate and the task of a developmental state is the creation of an enabling environment for the building of a caring society that fosters the spirit of love, respect and common brotherhood.
The Older Persons Bill is one critical piece of transformative legislation that seeks to deepen and accelerate the task of providing care and protection to our older persons by the state. This is in recognition of the critically important role and place of the older persons in our society. They constitute a critical reservoir of cultural, ethical and philosophical wisdom, which any society needs in its evolution and development.
There can be nothing truer than the saying that a nation that ignores its past deserves no future, and is thus doomed to fail. So there is no way, as a democratic and developmental state, that we are going to ignore and neglect those who brought us to where we are today, that is, older persons.
No one is better placed but older men and women, our grandmothers and grandfathers in our society, to serve as a transmission belt for values, norms and philosophy that define the identity of any nation. We can imagine what would have happened to us if there had not been that kind of dynamic assimilation of knowledge from one generation to another, which, in the African context, has been passed on to us or the lower generations by the older person. What kind of a nation and what kind of a society would we be? I don’t think there would be any difference between us as a human species and other nonhuman species.
It is in the consciousness and the embracing of a national identity that a country can define its position and destiny amongst the nation states. The Older Persons Bill seeks to protect and care for this reservoir of knowledge and strength in our society. Chapter 3 of the Bill deals with the rights of older persons in facilities and the prohibition of abuse of older persons. It also outlines the procedure for bringing persons who accommodate or care for older persons before magistrates; enquiry into accommodation or care for older persons; and deals with notification of abuse of older persons in need of care and protection.
In terms of notification of abuse of older persons, the Bill provides that any person who suspects that an older person is being abused or suffers from an abuse-related injury must immediately notify the director-general regarding his or her suspicion. This was never a culture in our society in the history of this country, so the passing of the Bill is a landmark in the history of our ongoing struggle for transformation.
Accordingly, this provision places an obligation on both the state and the community to co-operate in identifying the incidence of abuse against older persons. This places an obligation and challenge on the Department of Social Development and the state, in particular. The challenge is to step up efforts to educate the public about the rights of older persons, and the role of the state and the citizens in this regard, because there is no way, despite whatever amount of money we have, that this Bill can succeed without active participation of the communities where we are residing to ensure that the provisions of this Bill are adhered to.
This is clearly in line with the vision of our Reconstruction and Development Programme, which places the masses of our people at the centre of service delivery and transformation. It confronts the tradition of our people’s movement, the ANC, that the victory for freedom resides nowhere else, not in the wisdom of any leader, but within the masses of our people that we seek to liberate.
Through the passage of this Bill, our ANC government is declaring that no more shall our grandmothers and grandfathers be robbed of their pension grants by their grandchildren. No more shall our grandmothers and grandfathers be denied their human rights, both in their homes and private and public facilities of care. It declares that the abuse of elders is no longer going to be some sensational news in the print and electronic media, but something that the state is serious about eradicating in our social fabric.
Clearly, with the passage of this Bill, there has never been better and more interesting times for older persons to live in South Africa than today. One is quite shocked that the hon Minister might have been irritated at some stage with the protracted delays in considering this Bill, which the acting chairperson of the committee has attempted to explain.
The delays were essentially due to two related factors, which were, of course, not only necessary but also indispensable, because there is no way in which we could pass this Bill unless it had been scoped and costed. So those were the two critical areas. Since this is a section 76 Bill, which by implication and in all practical respects has to be implemented by provinces, it therefore occurred to the select committee that, before passing this Bill, it should be costed so that we avoid placing an undue burden on our provinces and opening up our government to unnecessary litigation, because we would be having a law that says, “This is what the state is supposed to do,” while on the other hand you don’t have the resources to carry that particular legal obligation.
So I must demystify the myth that has been created in this House by some hon members who find it opportune and fashionable to claim that it’s only because of their wisdom that the concerns around the costing and scoping of this Bill have been raised. I think that that was a general consensus, and it is fair that all of us must accede to that.
The position of allowing the department to do the costing of the Bill was accepted by all nine provinces. As to the length of the process of costing, the select committee obviously had no control in that process, and we therefore regret the delays in that regard, hon Minister. However, on the same note, we acknowledge the complexities the department had to go through in the costing process, given the complexity of the Bill itself. You know, it’s not easy to get all the information, data and statistics on hand, on the basis of which you are going to be able to say, “These are the kind of services that we are going to provide to this number of facilities and to this number of human beings.” So it’s a complex process.
As, and when, the implementation process of the Bill unfolds, the department will be able to take care of those things. So this does not necessitate a situation whereby as the legislature - the lawmakers and the representatives of our people - we should say that because we are not certain and have fear of the unknown that a particular process of costing has not been done to our satisfaction, we cannot pass this legislation.
I think, if we take that route, as opted for by the KwaZulu-Natal provincial legislature, we will actually be abdicating our revolutionary obligation. Because, our task here is nothing but to change, fundamentally, the conditions of the lives of our people – nothing else. This is not a profession, it’s a service.
It is our view that, regarding the costing process of the Bill, the national Department of Social Development was working in close collaboration with provinces to get the accurate data in terms of statistics that are relevant for that particular exercise. So I don’t think that that is fair. You know, at times we really need common sense to arrive at certain conclusions, and you don’t have to be a sophisticated university professor to do that.
I want to assume, based on my own common sense, that regarding whatever statistics the department of welfare got from the Free State, they never thumb-sucked those statistics. There was an interface that was systematic and coherent between the national department and the provincial department of social development. If there are weaknesses, those weaknesses cannot make us say that nothing has happened and therefore this Bill cannot be presented before this House. In that regard, we welcome the announcement by the Minister that the implementation of the Bill will be budgeted for within the framework of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, thus allowing for phased implementation.
I am tempted not to engage the KwaZulu-Natal position because of one primary reason, namely that there has been a rampant break and discontinuity in the information flow, you know, from KwaZulu-Natal. I must put this in context and state for the record: At one point they were represented by one person who raised a very robust argument before the select committee, and the select committee engaged that argument.
At another point, a new person came and introduced a completely new set of issues and a new set of debates. And, at the point when we finalised this Bill, we made it clear that we have respect for the right of anybody in any province to raise a dissenting view in so far as this Bill is concerned. We made it clear that we would welcome the sharing of wisdom of KwaZulu-Natal in this debate this afternoon on the issues that they have. Unfortunately, once more and for the record: They brought another completely new person who was never part and parcel of the deliberations and processes of the Bill. I thank you. The ANC supports the Bill. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Madam Chairperson, I rise again to thank the House for its patience and the hard work it has done in order to pass this Bill. Basically, we are aware of the complexities that they went through. This work was not easy and it mostly needed the co-operation of all provinces.
We have done whatever we could and we will continue to do so, working with the committee. Even those provinces that have not necessarily agreed, I hope we will meet them halfway – on condition that they also co-operate as much as possible on all the things that have been raised.
There are many other issues that have been raised. Quite obviously, we are aware that at the present moment we can’t claim that 100% of the people who are supposed to get their grants do get them, especially the elderly. But they have been the priority of the department since I came in there in 1999.
We would like to come back and say that we will be, and have been, able to ensure that each and every person who is entitled to a grant gets it. In order for us to be able to do that, we depend on almost all South Africans, especially members of Parliament and members of the NCOP, to be able to register or bring to registration points all those people who have not received their grants.
On the question of the difference regarding the age between men and women, that is 65 and 60 years, it’s quite a difficult issue. We understand that we all fought for equality. The Constitution demands that we must all be treated equally. You know the role that women play in society, even at home. Quite obviously, affirmative action should be put forward in order for them to be able to carry that out. And I think that that is happening throughout the world.
At the present moment, affirmative action is the basis of this Constitution. We know, and I am aware that there is a court case before the Constitutional Court on this issue. We will argue there. Those that are critical and want more affirmative action for men will have to come there and listen. But I think I also agree that all of us will have to work together and be able to achieve what is foreseen in this Bill. As you are part and parcel of South Africa, you saw the commission that we set up regarding the question of the abuse of elderly people.
With the passage of this Bill, we hope that we will be able to work together with all provinces and communities in order to be able to ensure that our elderly people – my age group – get the necessary services. We are working on that. We hope that by April next year we will have budgeted enough to satisfy that demand, especially concerning the rural areas of South Africa.
Once again, I want to thank the House for the support that they have given. There are a lot of implications and intricacies that we have to work together to resolve. The department alone can never be able to do that. We have to work with you and the civil society, especially the nongovernmental organisations. Clearly, in the rural areas of South Africa, it should be the faith-based organisations – the churches that work with us. Actually, they have done well so far.
We would not be where we are, had it not been for the religious faith-based organisations, the churches and the civil society as a whole. We hereby thank them for what they are doing and hope that we will be able to work with them further. Once again, thank you. [Applause.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon Minister. That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all the delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present? In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. I shall do this 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?
Mr A T MANYOSI: The Eastern Cape supports the Bill.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Vrystaat steun. [Free State supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Siyavuma. [We support.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal does not support it.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: ILimpopo iyayisekela. [Limpopo supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr K SINCLAIR: Ke ya rona. [Ditlatse.] [Ditsheho.] [We support.] [Applause.] [Laughter.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Ms J WITBOOI: We support.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, eight provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution. [Applause.]
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEES: Hon members, I am informed that there will be one speaker’s list for both the second and third orders.
TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
TAXATION LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Mr M C GOEIEMAN: Chairperson, my statement makes reference to both the taxation laws amendment Bills currently before the NCOP.
The first Bill, known as the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, is a money Bill and does the following. It amends the Transfer Duty Act so that property valued at less than R190 000 will not be subjected to transfer duty costs. It fixes the rates of normal tax payable by persons other than companies in respect of taxable income for the assessment year ending 28 February 2006, and by companies in respect of the taxable income during the 12 months, ending 31 March 2006. Also, it increases the primary and secondary rebates, and further regulates the taxation of travel allowances. Furthermore, it regulates the exemption in respect of interest and foreign dividends and, among others, it seeks to further regulate the provisions relating to small businesses or corporations.
The second amendment Bill before this House is known as the Taxation Laws Second Amendment Bill. It is classified as a section 75 Bill and deals with the administrative issues governing taxes in this country. The Bill seeks to amend the Customs and Excise Act of 1964 so as to further regulate an offence regarding the failure to export goods within a specific period. This implies that where the importer fails to export the goods before the period of 6 months, the importer shall cause such goods to be abandoned or destroyed.
The Bill amends the deadline for the exchange control amnesty. The original deadline for applications for the exchange control and related tax amnesty was 30 November 2003, and 29 February 2004 was the deadline for the submission of tax returns for 2003.
A number of tax advisers and publications advised that applicants should not submit their returns until such time as they had received confirmation that amnesty had been granted in the expectation that confirmation would be received before the deadline for returns. This was only possible in a very small number of cases, due to the immense interest in the amnesty and the extension of the deadline for applications for 29 February 2004.
A number of applicants followed this early advice, and overlooked the deadline for the tax returns. Instead of excluding them from the amnesty processes, it is proposed that they may submit their returns within a period of 30 days specified by the amnesty unit. The Bill will amend the Value Added Tax Act upon the introduction of the proposal that VAT returns must be submitted every four months instead of every two months. Small businesses regard the filing of VAT returns as a substantial part of their compliance cost. This year, the Minister of Finance announced in his Budget Review that as a further measure to keep that VAT compliance cost of small businesses to a minimum, and to assist with the cash flow in small businesses with an annual turnover of less than R1 million, they may elect to file a VAT return every four months instead of two months.
Many provisions of these two taxation laws amendment Bills were announced in the Minister of Finance’s Budget Speech in February this year.
On behalf of the Select Committee on Finance, one would want to make the following appeal: Let’s please submit our tax returns before 8 July 2005. Lastly, this particular select committee therefore recommends that this House endorse these two pieces of legislation. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon member. That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question in respect of the second order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declarations of vote, if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. Those in favour will say “Aye”.
HON MEMBERS: Aye.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Those against will say “No”. I think the ayes have it. The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: shall now put the question in respect of the third order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declarations of vote, if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. Those in favour will say “Aye”.
HON MEMBERS: Aye.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Those against will say “No”. I think the ayes have it. The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - Report on Public Hearings on THE Division of Revenue Bill
Mr Z S KOLWENI: Chairperson, hon members and my colleagues, it gives me great pleasure to address you on behalf of the Select Committee on Finance.
The select committee hosted public hearings on the Division of Revenue Bill from 2 March until 7 March 2005. These public hearings must be viewed as important instruments or tools for the Select Committee on Finance - broadly speaking, the NCOP - to exercise its oversight mandate.
Government remains committed to eradicating social exclusion, creating an environment conducive to the creation of more employment opportunities, reducing crime, and addressing the HIV and Aids pandemic. Central to the success of this commitment is the development of efficient Public Service and nation-building programmes.
Since programmes to meet these goals cut across all three spheres of government and often even across departments, they are most appropriately guided by policies set by the democratic government, which, in turn, is guided by the goals and objectives of the Freedom Charter.
The report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Public Hearings on the Division of Revenue Bill makes the explicit point that division of revenue is a tool that consolidates all the ideas of the Freedom Charter. It does this by giving expression to broad-based programmes in the national interest, as introduced by the government. This includes the prioritisation of the social sectors, that is, education, health and social welfare; expansion of the social safety net; nutrition, including food security; housing; sustainable infrastructure development at both provincial and municipal levels; and rural development.
One of the key reforms introduced in the national interest is a change in the way social grants are funded by centralising their funding from national equitable share. For sure, any new arrangement will produce new challenges. In this regard, allow me to mention two examples. The first one relates to the administration of the three different HIV/Aids conditional grants. Each of these grants is administered by a different national department namely Health, Education and Social Development.
Of necessity, each department lobbies for additional funding in order to administer its own HIV Aids grants programme. However, the point is that these departments do not adopt a holistic view of measures taken by one department in contributing to the national effort in combating the Aids epidemic. The synergy is greater than the contribution of the individual department to the national assault as imposed by this pandemic.
This brings us to the second concern that whilst government programmes are neatly demarcated into clusters, in practice a department does not work in active collaboration with other departments belonging to the same cluster. An important component of democracy is the manner in which national government produces laws and how national government interfaces with provincial government and local government.
All levels of government pass laws and relate directly to people. Of particular importance, however, is how the various levels of government relate to one another, how responsibilities are shared, and the extent to which the various spheres of government should work together effectively. This, in essence, refers to the manner in which conflicts and disputes are resolved during the stages through which legislation passes.
Conflict of interest may, for example, originate at provincial level. Different provinces may have varying opinions on the same subject. The select committee in such a situation becomes the venue or focus of the tabling of divergent views held by provinces. In addition, it may become a platform for the various spheres of government to work together effectively in the national interest when tackling contentious legislation.
With these few remarks, the Select Committee on Finance appeals to the House to endorse its report tabled in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports on Monday, 30 May 2005. I thank you, Chairperson.
Debate concluded.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Thank you, hon member. That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all the delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present?
Ngokwenqubomgomo, isigatshana sama-71, ngizoqala nginikeze izifundazwe ithuba lokubeka izimvo zazo ngevoti uma zifisa. Sizoqhubeka ngokuvotela umbuzo. Sizovota ngezifundazwe ngokweziqalo zamagama azo. Abaholi bamathimba ezifundazwe bazokhombisa kuSihlalo ukuthi ngabe bayavumelana noma abavumelani noma abazakuvota. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[In terms of section 71 of the Constitution, I shall firstly allow provinces to cast their votes, if they wish to do so. We shall now proceed to voting on the question. Provinces shall vote in alphabetical order. Delegation heads will indicate to the Chairperson whether they vote in favour or against or abstain.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Eastern Cape? Ms B N DLULANE: Siyavuma e-Eastern Cape. [Eastern Cape supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free state?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Free State supports.
The chaiRperson OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: IGauteng iyavuma, Sihlalo. [Gauteng agrees, Chairperson.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo steun. [Limpopo supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: IMpumalanga iyavuma. [Mpumalanga agrees.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr K SINCLAIR: Noord-Kaap steun. [Northern Cape supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North-West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: North-West ke a rona. [North-West agrees.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr N MACK: Wes-Kaap steun. [Western Cape supports.]
USIHLALO WAMAKOMIDI: Zonke izifundazwe ziyawusekela lo mbiko. [All provinces support the report.] I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution. [Applause.]
Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE – AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RSA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE – CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RSA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GABON FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RSA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND ON CAPITAL GAINS
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE – CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RSA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
Mr E M SOGONI: Chairperson, the Order Paper creates some confusion: it refers to an agreement and conventions. I think the confusion is just over terminology. In South Africa we have agreements. If you look at section 231 of the Constitution, it talks about agreements. Therefore we will refer to them as agreements.
The Reconstruction and Development Programme and the 2004 manifesto of the ANC committed our country to working with other countries of the world, particularly in Africa, to speed up economic integration and to strengthen democracy, peace, stability as well as economic growth and development through the New Partnership for Africa’s Development.
In order to contribute to the fight against underdevelopment, poverty and unemployment in South Africa, four new agreements have been concluded with Gabon, Ghana, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Turkey. The objective of these agreements is to eliminate double taxation and to prevent fiscal evasion; to create certainty in tax treatment; to reduce the withholding of taxes; to provide assistance in the collection of tax; and, finally, to provide a resolution of tax disputes and the interpretation thereof.
These agreements follow the OECD model convention, which forms the foundation for a vast majority of double taxation agreements, DTAs, worldwide. South Africa’s DTAs with African countries are especially very progressive, as they seek to promote and enhance economic activities between South Africa and other African countries. Though the OECD model convention sets 10% as a minimum that can be withheld, South Africa undertakes to withhold as little as 5% in tax dividends less than 25%.
Section 231(2) of the Constitution says:
An international agreement binds the Republic only after it has been approved by resolution in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces, unless it is an agreement referred to in subsection (3).
In line with this section, the Select Committee on Finance proposes adoption of these agreements. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question in respect of the fifth order. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present?
In accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Ke ya rona. [We support.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Free State supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: IGauteng iyavuma. [Gauteng supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal votes in favour.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports. The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr K SINCLAIR: Northern Cape supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West ke ya rona. [North West supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr N MACK: Wes-Kaap steun. [Western Cape supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the reports adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution. [Applause.]
Reports accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICES – ACCESSION TO THE CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS AGAINST THE SAFETY OF MARITIME NAVIGATION AND TO THE PROTOCOL FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS AGAINST THE SAFETY OF FIXED PLATFORMS LOCATED ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Chairperson, hon members, prior to 1994 this country was the outcast of the world. Since then, South Africa has taken its rightful place in the world and is now a respected member of the global community.
The ratification of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, as part of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Convention, Sua, and protocols, will further strengthen South Africa’s role in the global community.
In terms of the 2001 UN Security Council Resolution 1373, adopted under chapter 7 of the UN Charter, all member states are obliged to ratify and/or accede to 12 identified antiterrorism or counterterrorism conventions. South Africa has so far ratified and/or acceded to 9 of 12 such identified conventions.
The objectives of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Convention and protocols are, firstly, to ensure that appropriate action is taken against persons committing unlawful acts against ships, including seizure by force, acts of violence against persons on board ships and the placing of devices on board a ship which are likely to destroy or cause damage – and this also includes piracy; secondly, to oblige contracting governments either to extradite or prosecute alleged offenders; and thirdly, to enable member states, including South Africa, to address issues relating to unlawful acts that threaten the safety of ships and the security of passengers and the crew.
The benefit for the country in terms of the said conventions and protocols are as follows. Firstly, accession to the convention and protocol will, amongst others, enable South Africa to develop or amend relevant legislation which will serve as a tool to eliminate terrorism in sea transport, including piracy; secondly, in doing so, the confidence of other countries will be boosted to trade with South Africa, thereby boosting the economy and the social development of the country.
The Select Committee on Public Services therefore recommends that the Council, in terms section 231 of the Constitution, approves the said convention and protocol. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present? In accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Iyayixhasa. [Supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: steun. [Supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Igauteng iyavuma, Sihlalo. [Chairperson, Gauteng supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: IkwaZulu-Natali iyayixhasa. [KwaZulu-Natal supports it.] The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo yaseketela. [Limpopo supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: Siyayivuma. [We accept it.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr K SINCLAIR: Agrees.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West ya hina. [North West agrees.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape.
Mr N MACK: Wes-Kaapprovinsie steun. [Western Cape supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: All provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution. Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND RECREATION – STUDY TOUR TO BRAZIL
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: There is no speakers’list. I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all the delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present? In accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Ms B N DLULANE: Supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: In favour.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Ivhumerile. [Agrees.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: IkwaZulu-Natali iyavuma. [KwaZulu-Natal agrees.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo yaseketela. [Limpopo supports.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: Siyavuma. [We agree.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Northern Cape?
Mr K SINCLAIR: Agrees.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: Ya rona. [We agree.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Western Cape?
Mr N MACK: Supports.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: All provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Hon members, I just want to say to the heads of the delegation that if the question is asked whether all delegation heads are present, the delegation heads must indicate whether they are present or not for record purposes and, at the same time, to allow all provinces to make sure that their votes are cast. I think we have to respect that decision. It’s not my decision but it is the decision of the Constitution and it is the mandate of the provinces.
Hon members, I have an announcement. Tomorrow there will be training for members on travel facilities. It is from 09:00 to 10:00 in V454. This workshop is being co-ordinated specifically for NCOP members because NCOP members travel a lot. You are all urged to attend that training. That concludes the debate and the business of the day.
The Council adjourned at 16:05. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- Bills passed by Houses – to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 23 June 2005:
i) Taxation Laws Amendment Bill [B 19 – 2005] (National Assembly
– sec 77)
ii) Taxation Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 20 – 2005] (National
Assembly – sec 75)