THURSDAY, 18 MAY 2006 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

                                ____

The House met at 14:04.

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY

THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC

    South Africa’s contribution to eradication of global poverty

1. Mrs T J Tshivhase (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   In light of the fact that the United Nations declared the period 1997 to 2006 as the Decade for the Eradication of Poverty, what contribution has been made by South Africa to the effort to eradicate global poverty? N420E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: First of all, Madam Speaker, let me thank the hon Tshivhase for posing this question, which draws our attention to this important challenge of the eradication of poverty globally. Indeed, as the question indicates, the United Nations had declared the period 1997- 2006 as the Decade for the Eradication of Poverty. You would be aware that since that resolution of the General Assembly of the UN, there have at least three important conferences of the UN that have also focused on this matter, and would therefore have had an impact on the decisions that were taken at that time by the General Assembly. I am referring here to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, the Millennium Conference Summit of the UN in 2000 and the Monterey Conference on Financing for Development, all of which also addressed this particular matter.

The hon member wants to know what contribution has been made by South Africa to the effort to eradicate global poverty. To that extent she is not asking that we address matters that are domestic. I must say that our own efforts to address the matter of poverty have to start at home. Our first response to that Decade for the Eradication of Poverty has got to be about what we are doing domestically. With regard to that, I would like to say that ever since a democratic government was constituted, our programmes have focused precisely on this issue and it would be quite possible, relatively quite easy, to give a comprehensive account to the NA as to what has been done with regard to this, whether it relates to the management of the public finances, measures that have been introduced in order to achieve redistribution of wealth and income, matters that relate to interventions in the economy to make it grow, so that we have greater volumes of wealth with which to address this matter and various other matters.

That would be our first response as South Africa’s contribution to the efforts to eradicate global poverty. That would have to be the domestic effort to address what is indeed a very important matter in our country. Centrally, what we have done in the last 12 years has indeed been to focus on this issue.

The second element of that response has been on the continent and therefore more relevant on the continent of Africa and to the question that the hon member posed. I will say something about that. The third element of that response is the more global participation of our country in processes that have sought to address this matter.

The resolution of the General Assembly in December 1996, which declared this first Decade for the Eradication of Poverty, said that eradicating poverty is an ethical, social, political and economic imperative of humankind. The main objective of the Decade was the eradication of absolute poverty and the substantial reduction of overall poverty in the world. It constituted a commitment by the developing countries to direct resources freed through debt relief, debt reduction and debt cancellation, to an integrated poverty eradication strategy and national plans towards poverty eradicating activities, sustainable economic growth and development, social protection for the poorest and the most vulnerable, including women and children, priority areas of the social sector spending, including provision of basic services, primary education and health care, good governance, including the economic and political empowerment of citizens, efficient, transparent and accountable institutions and internationally agreed Millennium Development Goals, which came later.

Further, it also constituted a commitment by the developed countries to promote capacity-building and facilitate access to and transfer of technologies and corresponding knowledge on favourable terms, ensuring a more open and equitable system of international finance, facilitating access by the poor in the developing countries to microfinance, increasing development assistance to 0,7% of the gross national product of the wealthier countries, with greater co-ordination of that assistance, and opening the markets of the developed countries to the exports of the developing countries.

We had to respond to those goals as set by that resolution of the General Assembly, which declared the Decade. Last year’s UN Summit on the Millennium Development Goals came to the conclusion, clearly, that insufficient progress has been made towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals decided in 2000. It drew particular attention to the fact that our continent was falling behind with regard to this. The commitment by the developed countries to increase their development assistance to that 0,7% of GNP had not been met by most countries, except the Nordic countries and the Netherlands. It said, nevertheless, that absolute poverty in most parts of the world had declined, but had increased in Africa by 100 million people since 1990. However, the trend of economic growth in Africa has shown an upswing of 1,2% per year since 2000.

I think members are familiar with what we have been doing with regard to what I said was a second response to the challenge that was posed by the UN. That second response concentrated on the African continent. There is general agreement – and I know there is general agreement – that what is fundamentally important on the African continent in order to achieve this objective of the eradication of poverty and achieving the necessary rates of growth, is the matter of achieving peace and stability, security, freedom and democracy on our continent, so that we do indeed create the conditions that would enable us to address the development challenges which the Decade sought to address.

In that regard, I think the House is familiar with the work that we have been doing as a country to assist in the resolution of a whole variety of problems and challenges on the continent that have to do with peace and stability and democracy, including the interventions that we have made with regard to the DRC, Rwanda, Burundi, Somalia, the Darfur region, Côte d’Ivoire and the Comores, and that is a very important part of the response that we have made as a country to the call by the UN that we should indeed eradicate global poverty. I am happy to say that with regard to all of these matters, where we have intervened, there is progress. It does not mean that there are no problems that persist.

Recently, the Cabinet made a decision that we should contribute to a multilateral debt-relief initiative and commit to once-off payments to the World Bank’s International Development Association or IDA, and to the African Development Bank. The objective of this intervention is to deepen debt relief to the highly indebted poor countries, in order to help them to reach their Millennium Development Goals.

Globally we actively participate in all manner of initiatives, including the negotiations at the WTO, to build a global trading system focused on what was agreed on at Doha, which was correctly characterised as a Doha development round. I think, again, globally there is acceptance that the world trading system needs to be changed in a manner that would impact positively on this matter of addressing global poverty. I better stop, Madam Speaker.

The SPEAKER: I have allowed the President to continue to respond on this very, very crucial matter because unless the world solves the problem of poverty, we are not doing anything as leaders. I was also praying that President would look to his left – and indeed he saw it.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Your prayer has been answered, Madam Speaker. [Laughter.]

Muf T J TSHIVHASE: Ndi a livhuwa Mulangadzulo. Ndi na inwe mbudziso hafhu ine nda khou i livhisa kha Mailausumbwa. Ro lavhelesa vhukondi he ha vha hone kha luta lwa u fhedzisela lwa nyambedzano dza WTO, ndi afhio maga a u dzhenelela ane Afurika Tshipembe la tea u a tevhela? [Zwiseo.] (Translation of Tshivenda paragraph follows.)

[Mrs T J TSHIVHASE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a follow-up question that I wish to direct to the President. Given the impasse that occurred in the last round of the WTO negotiations, what steps of intervention must be followed by South Africa? [Applause.]]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, may I ask Minister Mufamadi to translate please? [Laughter.]

The SPEAKER: Yes, unfortunately the President does not have the equipment to be able to hear the interpreting services.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: What I know is how to do the tshikona, Madam Speaker. [Laughter.]

The MINISTER FOR PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Speaking one of the eleven languages that are recognised in the country, the hon Tshivhase wants to know, in view of the difficulties that were experienced during the WTO negotiations, especially during the last round of the WTO negotiations, which steps does the President think South Africa needs to follow in order to ensure that, notwithstanding those difficulties, progress can be realised?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: I do trust that the hon Minister translated that correctly. [Laughter.] The issue of the WTO negotiations is a matter of concern for everybody around the world. As I had indicated, all of us accepted, and all of us said that this was the Doha development round. Central to the outcome of the Doha WTO process was this matter of development and therefore the fundamental outcome of this process of negotiations at the WTO would indeed have to address the issue of development and therefore the matter of the reduction of poverty globally, as was indicated during this Decade for the Eradication of Poverty.

There is indeed a serious problem and part of it relates to agreement with regard to agricultural support provided to farmers, both within the European Union and the United States, which creates these difficult problems of access by agricultural products from the developing countries.

We still hope that in the ongoing negotiations, both the EU and the United States in particular would be able to change their positions – and I say, we hope, since none of us can make any commitment that they will do so – so that the issues about market access and the possibility for agricultural products from the developing countries to enter these markets on a just basis, without having to confront the subsidies provided to the farmers in these areas, would indeed be able to change their positions with regard to this.

South Africa belongs to the important group engaged in the negotiations, the G20 – developing countries - and South Africa continues to engage with that group to try and persuade the developed world to make the necessary changes. We interact with these processes in all other forums in order to achieve this objective. The answer to the question is that we shall continue to do what we did in the past to engage as vigorously as we can, to negotiate and produce a successful and acceptable outcome with regard to this issue of market access for agricultural products, and therefore the related issues of subsidies paid by the developed countries to their farmers.

The SPEAKER: We now pass on to question 8 posed by the hon Gomomo. I don’t see any supplementary questions on my screen. I am very glad to see them now.

Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker, certainly it must mean again that the process is not working. I don’t want to ask a question, but certainly Mr Boinamo does.

Mr G G BOINAMO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hon President, as part of the global community, South Africa is also concerned with the eradication of poverty within its own borders. In September 2005 the UN released its annual human development report. The HDI focuses on three measurable dimensions of human development: leading a long and healthy life, being educated and having a decent standard of living. South Africa ranked 120th out of 177 countries and has fallen 35 places since 1990. How does the President explain this dramatic drop in the standard of living in our country under this government, and what steps is he taking to reverse the situation?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, the report to which the hon member refers is not prepared by us. It is prepared by the UNDP and maybe they are the ones who should explain how they have come to this conclusion. [Applause.] The conclusion is wrong. The conclusion is patently wrong. The Minister of Finance, hon Trevor Manuel, has indeed been engaging the UN Development Programme on this report to ask them very specific questions about the actual information on which they base these conclusions. I would imagine that the UNDP would in time provide us with that information. We are quite convinced that information is wrong; the information on which they based this determination to which the hon member has referred. They made the determination but quite how they did it, is exactly the same explanation that we are seeking. The hon member says I must explain it but we did not draw up the report. It is not our report. The UNDP must explain and that is why the Minister of Finance is engaging them to get that explanation. I am quite sure that should the UNDP point us to certain realities of South Africa, which had resulted in us falling 35 places on the list, they should point us to those factors, which resulted in that, factually. We would address them. I am quite convinced that the report is wrong and I would be very interested to hear how the UNDP explains itself.

Ms S C VOS: Mr President, as you have indicated, in global terms the continent of Africa must be seen as the most in need in terms of poverty eradication. Now regional economic integration and political co-operation have been agreed by African leadership as vital to achieve this and it has been envisaged, in a multi-phased approach, first of all, to dismantle tariff barriers and customs duties among African countries, moving finally to an African common market. How confident are you that this can be achieved in the short term? There were documents that I have looked at and this would hopefully be done by 2007. This does not seem to be the case. Would you give us some idea of your views in terms of how we can reach these goals in terms of regional integration and what the problems are?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I suppose it does depend on how short the short term is. If the short term ends in 2007, then it is too short. In the course of the implementation of the Nepad programmes, one of the matters that has become very clear is that a lot of work needs to be done to strengthen the regional economic communities, SADC, Ecowas and so on. These are central instruments in terms of achieving the economic integration of the continent that we aspire to, to which the hon member refers. This includes the matter of creating free trade areas on the continent, regionally, and then building up to cover the continent as a whole.

One of the serious problems that has surfaced has been that our regional economic communities are not strong enough, don’t have sufficient capacity, haven’t had the capacity to do the things that needed to be done in order to achieve the objectives to which the hon member correctly refers. As a consequence of that, there has been a very regular interaction between the Nepad Steering Committee, the Nepad Secretariat and the regional economic communities to address this matter.

We have set up, with the co-operation of our development partners, a specific fund based at the African Development Bank to assist precisely with regard to this, to ensure that we are able to beef up the capacity, improve the effectiveness of the regional economic communities, so that they can discharge their responsibilities with regard to this integration. It is necessary and it has to be done. If our short term were 2007, we would have to extend it a bit beyond that. It is not possible that we would achieve this African common market within a short timeframe.

Mr L M GREEN: Hon President, there seems to be two schools of thought in this debate on the eradication of poverty. On the one hand you have the school of thought, and they often say this, that since the coming to power of our new government in 1994 up till now poverty has doubled. Amongst those people is the South African Institute of Race Relations with its recent 700-page report, indicating that this has in fact happened.

On the other hand, there is the school of thought – and maybe this seems to be the stronger of the two – which says that poverty has in fact been reduced in South Africa, given the government social spending, the amount that has gone into grants, electrification …

The SPEAKER: Your minute is finishing in two seconds.

Mr L M GREEN: Mr President, could you tell us, as the leader of our nation, whether you believe that poverty has significantly been reduced by the present government?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: The hon member is quite correct about the serious challenges you mentioned a bit earlier on. The serious challenge of poverty in our country has to be at the centre of everything that we do. Therefore we shouldn’t respond to it, whether this school of thought is right and that one is wrong, as a matter of belief. The hon member asked whether I believe it. It should not be a matter of belief. It ought to be a matter of the actuality, the facts about what is actually happening. I am quite certain that there would be no logical reason why, with everything that has happened in the country, people are poorer now than they were in

1. It is an illogical proposition.

I do not know if you saw an article written by Dr Gumede in our media responding to the report of the Institute of Race Relations to which you referred. I read the article because Dr Gumede said I must read it. He didn’t express beliefs. He presented facts in that report. He cited studies by other academics in the country, which said precisely the opposite of what the Institute of Race Relations had said. I can explain clearly why it is the case and on what facts I would base my own conclusions, that a school of thought which says that there has been an increase in poverty in the country, would obviously be wrong. It relates to the matter that was raised earlier concerning the human development report of the UNDP. Even they can’t adduce these facts, which would result in a conclusion that the situation has become worse in the country since 1994. So, beyond belief, basing our conclusions on facts, I am quite sure that the Institute of Race Relations was quite wrong.

       Shortage of suitably skilled persons in Public Service

1. Mr P J Gomomo (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   Whether, with reference to the shortage of suitably skilled persons in the Public Service which has given rise to weaknesses in service delivery, a lack of sound financial administration and management and under-spending, including on capital projects, the Government is considering any interventions to address this challenge; if not, why not; if so, what interventions? N421E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, yes, there is a shortage of suitably skilled persons in the Public Service, which has given rise to the weakness in service delivery.

In 2004, an audit was conducted across the 284 municipalities to assess the challenges they faced with regard to delivery of services. The number one challenge that emerged was one of the lack of skills, especially management and “hard skills” in welding, engineering, mechanical engineering and so on. That audit gave rise to Project Consolidate, which is aimed at providing hands-on support and capacity-building at local government level.

Last year the Cabinet requested the Forum of SA Directors-General to assess capacity and organisation of the government to perform and deliver socioeconomic programmes. Again, the number one challenge in the findings was identified as shortage of skills.

Following the discussions on capacity and the incapacity and organisation of the state, focus capacity assessments were conducted by the Department of Public Service and Administration on selected departments to determine the gaps and present corrective recommendations to the Cabinet. The departments that were assessed were Health, Education, Justice and Constitutional Development, Housing and Trade and Industry.

In addition to that, of course, there have been assessments made in the various sectors within the Public Service to identify precisely the shortages that we need to address. As a consequence of this, for instance, a plan of action has been developed for the health and education sectors for the development of targeted training programmes for hospital CEOs and the reopening of nursing training colleges, norms for principals and district staffing procedures, all of which have been completed. A skills database has been developed and piloted in the Departments of Trade and Industry and Justice, and the Department of Public Service and Administration to focus on the levels of skills shortages across the government.

The same matter, as hon members know, is being addressed in the context of the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative. There are a number of initiatives currently being undertaken by government to address these challenges. Five priority skills have been identified as critical spheres for that intervention.

The technical working group of the Joint Initiative for Priority Skills Acquisition, Jipsa, is currently involved in the process of developing concrete plans for the implementation of interventions to address the following: the high level, world-class engineering and planning skills for the network industries, that is, transport, communications and energy; city, urban and regional planning and engineering skills addressing gaps at the municipal levels; artisanal and technical skills, with priority attention to infrastructure development, housing and energy and in other areas of further education and training provision, identified as being in strong demand in the labour market. The other area is management and planning skills in education and health, mathematics, science, ICT and language competence in the public schooling system.

Among other things, as an example of what is being done, the Old Mutual Business School, in conjunction with the Office of the Deputy President, will launch its foundational project management training to 100 employees within local government in support of Asgisa and Jipsa in particular.

The Infrastructure Delivery Improvement Programme, targeted at provinces, has already been initiated by the National Treasury. It comprises a comprehensive project management and infrastructure programme, management guidelines and computer spreadsheet tools to provincial governments for departments to use.

In addition, consultants have been sent to provinces to train people in the use of the infrastructure delivery improvement programme toolkit and assisting in the analysis of provincial constraints with regard to infrastructure delivery. As we have already mentioned, work is continuing in the context of Project Consolidate, as well as an intervention that has been made via the Development Bank of Southern Africa – an initiative called Siyenzamanje.

The clock says I must stop, Madam Speaker.

Mr P J GOMOMO: Madam Speaker, … ndicinga ukuba uMongameli uwuphendule ncakasana nangobuchwepheshe umbuzo. Kambe ke ndifuna ukulandelisa ngelithi … [… I think the President replied to the question vividly and with expertise. Nevertheless, I want to follow up by saying …]

… that we recognise the importance to create an enabling environment for a single Public Service. How far have we got to ensure a more harmonious Public Service across the three spheres of government? How far has the government come with the establishment of multipurpose community service centres in rural development nodes from where all our people can access a basket of basic services from government? The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, the hon member is aware that, of course, we have taken the necessary decisions with regard to the steps that need to be taken towards the creation of that single Public Service. Like him, we do indeed believe that this is an important part of the process of dealing with the challenge that he posed – the capacity challenge and the possibility to speed-up service delivery and development. That process requires a lot of negotiation with all of these stakeholders, including the trade unions. That process is on course, and I think that we just have to await its outcome, but certainly it is proceeding apace.

With regard to the multipurpose community centres, again, we have set necessary targets to ensure that they are available and accessible to our communities. The hon member will be aware that there are some timeframes that have been set with regard to that. I cannot, on my feet, now remember exactly what dates we have set. Certainly, we have said we need to have these multipurpose community centres everywhere in our country. But we have gone beyond that to say that we would make sure that they are available in all of these areas by particular dates.

I am sure that if the hon member checks the government website as to the implementation of that programme, he will see regular reports with regard to that to indicate what sort of progress we are making. It is an important initiative which is now being backed by the introduction of e-government activists that we are deploying among the people to assist people to be able to understand accessing the computer technology that will be at these centres, because one of the lessons has been that the mere fact that you have that infrastructure there doesn’t answer all your questions. You have to address the matter of the ability of the population to access that infrastructure to be able to reach government.

But certainly, as I was saying, the hon member would be able to see on the government website reports on the programme of action of the government, the timeframes we have set and what we are doing with regard to this matter.

Rev K R J MESHOE: Hon President, whilst the ACDP appreciates that Jipsa has an initial timetable of approximately 18 months, what progress has been made with the programme, particularly relating to special training programmes and bringing back professionals and engineers that are retired abroad and also South Africans who are working outside of the country, who can help us with economy?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Well, as I have indicated, Madam Speaker, the technical working group of Jipsa is indeed currently in the process of developing concrete plans for the implementation of the interventions that are required. So, it’s working. But there have been other interventions with regard to this. I do not know if Minister Erwin would allow me to say this. Alec, do you allow me?

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISES: Yes.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you. You see, for instance, with regard to the state-owned enterprises you are perfectly familiar with the very big infrastructure programmes that we have put in place as part of the Asgisa programme. They also have to address this matter of skills shortages. One of the things we have done is to reach out to the South Africans who left the country in the various skills that are required – engineering skills and so on – and have really combed through that, contacted people directly to say: “Are you ready to come home?”

There’s extensive work in all countries in the world to identify these people to address them directly, each one of them individually, and to ask them to come back and all of that. So, it’s not just plans that are in the making, it’s work that is actually being done. I think hon Meshoe referred correctly to this 18-month timeframe. I would say let’s give it a little bit more time, we will get these priority skills addressed.

Cabinet last week discussed and reviewed again the issue of immigration regulations to see whether the regulations themselves or the implementation of the regulations serve as an obstacle with regard to acquiring those skills outside of the country as work that is therefore going on Home Affairs, and as a result of that to make sure that we remove obstacles of that kind. So, I am making an appeal that we give the project a few more days. I am sure it will be able to produce the results that we need. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr K J MINNIE: Mr President, does the government agree with the judgment of the Cape Arbitration Court that black candidates should get preference over coloured candidates and members of other disadvantaged groups for employment in the public sector? Mr President, if government does agree with this judgment, what are the reasons? If government does not agree with the judgment, will the government support amending legislation to allow for the equal treatment of all previously disadvantaged groups?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, it is the first time I hear about this decision of any arbitration process. Most certainly the government would not agree to this. Our Constitution and legislation that derives from that addresses in part the issue of sections of our population that were previously disadvantaged. The coloured community belongs among those sections of our population that were previously disadvantaged, and therefore it would never be possible for the government to say that the coloured people should be excluded with regard to those processes and therefore it would indeed argue for the equal treatment to which you refer. [Applause.] I do not believe, Madam Speaker, that there is any need for any changes in legislation with regard to that. What might be necessary is that we pay a little closer attention to what actually is being done which might be at variance with policy and the law. But I do not believe that there would be need to change the law. I think we must respect what all of us agreed that one of the critical matters with regard to the transformation of the country is indeed to ensure that these previously disadvantaged millions in our country catch up with the previously advantaged in our society. [Applause.]

Mr W D SPIES: Hon President, regarding the bringing back of skilled people into the Public Service, we have found with the private database that we had launched last year that we have received quite a number of queries from people who used to work for the Public Service, especially teachers who accepted severance packages, that they are not being readmitted into the Public Service because of the severance packages that were granted to them in the past.

Now, certain Ministers have announced that these measures will be looked at. What is the actual position, because people still complain that they are being referred away and told that severance packages were paid out to them? Will this barrier of entry be removed or should we give other plans to these people?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, let me suggest that the hon member discuss this matter with the Minister of Education. I am sure that it will be possible to find some solution. I know that this matter relates also to people in the health sector who also once took severance packages and now want to come back to the Public Service. I would suggest, in the event that there are people of this kind on that list, that you engage the relevant Ministers. I am sure they’ll be able to find solutions to that problem. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

        Government’s intentions with regard to floor-crossing

1. The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION asked the President of the Republic:

Whether, in light of a Washington Post/Kaiser Foundation survey which found that nearly two-thirds of South Africans disapprove of floor- crossing, the Government will (a) abolish or (b) amend the legislation which enables floor-crossing; if not, why not; if so, what steps will the Government take in this regard? N396E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, the government hasn’t discussed this particular matter of crossing of the floor, and what we might want to do about it, but I will express a view about it, since the question was whether the government would abolish or amend legislation affecting this matter.

The hon member is perfectly familiar with how this matter has evolved over the years: The discussions that took place as we negotiated the interim constitution; as we negotiated the Constitution we adopted in 1996, and the decisions that were taken then, amongst which was to set up a committee, which was chaired by the hon Yunus Carrim.

The legislation that was finally adopted was based essentially on the matters that came out of the work that had been done by that ad-hoc committee headed by the hon Yunus Carrim. That committee said, among other things, that the basic argument for this approach to do with floor-crossing is that, during the term of the legislature, there can be significant shifts in public opinion, which do not warrant fresh elections, but which have to be represented in the legislature.

It said that by allowing groups of Members of Parliament to cross the floor, these shifts of opinion may be reflected in the legislature. Also, genuine differences of interpretation on what mandate the electorate gave a party and how to implement it can lead to splits in a party, and this should be allowed expression by way of crossing the floor. The ability to cross the floor also curtails the power of the party bosses, and makes for a more vibrant political atmosphere. In short, greater democracy and representivity is made possible through a qualified freedom to cross the floor.

That was one of the arguments of the multiparty parliamentary committee that had been set up to look at this matter. That was one of its conclusions. It discussed other things like how to structure the whole thing, and I think one of the things we would take note of in that regard is that it took very seriously proposals that had been made by Prof Steytler, who was then at the University of the Western Cape - I don’t know if he is still there – and Prof Schrire at the University of Cape Town.

I think, in that context, we should take into account and pay some attention to the judgment of the Constitutional Court with regard to this matter, when it considered the issue that had been brought to it by the UDM. It makes some important observations, which I think would be relevant to a discussion on this matter.

A large majority of members of this House voted for that legislation. I think it was 84% who voted for it. [Interjections.] Yes, I am quite sure the FF was against it. [Laughter.]

At that time, there were some parties that even argued for complete freedom to cross the floor, with no restrictions. That included, I think, the then Democratic Party, the New National Party, the PAC, the ACDP, and the ANC and IFP seemed to be the only parties in favour of restrictions on defections. [Interjections.][Laughter.]

I think that Members of Parliament should discuss this matter. I think that the process that was instituted after the adoption of the 1996 Constitution would be a perfectly legitimate way of approaching this matter again. It is an eminently political matter, and I think the political parties represented in this House have every right and duty to discuss this issue and say whether the conditions which necessitated the institution of this legislation then, as agreed by the overwhelming majority of the members of the House and the overwhelming number of parties of the House, have changed such that we then need to change the legislation.

I do not believe that we should defer this matter to the executive. I believe that the political parties should engage this matter. There is a process that is agreed for an annual review of the Constitution by Parliament, and maybe you might want to take advantage of that to look at this.

I am told that during last year’s review no member of the public made any submission on the matter of floor-crossing. But, anyway, it may very well be that, now, for whatever reason, there is sufficient passion about this matter to subject it to that particular process. I think this should be done by Parliament rather than the executive. Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I agree with the President. Perhaps we should all take a leaf from the Jacob Zuma book, and apologise, those of us who supported the legislation. Not that the legislation was wrong, in principle, but the practice of it, Mr President, has become a perversion of the very necessary democratic reforms, which a lot of the proponents of the legislation were in favour of.

I think you would agree with me, Mr President, that the views of the legislators are important. But when the electorate has an opportunity to express itself, as the electorate did recently on the subject of floor- crossing, which it can do at a municipal level, but cannot do because of our closed list PR system at a national level, it was noteworthy that, in the cities of Cape Town and Pretoria, not a single floor-crosser who offered himself or herself for re-election was endorsed by the voters.

In other words, this opinion poll - which suggests that two-thirds of all voters in South Africa, out of a representative sample, are now against it

• seemed to have been endorsed as recently as 1 March on the ground, in the local government elections, in respect of floor-crossers.

I would ask you, sir, because unfortunately the majority party in the legislature is excessively deferential to the executive of the legislature, to encourage the legislators in the majority party to do exactly what you said, and to look at this afresh. Thank you. [Applause.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I can only repeat what I have just said – that I believe that the parties in Parliament really should discuss this. They decide amongst themselves how to do it, and look at everything, and look at whatever conclusions might be arising out of the recent local government elections and everything else. I think it is necessary to do that.

This poll that the hon Tony Leon refers to, I am told, is two-and-a-half- years old? [Interjections.] I wouldn’t describe it as “current”. [Laughter.] I wouldn’t describe it as “current”, in the way that you described it. Let’s discuss the matter. It is important.

Part of the reason I referred to the judgment of the Constitutional Court is that it is a very interesting judgment, because it assesses the question whether floor-crossing, however organised, undermines democracy. It says it doesn’t. It doesn’t matter whatever form it takes, so it may very well be that political opinion in the country is that there should be changes with regard to this matter.

I don’t think we should present any suggestion that, in itself, the floor- crossing is illegal, is a subversion of democracy, compromises multiparty democracy or any of these things. I think the comments made by the Constitutional Court are very instructive in this regard. Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Madam Chairperson, Mr President, we certainly welcome your giving the green light for a discussion on the subject. I have listened carefully to you, Mr President, but to us the critical issue remains very simple: Whom did the voters vote for? Did they vote for a political party, or did they vote for individuals?

You merely have to look at the ballot paper, and the hon Minister in the Presidency can look at the ballot paper and he will see that we voted for a political party, and not for an individual. That means that the seat, in fact, belongs to the party, and not to individuals.

Accordingly, Mr President, the seat does not belong to an individual. The act in our opinion is therefore inherently undemocratic and wrong, because it allows an individual to, in fact, steal the seat of a party and give it to another party.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): The question, hon Van der Merwe?

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: The question?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Yes. [Laughter.]

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: The question is … [Laughter.]

Madam Chairperson, the question is whether the President agrees with the Latin maxim, which says, nemo plus iuris ad alium transferre potest quam ipse habaret. [Laughter.] And that means …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Van der Merwe, your time has long since expired!

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: But, Madam Chairperson, can I remind you that when we were young, we sang a song “Can I have another minute, please?” [Laughter.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): No, hon Van der Merwe!

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Chairperson, perhaps Minister Mufamadi will translate that too! [Laughter.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon President, would you care for a translation?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Chairperson, no. Hon member, you say, again, that this process is fundamentally undemocratic. Again, I am saying that is one of the reasons I said I thought members should look at what the Constitutional Court was saying about this. This is not unique to South Africa, and is done all around the world. There is nothing undemocratic about it and, indeed, the judges said it might very well be that the process would favour a particular party, and that in itself was not unnecessarily undemocratic either.

I will speak to the hon Inkosi Buthelezi to suggest that the hon Koos van der Merwe should serve as the IFP representative in the parliamentary processes discussing this matter. [Applause.]

Mr S N SWART: Madam Chair, hon President, firstly, the ACDP clearly opposed the floor-crossing, and joined the hon General Bantu Holomisa in the Constitutional Court challenge. That is just as a matter of record.

As far as the Constitutional Court is concerned, albeit prior to the amendment of the Constitution, hon President, you might recall that in a certification judgment the Constitutional Court made it very clear that an antidefection clause, which disallows floor-crossing, would be supportive of multiparty democracy, and said that it also “prevents parties in power from enticing members of small parties to defect from the party upon whose list they were elected to join the governing party”. But, admittedly, that was prior to the later Constitutional Court hearing.

Hon President, we as the ACDP welcome the openness and the opportunity to discuss this issue anew, and believe that at the very least the 10% threshold should be reconsidered. So, hon President, we just request that you also consider the first Constitutional Court judgment, and the issue of the 10% threshold. Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Indeed, the hon member is quite correct to refer to the earlier views of the Constitutional Court during the certification process. That is correct. But one also needs to say what the ACDP said - they did indeed join the UDM in this action. That is correct.

But, in the period before that, as the matter was discussed, the position, I think, of the ACDP was somewhat different. [Interjections.] So, by all means, hon member, let Parliament, the NA and NCOP discuss this matter, and get it sorted out. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms F I CHOHAN-KHOTA: Mr President, clearly, from our side, on this side of the House, we’d be very happy to engage on this matter, which we think is fundamental to our democratic design.

Of course, we have no reason to believe that in two years’ time we will be asked to look at the issue yet again, and we simply just don’t know where the opposition stands on the matter at any given point.

Many who have joined the ANC, Mr President, have been vilified by particularly the DA, which has claimed that they sold their seats for money and positions. I don’t know if you have any thoughts on the matter of why it is that people join the ANC. [Interjections.] I wonder if part of the answer to this very perplexing question could be found in the fact that our opposition as a whole has great difficulty sticking to its guns on matters of import to the development of our democracy and the country as a whole. [Interjections.][Applause.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Well, Chairperson, the best I can do is to tell the hon member why I joined the ANC. [Laughter.][Applause.]

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: You were born into the ANC.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: No. The hon Leon says that I was born into the ANC. I joined the ANC Youth League when I was about 13 years old. [Applause.] When I was 13 days old, I had no possibility of joining the Youth League. [Laughter.][Interjections.] Yes, sure! If the ANC asks me to rejoin today, I would rejoin. [Applause.]

You see, in the broader context of the discussion of this matter, one of the issues that I remember being raised then was the same point that was made by the ad hoc committee – that we have to visualise a society in the process of change, that there necessarily was a certain dynamism, and there had to be a certain dynamism, in the evolution of our society, part of which would reflect itself in changing attitudes. For instance, on the issue of stereotypes, whereas I originally thought that Tony Leon was a racist to the bone, in the practice, I would discover that he is a democrat to the bone. [Interjections.]

But we would inherit a lot of the stereotypes and prejudices from the past, and therefore there was a need to allow for, as the situation evolved and as people got to understand better the truth rather than the stereotypes – the ANC is communist and terrorist and all that – you must allow for it. You can’t have a system that freezes that. Whereas the public mind is changing, you have structures that freeze everything.

So, in that context, there may be people who are members of the DA today, because they are fearful of this terrible ANC, but in practice, they see that their fear was based on false propaganda of the past. [Applause.]

It may also be true … [Interjections.] Indeed, vice versa also. It may very well be true that these members of the ANC who have a particular view of the DA get to know that it actually isn’t as bad as we thought it was … [Laughter.] … and defect to the DA. That was part of the reason of the argumentation for allowing for this process.

But it may very well be that, by now, the population and electorate all know one another very well. It may very well be. Thank you. [Applause.]

     Elections and peace process in Democratic Republic of Congo

1. Ms K R Magau (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   In view of the upcoming elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), (a) what progress has been made to achieve lasting peace in the DRC and (b) what is the relevance of this process to South Africa and the rest of the continent? N422E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Chairperson, since late 2002 considerable progress has been made to obtain lasting peace in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Our own constructive engagement as a country culminated in the landmark signing in Pretoria of the global and all- inclusive agreement between the belligerents in the Congolese conflict on 16 December 2002. This agreement was then endorsed in the final session of the Inter-Congolese dialogue at Sun City in April 2003.

This paved the way for the setting up in June 2003 of the current transitional government of national unity, which drew in the various warring factions in the DRC. A government was established, a two-chamber parliament was established, an interim constitution was negotiated and promulgated and various other institutions were established. I believe that all of this represents enormous strides forward that the DRC took.

On 18 December 2005 the Congolese voted in a referendum to approve the constitution that is currently in force; a constitution that had been negotiated by the institutions established as a result of the interim constitution. What was very encouraging, of course, about it was, first of all, the high level of registration of voters for the referendum and the high level of participation, as well as the fact that 84% of the electorate voted in support of that constitution.

That, I think, clearly demonstrated the commitment and the desire of the people of the Congo to move to the democratic elections that, for a number of decades, they had been waiting for. That constitution, of course, was promulgated on 18 February 2006 in a ceremony that we were privileged to attend.

Subsequent to that the electoral law was approved and promulgated in March 2006, which then paved the way for the holding of the elections later this year. Originally the elections were intended to be held before 30 June 2006, but for various technical reasons it became impossible to do that. Therefore a new date for the parliamentary elections and the first round of the presidential elections has been set as 30 July this year. And I think that one of the things that is very interesting in this regard, again reflecting the enthusiasm of the people for this electoral democratic process, is the number of candidates. For instance, you have 33 presidential candidates and about 280 political parties. But, again, it’s a reflection, I believe, of that enthusiasm.

So I would say that progress has been made towards achieving lasting peace in the DRC. Of course, there are other challenges with regard to this, not just the political challenges and the establishment of a democratic system. These are matters that relate to addressing the socioeconomic challenges in the country.

In that context the government has adopted an economic programme that seeks to rebuild the economy’s infrastructure and institutions to stabilise the microeconomic situation, to revive growth and investment in the social sectors, to reduce widespread poverty and to combat corruption, both in the government and in the handling of the natural resources.

There may be other campaigns that have been launched in the country, for instance the anticorruption Operation Clean Hands that was launched in October 2005, which resulted in the arrest of a number of high-ranking government officials, some of whom were involved in the mismanagement of tax revenues between 2001 and 2005.

We are very deeply involved in these processes in the Congo. Our Department of Defence, the National Defence Force, the Police Service, Home Affairs, Public Service and Administration, the Independent Electoral Commission, all of them are involved in assisting the DRC to progress towards the elections and that country’s reconstruction in the future.

Clearly, the DRC is a critically important part of what has to happen on our continent as we talk about the process of the renewal of Africa, because of its size, its location and its capacities. Therefore we do believe that it is critically important for the future of the continent and not just of the Congo that these Congolese processes succeed. Thanks, Madam Chairperson.

Ms K R MAGAU: Madam Chair, I thank the hon President for the reply. I must say that as South Africans we welcome and appreciate the work that we are doing in stabilising Africa through peaceful negotiations. May I just ask the President whether, apart from our initiatives in the DRC and elsewhere in Africa where we are charged with facilitating peace processes, there are any other interventions by other governments of the world, through the UN, aimed at promoting democracy, be it in the DRC or anywhere in Africa, and ensuring that we create a peaceful world? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Yes, of course, Madam Chairperson. In the DRC we work very closely with the UN. As you know, the UN has very big deployment of peacekeepers and other interventions that it is making. It is also very deeply involved with regard to assisting in terms of organising the forthcoming elections. We also work very closely with Monuc and other structures of the UN in that regard.

Belgium has also been keenly interested in supporting these processes of change in the DRC. Therefore we work closely with them as well.

As I’ve mentioned, the National Defence Force is involved in training various armed groups in the Congo and participating in the process of the formation of integrated brigades. In that regard we work, again, closely both with the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, which are supporting us with regard to that. There are also the United States, France and others. So yes, indeed, there are many players in this process and we try to co- operate as much as we can with all of them because all of us are pursuing these common objectives.

I think that would also be true of other interventions that we have to make, whether it’s in Côte d’Ivoire, Sudan, the Comores or elsewhere. So yes, indeed, there are others that help in this process. We do hope that the rest of the world will continue to remain engaged in this challenge to ensure that there is peace, stability and democracy on our continent. Thanks, Madam Chairperson.

Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: Madam Chairperson, hon President, the role of countries neighbouring the DRC to the east, particularly Rwanda and Uganda, merit a much closer and critical look. Both these countries were directly involved in the DRC and still continue to exert significant influence over the evolving situation there. They were and still are supporting various factions and political parties even in the DRC in an effort to maintain influence in the country and to continue to benefit from its natural resources. This clearly undermines the peace process and all our efforts there. This important factor must be recognised and subsequently addressed.

Mr President, my question is: What plans do you have in place to get the international community and all member states to address the situation in a firm and forthright manner?

Secondly, what corrective or even punitive measures are put in place to deal with defaulters or intransigent role-players who are signatories to the relevant AU protocols and peace treaties, and who continue to undermine the peace process? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Well, Madam Chairperson, I think the hon member knows things about the current activities in Rwanda and Uganda with regard to the DRC that I don’t know. [Laughter.]

We’ve been working with Rwanda, Uganda and the Congo for very many years now, even before the old man Kabila, who was unfortunately assassinated, reached Kinshasa during that particular military offensive. So we’ve been working with Rwanda and Uganda for a very long time and continue to do so now.

The original agreement was negotiated and signed in Lusaka, arising out of the conflict that had taken place when both Uganda and Rwanda had indeed gone into the Congo. We had to do a lot of shuttling among all of these countries, including Rwanda and Uganda, to persuade them to come to an agreement, which fortunately they did, and we’ve been working with them ever since.

The hon member may be aware that I was in Uganda last week, and one of the things we discussed was a request from the government of Uganda for South Africa to join a number of countries to handle a new problem that has arisen, which is the movement of units of the Lord’s Resistance Army of Uganda, the LRA, from Sudan into the Congo. This is something that needs to be dealt with. Indeed, certainly the Ugandan government took the view that, though you now have these units of the LRA that are attacking Uganda from the Congo, it would be incorrect for Uganda to then invade the Congo to deal with that matter, but that the matter had to be dealt with differently. That is the reason they asked us to join this group of countries in order to be able to manage this situation between them and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

We maintain similar relationships with the DRC and Rwanda, and I’d like to assure the hon member that there is nothing that Rwanda and Uganda are doing now that is intended or actually results in subverting or compromising the transitional process in the DRC. And, certainly, in all of the regular contacts I’ve had with President Joseph Kabila of the DRC, he hasn’t given me a report about these two countries that the hon member has just given. I think the situation is a bit different from what the hon member must have read in some newspaper. Thanks, Madam Chairperson.

Mr S N SWART: Hon President, we can be truly very proud of the involvement of our Defence Force and other state institutions in the DRC. Yesterday we received a full briefing, however, by the electoral commission, which is tasked with assisting in the DRC elections, as you pointed out. I understand that the ballot papers are also being printed in South Africa for the DRC.

However, an issue was raised in relation to the electoral commission being asked to assist in the DRC and the continent, and the strain that this places upon their budgetary resources. Would you agree, hon President, that whilst we welcome and are proud of the electoral commission assisting in the DRC and other African states, we need to be mindful of the strain this places upon it and ensure that donor organisations make timeous payments, according to their pledges, to prevent budgetary and capacity problems? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Chairperson, this is a very important matter. Indeed our electoral commission here has been working with the Congolese electoral commission for some time now, and there are people from the IEC who have been working in the Congo for some time now.

The Congolese IEC has requested of our IEC – they made this request two or three months back - to deploy an additional 300 people there. So we have agreed to that, because of the critical importance of these elections and the need to make sure that the Congo does move to re-establish democracy in the country. Yes, the IEC has indeed discussed the budget implications of that kind of deployment with government, and I’m quite certain that government will do whatever is necessary to make sure that the IEC is able to discharge its responsibilities.

You were correct about the printing of the ballot papers. We have the necessary understanding with the UN with regard to the financing, and so on, in support of the elections in the Congo. I would imagine that there is nobody who would contribute to a failure of the democratic process in the Congo simply because they didn’t provide the necessary resources. Certainly, from the point of view of the South African government, we will do what is necessary to make sure that our IEC discharges its responsibilities properly. Thanks, Chairperson.

Progress under Nepad programme with regard to Africa’s development and integration in world economy

1. Mr S J Njikelana (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   Whether, with reference to the Nepad programme, any progress has been made in the effort to (a) place Africa on the path of sustainable growth and development and (b) achieve its integration in the world economy and body politic; if not, why not; if so, what progress? N423E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Chairperson, yes, indeed, we are making steady progress in ensuring that Africa is on a path of sustainable growth and development, and the hon member may have noticed recent news reports that the overall economy of the continent grew by 5,8% last year and that an almost similar growth rate is expected this year.

The recording of this moderate but encouraging growth rate is attributable, in large measure, to the adoption by the African countries of policies and programmes that are informed by and are reliant on the vision and priorities of Nepad. As professor Wiseman Nkuhlu, former head of the Nepad Steering Committee and Secretariat, observed last year in his article entitled, The journey so far, leaders of the continent have not only taken charge of the programme of the continent’s socioeconomic development, but have also made certain that Nepad policies and objectives become the internationally approved framework for Africa’s development.

The latest report tabled by the chief executive officer of the Nepad Secretariat at the 14th summit of the Nepad Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee held in Khartoum in January said that through the efforts of African countries a solid foundation has been built for the successful implementation of Nepad, particularly in creating an environment conducive to sustained development. The report goes on to highlight some of the achievements made thus far and it mentions, among others, but by no means limited to that, the financing by the African Development Bank of some 16 projects to the tune of US$630 million under the short-term action plan on the infrastructure. Furthermore, an additional 13 other projects, involving an estimated total cost of US$523 million, are in the 2006 lending programme.

The conclusion of a memorandum of understanding by telecommunications entities of about 19 African countries for collaboration in planning and implementing the Eastern Africa Submarine Cable System represents another milestone in the pilgrimage towards the goal of Africa’s socioeconomic development.

A further indicator of the progress being made to ensure growth and development of the continent has been in the realm of development of Africa’s human and institutional capacities. In this connection, the African Capacity Building Foundation, an independent institution funded by, among others, the African Development Bank, the World Bank and African governments, has recently made available an amount of US$6,5 million to bolster requisite capacities in the areas of banking and financing in West Africa, poverty eradication programmes in Burundi, Mozambique, Mali and Sierra Leone, as well as a programme relating to women and development on the continent.

Regarding the latter part of the hon member’s question, we have already alluded to the considered view of Prof Nkuhlu that Nepad’s policies and programmes have become the internationally approved framework for Africa’s development. This is indeed shown by the engagement by Africa’s leaders with the G8 countries, as well as the OECD countries, whose aim has been the forging of partnerships between Africa and the developed states to ensure the actualisation of Nepad and its programmes.

That collaboration has resulted in both African and developed countries pledging themselves to deliver on their undertakings to guarantee socioeconomic development. And the hon members will recall the commitments made by the G8 at Gleneagles last July to cancel the debt of some 16 African countries, as well as to double aid to Africa to the amount of US$25 billion, and the speeding up of efforts to bring about a fair, transparent and equitable global trading system.

The draft communiqué of the African Partnership for a meeting convened in Maputo, Mozambique, on 4 and 5 May 2006, says that attention was paid in that meeting to agriculture and food security, infrastructure development and HIV and Aids. The participants agreed that efforts should aim toward joint actions, using the African action plan as a base, and that the principle of ownership and partnership must guide the work of the Nepad Secretariat and the African Partnership Forum Support Unit in the task of putting the joint plan of action into operation at a sectoral level.

It has become critical to create the climate necessary for attracting investments to the continent. In this regard, an important vehicle – as was decided at Glen Eagles – has been established to address this challenge, and that is the investment climate facility for Africa, which is targeted at further improving conditions on our continent to facilitate higher rates of investment by both domestic and foreign investors. The president of the African Development Bank yesterday announced the support of the Development Bank for this facility and its decision to put money into that facility.

In regard to all of this I must say, that because of the climate created by Nepad, and the resultant engagements with the developed world, there has been an increase in overseas development assistance to and improved foreign direct investment in Africa, reversing the decline the continent experienced during the 1990s into the beginning of the new millennium. Thank you.

Mr S J NJIKELANA: Thank you, Mr President, for the illustrative answer. My follow-up question refers to the various international institutions that one assumes are also interested in the advancement of Nepad. My question is as follows: To what extent has the South African government ensured the integration of programmes and resolutions of the specific institutions, the Africa Commission, the UN, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union? To what has extent has the government ensured that the programmes and resolutions of these institutions are in line with the advancement of Nepad?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Well, as the hon member knows, we are members of the implementation committee – the Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee of Nepad – and it is really in that context, rather than as South Africa, that we would engage the rest of the world, including the institutions that the hon member mentions, with regard to the Nepad programmes.

Currently, there is a meeting that is taking place in Bamako, Mali … not in Bamako, in Burkina Faso in Ouagadougou. It is a meeting of the Economic Commission for Africa and the African Development Bank, which do indeed have on their agenda how to implement and ensure the promotion of the Nepad programmes. It’s in that context that I mentioned that the African Development Bank president yesterday announced the decision of the African Development Bank to support the investment climate facility, which is part of those Nepad programmes. So, indeed, the Nepad Steering Committee and the Nepad Secretariat have sought to interact as closely as they can with all of these bodies to make sure that they come on board.

I’ll mention just one last thing in this regard: For a long time the World Bank programmes on the African continent have been based on bilateral agreements between the World Bank and individual countries. The Nepad Steering Committee has engaged the World Bank with regard to this to say that we are also looking … we’re not saying those programmes should stop, but we’re also looking at the matter of African integration - the matter that was raised by the hon Suzanne Vos. Therefore it is important that the World Bank must also change its procedures to be able to handle regional projects rather than just mere country projects. As a consequence of this, in the end, the World Bank agreed and in our region, here, their very first project was to provide something over US$400 million to build an integrated electrical system connecting the DRC, Zambia, Malawi and Tanzania – that’s one of those Nepad regional projects.

I’m saying that certainly the Nepad Steering Committee seeks to engage all of these bodies to make sure that, in terms of their own interventions in Africa, they do so within that Nepad framework. Thank you.

Mr I O DAVIDSON: I would like to ask the hon President whether he agrees with me that in order to place Africa on a path of sustainable growth and development, and indeed to integrate it into the body politic of the world, one of the central issues – one, because he referred to others – is the issue referred to by our own Auditor-General Fakie at the international conference on economic crime, yesterday, where he referred to, and I quote, “… the rampant increase in economic crime and corruption in both Africa and South Africa”.

Indeed he observed that in respect of South Africa the global economic crime survey registered a 12% increase in both public and private sectors. But also, I’m sure he is aware of Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index where, if one looks at the past five years, there has been a dramatic slide away as far as perception of corruption in Africa is concerned.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Yes, it is one of these critically important matters that the whole continent has recognised that we have to respond properly to these issues of corruption, good economic governance and good corporate governance.

You would recall that I referred for instance to a campaign that, even during its transition, the interim government of the Democratic Republic of Congo launched, in order to deal with this problem - and I’m sure that you’ll find that in many countries on the continent – an intervention to deal with this problem of economic crimes.

I’m sure you would have seen in the media, a few months back, actions for instance taken by the law-enforcement authorities here to deal with properties and things that have come to this country from some individuals in Nigeria. That came out as a result of a system of co-operation that exists between our law-enforcement authorities here, and the law- enforcement authorities in Nigeria to deal with this particular issue.

So, yes, it is important, but I think that there are many interventions that are taking place in many countries on the continent to deal with this. I would imagine that, as happens here, the more you expose corruption and this kind of misbehaviour the more the perception grows that countries are corrupt. It’s a perverse outcome because it suggests that if you don’t talk about corruption and don’t fight it then the perception would be that there is no corruption.

I wouldn’t, again, come to these negative views based on the perception that there is an increase in the incidence of this kind of crime. It is there, it’s prevalent, it’s serious and it must be dealt with, is being dealt with, but I do not believe that it is necessarily correct that the continent is focused in the wrong direction with regard to this, because I think the interventions that are being made, in many countries, focus on changing the course of our continent with regard to this issue of economic crimes and corruption. And I’m sure all of us are looking forward to listening to the outcome of the Enron case in the United States. I don’t believe that the fact that Enron was caught necessarily means that the United States is becoming more corrupt, but it is highlighted when you see a big case like that and you come to the conclusion that, oh, there’s a major disaster. But it is an advance if, indeed, those people are found guilty. Thank you.

Adv Z L MADASA: Hon President, there’s a Maputo resolution calling for the integration of the Nepad programme into the AU processes. I understand the matter will arise at the Gambia summit. My question is whether precautions will be taken when this is done to ensure that it is not done in a way that will impede the progress that has been made, and the prospective progress?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: It is an important question. The hon member is correct. Nepad is of course an AU programme, originally decided at the last summit of the OAU in Lusaka. It is an AU programme, but what has happened is that the view was that we were then in the process of establishing the new AU, that its institutions would not be strong enough at that point to move the headquarters of Nepad from here to Addis Ababa, the headquarters of the AU. Time needed to be given for those institutions of the AU, the AU Commission and all of its elements to really become properly established, and then of course to inherit these particular structures. So, the matter has been discussed in that way within that context and, indeed, may very well be on the agenda of the AU summit in Gambia in July, but I’m quite certain that in the consideration of this matter, and certainly this has been the view of the chair of the AU Commission, President Konare, who has been saying that it would be incorrect to merely satisfy an organisational requirement that this institution of the AU must be based at the AU headquarters, and to act on that in a manner that kills Nepad.

So it has been very sensitive to this, and I’m quite certain that in discussing the matter in Gambia this will be one of the matters that will be taken into account as to whether the original concern, that the new structures of the AU would not be able to house and manage an important initiative like this, has in fact now developed to the point where it could. I’m quite certain that that would be a central matter in deciding what we do next.

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Madam Chair, is there now an opportunity for me to translate my Latin message? [Laughter.]

        Recent actions of striking security industry workers

1. Mr C M Lowe (DA) asked the President of the Republic:

   (1) Whether he has taken note of the recent actions of striking security industry workers, the damage and destruction caused by them to private and state property and their alleged involvement in causing severe injury and even death to some individuals; if not, why not; if so,

   (2) whether Cabinet will discuss steps to ensure that unions are held accountable for those members who commit criminal acts while on strike; if not, why not; if so, what steps? N397E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thanks, Chairperson. The hon member indeed raises a very important issue. Yes indeed, hon member, we have taken note of the recent actions of some of the striking security-industry workers, including what took place here in Cape Town on Tuesday.

I would like to say, hon member, with regard to this that we lost many, many lives in the struggle to bring about democracy in this country. And I’m quite certain that all of us remember very clearly and very vividly the great numbers of people who were killed every day during the 1980s into the beginning of the 1990s. Even as we sat here to adopt the 1996 Constitution, those killings were still taking place – on the trains and everywhere else. People will remember names like Shobashobane they will remember names like Boipatong and so on.

All of us together as a country had said that we must establish this democracy in our country, which, among other things, then creates all of the space that anyone would need in order to address whatever their concerns are peacefully.

So this has, indeed, been a matter of great concern that in this instance you see people who are on strike with absolutely every right to go on strike - that is a right that we must defend – but then doing things that are quite wrong, things that are criminal. You cannot go around breaking windows, breaking up cars, looting. And very, very worrying too are these reports – I do not know if they are correct – of people being thrown out of trains. This takes us back to things that happened in the late 1980s and in the beginning of the 1990s. This can’t be right; it just cannot be correct.

So this is a matter of grave concern that, given all of the democratic space that everyone has and the possibility to advance one’s purposes and win one’s battles by peaceful means, that we have violence of this kind taking place. It can’t be right.

I do hope that our people as a whole take this matter up. Here are commuters – thousands of commuters – who want to go to work, and somebody goes and torches a commuter train. This impacts on these thousands of workers who want to go to work. Now they have to scramble to find places in taxis and have all sorts of problems. So I am saying that I believe that our country really needs to stand up and say: Enough is enough. [Applause.] And, most certainly, the law-enforcement authorities have to act with the greatest vigour on this matter. There isn’t a single person in this country – nobody – whose cause is so just that they are allowed to kill other people. No such person exists. [Applause.] Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Mr C M LOWE: Hon Mr President, thank you very much indeed for your answer. Could I immediately just endorse everything that you have said on behalf of the DA and strongly support the views that you have expressed this afternoon?

Now, Mr President, I actually asked this question a couple of weeks ago after the Durban violence situation. And, as you have already pointed out, in the two or three weeks since then we have seen some more unfortunate deaths. We have seen wanton destruction just a few metres away from this very building 48 hours ago.

There is a constitutional guarantee for everybody to strike peacefully, and we certainly would endorse that. It is something that people have fought and died for in this country. But, sir, next week on behalf of the DA, I will introduce into this Parliament private member’s legislation, making trade unions responsible civilly and criminally for the actions taken and the destruction caused by their members.

I’d like to ask you whether you would endorse that legislation. [Interjections.] Whether you will or will not, sir, could I ask whether you would consider asking your government to declare a state of emergency within the CBD of Cape Town to ensure, Mr President, that the innocent people … [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member …

Mr C M LOUW: … who were injured and attacked and the shop owners, in terms of the damage that was caused, will be compensated through that Act. Thank you very much, Chairperson.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): May I remind you that questions are there to get information, not opinions. Thank you very much. Hon Mr President?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thanks, Chairperson. No. I really do believe that in the end the entrenchment of our democratic system - its vitality, its vibrancy - really does depend on the commitment of all of us to make sure that that democratic system that is entrenched is vibrant. This is because you can pass any number of laws, but if these values and so on of democracy are not in the mind - are part of the things that we own – the laws will be disobeyed.

So, I think, the critical matter that we face now is to make sure that this message goes out to all our people in order to activate our people really to stand up for the defence of all of these rights - the right to strike must be defended; the right to peaceful demonstration must be defended; there is the right of choice and for people to say: “I decide to do this, which may differ from what you are doing” – to get all of us to understand all of this.

You’ve seen during the course of the local government elections some other people getting killed – municipal councillors, even councillors who got elected, others even before the elections took place. What does that say? That says that there are still some people who entertain these wrong ideas that they can impose their will on society by force of arms. I am also saying that you have a situation in which we can’t sit paralysed as a population and not defend these rights for which, indeed, so many people sacrificed their lives. That is the route I would go.

I’m quite sure that when the private member’s Bill is presented, the House will discuss that. It’s perfectly legitimate to do that. But I’d look in a different direction to deal with this problem that has faced us in a number of instances – the burning of mayors’ houses and councillors’ houses and all sorts of things that are quite, quite wrong and really ought not to be allowed. Thanks, Chairperson. [Applause.]

Mr G G OLIPHANT: Hon President, I think the matter is adequately put, and the trade unions do agree themselves that there is no place for intimidation and violence in our labour relations discourse and that strikes and demonstrations must be peaceful.

They have also said that it is very regrettable that some people – workers

• have engaged in these criminal activities and that those who engaged in those activities must face the consequences of their actions. That has also been said by the trade unions themselves.

What I want to point out is that there are two parties to this dispute: employers and workers, for that matter. The employers - in this instance we are referring to the security sector - have refused, are refusing and continue to refuse to go to the negotiating table.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Oliphant, your time is expiring.

Mr G G OLIPHANT: Shall we encourage both parties to go to the table and sort out this matter?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: As the hon member is aware, the Minister of Labour, the hon Membathisi Mdladlana, has indeed been urging this a number of times – that the employers and workers ought to engage one another in negotiations and solve this problem. It’s important. It has to happen, and the Minister was quite correct. Indeed, there has been pressure on him to intervene, and he has explained very clearly what the law says and that the government is not about to undermine the collective bargaining system in the country. So, yes indeed, hon member, you are quite right.

But we have to insist on this matter. Sure, those negotiations between employers and workers must proceed. But there is absolutely nothing that entitles anybody, whatever the circumstances, to engage in the violence that we have seen. [Applause.] If we allow it to continue, we will have anarchy in the country. The next time somebody disagrees with the hon Oliphant, refuses to sit with him when they should sit and bashes him on the head, we can’t say that is right – that Oliphant should have sat with that person.

We cannot have buts about this thing. It’s wrong, it’s wrong, it’s wrong. It’s undermining our democratic system. [Applause.]

Mr B H HOLOMISA: Hon President, in the light of the damage to property, vandalism, violence and suspected murders committed on the East Rand trains, I would like to know from you whether the government wouldn’t consider appointing a committee from the Cabinet security cluster, with the Department of Labour, to look into developing peaceful march regulations which would, among other things, ban the carrying of any weapons, be they traditional or otherwise, during marches, as well as ban intimidation of non-striking workers and employers. This matter must be looked at from a Constitutional perspective and the wide variety of human rights that violent strikers have trampled upon.

Okokugqibela, masibulele nangokuba uthi masiphengulule le nto yokuwelela ngaphesheya ngoba ukuba akuyenzanga, Mhlekazi … Umvile uBlade ngale ntsasa xa ebesithi uza kubhalisa umbutho omtsha yaye uza kuthatha amalungu akhe. [Uwelewele.] Ufike nini na ngoku, Mhlekazi? [Kwahlekwa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)

[Lastly, we welcome your suggestion that discussions about floor-crossing should be re-opened, sir. You must have heard Blade this morning when he said that he was considering becoming a political party and taking all his members. [Interjections.] When did you get back, sir? [Laughter.]]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: I would say, hon Holomisa, that the justice cluster has met to discuss this issue, not only about the strike but generally where you’ve had instances of this kind. Perhaps they might want to look at the law and the regulations, as the hon member has said, which affect these public demonstrations to see whether there is anything we need to do in that regard. But I am sure that we will raise that with them and follow up on it. Thanks, Chairperson.

Mrs P DE LILLE: I want to agree with the President that we must condemn violence in whatever form and that there is absolutely no justification for violence. Last week I intervened and spoke to both the employers’ association and to the unions in trying to find an amicable solution.

But I want to share this with you, Comrade President. While talking to some of the workers I came across a company in Johannesburg called Max Security. This company is receiving a government grant for training security guards but, in fact, it deploys them to work for something like R45 for a 12-hour shift. So this strike has raised many other problems that we need to look into.

I think the time has arrived that we must now begin to look at a bargaining council for security workers and also that we must appeal to the Minister of Labour to set a minimum wage for the industry in order to avoid the kind of exploitation that is taking place. Thank you. [Time expired.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: I know, hon member, that the Minister of Labour has indeed been concerned about a whole variety of matters with regard to the workers in the security industry that have to do with wage levels, protection of jobs, health, social pensions, working hours and a whole range of matters like that. I know that he is concerned about even this question that has been discussed about a bargaining chamber and so on.

But let’s get through this particular matter and, as the hon Oliphant said, let the employers and the workers get together and resolve this thing. It is not as though anybody is insensitive to the real issues that confront the workers in this sector. But they are not going to resolve them by acting in the way that they are acting. Indeed, I’m quite certain that the Minister of Labour would be quite happy even to engage you, hon De Lille, to look precisely at these questions, including the matter of this Seta if it is not, in fact, doing training and doing other things instead. Thanks, Chairperson. [Applause.]

See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES.

            GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

Mrs G D HLENGETHWA: Thank you, Chairperson.

HON MEMBERS: Malibongwe! [Praise!]

Mrs G D HLENGETHWA: Igama lamakhosikazi! [The name of women!]

The amending Bill we are debating before the House today is to amend the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, which was passed by this very House in 1997 and came into effect in 1999. The purpose of the principal Act is to address the potential risk associated with the introduction of GMOs. The Act provides the application of the GMOs, including import, production, release and distribution, which will be carried out in a way to limit possible harmful consequences for the environment.

South Africa and the continent as a whole are faced with challenges of attaining food security. Biotechnology has been proven by many researchers as an alternative that could help to enhance food production. Researchers also argue that biotechnology has the potential to increase food production and yields and thereby address food insecurity. This Act was passed because we understand the benefits that could be enjoyed through using biotechnology. However, at the same time, government is mindful of the risks associated with GMOs and the need therefore to regulate the use of biotechnology. In addition, the National Biotechnology Strategy was developed in 2001 to manage the application of biotechnology. This implies that the SA government embraced biotechnology within the provision that the application of biotechnology is properly managed.

Let me emphasise the point that we are not debating the principal Act today, but we are debating the Genetically Modified Organisms Amendment Bill that amends the Act of 1997. The main objective for amending the Act is to ensure that South Africa’s biosafety frameworks comply with the provision of the Constitution and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, of which South Africa is a signatory.

I am happy to announce that, in this Bill, the portfolio committee has taken up some of the concerns raised during the public hearings and therefore the department managed to address some of those concerns. However, it should be noted that some of the concerns that relate to the safe use of GMOs in South Africa would be incorporated in the regulations.

As portfolio committee we want to be involved also in the process of drafting the regulations so that we can have some inputs taken from the concerns raised in the public hearings we had. Allow me to deal with the main amendments. Firstly, the definition of a “user” is changed to cover all persons conducting activities with GMOs, including manufacturers. The new definition is: “A user means a person who conducts an activity with GMOs”. This change came as a response to the concerns raised during public hearings that manufacturers are excluded from the definition and therefore they are also excluded from liabilities.

Secondly, the amendments propose the increase of the executive council from eight to 10. This has been done to include an official from the Department of Arts and Culture and an official from the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry. The representative from the Department of Arts and Culture is important in the light of Article 26 of the Cartagena Protocol, which requires the council to take into account the socioeconomic considerations arising from the impact of GMOs that may have particular value for the indigenous and local communities, and also when looking at applications of GMOs, liabilities and redress.

The third amendment deals with liabilities and redress. The main purpose of the amendment is for the Bill to conform to Article 27 of the protocol. At the moment this article in the protocol is still being debated, so it has been agreed that it is premature to have it in the clause on its own in the Bill, and also the principal Act on liabilities is with the Department of Trade and Industry.

In the Bill the issues of liabilities and redress are covered by proposing that a user should ensure that appropriate measures are taken to avoid an adverse impact on the environment, human and animal health, which may arise from the use of GMOs in the amendments. Also proposed is that the users shall remedy the effect of the damage caused by the activity.

Other concerns that were raised during the public hearings and in the portfolio committee were the labelling of GMOs. We have also noted that providing consumers with the ability to exercise their right to choose what they want to consume, the portfolio committee discussed the issue of whether food can be labelled, and yes, we agree, this must be so, but further noted that this matter is covered by the regulations under the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, Act 54 of 1972, which came into effect in January 2004 and is the responsibility of the Department of Health.

In the main, concerns raised in the public hearings with this clause were liabilities for damage on the user, which includes farmers as an end user, who are the consumers of GMO products, and leave out the multinational industries and manufacturers that are making big profits from the GM products. However, with the new definition of a “user”, this includes the manufacturers as well, and these concerns have been addressed.

In conclusion, let me say that, categorically, the main purpose of the Bill is to give effect to the provision of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and thus represents South Africa’s continued commitment to ensure the safe and responsible use of the GM technologies in support of the national priorities. The application of GMOs can contribute towards a globally competitive, profitable and sustainable agricultural sector and thus enhance food production.

Let me take this opportunity to also thank the portfolio committee members who actively participated in the process of amending the Bill and other portfolio committee members who were concerned with the Bill that managed to send their members to be part of the whole process and also, not forgetting the people and organisations that came before the committee during the public hearings to raise their concerns regarding the Bill. The portfolio committee has taken all those concerns into consideration.

Let me not forget the hon Minister and her team who were always there for us, day and night, ready to respond to any clarity-seeking questions in processing the amending Bill. We value your support and your political guidance very much … [Time expired.][Applause.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Hon Chair, I think that these amendments have gone through the scrutiny of the committee and it has been done very well. I will make some general comments in this regard.

You know, science and biotechnology contributes increasingly to solve the many problems in the industrial and agricultural fields. The fact is that products derived from GMOs and this technology are part of everyday life in the forms of vaccines, hormones, enzymes and in food processing, as well as foods derived from GM crops that are already on all our tables.

In 2005 some 90 million hectares of GM crops were grown worldwide to supply food and textiles. In South Africa about 28% of our crops come from GM seeds. Food from these crops has been consumed by citizens on all continents. These foods are vigorously tested before being made available to the public. In fact, GMO foods have undergone very stringent scientific and medical tests throughout the world before they were sold on the market to the public. Scientists in the Americas and Europe scrutinised these crops and products as to their safety and concluded that biotech crops may even be safer than regular food. These conclusions were supported by the Royal Society of London, as well as nine other international academies of science in the world.

Even on the question of allergies, the Royal Society of London found no evidence that GM foods cause allergic conditions and stated that the risk posed by GM plants are no greater than those of conventional crops. Despite these and numerous other scientific assessments and assurances regarding the safety of GM foods, there are still activists making unsubstantiated claims and casting doubt over the safety of the use of this modern-day technology that has revolutionised agriculture and industry in the world.

Biotegnologie en GMO-gewasse stel die mensdom in staat om genoeg voedsel te produseer. Dit help ons om op verskeie gebiede te bespaar. Op landbougebied bied GMO-gewasse voordele vir alle boere, veral kleinboere. Een voorbeeld is in die Oos-Kaap waar, deur die gebruik van stamboorderweerstandbiedende saad, die produksie van mielies van 1,5 ton per hektaar toegeneem het tot 3,5 ton per hektaar en sodoende die voortbestaan van kleinboere gehelp wat andersins geen oes sou gehad het nie. Ook op industriële gebied word mikro-organismes ingespan om polimere, vitamines, ensieme en selfs brandstof te vervaardig wat noodsaaklik is vir die mensdom. Boonop stel die GMO-organismes die industrie in staat om toenemend fossielbrandstof te vervang en so aardverwarming teë te werk. Interessante statistiek: drie kilogram mielies kan nou deur mikro- organismes omskep word in ’n politipe materiaal waarvan jy ’n t-hempie kan maak.

Elke GMO-projek moet geregistreer word en moet aan streng vereistes voldoen, en al die departemente is betrokke hierby – Landbou, Omgewingsake, Gesondheid, Handel, Nywerheid, Wetenskap, Tegnologie, Waterwese en Kultuur. Dit is dus nie net ’n kwessie van ’n klein groepie mense wat hierna kyk nie; dit word omvattend ondersoek. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Biotechnology and GM crops enable humanity to produce enough food. This results in savings in various fields. In the field of agriculture GM crops offer advantages to all farmers, especially small farmers. One example is in the Eastern Cape where, by the use of termite-resistant seeds, the production of maize has increased from 1,5 tonnes per hectare to 3,5 tonnes per hectare, thereby promoting the continued existence of small farmers who would otherwise have had no crops.

Micro-organisms are also harnessed in the industrial field to manufacture polymeres, vitamins, enzymes and even fuel, which are necessary for humanity. In addition, the GM organisms are enabling industry to replace fossil fuel to an increasing extent and thus to counteract global warming. Interesting statistics: Three kilograms of maize can now be converted by micro-organisms into a polytypic material from which one can make a t- shirt.

Every GM project must be registered and must comply with strict requirements, and all the departments are involved in this – Agriculture, Environmental Affairs, Health, Trade, Industry, Science, Technology, Water Affairs and Culture. Thus it is not only a question of a small group of people who are looking at this; it is being scrutinised comprehensively.]

The GMO Act of South Africa is internationally considered as one of the best of its kind in the world. It has a balanced approach, using precautionary measures regarding biosafety, while allowing for the responsible application of technology. These amendments to the GMO Act are strengthening the objectives of the Act, namely to promote responsible development, to regulate the production and the use GMOs, and to limit possible harmful consequences for the environment.

There have been no accidents, no damage to the environment and no adverse effects in the 16-year track record of this Act. [Time expired.][Applause.]

Mr E J LUCAS: Mr Chairperson, the aim of the amending Bill is to amend the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, 1997, so as to, amongst other things, give effect to the international agreements pertaining to genetically modified organisms, to which South Africa is a party. This also amends certain definitions and sections, as well as adds new definitions.

The principal Act aims to provide for measures to promote the responsible development, production, use and application of genetically modified organisms. We in South Africa are only one of the few developing countries worldwide that grows GMO crops for commercial purposes.

Famine and food security are just a few of the many problems that contribute to extreme poverty and to the low living standards experienced by millions of people in Africa and most of the developing world. Whether GMOs are the answer to the world’s poverty, as suggested by some, is very debatable.

On the other hand, there are parties that think GMOs will contribute towards eradication of poverty and famine in Africa. While there are also those opposed to GMOs, we cannot ignore the suffering and pain that famine and starvation are inflicting on our many brothers and sisters in Africa, as well as the rest of the world. We also cannot simply say that GMO crops are the answer to all Africa’s food problems without considering the risks involved. The controversy around GMOs is still raging. A lot of debating will take place about the benefits or risks surrounding GMOs and the implications that they will have on poverty and famine in Africa and the rest of the developing world. We in Africa should also actively participate and contribute to this very important and relevant issue. We must, however, stress that during all these discussions and debates, the needs and safety of people whom GM crops are meant to help, must be at the forefront of our minds. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr L W GREYLING: Hon Chairperson, the ID has long been advocating and amendment to the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, as we have been concerned that it does not provide an adequate level of protection against any potential negative effects of this experimental technology. Unfortunately, however, the ID believes that this amending Bill still does not address the very real concerns that the public has over this technology.

In particular, the Bill emphasises a scientific approach to risk assessment and decision-making at the expense of an approach that incorporates environmental, social and economic factors. This reduces the likelihood that the interests of the poor and the marginalised will be taken into account when decisions are made about the use of GMOs.

The Bill also entrenches the self-regulatory approach adopted by the Act, where applicants submit risk assessments without independent review and are given the responsibility for monitoring their own compliance with permit conditions. Given the substantial economic interests at stake in the industry, the ID believes that this self-regulatory approach is highly inappropriate. The absence of a mandatory labelling regime undermines consumer choice, prevents users from protecting themselves against liability and impedes the monitoring of human health impacts associated with the use of GMOs.

On the international level, the ID is concerned that there are substantial areas in which the Bill fails to provide for the incorporation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety into our domestic regulatory system. This includes the failure to impose the precautionary approach in decision- making and the absence of any provisions incorporating the obligations imposed by the advanced, informed agreement procedure in the protocol. For this and many other reasons, the ID can therefore not support this Bill. I thank you.

Mrs C DUDLEY: Chair, the ACDP, while not able to participate in the committee’s process, has followed this debate for several years, calling for a more cautionary approach in line with the SA Faith Communities’ Environment Institute’s position.

Genetically modified crops have been in South Africa since 1997 and the country is one of only eight countries worldwide which grow GM crops commercially. Tests in South Africa last year showed that 90% of soy products and 61% of maize products tested contained traces of GMOs. Increasingly GM products are sneaking into the food chain. In the absence of compulsory separation and labelling of GM products, South African consumers have been deprived of their right to choose whether or not to eat GM food. In addition, farmers who choose to be GM-free are being prejudiced. This legislation was an opportunity for government to ensure stricter regulations, but in reality not much has improved.

The ACDP is not convinced by arguments that GMOs are critical in addressing food shortages in Africa where a complex interplay of factors, including drought, poverty, political instability and lack of transport and storage infrastructure, play a role. Instead, the ACDP is of the opinion that genetic engineering has serious implications for sustainable agriculture and food security.

Potential health and environmental hazards posed by genetically engineered seeds, lack of genetic diversity, increasing vulnerability to pests and disease, monopoly control of seeds resulting in fewer types of seeds being available, and gene transfer to domestic relatives and wild plants producing super weeds, are major concerns.

For centuries farmers have followed a tradition of saving, adapting and exchanging seed, which has promoted biodiversity and food security. If a farmer loses the ability to save seed, he or she cannot continue to select plants best adapted to local conditions and needs. Seeds evolve with communities and if farmers loose control over them, they lose control over their farming system, and become dependent … [Interjections.]

It doesn’t mean that one doesn’t adequately address concerns and the ACDP will not be voting for it. Thank you. [Time Expired.]

Ms S RAJBALLY: Chair, the MF welcomes this Bill that shall now govern the development, production, use and application of genetically modified organisms. Acknowledging the possible danger of GMOs, we are pleased that this Bill shall now seek to limit possible harmful effects GMOs may have on the environment, human and animal health. However, we are concerned as to how safety measures are calculated to ensure that GMOs do not cause any harm.

Further, it is supported that the Bill serves to bring our management of GMOs in line with the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Provisions regarding exportation, as well as the involvement of the necessary departments, are found appropriate. It is encouraging that the provisions of this Bill has been closely devised with that of the protocol, and that other legislation has also been consulted.

The MF supports the Bill. I thank you.

Mr B A RADEBE: Mr Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members of this august House, today we are presenting one of the most researched and most controversial topics in modern science. The sciences of biotechnology solicit strong emotions from both the pro- and antilobby groups. As members of this House we must strive to remove the emotions and confront reality so that we can create a better South Africa and a better world.

The process leading to today’s debate started as far back as 2003, when this Parliament acceded to the Cartagena Protocol. This protocol demands that we must be compliant with its articles. Article 8 of the protocol, for example, deals with a notification of transboundary movement of the living GMOs. This article obliges the Minister and Parliament to come up with the legal framework to ensure that all the activities concerning the GMOs are properly recorded and easily available to competent authorities. The protocol also provides for information sharing, and the creation of a biosafety clearinghouse. The biosafety clearinghouse will facilitate the exchange of scientific, technical and environmental and legal information on, and experience with, living GMOs.

Articles 15 and 16 of the protocol deal with risk assessment and risk management. This obliges the parties involved in the creation of the GMOs to co-operate with a view to identify GMOs or its specific traces that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risk to human health.

These articles are in line with section 24 of our Constitution, which guarantees the right to a safe environment. Since this protocol is compliant with our Constitution, it is then necessary to bring the principles of the protocol to our legislation; hence today we are presenting the GMO amending Bill. This Bill will create an environment in which the GMOs will be monitored.

During the public hearings, strong positions were advanced, like the scrapping of the GMOs alltogether, because of the environmental and human health concerns. This position assumes that there must be no risk incurred in any research. There is no science that does not have any risk. This position will not be sustainable because South Africa is an open country, and it interacts with the world, which is producing the GMOs.

The economists of 6 to 12 May 2006 indicate that more than a billion hectares in the world are planted with GMO crops and Monsanto is dominating the agricultural biotechnology company with a large market share of US$5,6 billion. In order for our country to protect itself, the biotechnological science must be developed, so that we can be able influence the debate and the research taking place in the world. Since the multinational companies are strong in the biotechnology sector, the Parliament of the Republic must come with laws and regulations, which will protect farmers operating in the second economy. For example, Mr Bhekokwakhe Mkhonto of the Vuvuzela Farmers Association made a simple request to the government during the public hearings, that it must ensure five things:

Firstly, the GMO amending Bill must protect the small farmers like him from big companies which sell seeds and fertilisers and have farmers taking all the risks; secondly, it must ensure that the household food security is not jeopardised; thirdly, the Bill must protect our indigenous seeds and vegetation; fourthly, the government must provide education to farmers on the impacts of the GMOs; and fifthly, the GMO companies must give assurance that there will be markets for GMO crops.

Mr Bhekokwakhe’s requests indicate the importance of this Bill, which must ensure that the GMOs are monitored and used responsibly. This will demand that the inspectors and the extension officers of the Department of Agriculture must work closely with the small-scale farmers, so that they are not left to the dictates of the big companies. It was claimed that the seed company representatives forced small-scale farmers to buy GMO seeds because the government has approved them. It was also noted that the small- scale farmers could not retain the seed for planting in the following season and this creates dependency upon the seed companies. This claim begs the question as to what is the role of the extension officers of the Department of Agriculture? We know that the government will never desert emerging farmers. This will demand that the Ministry ensures that information is shared with stakeholders of the department, and that the farmers must be informed that it is their voluntary choice to use GMO seeds.

Since Mr Bhekokwakhe Mkhonto has requested the government to ensure household food security, the government has identified biotechnology as a tool to attain more rapid and efficient means to diversify and improve food production in South Africa. This technology is also used to create gene banks so that the indigenous seed and vegetation are preserved. Although Mr Mkhonto thought that this amending Bill would fulfil his request, it is a principal Act and the biotechnology strategy of the country, which will bring possibilities of fulfilling it.

The other side of the lobby group – the free market foundation -maintains that the growth of the economy of the country depended upon the free flow of research, which will help farmers to improve their production capacity. The foundation felt that the Bill was too stringent and costly to the researchers, and this will stifle the scientific research. The consequence will be the drop in investment in research and development, and highly skilled South African scientists may choose to leave the country. In simple terms, the foundation suggests that we do away with environmental impact assessment studies.

This position will not help if the consequences of the damaged environment are faced by future generations. South Africa can easily become a dumping ground of untested GMOs and that is why the GMO Act provides a country with a decision-making tool. This functional tool enables the authorities in South Africa to conduct scientifically based case-by-case assessment of the potential risk that may arise from the creation of a particular GMO.

Decisions made through the Genetically Modified Organisms Act allow for the approval, amendment, conditional approval and the rejection of the application. An appeal process along with reviews of decisions is accommodated in the Act. The primary objective of this Bill is therefore to align the principal Act with the provisions of the protocol.

The presentation by the microbiology professor of the University of Cape Town welcomes the GMO amending Act, as the necessary intervention in adapting South African law regarding the work with recombination DNA technology to the commitments taken by South Africa under the Cartagena Protocol. The professor applauds the fact that this amending Bill is only bringing limited number of changes compared to the 1997 Act. This reflects positively on the quality of the existing legal and regulatory framework of the GMOs in South Africa.

The international dimension of the Bill requires that South African research institutions create the capacity to work effectively under the conditions to which the state has committed itself, in particular with regard to the research, which crosses national boundaries.

The professor states that there has been significant reduction in international movements of experimental materials resulting from biotechnology since the enforcement of the protocol. This proves the effectiveness of the biosafety clearinghouses internationally. That is why this Parliament must rest assured that proper mechanisms are in place in South Africa to deal with GMO accidents.

The consensus decision-making process of the GMO council will ensure that every GMO product is properly scrutinised. The GMO registrar will ensure that all the permits that are issued are in compliance with the law; the inspectors will be able visit the facilities and trial release sites where there’s contained use of GMOs; and that names and addresses of persons involved will be kept in the register. The transparency of the process involved in the Genetically Modified Organisms Act will help to minimise the risk of unintended consequences in the application of the Act.

The process of adopting this Bill has gone through a long process. The Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and Land Affairs held a biotechnology conference in Stellenbosch in 2003. Various stakeholders attended this conference and made positive contributions. [Time expired.]

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, firstly I would like to thank the chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture and her team. I must say that ever since I have been in Parliament and in this sector, this is one of the Bills that have taken more than three years to debate, not just in the House but also in the broader public. I must say that one of the interesting things is that this Bill has helped all of us to have an interest in this important matter in our society and in the world.

Secondly, I would like to say thank you to the ANC caucus. I must share with hon members in the opposition that this matter was so topical and so serious that the ANC caucus spent lots of time discussing it because they wanted to be convinced that, indeed, we had reflected on some of the issues that were topical. Therefore I must say I am happy that I don’t only stand here representing government, which is led by the ANC, but I also represent my party, which understands the need for this legislation.

I must say that the view we have taken as government, which I think is correct, is not to be dogmatic, not to be for and against but rather to look at what is in the interest of our country in ensuring that we can manage this technology for the benefit of our society; and also to look at how we can manage the risks so that we can protect our environment and our citizens.

It’s also important for me to indicate that, actually, issues of biotechnology have social, economic and political consequences. So sometimes when we enter the debate it’s not about the efficacy of science, it’s more about politics and how the constituencies that we represent view the matters, and you must, therefore, give political direction. Sometimes it’s about economic interests and the consequences that arise. That’s why there is concern about the role of multinationals and the impact thereof on your local producers and local seed-producing companies. However, it’s also about trade within the economic context.

I would like to share the following with hon members and I am sure you will read the report. There has been a long case between the European Union and the United States. Goods from the US were blocked by the EU on the basis that they were GMO, and the EU was not convinced about the safety mechanism and so on. Last week, the World Trade Organisation ruled against the EU because, on a scientific basis, when they had to prove it they could not say: “Indeed it is not safe.” I think what the hon Kraai van Niekerk raised concerns the rigour around which this technology has been tested and has had to undergo at any given time. Surely, we can’t be God and we may not know everything but, from what we know now, it is safe.

I also want to say that the social impact includes the environment. This is included in order to ensure that, indeed, through the manner in which this science is applied, our environment cannot be affected adversely. We have taken consideration of all those matters in the Act. But, I want to say briefly that what we are dealing with now is actually the second generation of GMOs, if I may say so, because your first generation of GMOs has been there. Maybe it’s important to borrow the scientists’ definition of what genetic modification refers to. It’s about the transfer of genetic material from one living organism to another, not through natural processes.

Let’s look back: How many times have human beings – not even scientists per se – manipulated the environment? The answer is, many times. I would use grafting as an example. All of us eat nectarines and tangerines. A tangerine is actually a combination of your classic orange, as we all know it, and a naartjie. What you do is to cut the stem of one, take the stem of another and put it on top. You then wrap it up, put it in the soil and a new hybrid comes out. That is your first-generation GMO. Similarly, with the nectarine you combine a peach and a plum.

And it’s not only in agriculture. To move umhlonyane [artemisia afra], which is a herb, towards being a cough mixture or tablet is a modification from one to another. This is not a natural process because there is no natural process that can produce a cough mixture. So I am just saying that this application has been there.

But what is the debate, because it’s important to locate the debate? The challenge that all of us are faced with is that, as scientists understand the technology better, having applied and seen new opportunities, what we are dealing with now - which I think causes fear from the majority of people - is about genetic engineering which allows for the transfer of genetic material within the same species and across species. I think this is what people were saying. They wanted to know: Are we going to produce Frankenstein tomatoes using some mouse genes? Surely that can’t be true. There is no way a gene of a mouse can produce a tomato.

I think this is the fear. Anecdotally, you hear people saying, “Ubaba uMlangeni wathi: ‘Hhayi, mina angikafuni ukufa mntanami. [“Mr Mlangeni said: “No, I don’t want to die yet, my child.”] I don’t want to die because of these things that I don’t know.” Surely, that raises the issue of safety, which we have adequately provided for.

The regulations that deal with the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act of the Department of Health deal with the issue of labelling that has been raised by the majority of members. I want to read the amendment that was made on 16 January 2004. If we don’t go back to that, we may think there is no adequate framework. It reads thus, and the section that I am going to read is mandatory:

Genetically modified food must be labelled as such if it differs significantly in composition, nutritional value or mode of storage, preparation or cooking from that of the corresponding existing foodstuff.

Secondly:

The label of the genetically modified food must indicate the likelihood of allergenicity if the novel gene is derived from any of the following donor organisms: crustacean, eggs, fish, groundnuts, milk, molluscs, soybeans, tree nuts or wheat.

Thirdly:

The food must be labelled as such if a plant-derived food contains genetic material derived from a human or from an animal, or if animal- derived food contains genetic material derived from a human or from an existing taxonomic animal family.

My own view is that if you look at this requirement, which is mandatory and is not voluntary, it covers the safety concerns that all of us have. With regard to the environmental questions, which indeed are a concern to all of us, one of the things we had to do was to ensure, in terms of the approval system, that where a company would like to introduce a genetically modified organism they would have to advertise. I am sure a lot of us have seen advertisements in the paper.

Those advertisements allow for even me or you to say: “I am not convinced, tell me more.” So, even before the committee has looked at the application, it allows a process for people to express their view, to object and to give relevant evidence that is contrary. But even at that level, one of the things we have decided is that even where approval has been given, you cannot introduce a genetically modified organism in an environment where you have relative species.

Ngakho-ke awukwazi ukufaka le nto lapho kusuke kukhona izihlahla ezicishe zifane nayo, ezingomzala, ukuze kungabi khona into ezoshintsha lezi ezinye izihlahla zibe yile nto ezingeyona. [Therefore, you cannot introduce genetically modified organisms where there are relative species. This would change other plants.]

So I am saying, even from that perspective, we have ensured that we protect our environment.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr A Mlangeni): Order! Hon Minister, I will give you an extra minute so that you can try to convince us all, as you have managed to convince me. However, your time is up.

The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Thank you very much. I hope even members of the ID and hon Dudley will support the Bill after the extensive explanation. [Applause.]

The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Mr A Mlangeni): Thank you, hon Minister.

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time. (African Christian Democratic Party and Independent Democrats dissenting.)

       FOODSTUFFS, COSMETICS AND DISINFECTANTS AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

There was no debate.

Bill read a second time.

CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF INTERNATIONAL  CONVENTION ON MUTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE IN CUSTOMS MATTERS, IN TERMS
                OF SECTION 231(2) OF THE CONSTITUTION

Mr N M NENE: Chairperson, the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters, which is referred to here as the Johannesburg convention, was adopted by the council of the World Customs Organisation, WCO, on 27 June 2003 in Brussels, Belgium. It’s one of the main international agreements of the WCO aimed at providing a legal and binding framework for reciprocal co-operation between customs administrations. Due to the increasingly complex, fluid and expanding global trade landscape, these conventions are an important instrument to provide stability.

Without going into the provisions of the convention, let me outline the benefits of ascending to this convention. Ascension to this convention will enable customs administrations to legally exchange information, including personal data, and provide assistance directly to each other, which is not possible under the current Nairobi convention. This will provide a legal base for a central automated information system and provide an instrument to supplement bilateral agreements dealing with topical issues relating to the protection of society, administration of trade and the collection of revenue.

Secondly, it will also enable South Africa to form part of an enhanced global network of international customs administrations and will strengthen South Africa’s ability to clamp down on economic security fraud. It will also enhance our reputation as a trusted and respected trading partner.

In terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, I present this convention to this House for approval. [Applause.]

There was no debate.

International Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters approved.

The House adjourned at 16:53. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister of Safety and Security

 a) Strategic Plan of the South African Police Service (SAPS) for 2006
    to 2007 [RP 42-2006].

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services on its Visit to Prisons in the Northern Cape, dated 24 March 2006:

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services, having undertaken an
oversight visit to the Northern Cape from 10 to 15 October 2005, reports
as follows:



Introduction:



    The Portfolio Committee undertook an oversight visit to prisons in
    the Northern Cape.


Delegation



    The following members of the Portfolio  Committee  on  Correctional
    Services visited prisons in the Northern Cape.


     • Mr DV Bloem (Chairperson)
     • Ms LS Chikunga
     • Mr NB Fihla
     • Mr LP Khoarai
     • Ms MW Makgate
     • Mr MS Moatshe
     • Mr MJ Phala
     • Mr LJ Tolo
     • Mr ET Xolo


Objectives



    The objectives of the visit were:

     • To raise community awareness around community corrections, the
       parole boards, special remissions, social cohesion and social
       justice.
     • To identify blockages in the system, which prevent release while
       awaiting trial.
     • To interact with members of the Integrated Justice Cluster and
       discuss possible solutions to overcrowding.
     • To identify concerns around juveniles in prisons in the region.
     • To interact with the Independent Prison Visitors and the Legal
       Aid Board.
     • To address staff and discuss grievances and concerns.

    The Committee visited the following prisons in the region:
     • Kimberley Correctional Centre
     • Douglas Correctional Centre (Kimberley Management Area)
     • Barkly West Correctional Centre (Kimberley Management Area)
     • Kuruman Correctional Centre (Upington Management Area)
     • Upington Correctional Centre (Upington Management Area)


Findings and recommendations





    The following are the findings and recommendations of the Portfolio
    Committee on Correctional Services:

1 Overview of the Region

    The Northern Cape and Free State provinces are combined into one
    Correctional Services region. The region receives a budget of R754
    million of which the Northern Cape gets R197 million.


    The region is struggling to retain occupational staff such as
    social workers, psychologists and nurses.


    Upington and Kimberley have high levels of alcohol abuse, therefore
    the murder and rape offences are very common.


    Four offenders who have benefited from the Special Remission
    process reoffended in Upington. There is also a gang called the
    “Oceans Eleven” in Kimberley who caused a lot of uproar. The
    community suspected that these gang members benefited from the
    Special Remission process, but there is no proof of this.
    The region had no escapes during 2005, partly attributable to the
    security session the region held to tighten security.


    The building of the New Generation Facility has not yet started in
    Kimberley. This prison will accommodate 3000 offenders and will
    assist in relieving overcrowding in the region. The first phase of
    the building site was complete, but the building works have been
    postponed due to financial constraints.


    It was mentioned that the management was divided at the Kuruman
    Correctional Centre, but all efforts are made to strengthen
    management. The centre provides actions of Restorative Justice
    Activities to try and create or build a better relationship between
    offender and the aggrieved party. A highlight of the centre was the
    handing over of a house that was built by inmates to a victim of
    crime in the area. Three offenders at the centre who have benefited
    from the Special remission process have reoffended. The centre has
    five disciplinary cases pending. These cases include, inter alia,
    absenteeism at work and alleged smuggling of money.


 1. Offender Population

Kimberley Management Area

Upington Management Area Kuruman

Upington

 1. Offender Programmes

    (i)      Agricultural produce
       The area produces a lot of agricultural products. Kimberley
       produces ± 13 tons per month, Douglas produces ± 8 tons per
       month and Barkly West produces ± 450 kg per month.


    (ii)      Production workshops (Kimberley)
       The offenders at Kimberley Correctional Centre are also making
       offender uniforms and plastic aprons, prisoner rain coats,
       shirts and trousers which are manufactured and distributed
       nationally in DCS.

    (iii)     Education and Training
       Many inmates receive technical education to equip themselves
       with skills which will enable them to find employment or be self
       employed upon release. The Department of Labour (DoL) funded
       courses in Computer training and Curtain making. Inmates also
       attend welding and plumbing courses. Formal education include
       ABET level 1-4 and mainstream education.

             iv) Other programmes
       Inmates also attend courses in life skills, placement
       preparation, conflict management, HIV/AIDS programmes,
       aggression, sexual offences, mosaic course, art classes, social
       work services, psychological services, spiritual care,
       bricklaying, upholstery and painting.


          v) Achievements
       One (1) offender at the Kimberley Correctional Centre won 1st
       prize in the Nicro Arts competition. Fifteen (15) female
       offenders won 1st position in embroidery for Gun Free South
       Africa, which is displayed in the Constitutional Court. An
       amount of R20 000 was donated by the Rotary Club for purchasing
       of cupboards, tables and material for embroidery work. Staff of
       William Humphrey’s Art Gallery helps with training of juveniles
       and female offenders in mosaic and embroidery courses. The choir
       at the Kimberley Correctional Centre participated in a show and
       obtained double gold. Inmates at the Kuruman Correctional Centre
       also participate in the Presidents Awards Programme


 4.     Interaction with Offenders.

    The following are some of the concerns raised by inmates, as well
    as comments of the Committee.


    (a)      Many inmates have complained about insufficient
         availability of the Legal Aid Board lawyers. They often see
         their lawyers on the day of their court appearance and many of
         the lawyers have a “don’t care” attitude towards the inmates.
    (b)      Many of the juveniles the Committee interacted with had
         committed serious crimes such as murder and rape.
    (c)      A worrying factor to the Committee is that most of the
         inmates, especially juveniles, have tattoos. The Committee has
         explained the danger and consequences of these kinds of
         tattoos to the inmates. Tattoos can result in stigmatization
         from society and can hamper an inmate’s chances of finding
         employment.
    (d)      The Committee identified a female at the Kimberley
         Correctional Centre who was sentenced to ten months, but was
         in the centre for more than a year. The Committee was later
         informed that the inmate had to complete release programmes
         before she could be released. Another inmate (65 years of age)
         at the centre who has benefited from the Special Remission
         process was also still incarcerated.
    (e)      Many of the females at the Kimberley Correctional Centre
         complained about the availability of medicine as some are
         using chronic medication.
    (f)      Gangsterism does exist in the region, but is not as rife
         as in other parts of Correctional Services.
    (g)      Complaints were also received that inmates do not receive
         enough assistance from DCS in respect of study or reading
         material.
    (h)      The Independent Prison Visitors (IPVs) also offer little
         assistance to inmates and many complaints are not registered
         with the office of the Inspecting Judge as is the case at the
         Douglas Correctional Centre.

    Comments and Recommendations

    The Committee is aware of the challenges the DCS is facing, but
    recommends the following:


    (a)      The Committee stated that no person should be kept in
         prison longer than the time allocated in his or her sentence.
         The Committee urges that all Heads of Prisons should ensure
         that all inmates whose date of release is near should go
         through release programmes timeously.
    (b)      Where there is a lack of medication, the Area
         Commissioners should register this with the Regional office as
         soon as possible.
    (c)      The Committee urges the DCS to ensure that all juveniles
         of school going age attend school, as per the requirement of
         the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, and the South
         African Schools Act, Act 84 of 1996.
    (d)      The Committee recommends that the Office of the Inspecting
         Judge takes strong action against those employees who do not
         perform and that all regional coordinators of the IPVs submit
         regular reports to the Inspecting Judge.

 5.     Community Imbizo (Kimberley and Upington)

    The Committee was impressed with the attendance of the members of
    the community and thanked them. There were also many ex-offenders
    present in the meeting.


    The biggest focus of the oversight visit was to interact with the
    community as the role of the community is imperative in
    Correctional Services. The challenge that faces the Department is
    to enhance rehabilitation, correction and development aspects of
    correctional supervision. The community can play a meaningful role
    with the release of inmates in accepting inmates back into society,
    as well as assisting offenders in finding employment.


    The community was urged not to stigmatise offenders when they are
    released. Emphasis was placed on overcrowding and its consequences,
    and that prison is not a place for young people. The committee
    commended those learners present in the meeting and appreciates the
    fact that they do not condone crime. It was also stated that
    poverty should not drive people to commit crime as crime does not
    pay.


    The Committee mentioned that the government celebrated its
    achievements recently through the Special Remission process. This
    process requires the support of the community as the DCS must work
    in partnership with the community.


 6.     Key Concerns raised by the Community


    (a)      The community placed emphasis on the fact that
         rehabilitation comes from oneself and people can forgive, but
         not forget. Many of the inmates are not rehabilitated upon
         release and still continue with their criminal activities.
    (b)      Concern was also raised around the building of the new
         prisons. The community is of the opinion that more schools
         rather than prisons should be built
    (c)      The ex-offenders complained that upon release, many
         systems are not in place and offenders are left to manage on
         their own.
    (d)      Complaints were also raised with regard to the private
         sector. Many companies/ institutions are not willing to employ
         ex-offenders. This makes it extremely difficult to secure
         employment.
    (e)      Many complaints were raised with regard to the so called
         “Oceans Eleven” gang. People do not feel safe in their own
         homes and areas and have to be indoors very early. Despite the
         complaints raised about this gang, there is no evidence that
         these gang members are ex offenders.
    (f)      Another issue raised was that communities should become
         more involved in the programmes offered to inmates at
         Correctional Centres.
    (g)      It was also stated that communities must take into
         consideration the seriousness of an offence committed and
         learn to forgive those who have offended.
    (h)      Ex-offenders also complained that the release procedures
         in the Northern Cape are not the same as in the Free State,
         and since these provinces fall under one Correctional
         Services’ region, it should be the same.
    (i)      The community is concerned about the dignity of
         Correctional officials. It was stated that many of the
         officials go to work under the influence of alcohol and that
         they, as rehabilitators should be an example to the inmates.
    (j)      Another concern raised was that certain inmates were
         treated more favourably than others.  This included cases of
         food parcels, the attendance of funerals outside and the
         receipt of tool kits upon release.
    (k)      The community felt that the DCS should have regular
         community izimbizo to bring society on board and discuss
         challenges faced.
    (l)      Sodomy remained a matter of grave concern and the
         community said that those who sodomise others should be
         exposed. Sodomy breaks down the self-esteem of men and many of
         them upon release, are more violent than before.
    (m)      The community complained that the After Care programme of
         DCS does little to assist those released. Community
         corrections officers often stand outside the homes of ex-
         offenders, hoot and then leave again. It was stated that these
         officials should be of more assistance to those ex-offenders
         and assist with problems they might experience.
     (n)     Some ex-offenders stated that they were supposed to get
         certificates for courses attended whilst incarcerated, but
         never got those certificates. This makes it difficult for them
         to find employment.
     (o)     The community also reported instances where inmates were
         assaulted by warders or that warders instruct other inmates to
         assault certain inmates.

 1. Staff

    Post Establishment of the Kimberley Management Area


    |           |Area          |Kimberley    |Douglas|Barkly |Total     | |           |Commissioner  |Correctional |       |West   |          | |           |(AC) including|Centre       |       |       |          | |           |Community     |             |       |       |          | |           |Corrections in|             |       |       |          | |           |Kimberley     |             |       |       |          | |Approved   |92            |327          |118    |45     |582       | |posts      |              |             |       |       |          | |Posts      |81            |291          |100    |36     |508       | |financed   |              |             |       |       |          | |Posts      |76            |276          |95     |36     |483       | |filled     |              |             |       |       |          | |Posts      |5             |15           |5      |0      |25        | |vacant     |              |             |       |       |          |

Equity |Centre |African |Coloured |Asian |White |Total |Tota| | | | | | | |l | | |Female |Male |Female |Male | | | |Sentenced|Unsentence| | | | | | |d | | | |A |2308 |130 |3812 |3942 |170.80% | |B |1766 |4037 |- |4037 |228.59% | |C |671 |1087 |- |1087 |161.99% | |Youth |629 |563 |262 |825 |131.60% | |Female |244 |271 |131 |402 |164.75% | |Umzinto |445 |522 |205 |727 |163.37% | |Total |6063 |6610 |4410 |11020 |181.75% |

Youth Correctional Centre

Medium A Correctional Centre: There are 1 163 unsentenced juveniles between the ages of 18 -21 years at Medium A.

Medium B Correctional Centre There are 397 sentenced juveniles between the ages of 16 -21 years at Medium B.

Female Correctional Centre |Age |Sentenced |Unsentenced |Total | |13 years |0 |0 |0 | |14 years |0 |0 |0 | |15 years |0 |1 |1 | |16 years |0 |1 |1 | |17 years |3 |1 |4 | |18 years |6 |6 |12 | |19 years |6 |8 |14 | |20 years |1 |6 |7 | |21 years |2 |0 |2 | |TOTAL |18 |23 |41 |

Babies: There are four (4) boys and four (4) girls

Awaiting-trial Adult Offenders versus Awaiting-trial Juveniles

Period of Awaiting Trial Offenders

 2. The Westville Youth Centre

    The Department of Social Welfare is responsible for the rendering
    of services to children awaiting trial in KwaZulu Natal. A vast
    majority is accommodated at the Westville Youth Centre. The Welfare
    component operates as a satellite office of Excelsior Secure
    Centre, in conjunction with the Department of Correctional Services
    (DCS). Whilst the needs of the children, comprising food,
    accommodation, health, hygiene and security are catered for by the
    DCS, the Department of Social Welfare renders a variety of Welfare
    Services to address social, emotional and development needs of the
    youth. Holistic and integrated care and support are provided by
    three (3) social workers, six (6) Child and Youth Care workers. The
    centre functions as an Assessment and Referral Centre.

 a) Programmes
    Life skills, education, diversion, sports and recreation, court
    readiness, sexual offences programme, aggressive offences
    programmes, drug and alcohol abuse and pre-release programmes.  A
    mobile library and television sets are also available for youths.


 b) Education and Training
    210 learners at the centre are attending education programmes
    offered at the centre such as ABET levels 1-4 and Further Education
    and Training. The Youth school has been registered as a full time
    centre. Many of the boys at the center are eager to go to school,
    but not all can attend, because of challenges such as lack of
    educationists and not enough floor space to have classrooms. Those
    children who attend school are accommodated in one section, i.e.
    cells are on one level and the school is on the next level. This
    was done to avoid disturbances.


 (c)    Shortage of Professional Staff
    The centre is supposed to have five (5) social workers, but only
    has two (2) of which one (1) social worker was to be transferred at
    the end of October. The ratio of social worker to inmates is 1:260.
    Social workers deal with as many as 12 inmates per group depending
    on the nature of the crime. The shortages of social workers put a
    lot of strain on those currently employed. The physical structure
    is also not conducive to the programmes. Social workers are often
    not escorted in the section, because of the shortage of manpower in
    DCS. The shortage of staff also has a negative effect on the parole
    hearings of inmates as inmates must have a sentence plan when
    appearing before the parole board.


    The centre has only two nurses. There is no ratio of nurses to
    inmates and nurses work with ± 1 000 inmates. Nurses attend to more
    or less 70 to 100 inmates per day. The centre has a high number of
    tuberculosis cases and this poses a health risk to the two nurses
    at the centre. Nurses at the centre are not prescribing medication,
    but are only administering.


 (d)    Other challenges
    Many of the youths are being abused when they are transported to
    court and at the SAPS holding cells. There is no separation between
    adults and youth offenders.
    Youths awaiting trail at the centre is another huge challenge as
    many of the youth are street children. Youths need to be released
    in the care of their parents or guardian, but these family
    structures are often non-existent.


    Serious offences such as murder, kidnapping and gang rape cases are
    being heard by the High Court. These cases can take up to 18 months
    to be finalised.
    Inaccurate age assessments can result in youths being incarcerated
    at the youth centre.
    Reoffending is also common amongst youth.


    There is often no space for youths at Places of Safety and
    Reformatory schools, which is problematic as youths often wait very
    long to be placed in these facilities.

Comments and Recommendations

    The Portfolio Committee makes the following recommendations.


    The issue of shortage of professional staff has  been  raised  with
    the Committee on many prison visits  throughout  the  country.  The
    employment of professional staff is essential as it plays a serious
    and  important   role   in   the   rehabilitation   of   offenders.
    Implementation of the White Paper, which outlines  this  focus,  is
    impossible without the support of a range of professionals.


    The Portfolio Committee requires a report by DCS, within  3  months
    after adoption of this report, on:

    (a)      Review of  salary  packages  for  all  professional  staff
          employed by  DCS  to  ensure  that  they  are  recruited  and
          retained by the Department.
    (b)      Measures  which  have  been  initiated  to  speed  up  the
          recruitment process for professional staff.
    (c)       The  Portfolio  Committee  will  engage   the   Portfolio
          Committees on Social Development and Education in  Parliament
          to discuss the problems around Reformatory schools and Places
          of Safety.
    (d)       The  Department  of  Justice  (courts)  should  be   more
          prescriptive  in  obtaining  birth  documents,   immunisation
          cards, maternity  certificates  or  letter  from  schools  to
          administer the age assessment of youths.
    (e) The DCS must look into the possibility of designing a  programme
          to address the specific needs of youths in  order  to  reduce
          reoffending. This should be  done  in  conjunction  with  the
          Department of Social Development.
    (f) The Committee recommends that the programme of  court  readiness
          be rolled out to all centres in Correctional Services.



 4.     Durban Female Centre


    Workshops
    The Committee visited the workshops at the female section and was
    very impressed with the programmes run and the production of
    materials. The females deployed to work in the workshops serve
    sentences of two (2) years and more. This allows them to go through
    training programmes.


    The females produce inmate garments as well as belts and collars
    for officials. These products are distributed to all 241 prisons in
    the country.


    The centre also has a laundry service and officials are allowed to
    bring their laundry to the centre at a cost of R2,10c for ironing
    and R6,30c for washing and ironing per kilogram. The inmates also
    do the laundry of the entire Durban Westville Centre.


    The females also receive a gratuity for their services at the
    laundry, which are added and then received upon release.

   Durban Adult Female



    Eight inmate teachers under the supervision of the DCS teach some
    of the education programmes as well as computer courses. Courses
    include ABET levels 1-4, Mainstream education, business skills,
    Grades 11 & 12. Computer courses include typing, Windows `98 and
    Excel `98. The computer courses are not accredited. The computers
    at the centre were donated by NICRO (National Institute for Crime
    Prevention and Reintegration of Offenders). It was stated that not
    many of the female inmates attend the educational courses, but
    rather the workshops, because of the gratuity. The inmates have
    worked out a programme where females attend the ABET levels from
    07h00 to 09h00; thereafter they go to the workshops. Inmate
    teachers are being paid a gratuity of R19,00 to R99,00, depending
    on how long they are teaching at the facility.



   Durban Juvenile Female



    Many of the juvenile females have high bail amounts and have
    charges of robbery and theft.
    There were also girls who were incarcerated for loitering. The SAPS
    arrests these girls on charges of prostitution. It was stated that
    the community courts should hear such cases.


    The following are concerns raised regarding inmates of the Female
    Centre;


        a) It was stated that the sentencing framework for female
           crimes must be reviewed as many households collapsed when
           females are sent to prison. Often children are left in the
           care of parents, many of whom are pensioners, and this
           causes various problems.
      (b)    It was also suggested that the DCS appoints a panel to
           evaluate prisoners and the level of rehabilitation. Many
           inmates serve long sentences and can only appear before the
           parole board after serving ¾ of their sentence.
      (c)    It was stated that the systems of Correctional Supervision
           and parole boards are not in place. Many inmates have to be
           educated around these issues, but without proper systems in
           place, efforts are fruitless.
       (d)   Many of the inmates reoffend, because of lack of post-
           release programmes. It was suggested that the DCS employ ex-
           offenders after release in its workshops etc.

    Comments and Recommendations

    The Committee is aware of the challenges the DCS is facing, but
    recommends the following;

    (a)      The DCS should have all courses accredited. This will
             surely assist inmates upon their release.
    (b)      The DCS must assist those inmates, especially the
             juveniles, with low bail amounts in ensuring that they are
             released.
    (c)      The Committee urges the DCS to ensure that all female
             juveniles of school-going age attends school, as per the
             requirement of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of
             1998 and the South African Schools Act, Act 84 of 1996.

 5.     Inmate Tracking System (ITS) at Durban Westville Centre.

    The Inmate Tracking System solution entails a Personal Tracking
    Device (PTD) being physically attached to the detainees wrist.


    The ITS is a pilot project, which will be evaluated in terms of
    strategic, operational, functional and economic viabilities. The
    Johannesburg Medium A and the Durban Medium A were identified to
    pilot this project.


    The system aims to (i) assist in decreasing the detention
    population by assisting in decreasing the awaiting-trial detainee
    cycle, (ii) optimise the management of facilities and population,
    thereby improving the accuracy of information, (iii) increase
    security within detention facilities.


    The objectives of the system are to:
    (i)      track and visually depict the physical location of
         detainees,
    (ii)     enable the electronic verification of detainee identity,
    (iii)    support processes of admission, roll-calls, bail and
         visitations,
    (iv)     support movements and scheduling processes,
    (v)      give notification of PTD/ Transceiver Unit tampering and
         or failure.


    Transceiver Units within and around the holding facility
    continually receive the data being transmitted by any number of
    PTDs within reception. The collected information is continually
    being communicated to the computer system installed within the
    identified control area, which processes and displays all relevant
    information, sends messages, and notifies officials of any
    extraordinary events such as tampering.


    The system has the capability of tracking the detainees’
    whereabouts within the facility at all times. The system allows an
    official to immediately identify the position of any detainee
    within the facility and to have that detainee’s position tracked
    and reported on a computer.


    Mobile hand-held computers or Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs)
    are provided within the sections, allowing the officials to
    interact with the system and through which all messages and alarms
    are received and lock-up (roll calls) are conducted.


    The standard process is for all detainee identifications to be
    verified through fingerprint and verification. Fingerprint
    capturing devices (biometric readers) and digital cameras are
    connected to the ITS, which allows for the electronic capturing of
    fingerprint and photo images, and which are then electronically
    attached to the computerised file of the detainee, stored within
    the Inmate Tracking database. This information is gathered through
    an interface with the current correctional centre management
    system, the Admissions, Detention and Release System (A&R).


    The official functionality acceptance of the ITS at Durban Medium A
    Correctional Centre took place on 4 November 2004 and accepted by
    centre management and the Head of the Centre. During October 2003,
    93 centre members were identified and nominated as change agents.
    Training took place during February 2004, encompassing 61
    correctional centre members. The network implementation began
    during September 2003.


    Tagging and tracking did commence at the centre on 08 March 2004
    but has as yet, still not been finalised. Members of the Medium A
    centre would have been responsible for the backlog capturing
    activities, but in reality only two members were made available to
    complete this mammoth task. Two employees from the Area
    Commissioners office were then deployed to assist, as well as a
    further five employees from the Regional Commissioners office. Due
    to lack of resources, the reception functionality of the system
    never took place and sabotage was suspected specifically to the ITS
    equipment installed.


    The Change Agents and members who attended the training were never
    available at all to assist with the implementation, and some of
    them even expressed their non-interest in the system.


    A company by the name of Exponent Consortium was awarded the tender
    for the ITS. Two site engineers from the company are at the centre
    to manage the system. The electronic components of the ITS are
    being ordered from manufactures in the USA, and the straps are
    being ordered from Canada. Exponent is seeking local companies to
    manufacture these straps.


    The cost of the tender awarded to Exponent amounts to R28 million
    (this is total value of the contract, VAT inclusive). The monthly
    supervisional costs of the system amount to R 52 000.00. The
    Department of Correctional Services will spend R88 million on the
    ITS for all 36 Centres of Excellence.


    A total of 8 292 tags were lost during the implementation phase of
    this process and this amounted to R7 million.


    Comments and Recommendations


    The Committee is extremely dissatisfied with the implementation of
    the ITS, specifically at the Durban Westville Correctional Centre.
    At Durban Westville, it is merely used for identification purposes,
    i.e. fingerprints and photos.


    Of grave concern to the Committee is the lost equipment (8 292
    tags) that amounted to R7 million, and the fact that the problem
    had not been addressed, as this loss was reported in February this
    year. Lightning often damages the readers placed on the outside
    walls of the facility and these readers are not insured, whilst the
    total cost of this contract amounts to R28 million.


    The Committee was informed that the straps are being cut off and
    replaced when detainees go to court and return to facilities. The
    cost per strap amounts to ± R3,50 and can escalate to R700,00 per
    day for 200 offenders attending court daily. Even though the
    Committee was informed that all Inmate Tracking databases
    (computerised files of inmates) was functional, this was not the
    case when the Committee inspected the database room at the centre.
    This is not a very viable exercise.


    The Committee recommends the following;


    (a)      The Committee is aware that an Evaluation Committee has
          been established to evaluate the system and expects the
          report of the Evaluation Committee immediately it has been
          completed or within one month after the tabling of this
          report.
    (b)      The DCS should take strong action against those officials
          who deliberately sabotaged the ITS and report back to the
          Committee on this matter.
    (c)      The Committee recommends that the DCS table all projects
          such as Inmate Tracking and Electronic monitoring before the
          Committee for its comments and recommendation.

 6. Durban Westville Correctional Centre Court
    Because of the high numbers of awaiting trial detainees at the
    centre, a court was established which the Committee visited at the
    Medium A Centre. Detainees can, via video conferencing and cctv
    cameras, interact with the prosecutors, witnesses and the
    magistrates of the courts in the area. Four accused can be together
    during this process. This video conferencing will assist a lot
    especially in terms of high profile inmates who must be transported
    to court. The exercise started on 07 October 2005 and will be
    tested for a period of eight (8) months. The DCS will have a full
    report on the functioning and effectiveness of this system by May
    2006. Officials from the DCS monitor this process.


    Comments and Recommendation
    a) The Committee request the DCS to furnish it with the report on
       the effectiveness of this system.
    b) The Committee recommends that if this is a feasible and operable
       exercise, it be rolled out to other bigger centres within DCS,
       such as Pollsmoor.

 7. Staff


Total Number of Correctional Officials at the Durban Management Area

7.1     Staff concerns

    The Portfolio Committee met with both management and staff of
    Medium A, Medium B, Durban Females and staff at Durban Westville
    Youth Centre. This exercise was to discuss key concerns and
    problems which hamper the ability to carry out their duties
    effectively. Many of the concerns and grievances raised were common
    to all of the centres as well as other Correctional Services
    regions. Managers and staff highlighted concerns and also
    identified solutions to these problems. The following are some of
    the key concerns highlighted by managers and staff:

7.2     Vacant positions

    The Durban Westville Centre is extremely  overcrowded  and  has  an
    inmate population of 14 000. This causes a lot of strain on members
    of the DCS. Not only is it dangerous to work  in  such  conditions,
    but it also poses a health  risk  to  officials.  This  lowers  the
    morale of staff.
    Comments and Recommendations


    The high number of vacant positions in the DCS is  unacceptable  to
    the Portfolio Committee. The  Committee  is  aware  that  with  the
    movement to a 7-day establishment the DCS  aims  to  employ  8  300
    officials over the next three years.


    a) The Portfolio Committee request that the DCS prioritise  centres
       such as Durban Westville when recruiting officials.
    b) The Portfolio Committee also request  that  the  appointment  of
       females in senior positions be prioritised in this region.


7.3     Professional Staff


    The shortage of professional staff within  prisons  remains  a  big
    concern for the Committee. The Committee is aware that  the  salary
    packages for social workers have  been  reviewed,  but  all  salary
    packages for professional staff should be adjusted.


    Poor salaries and difficult working  conditions  for  professionals
    have been identified as key reasons for the  inability  of  DCS  to
    attract and retain professional staff.  The need to offer  improved
    salaries for professionals was identified as a priority by staff.


    The Management Area is supposed to have 54  nurses,  but  currently
    only 23 are employed in this area. Many professional  staff  leaves
    the employ of the DCS  in  search  of  better  work  opportunities.
    Shortage of especially social workers in the DCS delays the  parole
    hearings of inmates, as inmates must be assessed by social  workers
    before appearing before the parole board. A lot of complaints  were
    received about the working conditions of  professional  staff.  For
    example, at  the  clinic  at  the  Durban  Westville  Centre  (male
    section), staff often deals with 50 to 150  inmates  per  day.  The
    physical structure makes it difficult to attend to all sick inmates
    in the facility and nurses  basically  deal  with  emergency  cases
    mostly.


  Comments and Recommendations


    It is essential that there is sufficient professional staff  within
    DCS in order to effectively implement the rehabilitation  approach.
    Implementation of the White Paper, which outlines  this  focus,  is
    impossible without the support of a range of professionals.


    The Portfolio Committee requires a report by DCS  within  3  months
    after adoption of this report, on:


    (a)      Review of  salary  packages  for  all  professional  staff
          employed by  DCS  to  ensure  that  they  are  recruited  and
          retained by the Department.
    (b)      Measures  which  have  been  initiated  to  speed  up  the
          recruitment
          process for professional staff.
    (c)      Strategies to improve the  recruitment  and  retention  of
   professional.
         staff, including scarce resources  such  as  psychologists  as
         well as social workers, nurses and teachers.


 4. Health Care

       HIV/AIDS is prevalent amongst the majority of the inmates.  Many
       of the females  admitted,  even  those  who  are  pregnant,  are
       diagnosed with HIV/AIDS.


       The shortage of nurses is exacerbated by the perception that the
       workload of nurses has increased with the  advent  of  HIV/AIDS.
       The shortage of nurses means that in cases where there  is  only
       one nurse for the facility and  when  the  nurse  is  on  leave,
       correctional officials are tasked  with  distributing  medicines
       and providing care to the patients.


       The growing number of inmates affected by HIV/AIDS in prison was
       identified  as  a  key  concern.   Access   to   anti-retroviral
       treatment remains a problem  in  DCS.  Many  inmates  enter  the
       system under false names. To receive ARV  treatment,  an  inmate
       must have an ID and a confirmable  address.  Another  matter  of
       grave concern is that many inmates are from  other  regions,  as
       persons are incarcerated in the area where the  crime  has  been
       committed and  not  where  people  are  from.  This  is  also  a
       stumbling block in  receiving ARV treatment as many need  to  be
       transferred to their areas.


       Comments and Recommendations


       The Portfolio Committee is concerned about the  high  number  of
       seriously ill inmates with HIV/AIDS seen in the prisons on  this
       visit.


       The Committee recommends the following:


       a) The Portfolio Committee requests that the DCS  have  frequent
          interaction with the Department of Health to ensure the roll-
          out of antiretroviral treatment to inmates. Barriers  to  the
          acquisition of ARV treatment must be identified and solutions
          to this problem addressed, in conjunction with the Department
          of Health.  The DCS must submit a report identifying barriers
          to access to treatment and solutions to the  problem  to  the
          Portfolio Committee  within  3  months  of  tabling  of  this
          report.

       b) The Committee requests quarterly reports  from  the  HIV/AIDS
          coordinator of the region on specific problems  that  inmates
          have.


    5. Promotion


       This concern was raised in all the  centres  at  the  Management
       area. A moratorium was placed on promotions  on  01  July  2001.
       During the visit, staff identified the lack of  upward  mobility
       as a key factor in demotivating members. Many staff members have
       furthered their education, yet there is no incentive for them as
       there is no link between further studies and promotion.


       Many staff members, especially those with  long  service  (“blou
       baadtjies”) are of the opinion that they are not appreciated and
       acknowledged. Staff is aware that policies have changed and that
       they must contribute to their  subsidised  benefits,  but  since
       staff stay  on  the  same  level  for  years,  it  becomes  very
       difficult and places a lot of financial strain on them.


       Comments and Recommendations


       The Portfolio Committee  recognises  that  the  DCS  is  in  the
       process of creating Career  advancement  opportunities  for  all
       staff, especially those on the lower levels. This process is  to
       be completed during February 2006.

       (i)         The Portfolio Committee will call the DCS in to give
           feedback on the outcome  of  this  exercise  within  a  month
           after tabling of this report.
       (ii)  The DCS should furnish the Portfolio Committee with a list
           of all positions advertised in all the regions.


   7.6  Incentives and Recognition

       Staff complained about lack of incentives for staff to embark on
       post-qualification studies while employed by DCS,  the  lack  of
       recognition for completed studies,  for  long  service,  and  on
       retirement.


       In addition staff stated that merit awards were often  given  to
       the same individuals. Staff felt that the assessment process was
       not objective as it relies on the ability of staff to write  and
       communicate effectively, rather than on an objective  assessment
       of how well they perform their  duties.   Staff  requested  that
       management explain clearly the criteria on which assessments are
       based.

       Comments and Recommendations


       The low morale of staff was a feature  of  all  the  centres  at
       Durban Westville. While many of the problems faced by staff  are
       more difficult to rectify, the problem of lack of incentives and
       recognition for ongoing good work or past service is not.


       The  provision  of  incentives  for  post-basic   qualifications
       acquired by staff while employed by DCS is important in order to
       motivate  staff  to  continually  improve  themselves  and  thus
       provide a better quality service. In  addition,  recognition  of
       long service and acknowledgement and thanks on the retirement of
       staff are important rewards for service. It is only courteous to
       thank staff on retirement after long periods of service. The DCS
       should explore innovative and creative  ways  of  rewarding  and
       acknowledging staff. If financial  constraints  are  a  problem,
       then rewards may even be non-monetary, outside funding could  be
       found to fund tokens of appreciation, or the skills of prisoners
       within workshops could be harnessed in this regard.
       The Committee recommends the following:
          a) The DCS should consider rewarding staff for  long  service,
             as this will definitely boost the morale of staff.
          b) The Portfolio Committee requests a report from DCS within 3
             months after tabling this report, on  steps  that  it  will
             take  to  ensure  that  staff  are  motivated  to   perform
             effectively,  including  measures  that  it  will  take  to
             improve the assessment process and to reward staff for long
             service or ongoing good work.

   7.7  Overtime

       The DCS has phased out the 7-day establishment, where previously
       the DCS functioned as a 5-day establishment,  which  means  that
       work during the  weekend  is  paid  out  as  overtime.   Due  to
       financial concerns with overtime payments (and a decision by the
       National Treasury  to  cut  the  overtime  budget)  as  well  as
       additional benefits that will result, it was necessary  for  the
       DCS to move to a 7-day establishment.
       Staff complained that this process has  placed  major  financial
       constraints on them, as they now  also  have  to  contribute  to
       medical aid and other benefits in the DCS. Staff  is  only  paid
       for 3 out of 4 days of overtime taken.  The fourth day can  only
       be compensated for by a leave day. Many Heads of Prisons find it
       difficult to relieve staff during the  week,  because  of  staff
       shortages. In addition, they raised concerns that  the  shortage
       of staff means that other staff members suffer when staff  takes
       leave that is owed to them in lieu of overtime pay.


       Comments and Recommendations


       The Portfolio Committee supports the decision to move from a  5-
       day to a 7-day establishment.  However, at the same time  it  is
       clear that the concerns of staff around a decrease in take  home
       pay that will result from this change  need  to  be  taken  very
       seriously by DCS management.


       The Committee recommends the following:


       (a)   That all Heads of Prison should ensure that  action  plans
             are completed  to  ensure  the  correct  staff  complement,
             especially over weekends.

   7.8  Communication

       It was evident throughout the region that the DCS’ staff is  not
       adequately informed on key issues and  developments  within  the
       Department.  It  was  clear  that  problems,  which  should   be
       communicated and resolved at local, area and regional level, are
       not  effectively  addressed.  Staff  feels  that  they  are  not
       timeously informed by management on key issues that affect their
       work, such as developments with regard to promotions, vacancies,
       assessments and medical aid and that they thus need to  rely  on
       the unions for this information.


       Comments and Recommendations


       The reliance by DCS on communication in written  form  does  not
       seem  to  be  effective,  especially  when  staff  have  serious
       problems with the changes that are  occurring  around  them  and
       that impact on their work and their lives.
       The Committee recommends the following:


          a) The Committee recommends that  monthly  staff  meetings  be
             scheduled and that monthly reports be sent to the  regional
             office, and that these reports be  sent  to  the  Committee
             quarterly.
          b) The Committee requests that interaction  and  communication
             with the National Office should be brought down  to  grass-
             roots level rather than written communication. In addition,
             staff must be given the opportunity to identify and discuss
             their  concerns  in  a  non-threatening   environment   and
             management,  in  particular  area  managers  and  Heads  of
             Prisons, need to take these concerns seriously and identify
             constructive ways of addressing them.
             The DCS must report to the Committee within 3 months of the
             tabling of this report, on problems that they have
             identified with regard to communication with staff on the
             ground and steps that they have taken or will be taking to
             address this problem.


   7.9  Medical Aid

       In the past, medical aid for staff was fully subsidised.  Due to
       a number of financial concerns, including the fact that staff
       was abusing the scheme, a decision was made to change the
       medical aid to a partially subsidised scheme. This has meant
       that all staff now has to pay a proportion of the medical aid
       monthly payments. Staff has identified concerns, including that
       they had not budgeted for medical aid payments and that the
       premiums have resulted in their taking less money home than
       previously. In addition, staff feels that while they are now
       paying for this service they are not receiving sufficient
       benefits in return and that, in many cases, the scheme has very
       limited allocations for various health areas.



  Comments and Recommendations

          a) The DCS must identify  problems  with  regard  to  the  new
             medical aid scheme and report to  the  Committee  within  3
             months after tabling of this report on steps that have been
             or will be taken to address these problems.
          b)  In  addition,   the   DCS   top   management   must   take
             responsibility for effective communication  on  this  issue
             and for ensuring that staff on the ground is aware  of  DCS
             initiatives to improve the medical aid provision.


   7.10 Staff Accommodation & Housing Subsidy

       Staff members complained about the state  of  the  accommodation
       facilities at the Centre.  As  many  as  thirty  (30)  officials
       occupy a floor with only one bathroom and one toilet  that  must
       be utilised by both males and females. There is often  no  water
       or electricity in these quarters.


       Many staff members are forced to leave  their  children  in  the
       care of family members, as they are not allowed  to  accommodate
       their children in single quarters. There is also a long  waiting
       list for staff to be accommodated at the staff facilities.


       Staff complained that the housing subsidy of  R300,00  does  not
       enable them to purchase their own property. This subsidy used to
       be R1 000, but has been revised.
       Comments and Recommendations
       Many of the DCS facilities are old and  do  not  cater  for  the
       current needs of staff  or  inmates.  It  is  the  view  of  the
       Committee that it is unacceptable that  female  and  male  staff
       members share facilities.


       The Committee recommends the following:

       (a)   That the DCS review the current  structure  of  facilities
             and try improving the living conditions for staff members.
       (b)   That  the  DCS  should  also  use  its  own  labour  force
             (inmates) to  do  minor  maintenance  and  repair  work  at
             facilities. This should be discussed with the Department of
             Public Works


   7.11 Transport

       Staff complained about the provision of transport  to  and  from
       funerals of colleagues of the  DCS.  The  policy  requires  that
       transport to and from funerals not exceed 400 km. This proves to
       be problematic as many members are from all over the country.

   7.12 Danger Allowance

       Members complained that according to policy,  danger  allowances
       are paid for staff working with maximum sentenced offenders, but
       staff working with ATDs do not  get  paid  this  allowance  even
       though the ATDs with whom they work may be extremely  dangerous.
       In addition, some staff suggested that the danger  allowance  be
       increased as staff has a lot of physical contact with  dangerous
       inmates.
       Because of the overcrowded conditions at the Centre, staff feels
       that all employees should receive a danger allowance.


       Comments and recommendations

          a) The DCS must review the policy  on  danger  allowances  and
             report back to the Committee on this issue.

   7.13 Inmate Privileges

       A concern was raised that  inmates  have  more  privileges  than
       staff.  Members  are  not  allowed  to  use  telephones  in  the
       institution,  but  inmates  are  allowed.  This  seems   to   be
       problematic at times.


       Comments and recommendations
       The Area Commissioner stated that a telephone system  for  staff
       is being revisited. This system will  function  with  pin  codes
       issued to staff.


   7.14 Transfer of inmates

       The institution houses a lot of maximum inmates and it was  said
       that it is a mammoth task to transfer  inmates  to  the  Kokstad
       Maximum Security prison  in  Kwa  Zulu  Natal  or  to  the  Cmax
       facility in Pretoria. Factors contributing to this are that  the
       Kokstad facility is not  staffed;  therefore  inmates  can’t  be
       transferred to the facility.


       Comments and recommendations


       It is worrying for the Committee that Government has to spend  a
       lot of money on facilities and then these are  utilised  by  the
       DCS. Many other  Correctional  Facilities  in  the  country  are
       overcrowded, whilst some facilities are not in use.
       The Committee recommends the following:
          a) That the Portfolio Committee request a report on the status
             of the Kokstad facility from the DCS. The  Committee  would
             like to be kept abreast on the issue of sufficient manpower
             to run the facility and why, at this  stage,  there  is  no
             manpower at the facility.
          b) That the Committee request a detailed  report  on  all  the
             facilities of the DCS, those in use, those not in  use  and
             those being upgraded. The information should entail details
             of maintenance projects and when it will be completed. This
             report should be tabled before the Committee within two (2)
             months after the adoption of this report.

   7.15 Resources

       Staff complained that many of the resources  they  must  use  to
       fulfill their daily tasks are old, especially the  computers  at
       the  visitors  centre.  These  computers  are  used  to   obtain
       information on specific inmates the public would like to  visit.
       Officials deal with as many as 500 visitors daily. The computers
       are also not enough to deal with the daily influx of visitors to
       the centre.


       Comments and Recommendation
          a) That the  Committee  recommend  that  the  Management  area
             provide enough resources such as computers to officials. If
             resources are old and in a  poor  working  condition,  they
             should be either upgraded or replaced.


   7.16 Favouritism and Discrimination
       The Committee was informed of a specific official who  is  being
       discriminated against because  the  official  is  not  from  the
       area/province. At the time of the visit, the  staff  member  was
       extremely traumatised by these instances of discrimination.


       It was also stated that  there  is  a  lot  of  favouritism  and
       exploitation with the overtime schedule in terms  of  who  works
       overtime and who don’t. This is problematic to staff members.


       Comments and Recommendations


       The Committee is dissatisfied  that  some  officials  are  being
       discriminated against because of  different  ethnic  groups  and
       provinces. The Department is a department for all South Africans
       employed by it  and  instances  of  discrimination  are  totally
       unacceptable.


          a) The Committee recommends that the Management of the  center
             draw up monthly  action  plans  and  distribute  the  staff
             complement equally to deal with overtime.

1. Intersectoral Communication

 It was mentioned that more  sensitivity  around  issues  of  diversion,
 restorative justice and correctional supervision needs to be raised. It
 was mentioned that prosecutors are judged based on  their  performance.
 The SAPS also has an approach of  zero  tolerance  against  crime,  but
 this, in some cases, tends to the problematic.


 Recently more judges in the Durban area opt  to  divert  children  away
 from the correctional system. With diversion,  all  offenders  must  be
 screened and must admit guilt  before  diversion  can  be  implemented.
 Diversion can at times be problematic as there is no database  to  pick
 up previous offences and some offenders can be diverted more than once.
 Many workshops have been organised in the  region  on  Victim  Offender
 Mediation to advocate  awareness  amongst  judges.  Despite  all  these
 efforts, more  intervention  and  interaction  is  needed  amongst  the
 officials  monitoring  correctional  supervision,  the  Department   of
 Justice, the Department of Social Development and the SAPS.


 Section 276A (3) (a) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that in the
 case of a prisoner who has been sentenced to less than 5 years (or his
 or her release date is less than 5 years in the future) the
 Commissioner may, if he is of the opinion that such a person is fit to
 be subjected to correctional supervision, apply to the clerk or
 registrar of the court, as the case may be, to have that person appear
 before the court a quo in order to reconsider the said sentence. The
 court has an option to convert the sentence into correctional
 supervision on the conditions it may deem fit. Section 287 (4) (b) of
 the Criminal Procedure Act deals with a situation where a person has
 been sentenced to pay a fine with an alternative of imprisonment not
 exceeding 5 years, and such person is unable to pay the fine. The
 matter may be referred back to the court to set a new sentence of
 correctional supervision.
 The magistrates in the Durban area informed the Committee that they
 have never received such applications.


 Comments and Recommendations


 The Portfolio Committee understands that it is only possible to resolve
 the problem  of  overcrowding  in  prisons  by  ensuring  intersectoral
 solutions to the problem. Communication  between  the  various  sectors
 including the DCS, the SAPS and  the  Department  of  Justice  is  thus
 essential. The DCS must take responsibility for ensuring the  effective
 functioning of cluster committees at all levels.


 The Committee recommends the following  in  order  to  ensure  adequate
 intersectoral communication:


  (a)         The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services will meet
      with the Portfolio Committee on Justice to also discuss  possible
      solutions to the blockages in the system.
  (b)         Magistrates and judges should  be  sensitised  around  the
      options of diversion and community supervision.
  (c)         The Committee recommends that  the  Department  of  Social
      Development ensure that measures be are in  place  at  Places  of
      Safety to prevent children from absconding.
  (d)         IPVs and the  Legal  Aid  Board  representatives  must  be
      included in cluster  committee  meetings  at  regional  and  area
      levels.
  (e)          In  addition,  the  Judicial   Inspectorate   must   take
      responsibility for ensuring that the  IPV  and  Legal  Aid  Board
      representatives at each prison meet regularly  to  discuss  cases
      and problems.
  (f)         The cluster committees should investigate whether all ATDs
      in police cells need to be there or whether they can be  released
      using  the  available  mechanisms.   Those   ATDS   who   require
      incarceration in prison should be shifted from the  police  cells
      to the prisons by moving prisoners  within  the  management  area
      from overcrowded to less overcrowded prisons.
  (g)   The Committee supports intersectoral priorities  to  reduce  the
      caseloads of court officials and to improve police investigations
      to ensure more speedy resolution of cases which will shorten  the
      length of time that Awaiting  Trial  Detainees  (ATDs)  spend  in
      prison.
  (h)   All ATDs who are accused of non-violent offences  and  who  have
      been granted bail of R1  000  or  less  by  the  courts  and  not
      considered by the courts to be  a  danger  to  society,  but  are
      unable to afford the stipulated bail amounts, should be released.

E. Conclusion

In conclusion, the Portfolio Committee would like to commend all staff
at the extremely overcrowded Durban Westville Correctional Centre for a
task excellently delivered. The Committee undertakes to address the
grievances and problems raised by staff, not only at the Durban
Westville Centre, but at all other centres the Committee visited. The
Committee gained more appreciation and insight into the difficult
conditions under which DCS staff work, exacerbated by overcrowding and
the lack of adequate resources.  The issue of career advancement
opportunities should be communicated to all staff throughout the
country.  More interaction and intervention from the Integrated Justice
Cluster is needed in this region. However, the Committee is extremely
dissatisfied with the haphazard implementation of the Inmate Tracking
System at the center and will keep a vigorous eye on the effective
completion of this system and expects the DCS to provide the Committee
with a full report on the matter. The Portfolio Committee on
Correctional Services will monitor measures to implement the
recommendations outlined in this report and will meet with the Regional
Commissioner responsible for the Durban Westville Correctional Centre
within 6 months of tabling this report, to discuss progress on
implementation of the recommendations.
Report to be considered.

1. Annual Report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services January – December 2005

   ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

                    JANUARY – DECEMBER 2005
   

2. Name of the Committee:

   Chairperson: Mr D V Bloem

   Committee Secretary: Imogen Davids

3. Chairperson’s overview

   The Committee had an extremely busy year. The briefings by the Department on progress made in terms of the recommendations of the Committee’s oversight visits reports was a very useful tool/mechanism to hold the Department of Correctional Services responsible for its actions. More stringent measures will have to be implemented to ensure that policy is implemented. The briefing by the Department on Special Remissions provided the Committee with a more comprehensive understanding about the implementation, lessons learnt and processes of this initiative. The Committee will hold continuous discussions with the DCS on its activities. A concern was raised at the briefings by the National Council on Correctional Services and the Judicial Inspectorate about the Correctional Services Act. Certain amendments have been effected to the Act of which the Committee was not aware. The Committee had requested that the amendments be forwarded to it. Another issue of serious concern was the timeous receival of documentation. This hampers the work of the Committee, as it does not have sufficient time to interrogate the documents. The oversight visits were also very successful. The Committee concentrated specifically on the awaiting-trial population in an attempt to identify blockages in the judicial system. Meetings with Magistrates, Prosecutors and the Police were held in order to have an integrated approach to the problems and plights of the awaiting-trial population. Another area of focus was that of building strong relations with the community. Awareness around the reintegration of offenders upon their release is very essential. The Committee also had detailed discussions and inspections at the Private Prisons. The DCS can learn from the Private Prisons, especially in terms of security. The Committee wishes to build stronger partnerships with the DCS and the Ministry in order to have a common understanding on challenges faced.

4. Vision and mission of the committee

   To assist in building a strong Department that will contribute towards maintaining and protecting a just, peaceful and safe society by enforcing court-imposed sentences and detaining prisoners in safe custody.

5. List of public entities over which the committee exercise oversight

   The Department of Correctional Services The Judicial Inspectorate of Prisons The National Council of Corrections

6. Number of meetings held and those cancelled

   31 Meetings from January till November 2005 Only two meetings were cancelled, because of Plenary sessions, but the Agenda items were incorporated into the Committee programmes.

7. Legislation referred to the committee (Finalised and not finalised) indicate the following:

            • The Committee had no legislation before it.
   

8. Papers (International Agreements, Protocols, Reports etc) referred to the Committee indicate the following:

   Draft directives in terms of section 299 A of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977; Right of complainant to make representations in certain matters with regard to placement on parole, on day parole or under correctional supervision. • Referral date: 05 October 2005 • Consideration date by the committee: Friday, 28 October 2005 • Report publication (ATC date): No report in the ATC • Debate in the House: No debate in the House

9. Oversight (Local) visits

    8.1 Oversight Visit to the North West and Mpumalanga provinces
            • Objectives of the trip
              Visit to the North West and Mpumalanga region to identify
              the impact of overcrowding on conditions of prisons. Meet
              with staff at all levels to discuss issues of
              communication, corruption and other staff grievances.
              Identify concerns around juveniles in prison. Interact
              with the Legal Aid Board and the Independent Prison
              Visitor.
   
            • Dates
              26 January till 04 February 2005
   
   
            • Delegation
              Mr D V Bloem
              Ms. L S Chikunga
              Ms. M W Makgate
              Mr M S Moatshe
              Mr S Mahote
              Mr L J Tolo
   
   
            • Provinces/ places visited
              Potchefstroom Correctional Centre (North West Province)
              Mogwase Correctional Centre (North West Province)
              Losperfontein Correctional Centre (North West Province)
              Rustenburg Correctional Centre (North West Province)
              Wtibank Correctional Centre (Mpumalanga Province)
              Barberton Correctional Centre (Mpumalanga Province)
              Nelspruit Correctional Centre  (Mpumalanga Province)
              Ermelo Correctional Centre  (Mpumalanga Province)
              Bethal Correctional Centre(Mpumalanga Province)
   
   
            • Report
              Adopted on Tuesday 15 March 2005.
   
   
            • Report publication (ATC date)
              Thursday, 19 May 2005
   
   
            • Debate in the House
              Tuesday, 07 June 2005
   

   8.2 Oversight Visit to the Limpopo Province

            • Objectives of the trip
              Visit to the Limpopo Province and the Private Prison,
              Kutama Sinthumule, to identify the impact of overcrowding
              on conditions of prisons. Meet with staff at all levels to
              discuss issues of communication, corruption and other
              staff grievances. Identify concerns around juveniles in
              prison. Interact with the Legal Aid Board and the
              Independent Prison Visitor. Compliance with the
              Correctional Services Act. Training programmes at PPP’s
              and the standard of Security.
   
   
   
            • Dates
              3 – 5 August 2005
   
   
            • Delegation
              Mr D V Bloem
              Ms. L S Chikunga
              Mr N B Fihla
              Ms. M W Makgate
              Mr M S Moatshe
              Mr M J Phala
              Mr L J Tolo
              Mr E T Xolo
              Ms S Seaton
   
   
            • Province, places visited
              Thohoyandou Correctional Centre
              Kutama Sinthumule Private Prison
              Polokwane Correctional Centre
   
   
            • Report
              Adopted on 01 February 2006.
   
   
    8.3 Oversight Visit to the Training Colleges of DCS and the Private
        Prison
   
   
            • Objectives of the trip
              To address the new recruits at the colleges, specifically
              addressing the Code of Conduct, the Training Curriculum,
              issues of Discipline and Respect, Compliance with the
              Correctional Services Act, Training programmes at PPP’s
              and the standard of Security of the PPP’s.
   
   
            • Dates
              16 – 18 August 2005
   
   
            • Delegation
              Mr D V Bloem
              Ms. L S Chikunga
              Mr N B Fihla
              Mr M S Moatshe
              Mr M J Phala
              Mr L J Tolo
              Mr E T Xolo
              Mr J Selfe
              Ms S Seaton
   
   
            • Province, places visited
              Zonderwater Training College
              Kroonstad Training College
              Mangaung Private Prison
            • Report
              Adopted on 01 February 2006.
    8.4 Oversight visit to the Northern Cape, KwaZulu Natal and the
         Training Colleges
   
   
            • Objectives of the trip
              To inspect prisons, to address the high number of
              awaiting trial detainees in Correctional centres by
              having meetings with the Integrated Justice Cluster, to
              gain first hand knowledge on the implementation of the
              inmate tracking system at Durban Westville prison,
              address the new recruits at the colleges by specifically
              addressing the Code of Conduct, the Training Curriculum
              as well as issues of Discipline and Respect within the
              Department.
   
   
            • Dates
              10 – 21 October 2005
            • Delegation
              Mr DV Bloem
              Ms. L S Chikunga
              Mr N B Fihla
              Mr L P Khoarai
              Ms M W Makgate
              Mr M S Moatshe
              Mr M J Phala
              Mr L J Tolo
              Mr E T Xolo
              Mr J Selfe
              Ms S Seaton
   
   
            • Province, places visited
              Kimberley Correctional Centre
              Douglas Correctional Centre
              Barkly West Correctional Centre
              Kuruman Correctional Centre
              Upington Correctional Centre
              Durban- Westville Prison
              Kroonstad Training College
              Zonderwater Training College
   
   
            • Report
              To be adopted on 24 March 2006.
   

10. International Visits: The Committee did not undertake any International Visits during 2005.

11. Budget Vote

            • Referral date
              23 February 2005
    
    
            • Briefing by department
              Tuesday, 08 March 2005
    
    
            • Public Hearings:
              Tuesday, 04 April 2005
            • Report publication
              Monday, 10 March 2005
    

12. Annual reports of the Executive

           • Referral date
             30 September 2005
    
    
           • Briefing by department
             Friday, 28 October 2005
           • Public Hearings:
             Friday, 28 October 2005
    
    
           • Report publication
             Report published on 23 February 2006
    

13. Other committee activities (briefings on other issues, workshops, conferences)

1. Budget of the committee

       i. Budget Allocation for 2005/6
           R 471 106,00
   
               • Expenditure incurred as at end of September 2005:
           R 140 442,20
   
        1. Credits to consolidated Fund:
           R 105 318,90
   
        2. Balance as at end of September 2005:
   
   
           R 225 344,90
   
             3. Total cost of Oversight visit during October 2005:
           R 196 221,00
   
   
             4. Balance as at October 2005
           R 29 123,90
   

   1. OUTSTANDING MATTERS:

Reports on Oversight visits were adopted during January 2006.

1. SUPPORT STAFF

Committee Secretary Imogen Davids

Control Committee Secretary: Ben Kali

Committee Assistant: Fungile Bulawa

Secretary to Chairperson: Rene Lawrence

Researcher (Research Unit): Nadia Dollie

…………………………………………

COMMITTEE SECRETARYDATE: DATE:

………..…………………………..……………

CONTROL COMMITTEE SECRETARY DATE:

………..………………………….

COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON DATE

                             APPENDIX II





    |REPORTS TABLED                 |DATE                                         | |                               |ATC                   |DEBATE                 | |Oversight visit to the North   |19/05/05.             | 07/06/05              | |West and Mpumalanga            |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Oversight visit to Lindelani   |19/05/05              |No debate              | |Place of Safety                |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Oversight visit to Bonnytoun   |9/05/05               |No debate              | |Place of Safety                |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Oversight visit to Pollsmoor   |19/05/05              |No debate              | |Juvenile Centre                |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Report on Solutions and        |20/05/05              |No debate              | |Recommendations to Overcrowding|                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Report on two fire incidences  |20/05/05              |No debate              | |at Pollsmoor Management Area.  |                      |                       | |                               |                      |                       | |Oversight report on the visit  |20/05/05              |No debate              | |to Cmax after a breach.        |                      |                       |