THURSDAY, 25 AUGUST 2005 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

                                ____

The Council met at 14:05.

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.

                             NEW MEMBER


                           (Announcement)

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon members, I would like to announce that the hon Mr L H Fielding has been appointed to fill the vacancy that occurred in the delegation of the Northern Cape. The member was sworn in in my office this morning, 25 August 2005. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the hon member and say: Welcome to the working House. Could you stand up so that members can see you? [Applause.] Thank you.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move, on behalf of the IFP, at the next sitting day of the Council:

That the Council-

 1) notes with shock that David Masimong of Munsieville in Krugersdorp,
    who is the father of five and the sole breadwinner, spent almost
    two years in prison for a crime that he did not commit after he was
    falsely arrested in September 2002;


 2) further notes that having been released a year ago, Mr Masimong has
    yet to be compensated for his ordeal and that little headway has
    been made as the prison authorities have not yet released the
    records of his incarceration;

 3) urges the relevant authorities to deal with this issue as a matter
    of urgency so that Mr Masimong can be compensated for his ordeal
    and move on with his life;

(4) acknowledges that Mr Masimong was not treated in an appropriate manner and did not receive the necessary support that he needed; and

(5) therefore calls upon the relevant authorities to investigate this matter and take the necessary action against the officials responsible for this gross negligence.

Mr R J TAU: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move at the next sitting day of the Council:

That the Council-

(1) notes the economic-fear politics instilled by the leader, Mr Tony Leon, in US companies wanting to invest in South Africa;

(2) notes that, while addressing a DA regional meeting in KwaZulu-Natal, he was quoted as saying, ̀No foreign company wants to be told that it must give up 25,1% of its equity on arrival, nor does it want to be told whom to hire and fire, especially when the US demographics is quite different to South Africa’s.́ . . .;

(3) further notes that this statement smacks of racism and unpatriotism and confirms the DA is anti Black Economic Empowerment and further confirms the DA is anti the wealth redistribution programme of the country;

(4) further notes that, to the contrary and to his embarrassment, on the same day that he said this to South Africans and in particular the economically marginalised, the US computer company Unisys struck an equity deal in South Africa by placing 30% of its shares with a black South African company called CyberKnowledge Systems (CKS);

(5) therefore calls on Tony Leon to stop misleading South Africans and international investors who are interested in investing in South Africa; and

(6) acknowledges that this furthermore confirms Tony Leon’s great dislike of the South African Economic Transformation Programme.

CONGRATULATIONS TO CHAIRPERSON ON ROLE HE PLAYED IN OVERSIGHT VISIT AND CONDOLENCES ON THE LOSS OF HIS BROTHER

                         (Draft Resolution)

Ms A N T MCHUNU: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council-

(1) congratulates the hon Chairperson on the role he played in relation to the oversight visits to the Kwambonambi, Ntambanana and Umhlathuze Municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal together with his NCOP team;

(2) acknowledges that despite the upsetting news about the loss of his brother, he stayed and completed his mission; and

(3) therefore conveys a message of condolence and sympathy to his family. May God be with you in this time of mourning.

Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

                CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS AMENDMENT BILL

  (Consideration of Bill and of Report of Select Committee thereon)

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Chairperson, hon members and delegates, comrades and friends, ladies and gentlemen, I want to start by conveying Minister Mabandla’s regrets and apologies for not being able to be with you today as we consider this important Bill. The Minister is currently abroad. I commence by thanking, in advance, all the members and delegates who support the passing of this Bill.

Hon members will recall that the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development as far back as the year 2003 in its report on the crossing-of-the-floor legislation recommended, amongst other things, that the department and other relevant role-players: . . . review the laws pertaining to the funding of political parties, in particular parties represented in a legislature, and to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that those provisions are aligned with the changes effected in terms of the above legislation . . .;

and

. . . consider all legislation which may need to be amended in order to be brought into line with the new laws referred to in paragraph 1, and to make recommendations regarding such changes as may need to be effected.

In other words, this Bill is really trying to deal with the injunction from the portfolio committee to deal with all consequential amendments flowing from the crossing of the floor. So it does not deal itself with the principle of crossing – that has been dealt with - it only deals with consequential amendments in other legislation that are needed.

Therefore the Bill before the House addresses the consequences of the floor- crossing legislation as was passed already in 2002 and 2003. Specifically, this Bill deals with matters relating to the funding of political parties represented in Parliament and the provincial legislatures and the determination of the delegates to this House of Parliament. Therefore the Constitutional Matters Amendment Bill is intended to amend the Determination of Delegates (National Council of Provinces) Act of 1998; and to amend the Public Funding of Represented Political Parties Act of 1997.

Schedule 3 of part B of the Constitution indicates the formula to be used in determining the number of delegates to the National Council of Provinces that each party represented in a legislature is entitled to. The Determination of Delegates (National Council of Provinces) Act provides the formula that is utilised to determine the number of special and permanent delegates to the NCOP.

The floor-crossing legislation amended section 61 of the Constitution in order to regulate the allocation of delegates to the NCOP in the event of changes of party membership, mergers between parties, the subdivision of parties or subdivision and merger of parties within a provincial legislature.

The delegates Act was, however, not amended accordingly in order to address the possibility of extreme changes that may occur in legislatures during the floor-crossing window periods. In this regard, clause 11 of the Bill seeks to amend the delegates Act so as to make provision for the redetermination of certain delegates of a provincial legislature that has been reconstituted on account of changes of party membership, or because of mergers and subdivisions of parties during the floor-crossing period. The floor-crossing legislation has introduced a scenario in which, during the window period for floor-crossing, extreme changes in terms of the make- up of parties represented in the legislatures can take place. Represented parties can gain new representatives, and some parties can become weaker as they lose representatives to others. The scenario also allows for the emergence of completely new parties that have not contested any elections and for the likelihood that some parties may completely disappear.

The Bill therefore addresses all these consequences and scenarios that the delegates Act did not previously provide for. Therefore the amendments take into consideration the possibility of these extreme changes that may take place in these legislatures after a floor-crossing period. Previously, if there was a deadlock over the determination of the number of permanent and special delegates, the deadlock-breaking mechanism was to resort to the number of votes cast for a party in the preceding election.

However, this mechanism does not take into consideration that completely new parties, that had not contested elections before, may have emerged during the floor-crossing period. Mindful that our electoral system is essentially based on the proportional representation model and that votes are cast for a party and not an individual, the portfolio committee and the select committee have provided that a nil or zero vote be recorded for such new parties in the deadlock-breaking mechanism. The other extreme is the possibility of two parties that have contested elections, each one of them recording votes, merging in their entirety. In such a case, as long as there remains no single member representing such parties and that the merger was not a subdivision and merger, the combined number of votes cast for each party will be considered for the purposes of the deadlock-breaking mechanism.

However, if there remain further deadlocks, that is if two parties record exactly the same number of votes at the polls or two completely new parties each record zero votes, the Act now provides that the legislature determine, in accordance with the principles of democracy, the question of which party will receive the permanent delegate.

Turning to the matter of funding of political parties, section 236 of the Constitution necessitates the enactment of national legislation that must regulate the funding of political parties represented in the national and provincial legislatures on an equitable and proportional basis.

The funding Act was therefore enacted to give effect to that constitutional requirement. The Act, amongst other things, established the Represented Political Parties’ Fund with a view to making provision for the funding of political parties participating in Parliament and provincial legislatures; and it regulates the allocation of moneys from the fund to political parties.

In terms of section 5(2)(a) of the funding Act, allocations from the fund must be made and paid to each of the political parties concerned in accordance with a prescribed formula based, in part, on the principles of proportionality and equity.

As a consequence of the floor-crossing window period, a need has arisen to regulate, in the year in which floor-crossing is allowed at provincial and national levels - for example this year - the reallocation of moneys from the fund to which parties are entitled. In order to address that need it is necessary to amend the funding Act and the regulations made under that Act.

The Bill now obliges the Independent Electoral Commission, the IEC, to reallocate funding to qualifying political parties in recognition of the changes brought about by the floor-crossing window periods. The Bill requires the IEC to reallocate 50% of the funding available to parties, in a year in which floor-crossing takes place, in a manner that recognises the changes in party representation as a result of the floor-crossing.

This is so because payments from the fund are made in four equal instalments payable in April, July, October and January each year. Therefore if a party’s representation in the National Assembly or a provincial legislature has been affected as a result of floor-crossing, the allocations for the third and fourth instalments – in other words, October and January – would have to be reallocated on the basis that those parties that gained seats would be entitled to increased funding and those that lost would have their allocations reduced.

At the same time, political parties that are no longer represented in any of the national or provincial legislatures will no longer be entitled to funding and will have to pay back unspent moneys. Political parties no longer represented in any of the national or provincial legislatures will be required to submit to the IEC their financial statements and supporting documents which the IEC will use to determine, at its discretion, the amount of unspent moneys.

These unspent moneys, once determined by the IEC, will be repaid to the IEC, and will go into the fund and be distributed accordingly among the remaining parties that qualified for funding in the following financial year.

The new section 6A also places some obligations on the accounting officer or leader of a political party that has to repay the IEC its unspent balances. Provision is further made that an accounting officer or leader of a party who fails to comply with these obligations will be guilty of an offence in certain circumstances when they do not do so. To conclude, I want to take this opportunity to thank the select committee, especially its chairperson, Kgoshi Mokoena, and the portfolio committee for a job well done under tremendous time pressure. [Applause.]

I also want to thank the leaders of other parties for making it possible for us to process this matter in the timeframe that we could. I also want to thank the department and particularly Mr Johan Labuschagne for really working very hard to make sure that these amendments were put on the Statute Book before 1 September. I thank you for supporting this Bill. [Applause.]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, we agreed with the wonderful and dynamic Deputy Minister that at some point I would only emphasise what he has just said.

In seven days’ time a window period will be opened to allow members of Parliament and of the provincial legislatures to join a party of their choice. The Constitutional Matters Amendment Bill amends the Public Funding of Represented Political Parties Act, Act 103 of 1997. It also amends the Determination of Delegates Act (National Council of Provinces) Act, Act 69 of 1998.

Let me also try to simplify these two amendments as much as I can. In the principal Act, that is the Public Funding of Represented Political Parties Act, provision is made that all parties that are represented in Parliament qualify for funding from the IEC. Just to assist my colleagues, I would like to say that these payments are made every three months. That is, there are four payments per year, as the Deputy Minister said, in the months of April, July, October and January.

When this Bill was enacted in 1997, we did not make provision for parties that may cease to qualify to pay back moneys immediately after floor- crossing. Let’s face it: there may be parties that will not qualify for funding immediately after this coming floor-crossing period. We are now putting in place a mechanism that must be followed when the time arises for parties to repay those unspent balances to the commission.

In this Bill provision is made that these payments be made 21 days after the party ceases to qualify. Some people are still wondering at what stage a party ceases to qualify. Let me give three instances that may cause a party not to qualify for funding: one, if a party loses an election; two, immediately after a floor-crossing if a party loses all its members; three, if a legislature or a parliament is dissolved, all parties will cease to qualify for any funding, because there won’t be any party in that parliament.

In the same breath, there are instances in which parties will not be expected to repay the unspent balances to the commission. Let me give an example of a party that has, say, 10 members. Of those 10 members, let’s say nine members cross to another party. Only one member remains with that party and that member retains the name of that party. That one-member party will not be expected to repay any money to the commission, because he or she is still the leader of that caucus of that party. What will affect that party, if I may elaborate, is only the payment, because now the number of members of that party is reduced. That party will get a smaller amount when the next allocation is made. As you are aware, payments for these parties are done proportionally.

Another example is in the case in which a party subdivides, and one component retains its original name. That party cannot repay any unspent balances. There are other examples that one can give, but I think members have got the gist of what we are talking about.

What is good about this Bill is that it allows parties that may be required to repay those unspent balances time to close their books and submit audited statements to the commission. As my dynamic Minister said, failure to comply with these requirements will be an offence and that party can be prosecuted. Here we are referring to the accounting officer. If the accounting officer is not there, the leader of that party will be expected to do exactly that. By this, I think, we have tried to clarify the stage at which parties are expected to submit audited statements.

I hope members are aware that all Speakers in either provincial legislatures or here in the National Assembly are expected to publish a list of names of all parties immediately after the window period. This will have to be done on 22 September 2005 – this year, for example. Let me not bore you with this, because these are just administrative issues. Members can follow what will happen thereafter.

Let me deal briefly with the amendments to the Determination of Delegates (NCOP) Act. This clause affects us directly as permanent delegates. Whatever movement happens in the province, it will affect us. It means our fate as members, as we are seated here, depends on what will be happening from 1 September to 15 September. I am not trying to scare members here, but let’s face it: the possibility is that come 15 September some members may be compelled to be redeployed to civil society . . . [Laughter.] . . .that is, to be on permanent leave. Simply put, they might not come back.

This clause 11, which amends section 2 of the principal Act, provides for a mechanism or formula that will be used to determine how parties are to be represented in the legislature, or how permanent delegates are to be sent to represent that particular party here in the NCOP.

Rev P MOATSHE: [Inaudible.]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: More than serious, Rev Moatshe. Some of those calculations will be done by the IEC and the legislature. It is the normal process. Again, this mechanism outlines all processes that need to be followed in a case in which parties get the same number of votes after an election or floor-crossing. Some of the things that need to be followed are just technical and administrative. I won’t dwell much on them. This clause took up most of our time as the committee.

Concerns were raised about how we were going to treat new parties that had not participated in any election, but come 15 September that party or those parties would have members in the legislature. In this Bill we have come up with a mechanism in order to see how we can do the calculations to enable those new parties to have some representatives here in the Council.

There were those who said, “Let’s treat them equally,” as though they had also run and participated in an election, but there were those who said, “Let’s give them a nil vote”, because they hadn’t participated in any election. Guess what? All parties agreed that they start with a nil vote, because they hadn’t participated in any election. [Laughter.]

The two versions, I think, are self-explanatory. Let me appeal to our respective members from all our provincial legislatures and here in the National Assembly to carefully and correctly choose soberly. This is your chance to walk with pride and join the masses. This is your chance to belong to a party with a vision. This is your chance to be part of history in the making. The doors are open; come home. You are going to be warmly welcomed.

Let me take this opportunity to thank our committee members for once again showing their dedication and commitment to bettering the lives of all South Africans. You are really serving your country with distinction. Let me also thank the one and only “Lappies” Johan Labuschagne. If we had only five Lappies in this country, let me tell you this country would move. [Applause.]

Let me stop here and allow my colleagues to take over where I leave off. They will also assist in giving “umrhabulo” [political education] about what this Bill is all about. I thank you, Chair. [Applause.]

Mr J W LE ROUX: Hon Chair, hon Deputy Minister and colleagues, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank our chairman, Kgoshi Mokoena and the very hard-working Johan Labuschagne for guiding us through this difficult Bill. It was wonderful that at the end of the day we could get consensus on every single clause. Thank you very much for that.

Dit is nou duidelik dat die reg om van een party na ’n ander oor te loop só misbruik word dat die demokrasie en die wil van die kiesers totaal geïgnoreer word. Die ANC was nog nooit so verdeeld soos nou nie en dis duidelik dat die party alles in sy vermoë doen om op elke moontlike wyse lede van ander partye af te rokkel, veral in die Wes-Kaap.

As gevolg van hierdie toedrag van sake het die federale raad van die DA nou besluit dat slegs persone wat die beginsels van die DA onderskryf, aanvaar sal word. [Gelag.] Jy weet natuurlik nie wat beginsels is nie, dis dié dat jy so lekker lag! Tweedens is daar besluit dat geen persoon deur beloftes of aanbiedings oorreed sal word om by die DA aan te sluit nie; en derdens, dat die DA die Parlement sal versoek om die hele oorloopkwessie weer in oënskou te neem in die lig van die probleme wat nou ondervind word.

Die wetsontwerp, soos die Adjunkminister baie duidelik vir ons uitgespel het, het twee hoofoogmerke: die een is die befondsing van politieke partye ná afloop van die oorlooptydperk, en die ander is die aanwysing van lede van die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies, waarin ons natuurlik die meeste belangstel.

Wat die befondsing van partye betref, ná die oorlooptydperk word die toewysing gedoen asof ’n verkiesing plaasgevind het. Indien ’n party al sy lede verloor, sal so ’n party nie geregtig wees op befondsing nie en sal ongebruikte fondse terugbetaal moet word. Wat die kontrolering van hierdie fondse betref, is daar streng ouditvereistes en die hoof-uitvoerende- beampte of die leier van die party sal aanspreeklik gehou word.

Tweedens maak die wetsontwerp voorsiening vir die aanwysing van lede van die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies - dis nou ons. Die wetsontwerp is nou gewysig om voorsiening te maak vir veranderinge van die samestelling van die provinsiale parlemente ná afloop van die oorlooptydperk. Weer eens word die NRVP saamgestel asof ’n verkiesing plaasgevind het.

Waar daar egter met die samestelling van die NRVP ’n gelyke uitslag tussen partye plaasvind, word daar na uitgebragte stemme in die vorige verkiesing gekyk om ’n uitslag te bepaal. In die geval van ’n nuwe party wat dus nié aan die vorige verkiesing deelgeneem het nie, sal so ’n party gesien word as ’n party wat geen stemme verwerf het nie. Die DA steun die wetsontwerp. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[It is now clear that the right to cross the floor from one party to the next is abused so much that democracy and the will of the voters are totally ignored. The ANC has never been as divided as it is now and it is clear that it would do everything in its power to lure away members of other parties in any which way they can, particularly in the Western Cape.

As a result of this situation, the federal council of the DA has now decided that only persons who subscribe to the principles of the DA will be accepted. [Laughter]. Of course, you do not know what principles are, that is why you’re having such a good laugh! Secondly, it was decided that no person would be persuaded by means of promises or offers to join the DA; and, thirdly, that the DA will request Parliament to review the whole crossing-the-floor issue in the light of the problems that are now being experienced.

The Bill, as the Deputy Minister clearly spelled out, has two primary objectives: the one is the funding of political parties after the conclusion of the floor-crossing period, and the other is the appointment of members to the National Council of Provinces, in which we are, of course, the most interested.

With regard to the funding of parties, after the floor-crossing period the allocation is done as if an election had taken place. If a party loses all its members, such a party will not be entitled to funding and the unused funds will have to be paid back. There are strict auditing requirements concerning the controlling of these funds and the chief executive officer or the leader of the party will be held accountable.

Secondly, the Bill makes provision for the appointment of members of the National Council of Provinces - that would be us. The Bill has now been amended to make provision for changes in the composition of the provincial parliaments after the conclusion of the floor-crossing period. Once again the NCOP is composed as if an election had taken place.

However, where the composition of the NCOP reflects an even result between the parties, the votes cast in the previous election are looked at to determine a result. In the case of a new party that did not participate in the previous election, such a party would be regarded as a party that had not won any votes. The DA supports the Bill. [Applause.]]

Mnu Z C NTULI: Sihlalo – Mabhoko, bahlonishwa nabahlonishwakazi bale Ndlu yoMkhandlu kaZwelonke weziFundazwe, Phini likaNgqongqoshe, Johan Labuschagne, njengenhlangano ye-ANC, silokhu siqhubeke njalo ngokugxilisa izimpande zombuso wentando yeningi eNingizimu Afrika, e-Afrika nasezweni lonkana.

Lapha sikhuluma ngalo Mthethosivivinywa obizwa ngokuthi i-Constitutional Matters Amendment Bill. Phela sikhuluma ngokwabiwa kwezimali yi-IEC emuva kokuba amalungu ePhalamande elandele onembeza bawo, aya kuleyo nhlangano emele ukushintsha izimpilo zabantu eNingizimu Afrika ukuze zibe ngcono.

Siyazi ukuthi kukhona labo lo mthetho asebewuphe amagama awukwehlisa isithunzi njengegama elithi “umthetho wokugcogcoma”. Thina-ke kwaKhongolose sithi ungumthetho wokulandela unembeza. Bona laba abathi ukugcogcoma abasho njalo uma bemukela amalungu avela kwezinye izinhlangano. Baye benze imicimbi bejabulela ukuthi kuhle kwabo, kodwa uma umuntu elandela unembeza wakhe eya kwaKhongolose bakhala kudume izintaba nezihosha, begxeka besho wonke amaganyana ayiziswana.

Abantu bayohlale njalo belandela onembeza babo beya kwaKhongolose ngoba le nhlangano igcina labo abangaphakathi besese, nalabo abangaphandle behehekile ukuthi bayijoyine le nhlangano. Phela nemfuyo yakho uyiphatha kahle ukuze izalane yande. Ngiyazi ukuthi ukuba uMthethosivivinywa uyasivumela lapha kuMkhandlu kaZwelonke weziFundazwe ukuba silandele onembeza bethu, ngabe nathi senze njalo. Mina-be bengizolalela unembeza wami ngisuke kwi-ANC ngiqonde kwi-ANC! [Ubuwelewele.]

Siyazi ukuthi laba abafuna ukulandela onembeza babo babhekene nobunzima obungakanani ngenxa yezindlela ezingasile ezisetshenziswa ondlovu kayiphikiswa abangabaholi babo. Okufanele sikwazi lapha ukuthi asiwushintshi uMthethosisekelo kodwa senza ukuthi uhlelo lokwabiwa kwezimali emuva kokuba amalungu eguqukele kwezinye izinhlangano lube ngoluhambisana nentando yeningi.

Siyakuphika ukuthi lo mthetho uphambana nezinhloso zabantu – lokhu okubizwa ngokuthi i-voter betrayal. Mina ngifuna ukubuza ukuthi bangasho yini ukuthi yi-voter betrayal lokhu okwakwenziwa yi-IFP ne-DA KwaZulu-Natal ngenkathi behlangana benza uhulumeni wokubambisana? Akuzange kushiwo ukuthi baphambana nezinhloso zabantu ngoba abazange babatshele abantu ukuthi sebayahlangana, sebezokwakha uhulumeni wokubambisana.

Futhi-ke siyakuphika thina lokho ngoba umphakathi uyakwazi ukuthi phakathi kwale minyaka emihlanu uzikhethele ukuthi uya kuliphi iqembu. Akukaze kushiwo ukuthi ngukugcogcoma lokho. Baye bajabule bathi, “Hhayi, sesijoyinise amalungu awukuthi,” esikhundleni sokuthi bathi ukugcogcoma. Mina-ke futhi ngiyakuthemba ukuthi kuyasebenza ukulandela unembeza ngoba sikubonile ngo-2004 ngenkathi kuvulelekile ukuguqukela kwelinye iqembu. Batshengisile abantu baKwaZulu-Natali ukuthi, cha, balandela labo abaguquka ngoba nabo bavotela i-ANC.

Futhi sikubonile lokhu okhethweni lokuvala isikhala, i-by election, laphaya KwaMbonambi lapho umkhandlu kade uphethwe yi-IFP khona. Kuthe ngenkathi kwenziwa lolo khetho, ingakapheli iminyaka emihlanu, bakwazi ukuvota futhi bavotela i-ANC. Kusho ukuthi balandele onembeza babo.

Kuhle sazi ukuthi abantu bayakwazi ukubona ukuthi umnyama ongenafu lona bese belandela onembeza babo ingakapheli le minyaka emihlanu. Futhi le nto ihleleke kahle ngoba leli thuba lokuguqukela kwenye inhlangano livela emuva konyaka sekudlule ukhetho, abantu sebebone kahle ukuthi bazoya ngaphi. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[Mr Z C NTULI: Chairperson Mabhoko, hon members of the National Council of Provinces and Deputy Minister Johan Labuschagne, as the ANC, we continue to deepen the roots of democracy in South Africa, Africa and the whole world.

Here we are talking about the Bill called the Constitutional Matters Amendment Bill. We are talking about a budgetary allocation by the IEC after the members have followed their conscience by joining the party that changes the lives of South African people for the better.

We know that there are those people who have given this law names that undermine it, like the “floor-crossing Bill”. We in the ANC call it the “conscience-following Bill”. Those who are saying it is a floor-crossing Bill do not say that when they welcome members from other parties. They throw parties, delighted to have new members. However, when the person is following his conscience by joining the ANC, they wail, criticise and utter all sorts of provocative words.

People will always follow their conscience by joining the African National Congress, because this party always keeps its members happy. Those who are not members are always interested in joining this party. In fact, you have to take care of your livestock in order for it to multiply. I know if the Bill were allowing us to follow our conscience here in the National Council of Provinces, we would have done so. Personally I was going to do that by defecting from the ANC to join the ANC! [interjections.]

We know how hard it is for those who want to follow their conscience because of unacceptable ways used by their autocratic leaders. What we must know is that we are not changing the Constitution, but we are adjusting the system of budget allocations after members have defected to other parties in order to be in line with democracy.

We deny that this law is contradictory to the will of the people, what we call “voter betrayal”. What I would like to know is whether they could call the alliance between IFP and the DA in KwaZulu-Natal to form a coalition government “voter betrayal”? They did not say that it contradicted the will of the people, because they did not inform people that they were merging to form a coalition government.

We also reject that because in these five years the public have been able to choose a party to join. They did not call that floor crossing. They were happy, saying we have welcomed so many members instead of calling it floor crossing. Personally I feel that it does work to follow your conscience, because we witnessed this in 2004 when the floor-crossing window was opened. People of KwaZulu-Natal have showed that they are following those who defected because they voted for the ANC.

We have also witnessed this in the by-election in KwaMbonambi, where the council was headed by the IFP. When that election was held within five years people were able to vote, and they voted for the ANC. That shows that they followed their conscience. It is important to know that people see if there is a future and they follow their conscience within these five years. This thing is also well organised, because the chance to defect from one’s party comes a year after the election, when people have decided which party to join.]

Chairperson, hon members, comrades and friends, without fear of any contradiction let me stress that the ANC believes that floor-crossing does not constitute betrayal of voters as previously suggested by some political parties. Floor-crossing does not only occur within the confines of the Constitution, but it also strengthens democracy in our country. This is a view, which was expressed by the Constitutional Court in the United Democratic Movement vs President of the Republic of South Africa case in 2004.

However, the opposition we have in this country has the tendency to deliberately cloud political interventions, which purport to deepen and advance democracy. Hence I am not surprised that even in today’s debate some view the amendment as nothing else but the changing of our Constitution and the undermining of democracy and constitutionalism through legislation.

The fact of the matter is that this Bill does not purport to amend our Constitution as some have always believed and wanted South Africans to believe. Instead, this Bill addresses the consequences of floor-crossing by amending the legislation that deals with the funding of represented political parties and the determination of delegates to the National Council of Provinces. Therefore the amendments proposed in this Bill should be viewed and understood within a broader context of advancing, deepening and consolidating democracy in our country. The ANC supports this Bill. I thank you.

Mr M A MZIZI: Sihlalo ohloniphekile neSekela likaNgqongqoshe namalungu ahloniphekile. [Hon Chairperson, Deputy Minister and hon members . . .]

Chairperson, I find it difficult to believe that after three years of the floor-crossing Bill, which was passed, debated and passed by this Parliament, I am yet again to take part in a debate on a Bill that arose from the Bill that, as I describe in Afrikaans: “Dit gee my grys hare.” [It gives me grey hair.] [Laughter.]

The good thing about this Bill that we are debating today is that it deals with funding of political parties and accountabilities of parties regarding the funds.

Noma kunjalo Sihlalo, ukuxhaswa ngemali kwamaqembu anamalungu lapha ePhalamende akusho ukuthi sesiyawabusisa futhi samukela ukuthi kuhle ukugcogcoma nezihlalo zeqembu elizizuze kubavoti ngesikhathi wonke amaqembu ekhankasa ejuluka ukukhanda nokuthola amavoti, bese kuqhamuka nje abantu esingathi ngesiXhosa bathi “into yomuntu ngeyami”. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)

[Be that as it may, Chairperson, supporting the funding of parties with members in Parliament does not mean that we support and condone the floor- crossing of members with positions as chairpersons that had been gained during vote-sweating campaigns of parties and all of a sudden people came from nowhere, claiming what we would express in Xhosa as “what belongs to another person is also mine”.]

. . . climbing on a band wagon and claiming to be representing the voters, when he or she did not contest the elections.

Ms N D NTWANAMBI: Mhlalingaphambili, akulunganga ukuba ilungu xa lisoyika lisebenzise isiXhosa ngokungekho mthethweni.[Kwahlekwa.] [Chairperson, it is not right that a member should speak improper isiXhosa when she or he is afraid of something. [Applause.]]

Mnu M A MZIZI: Sihlalo, masikwemukele ukuthi iyazalwa ingane kungesiyo ingane ezalwa ngumnumzane wekhaya. Leyongane-ke iyivezandlebe. Ngokomthetho wakwantu leyo ngane ayibulawa, ayikhishwa inyumbazana kodwa yenzelwa konke okwenzelwa ezinye izingane zakulelo khaya. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)

[Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, let us admit that a child could be born in a particular home, not necessarily of the man of that home. That child is illegitimate. Naturally that child is not killed or discriminated against, but it receives all the benefits enjoyed by the rest of the children in that home.]

Chairperson, because we are dealing with section 5 of Act 103 of 1997, which is a funding Act of political parties, the IFP will support the Amendment Bill. “Feela modulasetulo, tseba ke hona hore re tshehetsa tjena, re ja dikgobe le majwe.” [But, Chairperson, you must know that although we support, we are not satisfied.]

I hope one day we will find the time to have a debate about the new political party or parties formed after the floor-crossing. “Sihlalo, selidumela emansumpeni, imisindo iyezwakala. Lafa elihle kakhulu.” [Chairperson, the time for things to happen has arrived, noises can be heard. Our beloved country is perishing.]

Mnr F ADAMS: Voorsitter, agb Minister en kollegas in dié Huis, ek wil vir ons voorsitter van die komitee baie dankie sê vir sy harde werk, asook vir die amptenary en veral vir “die agb” Lappies. Dis jammer Lappies kan nie vir die Springbokke speel nie, anders het ons al lankal die Drienasies- reeks gewen en was ons nommer een in die wêreld.

Ek gaan nou afwyk van my toespraak, maar ek wil graag oor die beginsels praat waaroor my agb kollega Wilhelm le Roux hier gepraat het. As my geheue my nie in die steek laat nie, wil ek net vir my kollega Le Roux sê hy moet asseblief met sy provinsiale leier gaan praat oor beginsels, want sy provinsiale leier het mense in die Wes-Kaap poste belowe as hulle sou oorloop na die DA toe. [Tussenwerpsels.] Sy leier het mense poste belowe.

Die DA praat van beginsels, maar hulle skuif mense in wetgewers rond. Toe hulle in die wetgewer hoor die man gaan loop, skuif hulle hom NRVP toe. Die agb lede moet die waarheid praat. Hulle moet praat oor beginsels. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dan wil ek vra, wat is beginsels dan by hulle? [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr F ADAMS: Chairperson, hon Minister and colleagues in this House, I want to say thank you very much to the chairperson of our committee for his hard work, including the officials and especially “the hon” Lappies. It is a pity that Lappies cannot play for the Springboks, or we would have won the Tri-Nations series long ago and we would have been number one in the world.

I am now going to deviate from my speech, but I should very much like to speak about the principles that my hon colleague Wilhelm le Roux has spoken about here. If my memory is not failing me, I would just like to tell my colleague Le Roux please to go and speak to his provincial leader about principles, as his provincial leader promised posts to people in the Western Cape if they crossed the floor to the DA. [Interjections.] His leader promised people posts.

The DA talks about principles, but they shift people around in the legislatures. When they heard in the legislature that the man was going to leave, they shifted him to the NCOP. The hon members must speak the truth. They must speak about principles. [Interjections.] Then I want to ask, what are principles to them? [Applause.]]

Mnr A WATSON: Agb Voorsitter, die lid is besig om hierdie Huis te mislei met blatante leuens, en ek vra u om hom tot orde te roep. Hy praat van goed waarvoor hy geen bewyse het nie. Hy is besig om mense hier te beswadder. Hy skuil agter sy privilegie as ’n lid, en ek vra u om hom tot orde te roep. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr A WATSON: Hon Chairperson, the member is misleading this House with blatant lies, and I am asking you to call him to order. He is speaking about things of which he has no proof. He is besmirching people here. He is hiding behind his privilege as a member, and I am asking you to call him to order.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: No, that is not a point of order. Continue, hon member.

Mr F ADAMS: Dankie, Voorsitter. Nou vra ek, waar is beginsels nou? [Tussenwerpsels.] Thank you, Chairperson. Now I am asking: Where are principles now? [Interjections.]] The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon Lamoela, can you give the hon member a hearing, please.

Mnr F ADAMS: Is dit reg dat mense poste belowe word? Die NNP, vir die DA se inligting, loop op een 1 September na die ANC toe oor sonder voorbehoude. [Tussenwerpsels.] Daar is geen beloftes gemaak van poste nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ons werk al van 2001 met die ANC saam, want ons sien Suid- Afrika is besig om op ’n pad te gaan . . . [Tussenwerpsels.] Hierdie land van ons is besig om op ’n pad te gaan wat geen keer sal duld nie.

Al gaan die DA en maak ons land in die buiteland sleg, was dit verblydend om nou die dag te lees dat ons ekonomie teen 7,3% groei. [Tussenwerpsels.] Agb Watson, waar kan die DA ooit getuig van ’n konstruktiewe bydrae tot hierdie land? [Tussenwerpsels.] Waar is daar getuig van ’n konstruktiewe bydrae? Beginsels! Mense wat in glashuise woon, moenie met klippe gooi nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Mense wat in glashuise woon, moenie kritiseer nie.

My agb kollega praat van beginsels; as daar beginsels was, het die NNP ’n beginselbesluit geneem om by die ANC aan te sluit om ’n beter lewe vir ons mense uit te kap, want geen ander party, geen ander politieke beweging kan dit doen nie. [Applous.] Dis nie ’n party wat regeer word deur een mens wat besluit daardie een gaan hiernatoe of daarnatoe nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Is it right that people are promised posts? The NNP, for the DA’s information, is crossing the floor to the ANC without reservation on 1 September. [Interjections.] There were no promises concerning posts. [Interjections.] We have been working with the ANC since 2001, because we see that South Africa is embarking on a course . . . [Interjections.] This country of ours is embarking on a course that will not tolerate any resistance. Even though the DA goes along and disparages our country abroad, it was heartening to read the other day that our economy is growing at 7,3%. [Interjections.] Hon Watson, how could the DA ever testify to having made a constructive contribution to this country? [Interjections.] Where has there been evidence of a constructive contribution? Principles! People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. [Interjections.] People who live in glasshouses should not criticise.

My hon colleague speaks about principles; if there were principles, the NNP has made a decision in principle to join the ANC in order to carve out a better life for our people, because no other party, no other political movement, can do it. [Applause.] It is not a party that is ruled by one person who decides who goes where.]

As they say in English, it is the people’s movement. We as the people, the NNP, have joined the people’s movement. [Interjections.]

Dit lyk my die DA is kwaad omdat die NNP hom voorgespring het om die “people’s movement” te “join”. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dit lyk my dit is waarom hulle kwaad is! [Tussenwerpsels.]

Die NNP steun hierdie wetgewing. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[It seems to me as if the DA is cross because the NNP has stolen a march on them by joining the people’s movement. [Interjections.] It seems to me this is why they are cross! [Interjections.]

The NNP supports this legislation. [Time expired.]]

Mr A L MOSEKI: Chairperson, Freddie has done the work. I am not going to repeat what he has said. Thank you very much, Chairperson. Deputy Minister . . .

. . . re a leboga. Modulasetulo wa komiti o setse a buile gore bothata jo re neng re kopane le bona ke ba mofuta mang. Kgweetlo e re neng re lebagane le yona ke efe fa re ne re dira ka Molaotlhomo o o leng fa pele ga rona. Sengwe se se botlhokwa fa re dira ka Molaotlhomo o ke go lebelela gore a Molaotlhomo o, o dumalana le molaotheo wa Aforika Borwa. Molaotheo wa Aforika Borwa kgaolo 2 karolo 19. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[. . . I thank you. The committee chairperson has already explained just what type of problems we encountered. He also spoke about some of the challenges we faced when dealing with this Bill. One important factor that we took into account whilst dealing with this Bill was to ensure that it aligned itself with the Constitution. The South African Constitution, Chapter 2, section 19, talks about . . .]

. . . freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of political rights, and all those important facets of our democracy. Our understanding . . .

. . . ke gore, fa re tsaya kgang ka Molaotlhomo o gompieno re be re lebeletse fela mo molaotheong wa rona. Maitlhomo magolo a Molaotlhomo o ke go tiisa demokerasi ya rona gore e gole e re ka moso, re sa tlhole re tshela, bana le bana ba rona ba fitlhele boswa jono jwa demokerasi jo re tlaabong re ba agetse jona.

Fa re lebile 1 Lwetse, go bonagala gore go na le batho ba e rileng fa reya kwa ditlhophong, mo ngwageng yo o fetileng, ba tsaya ditshwetso tsa gore ba tsene ka makoko a a rileng a sepolotiki. Fa ba ntse ba tsamaya mo tseleng, re kopana re buisana mo Ntlong e le mo dipolatefomong tse dingwe, batho ba ba simolola go elelelwa gore ditshwetso tse ba di tsereng ka nako ya go nna bontlhopheng ba makoko a a riling ga di a siama. Ba simolola go fetola megopolo ya bona ka gonne ba bona tshedimosetso, ba bona lesedi kwa bofelong.

Molaotheo ware re na le tshwanelo ya gore re ikamanye le mekgatlho e re e batlang kgotsa re simolole mekgatlho e re e batlang, rona re le baagi ba Aforika Borwa. Fa molaotheo o bua jana, ga o fe fela baagi ba naga e natla le tshwanelo eo. Maloko a Ntlo e re leng mo go yona e, a eleng maloko a makoko gotswa kwa diporofenseng, le maloko a Kokoano Bosetšhaba le bona ba fiwa natla ka kutlwisiso ya gore ke baagi ba Aforika Borwa mme le bona ba na le ditshwanelo tse ba bangwe ba nang le tsona.

Molaotheo fa o bula letlhabaphefo le e tlaabong e le bula ka 1 Lwetse, ware yo o iphitlhetseng ka mabaka a a rileng a tsere tshwetso ya gonna leloko la lekoko la ga mme Louw fale, a nne fatshe a itlhokomedise gore a tshwetso e a neng a e tsaya ka nako eo e tshwanetse na? Fa a fitlhela gore tshwetso e a neng a e tsaya e fosagetse, a tseye tshwetso ya gore jaanong ke fetola maikutlo a me ke ya go ikamanya le lekoko le lengwe. (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)

[ . . . is that when we deal with this Bill today, we have to ensure that it aligns itself with our Constitution. The main intention of this Bill is to develop and strengthen our democracy, so that tomorrow when we have passed on, our children and grandchildren will inherit the benefits that are brought about by that.

As we approach 1 September, it is becoming very clear that when we voted last year there were some people who took decisions then to join certain political parties. However, as we traversed this political path and started debating issues in this House and on other platforms, these people realised that their decisions to contest the elections under those parties’ banners were not the right ones. They started changing their minds after getting more information and in the end saw the light.

The Constitution gives us, as South Africans, the right to align ourselves with parties of our choice or to form new political parties. The Constitution does not just give that right to ordinary citizens of this country. Members of this House – who also happen to be members of political parties from the various provinces – and members of the National Assembly also enjoy that right on the basis of being citizens of South Africa. They are also entitled to the same rights that other citizens enjoy.

The Constitution says that when the window of opportunity opens on 1 September, members of Ms Louw’s party can sit down and re-examine the decisions they took in the past. When they find that those decisions were not the right ones, they should feel free to change their minds and join other political parties.]

That is a fundamental constitutional right of our people in this country.

Re etse maemo tlhoko fa e sale re simolola go mametlelela molao o gore go na le makoko, lengwe la ona ke laga rre Holomisa, a a simolotseng go lwa le maloko a ona. Ba dirisa mekgwa e e neng e diriswa ke puso ya tlhaolele go tshosetsa batho, go ba emisa le go ba pateletsa go ikgolola mo makokong ao. Tlwaelo e ke e e ka dirisiwang ke batho ba dipolotiki tsa bona di tswang mo lemoragong le le bodileng. Mongwe wa bona ke Holomisa a latelwe ke Tony Leon. Ba batla go tlisa tlhaolele le mekgwa e e sa siamang mo morafeng wa rona. Re lwantsha mekgwa ego. (Translation of Setswana paragraph follows.)

[We have noticed that ever since the promulgation of this law certain parties – one of them is Mr Holomisa’s party – have been fighting with their members. They use tactics that were employed by the apartheid government to intimidate people, forcing them to leave those parties. This is the kind of thing that can be expected from people who come from a rotten political background. One of them is Holomisa, followed by Tony Leon. They want to bring back discrimination and other bad practices to our country. We are fighting these practices.]

Chairperson, we want to stand in this House today and appeal to all of us . . .

Ke ntse ke reeditse mme Louw are rre Mokoena o gwetlha maloko a makoko a mangwe go ikwadisa. [I have been listening to Ms Louw saying that Mr Mokoena is canvassing members of other parties to join his party.]

We want to stand here and appeal to members, especially people who are public representatives. Our people have voted us into power so that we can lead them, not to fear, not to be intimidated by those dictators, those who want to remain in the political scrapyards of the apartheid regime. We want to appeal to those who want to cross the floor and join the people’s movement not to be intimidated by Holomisa, not to be intimidated by Tony Leon. They must cross over and join the ANC.

Having discussed this Bill in the last two weeks, we are more convinced, as we have said, that this Bill’s main intention is to entrench democracy and ensure that we build a legacy that will remain there for our coming generation. With those words, as the ANC we want to concur with the Chairperson by saying that this Bill must find its passage and become part of the law of this country. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Mr Chairperson, it is quite clear that the hon Mr Le Roux had the unenviable duty to do some damage control after Sheila Camerer’s speech yesterday in the National Assembly and that is the reason that Mr Le Roux said: “Die DA gaan vra dat die oorloopwetgewing weer ondersoek moet word”. [“The DA will ask that the floor-crossing legislation be looked at again.”]

Dis niks anders as weer ’n foefie van die DA nie. Hulle wil op hul pamflette aan kiesers sê dat hulle teen die oorloopwetgewing is en dit stel dat hulle dit weer wil laat ondersoek.

Ons sal die DA gebonde hou aan hulle stemming ten gunste van die oorspronklike oorloopwetgewing, ons sal hulle gebonde hou aan hul steun vir hierdie wetgewing, en as hulle reken dat hulle vorentoe die kiesers gaan flous met dit wat die agb le Roux hier probeer doen het - in alle billikheid hy het sy bes probeer, maar hy het nie geslaag nie – maak hulle ’n fout. [Gelag.]

Die DA gaan nie wegkom met dié foefie en met die poging om ’n persepsie te laat ontstaan dat die DA sogenaamd die kiesers se wil weerspieël nie. Ek wil baie duidelik wees ten opsigte daarvan. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[It’s nothing but another trick by the DA. On their pamphlets they want to tell voters that they are against the floor-crossing legislation and state that they want to have it re-examined.

We shall keep the DA to their vote in favour of the original floor-crossing legislation, we shall keep them to their support for this legislation, and if they think that they are going to mislead the voters in future with what the hon Le Roux has tried to do here - let us be fair, he has tried his best, but he has not succeeded - they are making a mistake. [Laughter.]

The DA will not get away with this trick and with the attempt to create a perception that the DA supposedly reflects the will of the voters. I want to be very clear in this respect.]

The Deputy Minister said, and he is quite correct, that this Bill does not deal with the principle of crossing the floor, but one cannot get away from that, because the floor-crossing issue will always arise whenever any legislation that is linked with the crossing of the floor is being debated again.

The FF Plus voted against the floor-crossing legislation, and we will again vote against this legislation. We understand the necessity of having this Bill in place. In fact, I took your point yesterday in the committee, hon Mokoena, and I understand the situation. But it goes against our principles, although we understand that it needs to go through. But in spite of the fact that it is a necessary situation we cannot support it, because it unfortunately again involves the whole principle of violating the will of the people. We cannot support anything like that. But we understand the necessity, and we feel offended by the different viewpoints that were taken up by the DA yesterday in the NA, and today here in the NCOP. As far as FF Plus is concerned I just repeat: We will not support the legislation. Thank you.

Mr S SHICEKA: Hon Chairperson of the Council, Deputy Minister, Deputy Chairperson of the Council, Acting Chief Whip, Mr Sulliman, and hon colleagues, you can see that the Acting Chief Whip takes “acting” very seriously. He even sits in the Chief Whip’s seat. [Laughter.]

The principal Act raised fundamental principles that are entrenched in our Constitution, in particular the principle of freedom of association. In this country we are living in interesting times, in times where in our country the motive forces are in a state of permanent motion. That period is characterised as a young, developing democracy, pregnant with many possibilities of building a better life for all.

In a period of transition the situation is fluid, therefore the mechanism in this country was created to allow men and women to choose which party they want to belong to. One year after the elections, and one year before the elections, that is what we call the crossing of the floor. The ANC, Mr Willem Le Roux, to give you a lesson in history - because I think at that time you were not part of the DP - during negotiations at Codesa at Kempton Park was very reluctant to allow this clause in our Constitution. However the DP insisted on this issue, particularly Mr Colin Eglin. You would have been aware of this if you knew the history.

That clause was then called the antidefection clause. The ANC reluctantly agreed to it. Therefore, you must know that we implemented this clause and the laws that are subsequent to that reluctantly, because we knew that the ANC is a parliament of the people and that the ANC is an organisation that is loved by the people of this country. The ANC is the only organisation in the world that gains a majority after elections. In countries across the world parties decline when they conduct elections, but the ANC grows further and further with each election. It is the only party that we have – the ANC.

Therefore, when you, Mr Le Roux, say that the ANC is divided at the moment, you are not correct. The ANC is an organisation that allows differences because it believes that differences are healthy, but we are able to manage those differences, and we are able to ensure that the party emerges out of those differences as more united than ever before. Even now this movement is going to emerge much stronger than ever before. [Applause.]

Hon member Le Roux, you say the ANC wants to gobble up members of other parties. That is not the intention of the ANC. People come to the ANC voluntarily. They join the ANC and they sign on as members, because they believe in its policies and they believe in its principles. They come to join these organisations as individuals. Therefore, Baba Mzizi, when you talk about this party as a party that allows . . .

. . . ukugcogcoma. Uyabona Baba uMzizi . . . [ . . . moving from one spot to another. You see, Mr Mzizi . . .]

Mnu M A MZIZI: Kunjalo impela! [Yes, that is how it is!]

Mr S SHICEKA: . . . I think you must go down memory lane. In this country the ANC is loved by the people. If you will remember, in 2003 when the floor-crossing came, your party held a night vigil, a day before the floor- crossing kicked in. Its intention was to ensure that you had a hold on the members so that they did not cross the floor. [Applause.] Some of them were dismissed, but the eventual decay, when last year’s elections were held, set in when you lost the only province that you governed. That province, today, as I speak, is governed by the ANC.

We know that your fear is that we will gain a bigger majority in that province. You are panicking. [Interjections.] The situation is being compounded by the fact that a new party is being created, led by Mr Ziba Jiyani. The situation is more complex now. You are not only faced by the ANC, but by your own child.

When we move to the issue of the UDM, we have a situation where the UDM . . .

Mr A WATSON: Chairperson, on a point of order: The member is so honest about other parties, will he take a question?

Mr S SHICEKA: Yes.

Mr A WATSON: Chair, it is common knowledge that the ANC is the political lucky packet of South Africa, will you tell us what part of that lucky packet you come from? [Laughter.]

Mr S SHICEKA: Chair, what the member is saying is a figment of his imagination. There is no truth in what he is saying. [Applause.] [Interjections.] When you go down memory lane, the UDM led only one council in this country - it was in Umtata. When the time for floor-crossing arrived last year they panicked, they dismissed councillors, even ward councillors were dismissed, because they were hoping that they were going to hold on to that council, so that they could display their own policies.

They thus dismissed them, by-elections were held, and the ANC emerged victorious. It took that council. That council is now under ANC leadership.

The DA had one province that it led in this country - which is the province in which we are. When it was the time for floor-crossing it panicked, and after panicking the eventuality came last year that the people of this province chose to elect the ANC to take charge of their affairs. [Interjections.] Today the people back the ANC because they believe the policies of the ANC are the good policies.

The question that we must ask ourselves is whether there is any party in this country that has not been given an opportunity by the people of this country. The IFP, the UDM and the DA all failed to show policies that are sustainable and that will build a better life for all. The people have chosen to say that there is only one party in this country, and that party is the ANC. [Interjections.]

The ANC has a vision; it has a plan and it has programmes to ensure that the quality of life of the people of this country is improved. Therefore, members, when people choose to cross the floor, they will choose a party that has a plan, a party that has a vision, a party that has programmes to ensure that . . . [Laughter.] [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! They are wasting your time. Order!

Mr S SHICEKA: Chair, on that note we must accept that we entered this terrain of struggle reluctantly, but the people of this country are saying: “We want you; you are the only organisation that can lead us to a land of promise.” [Interjections.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Chairperson and hon members, I am tempted to “gooi kole” [heap coals]. [Laughter.] They say I have to be much calmer now. May I start by thanking everyone who participated in the debate? We did not say too much about the Bills but we said a lot about other things, which in its own right makes it a very interesting debate that we have had. I have listened very carefully and if there are any issues that people have raised which we have to follow up, we will do so. The portfolio committee and the select committee have suggested in a resolution the matters that we have to look at. We will do so and try and tighten up issues. I think it is important and I think it has come out in the speeches that these Bills have not really got anything to do with principles and politics, and so on. They are really about good governance. These are the issues that flow out of the floor-crossing. People may differ about it and have differences of opinion, but the legislation itself, now that the principle is there, just makes things work better; the funding works better and how we decide how delegates should come to Parliament also.

I want to thank everyone for their inputs. I want to thank everyone that has worked hard. Again, Mr Johan Labuschagne – I didn’t know you were so famous and maybe what you should do is look at this chance of floor- crossing and see with this kind of popularity if there isn’t a space somewhere in a party for you, Mr Labuschagne. There may just be opportunities. I just want to comment on two people. Dr Van Heerden, I really am sorry that the FF Plus has not been able to see their way clear to support this legislation like other parties. As I say, it is very technical.

There is a more important reason and that is, as I said yesterday to Dr Mulder, when we passed the floor-crossing legislation and you opposed it at that stage as a party, it was him who came and raised the issue about consequential amendments and other legislation, particularly the funding issue. We brought this legislation here because of the FF Plus. We pass this legislation because of the FF Plus. And now they don’t want to support it. They are the only party that is not supporting it. It is so sad. It really makes my heart so sore that when we help opposition parties and when we work for their resolutions and things that they ask for, that they cannot support it. It is a really sad day for me on this occasion that you couldn’t support us. Baba Mzizi, let me just say this: I know you said a few years ago that: “Die wet gee jou grys hare.” [“This Act gives you grey hair.”]

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Chairperson, I hate to interrupt the Deputy Minister, but is he willing to take a question?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I didn’t give you the floor.

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Mr Deputy Minister, would you grant that it is a consequence of the “oorloopwetgewing” [floor-crossing legislation] that this particular legislation . . .

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Mr Van Heerden, why are you rising? Is it a point of order or what?

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: I apologise, Chairperson. I was not granted permission to stand up and put a question.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Do you want to put a question?

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Yes, I want to put a question.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Deputy Minister, would you like to take a question?

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: No, it was all said in jest. It is fine.

Dan, Baba Mzizi, sê jy dat jy grys hare het oor hierdie wet. Maar ek kyk na jou kop, en jy het geen hare nie! [Gelag.] Nou kan ek nie verstaan wat aangaan nie. Lyk my die hare het eers grys geraak en toe val dit uit. Ek dink jy het op die oomblik ’n siviele eis teen die regering vir jou min hare. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Then, Mr Mzizi, you say that this Act gives you grey hair. But I am looking at your head and see that you have no hair! [Laughter.] Now I don’t know what is going on. It looks as if your hair first turned grey and then fell out. I think you have a civil case against the government for your little hair at the moment.]

Obviously, the issue that has really been discussed is the issue of crossing the floor and I think it is important that we remind ourselves of these things, especially now that elections are coming closer. We get every excited and we forget things and we become very “ahistorical”. I think members have already pointed out that the history of floor-crossing in this country is well-recorded. The governing party very strongly resisted the issue of floor-crossing, particularly in the first years of this country.

There were reasons for it and not because of some big principle. The reason for it was that at that stage our politics were very fluid. We were just moving out of the apartheid system and we were trying to create a new democracy. We felt at that stage that it would be very difficult for us to create a mechanism in the Constitution that would prevent that fluidity from maybe getting out of hand. The first few years we were very strongly opposed to it in order to make sure that until we became a settled democracy and had started creating institutions, that we try to keep things as inflexible as possible. Therefore, parties like the DP and members such as Mr Eglin, Mr Ken Andrew and others very strongly fought for the crossing of the floor, which we did not agree upon. Then at a stage a few years down the line, they again tried to introduce the matter and a committee of this Parliament was appointed to look at the issue.

I remember that the hon Yunis Karrim was the chairperson. Again Parliament felt that the time was not yet ready and the ANC argued that we were still trying to consolidate our democracy and that we should be careful. And then something happened which was called the marriage of the NNP and the DP and they became a democratic alliance to fight a local government election. And then things went very wrong. They did not like each other. They wanted to get divorced and they could not stand each other.

Enormous pressure built up in the body politic of South Africa to deal with this issue. It was becoming a circus. And at that stage we as the governing party felt that things had been consolidated and that our democracy was strong enough to withstand it and then we were prepared to look at this issue, and deal with that issue which was being argued very strongly, openly and not so openly, with the governing party to please let this thing happen where they can have a divorce. We then, on that basis, introduced it. It has got nothing to do with us and has nothing to do with any . . .

. . . verdeeldheid in die ANC. Dit het niks daarmee te doen gehad nie. Dit het niks met enigiets anders te doen gehad nie, want as jy kyk na die geskiedenis van die ANC tot nou toe, in elke verkiesing doen ons beter. Ons het nie oorlopery nodig om sterker te word nie. Ons het dit nie nodig nie. Daarom het ons toe die Grondwet gewysig en die wetgewing ingedien om hierdie saak te hanteer. En laat ek vir julle sê, hier is ’n klomp mense in dié Huis – en mev Camerer in die ander Huis – wat toe daarvan gebruik gemaak het en oorgestap het. Toe was dit nie meer ’n beginselsaak nie. As julle nou argumenteer dat dit ’n beginselsaak is en dat julle teen oorlopery gekant is, wat sê dit oor julle aksies in daardie stadium? Daar is party mense wat so gereeld oorloop, hulle loop meer gereeld oor as wat hulle hul onderklere ruil. [Gelag.] Dit is hoe beginselvas party mense is. Dit sê natuurlik niks oor hoe gereeld julle jul onderklere ruil nie, maar ek dink dit is belangrik dat as jy sê jy staan op beginsels, dan moet jy jou hou by jou beginsels. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[. . . division in the ANC. It had nothing to do with that. It had nothing to do with anything else, because if you look at the history of the ANC up to now, we are doing better in every election. We do not need floor- crossing to become stronger. We do not need it. That is why we amended the Constitution and introduced the legislation to deal with this matter. And let me tell you, there are many people in this House – and Mrs Camerer in the other House – who then used it and crossed the floor. Then it was no longer a matter of principle. If you are now arguing that this is a matter of principle and that you are opposed to floor-crossing, what does it say about your actions at the time? There are some people who cross the floor so often that they cross the floor more often than they change their underwear. [Laughter.] That is how principled some people are. This, of course, doesn’t say anything about how often you change your underwear, but I think it is important that if you say you are standing on principles, then you should adhere to your principles.]

A principle, if you look in the dictionary, is a fundamental tenet of who and what you are. A principle is immutable and fixed. You don’t play with principles. Therefore, when Mrs Camerer yesterday and Mr Le Roux today said to us this is a principle and we will now change our stance - and anyone who wants to walk across from us to another party, we will punish them, if anyone wants to walk to us, we will accept them - how can that be a principle? How can that be a principle? That is opportunism of the worst kind. If you have a principle, then you say: I will not accept anyone else into my party. Then one can say one respects that. That is good. You stand by your principle. But you can’t like the DA and the ACDP say it is a principle that we don’t accept it, but if someone walks over to us, we accept them. That is wrong. That can’t be a principle. That is opportunism.

You go even so far, Mr Le Roux, as to say the following: “Ons het besluit dat ons van nou af net mense sal aanvaar wat aan ons beginsels glo”. [We have decided that from now on we will only accept people who believe in our principles.] We will only accept people who accept our principles into our party. What do we accept by that? Until now have you accepted people who don’t accept your principles? That is the only conclusion that one can come to because that is the corollary of it. I can say to you, for example: The ANC only accepts people who accept its principles. The NNP have now gone and said that they accept the Freedom Charter, they accept the principles that we stand for and on that basis we accepted them. [Interjections.] Well, Mr Watson, people in glasshouses should not speak. You are one of the people who crossed the floor. [Laughter.] Yes, you were a NP member. [Applause.] You are one of those who change your party more often than your underclothes. You are one of them. [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order, order! Mr Watson, why are you rising? A point of order?

Mr A WATSON: On a point of order, the Deputy Minister is deliberately misleading the House. I have never, ever crossed the floor as an elected politician. I resigned from the NNP and I was without a job for more than a year and then I joined the DP. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: How often do you change your underclothes? That principle is “stay where you are”. I want to remind you about this issue of betrayal. You really should take the chance to go and read a little bit. Go and look at the principle of crossing the floor anywhere in the world. Most democracies – and the ones that you all aspire to – have the principle of floor-crossing as part of their constitutions and dispensations.

I try, and I really try, to understand this difficulty. Where do we find that this is the most terrible and obnoxious principle, and where do we find that it is something that is kind of foreign to the rest of the world. Firstly, this is an established principle in almost every democracy.

Secondly, our Constitutional Court has had a challenge about crossing the floor. They look at all the values in the Constitution, and not a single value could be found in the Constitution that actually says that crossing the floor is unconstitutional; and therefore the Constitutional Court found that it’s in line with our Constitution and the values in the Constitution.

Why is it betrayal? How is that possible? This Constitution that we attach so much value to - and we say it’s such a wonderful Constitution - why do we do it? It is because of the values that are enshrined in it, and nothing in those values says there is anything wrong with regard to the principle of crossing the floor. And the Constitutional Court says so, not me; and it said so unanimously.

Then I want to remind you that I agree with people who argue that we must be careful of crossing the floor in the sense that it can corrupt our politics. Of course we know that, everyone knows that. I mean, the parties that are actually saying yes know it better than the lot of us, because they have used it more often. [Laughter.] But, that is why, even when we argue, we said that we’d only allow with the first crossing that each one could individually decide what they wanted to do. However, from then on we put in place a 10% threshold. As from this crossing of the floor, if you want to cross you can’t do so just on your own; at least 10% of your party have to go with you.

Why did we do that? Exactly to try and stop, to try and minimise the kind of corruption that can take place; that is why. So that you won’t get big changes, because you’d have to get big groups of people that actually decide to go with you. In this legislature, for example, if the ANC or a group of ANC-people want to cross the floor, at least 10% of that House would have to do so. The DA in the other House would have to do so, 10% of their party as it exists there would have to do so.

There are very few countries in the world that actually have that principle. In the rest of the world individuals can do what they want; we have said no, from now on . . . [Interjections.] . . . Exactly because we don’t want this to be used as something that you can wave, and wake up in the morning and say, come over to us and we will give you something - exactly not to do that, we’ve introduced a 10% threshold. Somehow everyone’s forgotten about that, but it’s in the Constitution, it’s in the law, for now.

And also, one has to be careful. You see, you shout and “maak beloftes in die Wes-Kaap, u maak beloftes”. [make promises in the Western Cape, you make promises.] We haven’t made a single “belofte” [promise]. I’m part of the Provincial Executive Committee of the Western Cape and not a single promise has been made in this province. But what I can tell you is that I read in the newspapers that promises are being made to other opposition parties by the DA. [Applause.] That’s there; it’s being said. [Interjections.]

Mr A WATSON: Not true.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: If you want to look at the truth of it, look at this: They need a few people to be able to take over the province. How are they going to do it other than with promises? How will they do it otherwise? Already two of the NNP people that are coming over to us are already MECs; we don’t have to promise them anything. The other member already has a position; there doesn’t have to be any promises about it. [Interjections.]

Mr A WATSON: What about the one you’re going to make ambassador? You don’t even know.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: I don’t know who we’re going to make ambassador. Who? Who are we going to make ambassador?

Mr A WATSON: That other gentleman.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Who? Piet Meyer! Piet Meyer has never . . . [Interjections.] . . . Piet Meyer is going to form his own party. You don’t read the newspapers! [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order, order! Mr Deputy Minister!

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: So what has that got to do with anything?

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order, order, Deputy Minister! Order, order! I will not allow a dialogue between two people in this House. It’s a debate; respond to the debate. Mr Deputy Minister, no dialogue, please.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Sorry, Chair. The promises emanate from people who want to take over, and we must look at ourselves. “This is a principle for us, but we’ll accept others . . .” “You make promises, but they make promises . . . ”. And they’re blaming everyone else. So I think we should be very careful.

Let me tell you what the truth is. Let me tell you what the truth is. If you go and speak to DA people, softly, they’ll tell you what it is. When the crossing of the floor took place last time, at national level things worked out for them. People walked over here and they got quite a few people, but at local government level they lost out. That was the problem. They lost out big time.

In this province, where do they govern in this province? Where? They lost out big time in this province, and suddenly it became a principle. It had nothing to do with people feeling there’s something wrong with this, but they realised that they are in trouble. They did not get what they wanted last time, and they definitely won’t get it this time. So, suddenly we make a policy change and from now on we are not going to be crossing the floor, but we will accept people from other parties. Now, you see, that is opportunism.

And as the hon Dr Van Heerden says, the problem is people are not stupid, man. The people out there in our communities are not stupid. They are not stupid. They see a thing for what it is. And when you come to them with these things, when you try and make out that you stand for principles and you are opportunistic, people will absolutely despise you and you will see the results in the elections. You’ll see it. What it is, is you think people are stupid and you can lie to them.

The one thing the ANC has always done, and that is why . . . Even when we go through difficulties in this country we’ve always been open and honest with our people. Even when we have difficulties we admit those difficulties, we say we haven’t done things wrong and we move on, and for that reason people respect you and will vote for you. But when you twist things and are opportunistic it will come back and it will bite you, it will bite you big time . . . [Laughter.] [Interjections.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Deputy Minister, you have one minute to wrap up.

The DEPUTY MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: I think that it would be important that in our own parties we see as we move forward on these issues, that the issue of what the principle is, is not the problem, it is the way in which we conduct ourselves. That is what people don’t like and what they despise out there - not this thing about betrayal, because there is no betrayal. There is nothing wrong with this principle. It is how people sometimes implement it. And if there is someone in the ANC that uses the crossing of the floor to promise people things, and do things that are not in our party policy, you must please tell us about that. We would like to deal with that, because it is unacceptable in the ANC to which I belong to use positions and use promises, and use money to entice people. We do not need that; we get 70% of the vote out there. We do not need those types of things.

So, if anyone makes the allegation that this party that I belong to does that, we would like you to tell us about that. But, equally, if you’re really principled, look at yourself and go and do the same thing in your party, then we wouldn’t have this debate and this discussion. Thank you very much.

Debate concluded.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

The House adjourned at 15:37.

                             __________

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                      WEDNESDAY, 24 AUGUST 2005

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Referral of Bill to National House of Traditional Leaders:

The Secretary to Parliament has, in accordance with section 18(1) of
the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, 2003 (Act No.
41 of 2003), referred the Repeal of Black Administration Act and
Amendment of Certain Laws Bill [B 25 – 2005] (National Assembly – sec
76) to the National House of Traditional Leaders, which must, within 30
days from the date of this referral, make any comments it wishes to
make.

National Council of Provinces:

1. Referrals to Committees of papers tabled

1.      The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
    Land and Environmental Affairs for consideration and report:

      a) International Plant Protection Convention, tabled in terms of
         section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996 (Act No 108 of 1996)


      b) Explanatory Memorandum to the International Plant Protection
         Convention.

2.      The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
    Labour and Public Enterprises:

      a) Recommendation of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) –
         Recommendation No 195 concerning Human Resource Development:
         Education, Training and Lifelong Learning, adopted by the
         Conference at it’s 92nd Session – Geneva, 17 June 2004.

3.      The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
    Security and Constitutional Affairs:

      a) Proclamation No R.26 published in Government Gazette No 27719
         dated 27 June 2005: Referral of matters to existing Special
         Investigating Unit and Special Tribunal in terms of the Special
         Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act, 1996 (Act No 74
         of 1996).


    (b)      Proclamation No R.27 published in Government Gazette No
         27719 dated 27 June 2005: Referral of matters to existing
         Special Investigating Unit and Special Tribunal in terms of
         the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act,
         1996 (Act No 74 of 1996).


    (c)      Government Notice No R.614 published in Government Gazette
         No 27719 dated 27 June 2005: Amendment of Regulations in terms
         of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No 3
         of 2000).

1. The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Education and Recreation for consideration:

   (a) Report and Financial Statements of Umalusi – Council for Quality Assurance in General and Further Education and Training for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

2. The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs for consideration:

   (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Johannesburg World Summit Company for 2002-2003, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2002-2003.

   (b) Report and Financial Statements of the Johannesburg World Summit Company for 2003-2004, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

3. The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Economic and Foreign Affairs:

   (a) Report on Information and Update Workshop for Pan-African Parliament Standing Committee on Cooperation, International Relations and Conflict Resolution, 1-2 April 2005.

4. The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on Finance for consideration and report:

 (a)    Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa
         and the Government of the Republic of Malaysia for the
         Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal
         Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income, tabled in terms of
         section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.


 (b)    Explanatory Memorandum on the Double Taxation Convention between
         the Government of the Republic of South Africa and the
         Government of the Republic of Malaysia.

1. The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Finance: (a) Proclamation No R.32 published in Government Gazette No 27766 dated 8 July 2005: Appointment and Re-appointment of members of the Tax Courts in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 53 of 1962).

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:

1. The Minister of Defence

   (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Armaments Corporation of South Africa Ltd (ARMSCOR) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004- 2005.

2. The Minister of Public Enterprises

   (a) Report and Financial Statements of Escom Holdings Limited (Escom) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Council of Provinces:

1. Report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on the Constitutional Matters Amendment Bill [B 22B - 2005] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 24 August 2005:

    The Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs,
    having considered the subject of the Constitutional Matters
    Amendment Bill [B 22B - 2005] (National Assembly - sec 75),
    referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
   
   
                   THURSDAY, 25 AUGUST 2005
   

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister of Health


      i) Nursing Bill [B 26 – 2005] (National Assembly – sec 76) [Bill
         and prior notice of its introduction published in Government
         Gazette No 27904 of 12 August 2005.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Health
         of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint
         Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint
         Rule 160, on 24 August 2005.


         In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification
         of the Bill may be submitted to the Joint Tagging Mechanism
         (JTM) within three parliamentary working days.

1. Draft bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

 1) Precious Metals Bill, 2005, submitted by the Minister of Minerals
    and Energy on 25 August 2005. Referred to the Portfolio Committee
    on Minerals and Energy and the Select Committee on Economic and
    Foreign Affairs.


 2) Diamonds Amendment Bill, 2005, submitted by the Minister of
    Minerals and Energy on 25 August 2005. Referred to the Portfolio
    Committee on Minerals and Energy and the Select Committee on
    Economic and Foreign Affairs.

National Council of Provinces

The Chairperson

1. Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces in respect of Bill passed by Assembly and transmitted to Council:

(1)    Bill passed by National Assembly on 25 August 2005 and
     transmitted for concurrence:


      i) South African Abattoir Corporation Act Repeal Bill [B 21 –
         2005] (National Assembly – sec 75).


      The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Land and
      Environmental Affairs of the National Council of Provinces.

1. Membership of the Council

   The vacancy in the representation of the province of the Northern Cape, which occurred owing to the resignation of Ms S J Loe on 15 August 2005, has been filled with effect from 16 August 2005 by the appointment of Mr L H Fielding.

2. Referrals to committees of papers tabled

   (1) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on Local Government and Administration:

     (a)  General Report of the Auditor-General on the Audit
           Outcomes of Local Government for the financial year ended
           30 June 2004 [RP 73-2005].
   

   (2) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Economic and Foreign Affairs:

     (a)  Report of the South African Delegation to the Third
          Ordinary Session of the Pan-African Parliament, 29 March
          2005, held at Gallagher Estates, Midrand.
   

3. The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on Finance:

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the South African Reserve
     Bank for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent
     Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.
 (b)    Report and Financial Statements of the Development Bank of
     Southern Africa for 2004-2005, including the Report of the
     Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.


 (c)    Report and Financial Statements of the Financial Services Board
     for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
     Financial Statements for 2004-2005 [RP 51-2005].


 (d)    Activities Report of the Development Bank of Southern Africa for
     2004-2005.


 (e)    Development Bank of Southern Africa – Footprints of Development
     2001-2005.


 (f)    Government Notice No 1114 published in Government Gazette No
     27773 dated 15 July 2005: Amendment of the list of public entities
     as contained in schedule 2 and 3 of the Public Finance Management
     Act, 1999.

1. The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on Labour and Public Enterprises:

   a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

   b) Report and Financial Statements of Escom Holdings Limited (Escom) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

2. The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs for consideration and report:

 a) Report on the provisional suspension from office with remuneration:
    Mr K Sulliman, an additional magistrate at the Durban Magistrate
    Court.


 b) Report on the provisional suspension from office with remuneration:
    Mr M S E Khumalo, magistrate and Head of office at the Amsterdam
    Magistrate Court.

 c) Report on the provisional suspension from office with remuneration:
    Mr M F Mathe, an additional magistrate at the Pinetown Magistrate
    Court.

1. The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs:

 a) Report and Financial Statements of the Armaments Corporation of
    South Africa Ltd (ARMSCOR) for 2004-2005, including the Report of
    the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

1. The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on Finance:

   (a) Proclamation No R.32 published in Government Gazette No 27766 dated 8 July 2005: Appointment and Re-appointment of members of the Tax Courts in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 53 of 1962).

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs

(a)    Report and Financial Statements of Ncera Farms (Pty) Ltd for
    2004-2005, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the
    Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

1. The Minister of Labour

 a) Report and Financial Statements of the Commission for Conciliation,
    Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) for 2004-2005, including the
    Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2004-
    2005 [RP 54-2005].

1. The Minister of Education

 a) Report and Financial Statements of South African Council for
    Educators (SACE) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Auditor-
    General on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005.

1. The Minister of Arts and Culture

 a) Report and Financial Statements of Artscape for 2004-2005,
    including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
    Statements for 2004-2005.