WEDNESDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2006 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

                                ____

The Council met at 14:05.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): We are sorry for the delay. We have to wait until the system is working. The system is completely off. The system is working now. You may continue, sir.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Mnr J W LE ROUX: Dankie Voorsitter, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag sal voorstel:

Dat die Raad kennis neem -

    1) dat die swendelaar Tony Yengeni voorkeurbehandeling in die
       gevangenis ontvang;


 2) dat Suid-Afrika se beeld as regstaat deur die modder gesleep word;


 3) dat wetsgehoorsame burgers van die land die gebeure met minagting
    ervaar en dat regverdigheid voor die reg nie in Suid-Afrika bestaan
    nie; en


 4) dat die Regering onmiddellik hierdie skandalige gebeure moet
    veroordeel en regstel. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Mr J W LE ROUX: Thank you Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day:

That the Council notes -

(1) that the fraudster Tony Yengeni is receiving preferential treatment in prison;

(2) that South Africa’s image as a constitutional state is being dragged through the mire;

(3) that law-abiding citizens of the country are perceiving these events with disdain and that equality before the law does not exist in South Africa; and

(4) that the Government should immediately condemn and rectify these outrageous events.]

Mr M A MZIZI: Madam Deputy Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move:

That the Council –

(1) expresses its shock that a boy, aged 14, was robbed and sodomised while walking home in Germiston on Saturday, 11 November;

(2) especially notes that the incident occurred in an open field; and

(3) urges the authorities to monitor such open spaces and fields on an ongoing basis to protect the public and to discourage undesirable elements from using such spaces as their base of operations.

                   FIREARMS CONTROL AMENDMENT BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I wish to welcome the hon S Shabangu, Deputy Minister of Safety and Security, and I therefore call upon the hon Deputy Minister to open the debate.

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Deputy Chair, hon members, chairperson of the Select Committee on Safety and Security and Constitutional Affairs, I must say that the select committee made history by having its final deliberations on this Bill in Parys, in the Free State.

One must congratulate the committee for the thorough manner in which they have dealt with this Bill, by revisiting the submissions made to the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security during its public hearings on the Bill, and by way of in-depth discussion of the Bill itself.

One of the touching submissions to the portfolio committee was that of the Red Cross Hospital, which pointed out the tragic consequences of the illegal use of firearms when children land in the crossfire. We all will recall also the recent incident in which a small child was killed in an armed robbery in Johannesburg where an illegal firearm was used.

The cornerstone of the Firearms Control Act of 2000 is responsible ownership, which is directly linked to the competency to possess firearms. One of the sources of illegal firearms is legal firearms that are obtained by means of robberies, housebreakings and theft. I would like to emphasise the need for the safekeeping of firearms by owners because that would reduce the number of illegal firearms we find in our communities.

The amendment to the Act, in the Bill before this House, provides for new categories of competency certificates in respect of muzzle-loaders, professional hunters and collectors. Furthermore, the Bill provides that the validity period of competency certificates will in future coincide with the validity period of the particular licence.

The Bill furthermore provides for a renewal process for competency certificates, which will be simplified but will still ensure that field investigations are done when there is any indication in the application in respect of a person’s unfitness to own a gun.

We realise how important the hunting industry is to the country in respect of income generated through hunting by overseas hunters. On behalf of the professional hunters a good case was made for creating a separate category of licence for professional hunters.

At present professional hunters own their firearms as dedicated hunters. They are employed for specific hunts by the hunter outfitters who organise the hunt. In terms of the law, these hunters must be accompanied by a professional hunter.

These outfitters expect the professional hunters in many cases to provide the appropriate firearms. By registering firearms for professional hunting purposes, the professional hunters will be empowered with regard to the Firearms Control Act of 2000. This will now link up with the requirements of provincial laws regulating firearms.

In respect of muzzle-loaders it needs to be pointed out that the provision in the original Act that antique firearms, as well as replicas thereof, were excluded from any regulation in terms of the Act, led to abuse, where muzzle-loading firearms were sold at all sorts of shops, even gift shops, and even children were allowed to buy these muzzle-loaders. The Bill now provides that only a person in possession of a competency certificate will be allowed to possess a muzzle-loading firearm, and that such firearms may only be manufactured, imported, exported and traded in by licensed manufacturers or dealers.

In respect of silencers, it was clear, even from the submissions of various organisations, that there are thousands of silencers being used for hunting purposes. Currently a silencer which can be used for assassination may be manufactured, traded or possessed without any form of control. It is common knowledge in many countries that silencers may only be possessed by a licensed firearm owner.

The Bill now includes a silencer or sound moderator as a firearm part. This will ensure that only a person who is a licensed firearm owner may possess a silencer for that firearm. It may only be manufactured by licensed manufacturers and may only be sold by a dealer.

In addition, it opens the avenue for the Minister of Safety and Security to prohibit or restrict, by notice in the Gazette, the acquisition, disposal, possession or use of silencers, if it is in the interests of public safety or the maintenance of order.

We honestly cannot think of lawful reasons to possess a silencer for a handgun. However, we do recognise that especially game farmers have a need to use silencers in culling operations in order not to scare and traumatise the animals unnecessarily. In terms of the Act, any notice in the Gazette to further regulate silencers would require the approval of both Houses of Parliament.

During the deliberations on the Bill a number of organisations were concerned that orders made under the Domestic Violence Act are not taken into account in respect of pending applications for firearm licences. The Domestic Violence Act does provide that such an order must be sent by the court to a police station of the complainant’s choice. However, the committee undertook to strengthen the firearms control regulations in this respect by ensuring that any such order would be related to pending applications for firearm licences, to ensure that a licence is not issued in any circumstances where there is a danger of it being abused.

The Bill is important in that it will simplify the administration and further the implementation of the Firearms Control Act of 2000. The Bill extends the validity period and therefore the sequence of renewal of certain licences, such as firearms for business purposes and gunsmith licences.

An aspect which complicated and slowed down the relicensing of firearms licensed under the repealed Act, as well as the issuing of new licenses, was the requirement of SA Safety and Security Education and Training Authority certificates, which are issued by Sasseta, whilst the service provider is accredited and registered as such.

The SAPS has already undertaken to allow applicants to lodge their applications on the basis of the certificate by the service provider, in anticipation of the Sasseta certificate, to allow the processing of the licences without delay. The SAPS has also commenced accepting applications for licences together with applications for competency certificates, in order that these processes run concurrently. Steps are taken to ensure that applicants are informed at the time of the application that they may follow this route.

In respect of collectors, the Bill provides that prohibited and restricted firearms - in other words, fully automatic and semi-automatic firearms - must be made inoperable in order to be kept in a collection. This process of making a firearm inoperable will mean that it will not be able to fire ammunition. The process will be prescribed by regulations and will be drafted through consultation with the relevant role-players in order that it might be a reversible process not affecting the collectors’ value of the firearm in question.

Chairperson, the SAPS is doing its utmost to locate and destroy illegal firearms in South Africa through police operations. A series such as Operation Rachel took place over a period of 12 years between Mozambique and the South African police. During the last operation more than 5 tons of weapons were destroyed by blowing them to pieces with explosives. Similar operations were held in Lesotho and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Deputy Chair, I move that this House adopt this report, and that the Bill be adopted by the National Council of Provinces. I thank you. [Applause.]

Kgoshi M L MOKOENA: Chairperson, my hon Deputy Minister, colleagues and committee members, there are people who believe that there are always plenty of reasons not to take a decision. They have plenty of reasons to wait for more information or to wait for more options or even to wait for more opinions.

Fortunately, the majority of us, as leaders, display a consistent bias for action because of the call that was made by many of our South Africans that there are many licensed and even unlicensed firearms in the country. We had to take action. It is on this basis that, as a committee, we deemed it fit and proper that, even when we were somewhere down there in the Free State, we had to meet and discuss this Bill in the best interests of all South Africans.

Having said this, I must thank the departments represented by Dr Jacobs. I must thank Dr Jacobs for being such a humble person, dedicated and ready to serve all South Africans. If we can have many Dr Jacobses in this country, we will go very far. That is the reason this Bill is here before this House. As the Deputy Minister has already stated, when Parliament passed the principal Act - that is the Firearms Control Act of 2000 - we omitted to include the muzzle-loader and even the silencer.

In this Bill we also define professional hunters, dispossessions, fit and proper persons, etc. This is done to make sure that there is consistency between this Bill and the principal Act. In that clause, we are just doing what we call “a cleaning exercise.”

Allow me to quote one of my committee members on what he said during our deliberations on this Bill down there in the Free State:

The very licensed firearms that are possessed by many of us … there is a possibility that one day they’ll end up being unlicensed firearms because they land in wrong hands.

None other than the hon Chris Ntuli said this when he was trying to bring the message home to those who had not seen the light as yet. And I’m happy that it really made sense because once he made that statement, the debate subsided.

There are those who are saying that we are disarming law-abiding citizens through this Bill. It is not true. What we are doing is to make sure that a person owns one firearm for self-protection and the other one either for professional hunting or sports purposes. Why do you need so many firearms to protect yourself? It doesn’t make sense. If you want to own many firearms as well, the law allows you to do that but you have to apply. And if you are a fit and proper person, you’ll be licensed. But you have to state reasons why you want many firearms rather than one.

There are those who want to have many firearms because they are private hunters or collectors, etc. This is allowed by this Bill. There are those who need these firearms for other reasons. As government, we would be abdicating our duties to allow those kinds of things.

There are those who attach such sentiment to their firearms that they can’t part with them. In this Bill, what we are saying is that you must follow the normal process of making sure that your firearm is deactivated or dismantled. You still own it because you are not going to use it to shoot anything but you just want it for its sentimental value. That’s it. And this Bill says, “Yes, you can do that.” There is no fuss about it. Who can oppose those kinds of arrangements concerning this Bill?

Go nale bao ba rego mmušo wo ga o tšee magato go leka go fediša boganka le bo kebekwa mo nageng. Bare go na le dibetša tše ntšhi tšeo e lego gore mmušo ga o di hlokomele.Ke leka go fetiša gore ge batho ba lla bare go nale dibetša tše ntšhi mo nageng, bjale ka mmušo re tšere magato a gore dibetša tšeo di tloge matsogong a batho bao di fedišwe.Ka Moloakakanywa wo ke seo se diregago. Sa go makatša ke gore ba lla gore dibetša ke tše ntši kua matsogong a sego a swenela. Ge mmušo o di tšea ba a lla gape bare o seke wa di tšea. Nare ba nyakang batho ba? (Translation of Sepedi paragraph follows.)

[There are people who complain that the government is not taking any measures against fraud and corruption in this country. They say that there are a lot of illegal weapons that the government is not even doing anything about. I am trying to ignore the fact that people are complaining about the many illegal weapons, while the government has appealed to the people to hand them over so that they can be destroyed as proposed by this Bill. What is surprising is that people complain about the many illegal weapons and they complain again when the government takes them away from them. What is it exactly that these people want?]

As the ANC-led government, we can’t be like those bad managers who work very long hours thinking that that is a brand of heroism, not realising that their action is just a hallmark of incompetence. It is high time for all of us to walk the talk. Those who live in glass houses must dress properly.

A re tlogeleng dilo tša go se sepele ka tsela gore molao wo o phase ka gore batho ba a o nyaka. Ga re ganetše motho go ba le sebetša, feela go nyakega gore se be molaong, ke moka.

Mohlomphegi Motlatšatona o šetše a boletše taba tše ntšhi mo, nkase boeletše.

Bjale wena ka bo wena, ke kabelo efe yeo o tlago go e raloka gore o thuše setšhaba gore molao wo o phase naa? Batho ba le lebeletše. Ge o gana gore molao wo o phase gora gore o nyaka gore dikebeka di tšwele pele ka go šomiša dibetša tšeo di sego molaong. (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)

[Let us abstain from unbecoming behaviour so that this Bill can be passed, because it is what the people want. We do not have a problem with someone owning a weapon as long as it is legal and that’s it.

The hon Deputy Minister has already mentioned a couple of things here and there is no need for me to repeat them. Now the question is: What role are you going to play to help get the Bill passed? People are watching you. If you are against this Bill being passed, it means you want the criminals to carry on using illegal weapons.]

Colleagues, once more, we have done it. I know it was not easy but we managed. It is worth it. And I’m proud to say that, with this kind of team, we can move mountains. Let me thank you for your contributions, motivations, deliberations and dedication. We are what we are and where we are because we first imagined it.

While it is good enough to leave footprints in the sands of time, it is even more important to make sure that they are pointing in a commendable direction.

With these words … … ke re Molaokakanywa wo ke wa rena. Ao phase, batho ba o emetše – ba a o nyaka. Morena. [… I say that this is our Bill. It has to be passed. The people are desperately waiting for it – they want it, sir.]

Mr D A WORTH: Deputy Chairperson, Deputy Minister and hon members, the Firearms Control Amendment Bill makes some adjustments to the original Firearms Control Act, which was introduced on 1 July 2004. The DA believes that the control and responsible management of firearms is important in any society. Legislation is, of course, necessary to control the use and possession of firearms.

However, this Act targets legal firearm owners and does not address the millions of illegal firearms that remain in the hands of the criminals. The purpose of such legislation should be to control and manage legal firearms and not to disarm law-abiding citizens. The weapons most commonly used in robberies and cash heists are AK-47s, R4 and R5 assault rifles, which ordinary members of the public do not possess or own. Meanwhile, the robberies, rapes, murders and mayhem continue unabated.

According to the latest annual report of the South African Police Service for 2005-06, 33 823 illegal firearms were surrendered in the extended amnesty period. Some 42 095 legal firearms were handed in voluntarily to the SAPS.

This, in effect, means that more legal firearms than illegal firearms were recovered; most as a result of owners, especially pensioners, who could not afford the cost of training and licensing that made keeping a firearm unaffordable. Many applications for a licence are rejected with the flimsiest of excuses, such as a lack of motivation. No compensation whatsoever is paid in respect of guns handed in. The SAPS states that legal firearms are often stolen from the public and then become illegal firearms, used in murders and robberies.

However, the Auditor-General states on page 131 of the annual report of the SAPS that some 2 297 firearms were either lost, stolen or robbed from the police themselves during the year 2005-06 compared with 735 the previous year – a 312% increase. The Auditor-General further states, and I quote:

Firearm registers were not properly maintained and weapon inspections were not performed at least twice a year.

A gun-free South Africa would be ideal, but until we can deal effectively with crime, our citizens must be able to protect themselves, their families and their property. On the TV programme Special Assignment, a team with hidden cameras were shown freely buying firearms, including a rapid firing gun capable of firing shotgun cartridges, for a nominal price.

Whilst the rapists and murderers obtain weapons illegally, the average law- abiding citizen is being systematically disarmed. Whilst there are purportedly some 2,5 million firearm owners in South Africa, who together own 3,6 million firearms, only 8 000 licences have been issued so far, with 1 000 applications being rejected. A further 20 000 licences are in the process of being issued. It would appear that only a small proportion of the original estimate of legal firearms in South Africa will eventually be registered.

A credible alternative to the existing Act could have been an extensive audit of all existing firearms, firearm licences and owners, instead of a costly mass renewal process.

The Firearms Control Act in its original form has met with heavy criticism, hence the ongoing amendments and tinkering with the Act to try and make it implementable. Paranoia has instead taken hold in the government. First, the commando units are disbanded and nothing effective is put in their place. [Interjections.] Then law-abiding citizens are systematically disarmed. Even old … [Interjections.] … firearms in museums are checked to ensure whether they are disabled. Now the large security business in South Africa is to be brought under the so-called “control by the state”, and all of that because police are unable to do or incapable of doing their duty.

While this Bill focuses on things like silencers and muzzle-loading firearms, the robberies, rapes, murders and mayhem continue. The DA wishes to thank all the police who are on duty during this festive season and trust that it will be peaceful and that the rule of law and order will prevail. However, the DA can neither support this legislation, nor the amendment. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr A T MANYOSI: Deputy Chairperson and hon members, last night one interviewee on the fourth television channel, that is e.tv news, stated that owning a firearm does not necessarily translate into having security.

In support of this critical Bill at this stage of the development of our country, it is appropriate to borrow from the words of someone who once said that courage is doing what you are scared to do. And one African- American, the well-known Bill Cosby, confessed that he did not know the key to success, but that the key to failure was to try to please everyone. These were indeed encouraging statements.

On the other hand, one imperialist, Lord Randolph Churchill, Sir Winston Churchill’s father, once declared unashamedly that the duty of an opposition is to oppose and nothing else but to oppose. This, in our case, presupposes that the opposition should adopt a policy that says, “Forward never, backwards ever.”

The introduction and adoption of the Firearms Control Amendment Bill will demonstrate that we are committed to achieving the demands of our people in Kliptown, when they cried out in 1955 for a South Africa that would be at peace with itself and contribute to a peaceful world order.

Today we are not only complying with what is required of us in section 12(1) of the Bill of Rights enshrined in our Constitution, which talks of the “freedom and security of the person”, but we are also demonstrating, in practical terms, our commitment to the international peace agreements and protocols we have signed as a country in relation to international efforts so as to rid the world of violence.

The timing has never been as appropriate as it is today, where again in practical terms we set in motion actions to respond to the campaign for activism against women and child abuse - precisely because most of the incidents of abuse involve the use of firearms and include homicides where families are maimed at times by their own fathers or mothers owning licensed firearms.

But, it is equally our duty and responsibility to seek to allay the fears of those doubting Thomases who have consciously or unconsciously formed an opinion that the Bill will rather disadvantage than benefit the society, without losing sight of the principle that the interests of the majority of society override those of the minority.

Together with those who have concerns about the Bill, we share an abhorrence of the violent past experience of gruesome murders and armed robberies where uncontrolled and lethal firearms were used. Together we are definitely committed to achieving peace and eliminating the fear and insecurity engendered by the proliferation of unlicensed firearms and therefore eliminating the need for unwarranted ownership of firearms in our country.

What is of interest and importance in the Bill is that, inter alia, it does not bar citizens from owning firearms for useful purposes. All amendments are well thought through and any logistical hiccups that are experienced by applicants for firearms licences today are far outweighed by the substantial benefits that come with the Bill. One can mention but a few in this regard, namely: firstly, the burden that has been borne by prosecution with regard to the issuing of admission of guilt fines in respect of minor offences that had a bearing on the licensed firearm owner’s fitness to possess a firearm - that is in the current Act.

Secondly, the Bill proposes that where such an admission of guilt fine has been issued and paid, a disqualification does not automatically follow without due administrative procedure to the effect that the owner of the firearm is deemed to be unfit to possess a licence for a firearm. Therefore, there will be no wholesale disarming of people willy-nilly.

Thirdly, the Bill also proposes, to the relief of gun sports persons, to remove the restriction on the number of shots that the semi-automatic shotgun may fire in succession in respect of dedicated gun sports persons.

The period provided for this transitional process recognises the need to allow everybody concerned to be on board and gives time for the department to fasten its screws in terms of an effective and efficient delivery of services regarding the applications and the auditing of firearms.

The Bill is a framework to further reinforce, as hon Worth has said, the firearms amnesty strategy of the hon Minister that sought to induce those who would be willing to surrender their unlicensed firearms and those who aligned themselves with the notion, very much cherished by the ANC, of a gun-free South Africa.

In terms of section 12(2), the court has the discretion to declare any person who has been convicted of an offence contained in schedule 2 of the Arms and Ammunition Act, Act 75 of 1969. Under the schedule, there are contained offences for which convicted persons should be declared automatically unfit to own firearms. These include the following: terrorism, murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping and child stealing.

In conclusion, for the reasons above, we are all aware that, globally, South Africa is recognised as having an extraordinary level of gun violence. Police statistics tell us that between 1994 and 2003 we saw over 104 000 gun-related homicides and incidents where families have been maimed by husbands at their own homes with firearms that were licensed, and almost one million aggravated robberies reported to the police have been reflected in our statistics.

It is therefore incumbent upon all of us to go to the ends of the earth to ensure that we bring about an end to gun-related crime in South Africa. This can never be pursued and achieved by an increase in firearms in the possession of our citizens, but through fighting for peace and stability where there will be no need to own a firearm. This is the route that the majority of our people want us to take. The ANC supports the Bill. I thank you.

Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, I also wish to recognise the Deputy Minister of Safety and Security as well as the Deputy Minister of Sport and Recreation.

This Bill seeks to address the issue of firearm-free zones. The IFP is concerned whether the SAPS will be in a position to implement this idea speedily and successfully so that the Minister is able to prioritise the declaration of all schools as firearm-free zones, as well as other important places. The other aspect that the Minister needs to clarify deals with the regulations on competency certificates. When an applicant is declared incompetent to possess a firearm by a police officer, that person may appeal, but the question is: To whom does the applicant appeal? Does the applicant appeal to the person who already declared him or her incompetent? My opinion is that a court of law is the only body that may rule on such an appeal and pronounce in the final instance regarding a person’s competence.

The IFP sincerely hopes that this Bill is not going to victimise law- abiding citizens while allowing criminals a free hand. We hope that the police will intensify their efforts to track down unlicensed firearms in order to ensure that the number of illegal weapons in circulation is curtailed.

Phini likaNgqongqoshe, ukusho kwethu kanjalo asisho ukuthi phela amaphoyisa awanalo ikhono lokuwenza lo msebenzi. Sihlaba nje umkhosi ukuthi akubonakale phela ukuthi amaphoyisa ayayithatha impi ayibhekise khona impela kubashokobezi laba abahleli nezikhali bengaziwa. Sithi ofeleba laba mababoshwe khona zizobuya nganeno izibhamu, ukuze sithi noma-ke sesivuselela amalayisense ezethu izibhamu sazi ukuthi azikho izinduku abazithukuse emqubeni ngoba phela ingase ikhohlisane ihlomile, sithi izibhamu azisekho emuva kanti ziningi zingaphezu kwalezi esiziphethe.

Phini likaNgqongoqshe, ngo-2000 sayibuka le ngane ikhasa manje sekuhambe kwaze kwafika namhlanje, sesiyayibona iyacathula. Ngakho-ke ithi i-IFP ake siyiyeke le ngane, siyibone ikhula. Sithi lo mthetho asiwemukele ngoba abaningi bazohlomula kuwo, ngakho siyawuxhasa. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[Deputy Minister, by saying that, we don’t mean that the police don’t have the skills to do this job. We are making a call that the police must declare war against terrorists who are in possession of illegal arms. We’re saying that these people should be arrested in order to recover those firearms, so that when we renew our firearm licences we know that they are not hiding anything because we may fool each other and think that there are no more illegal firearms and yet there are so many of them that they outnumber the ones we have.

Deputy Minister, in 2000 we saw the start of this process and now it is beginning to take shape. Therefore, the IFP feels that it must be observed and we must see where it is heading. We accept this Bill because a lot of people are going to benefit. We therefore support it.]

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Mevrou die Voorsitter, hierdie wetsontwerp is ’n moedige poging van die departement om werklikwaar iets te bereik, maar dit bereik egter nie die doel nie. Wat was die doel? Die doel is seer sekerlik om onwettige wapens wat in sirkulasie is, te beperk. Maar wie word nou geteiken? Dit is die wettige wapeneienaar en die gelisensieerde persoon wat nou geteiken word. Volgens die oorspronklike voorstelle sou alle vuurwapenlisensies geldig bly. Dit is nou verander. Dit beteken nou dat bestaande lisensies teen Junie 2009 totaal en al hernieu word. Die teiken is nou die wetsgehoorsame, gelisensieerde wapeneienaar en dit terwyl die misdadiger steeds vrykom.

Die doel om die onwettige wapens te beperk kan mos nie bereik word deur die wettige wapeneienaar sy eiendomsreg by wyse van onteiening te ontneem nie. Artikel 25 van die Grondwet, wat eiendomsreg beskerm, kom nou heeltemal in gedrang. Die vergoeding wat aan ’n eienaar betaal sal word, is nie goed genoeg nie. As ek ‘n bepaalde sentimentele waarde het aan ’n vuurwapen of bepaalde besitting, wat die rede ookal mag wees, moet ek dit nou ter wille van die wetgewing tot niet maak? Of moet ek nou daarvan ontslae raak? Of moet ek dit onaktief maak? Steeds kom ons nie uit by die doel nie, naamlik om die misdadige element wat onwettige wapens het, te beperk.

Dit kom weer daarop neer: waarom moet ek my eiendomsreg opgee om onwettige en misdadige elemente te probeer beperk, en wel deur die wettige eienaar se eiendomsreg wat gewaarborg word deur die Grondwet, te beperk? Die VF-Plus sal nie die wetgewing ondersteun nie. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Madam Chairperson, this Bill is a bold attempt by the department to really achieve something, but it fails to achieve its objective. What was the objective? The objective is surely to curb the number of illegal firearms that are currently in circulation. But who is now being targeted? It is the legal owner of firearms and the person with a licence who are now being targeted. In the original representations, all firearm licences were to remain valid. That has now changed. That means that existing licences will now have to be renewed completely by June 2009. The target now is the law-abiding, licensed firearm owner and that whilst the criminal still gets off the hook.

The objective to curb illegal firearms can surely not be achieved by stripping the legal gun owner of his right of ownership by dispossessing him of it. Section 25 of the Constitution, which protects right of ownership, is now being pushed aside. The compensation that will be paid to the owner is not good enough. If a firearm or specific item is of special sentimental value to me, for whatever reason, do I now have to destroy it for the sake of the law? Or should I now get rid of it? Or should I disable it? Still we have not achieved the objective, namely to curb the criminal element that possesses illegal weapons.

Once again it amounts to the following: Why should I surrender my right of ownership, in an effect to control illegal and criminal elements, and in fact by curtailing the legal owner’s right to ownership, which is guaranteed by the Constitution? The FF Plus will not support this legislation. I thank you.] Mnu Z C NTULI: Sihlalo, Phini likaNgqongqoshe Wezokuphepha Nezokuvikeleka, Phini likaNgqongqoshe Wezemidlalo, bahlonishwa, bahlonishwakazi kanye nezithunywa zoMnyango, ngizothanda ukuthi lokhu engikushoyo ngikubhekise kuDarryl Worth. Kufanele azi ukuthi ukuba nesibhamu akusho ukuthi uma isifikile i-AK ngeke ikuthinte. Kulokhu kwesibili kokuthi aqedelweni amabutho amakhomando, ngithi, cha, sisezweni elikhululekile elinombutho wezempi owodwa, okuyiwona ofanele uvikele leli lizwe. Futhi-ke sinombutho wamaphoyisa owodwa, ngeke kulunge ukuthi sibe nemibutho eminingi eyehlukene, esingayazi ukuthi iphethwe ubani.

Baba uMzizi, maqondana nendaba yakho yokuthi isitifiketi esibizwa nge- competency certificate kufanele sitholakale ezinkantolo, phela Mzizi siwenza lo mthetho ngenhloso yokuthi amaphoyisa ababambe ngawo umthetho ukuze baye kovela enkantolo. Ngeke nje imantshi ihambe ithi iyobheka lezo zitifiketi. Kufanele umuntu aze alethwe enkantolo kuqala ngaphambi kokuba imantshi isho-ke ukuthi ngabe leyo competency certificate iyiyona yini noma ibuze ukuthi iphi.

Maqondana nelungu elimele i-FF Plus, elithe libona ukuthi kuliwa nabantu abanezibhamu ezisemthethweni, phela yikhona lapha okufanele siqale khona. Njengoba siqala lapha nje sinciphisa izibhamu, kufuneka khona ukuthi siqale kulezi ezisemthethweni, njengoba kade ngilokhu ngisho ukuthi isibhamu siqala sisemthethweni kodwa sigcine sesingekho emthethweni.

Lapha eNingizimu Afrika ama-80% obugebengu kuthiwa benzeka phakathi kwabantu abazanayo, ngokwalokho okuthiwa yi-recidivism. Kusho ukuthi empeleni kulukhuni ukuthi amaphoyisa akwazi ukungena phakathi kwemizi yethu, njengoba sithi kwenzeka phakathi kwabantu abazanayo nje, phakathi kwabantu abathandanayo, phakathi kwabantu abayizihlobo zegazi kuphinde kwenzeke naphakathi kwabantu abangomakhelwane.

Okunzima kakhulu-ke lapha eNingizimu Afrika ukuthi abantu abaphethe izibhamu baningi ngaphezu kwamaphoyisa asemthethweni agada isizwe saseNingizimu Afrika. Siyazi ukuthi kukhona abantu abayi-800 000 abasebenza ezinkampanini zonogada ezizimele. Kulezi zi-800 000, onogada abayi-300 000 bahlomile, baphethe izibhamu. Kubuye kube khona lezi ezingekho emthethweni, kubuye kube nezinkampani ezingama-977 ezinezimvume zokuphatha izibhamu.

Uyabona-ke lapha Sihlalo ukuthi uma laba bengase behlangane, amaphoyisa awalutho lapho; bangavele bawamboze nje. Uma ungase uthathe zonke lezi zibhamu ezisemthethweni uzihlanganise, uyabona ukuthi isimo sibi kanjani? Ngakho-ke ngithi lesi simo kufanele sisifakele izibuko ngoba kusobala ukuthi sisadlala ngegeja kuziliwe.

Yingakho-ke thina njengohulumeni oholwa uKhongolose sithi makube nemigomo yokulawula ukuphathwa kwezibhamu. Siyazi ukuthi kunezinhlangano eziningi ezenze izethulo ngaphambi kwekomidi lasePhalamende. Indlela lezi zethulo ebezihlukene ngayo ubungathi impumalanga nentshonalanga. Abanye babethi nje, cha, izibhamu aziphele nya; abanye bethi, hhayi, izibhamu siyazifuna, njengoba besho nje abe-DA nabe-FF Plus bethi kufuneka bathole izibhamu zibe ziningi. Kodwa-ke thina njengohulumeni oholwa uKhongolose sibone kungcono ukuthi sibahlangabeze, sibasingathe nhlangothi zonke.

Esikuqaphelayo ukuthi ziningi izigameko ezenzekayo emiphakathini yakithi bese kutholakala ukuthi kusetshenziswe izibhamu. Umphakathi uhlale wethuka izanya ngenxa yalezi zibhamu ezixhaphake kuhle kwamakhowe kade kuduma izulu. Ngakho-ke, Phini likaNgqongqoshe, sizishayela izandla lesi senzo sokuchibiyela lo Mthetho wokuphathwa kwezibhamu, ngoba ngaphandle kwawo, kungaba ikwampunzi edla emini, kwenziwe noma ikanjani.

Phela kufanele sikhumbule ukuthi kungani i-DA ne-FF Plus bekhihla esikaNandi ngokuchitshiyelwa kwalo Mthetho. Phela onkabi basadla ngoludala. Emiqondweni yabo, babona abamhlophe bephucwa umbuso wabo wokuba nezibhamu eziningi ngokuthanda kwabo. Ababoni ukuthi sizama ukusiza bona uqobo lwabo. Siyazi ukuthi kuyilungelo lomuntu ukuthi azivikele. Kepha kunomehluko uma umuntu uma esekwenza lokho ngobugwala, ngenxa yokuthi kukhona abantu abagcina sebezilimaza ngoba bethi bayazivikela.

Sihlalo, kunendaba engayixoxelwa ubaba ukuthi kwakunomuntu owayenovalo kakhulu, owayehlale njalo esaba. Kuthiwa wayethi uma elala abeke ucelemba lapha eduze kwakhe. Sekuthi-ke ngelinye ilanga elele aphuphe sengathi sekungene isigebengu. Ngayo leyo nkathi wabe emise amadolo. Usethi uma ephaphama abone sengathi kumi umuntu phambi kwakhe. Wavele wadonsa ucelemba ngesandla washaya kwakanye edolweni. [Ubuwelewele.]

Ngizothanda futhi ukuyazisa i-DA ne-FF Plus ukuthi umthetho awubhekisiwe kubona kodwa ubhekiswe kubantu baseNingizimu Afrika. Ake ucabange nje ukuthi kungaba njani uma kungase kube uthelawayeka kithi sonke, kuthiwe nje sonke asiziphathe izibhamu, akukho mthetho okhona. Kunganjani-ke lapho ukuthi sibonakale sonke sesifika lapha emsebenzini, wonke umuntu esekhipha isibhamu sakhe kuthiwe asibekwe laphaya? Singaba nayo indawo yokuzibeka? Ake sicabange nje ukuthi singaba nayo yini indawo yokuzibeka izibhamu uma kuthiwa sonke sifike sihlomile. Kungaba yinkinga.

Kodwa-ke sengiya ngasekugcineni, ngithi izigebengu uma zike zakubona uphethe isibhamu, ikakhulukazi isibhamu sohlobo oluthile okubonakalayo ukuthi sinamandla, azilali ngoba zihlale zicabanga ukuthi zizosithola kanjani. Thina nje esaziyo futhi esihlala emalokishini, siyazi ukuthi uma beke basibona nje abafana ukuthi, “Hheyi uphethe uhlobo olunje!” abalali bebonisana ngokuthi “Sizosithola kanjani isibhamu sikasibanibani?” Uma-ke sebesithatha, abasithathi kahle. Baqala ngokudubula ngoba basuke bazi ukuthi unaso. Siphenduka kanjalo isibhamu leso okuthiwa sisemthethweni bese siba ngesingekho emthethweni.

Omunye umyalelo engingawusho lapha ukuthi, njengabantu baseNingizimu Afrika, ake siyekeni ukuthengela izingane amathoyisi ayizibhamu, ngoba kusho ukuthi izingane zethu sizifundisa zincane ukuthi zifike lapha nje zifikele udlame. Zikhula nje zihlale zicabanga ukuthi: Siyothengwa nini isibhamu? Lokho kudalwa yile ndaba yethu yokujabulela ukuthi sinezibhamu ezithile zohlobo oluthile esihlale sinazo emakhaya. Sizokhulisa izingane zethu ngendlela enjani? Ngakho-ke siyanicela ukuthi masehleleni ngenzansi.

Sengigcina-ke, ngithi-ke mina uSomqulu Wenkululeko uthi, “There shall be peace and comfort.” Ngakho-ke, thina siyi-ANC, sizowesekela lo Mthethosivivinywa. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu speech follows.)

[Mr Z C NTULI: Chairperson, Deputy Minister of Safety and Security, Deputy Minister of Sport and Recreation, honourable members and delegates from the department, I would like to direct my comments to Darryl Worth. He must know that having a firearm does not mean that an AK-47 won’t shoot you. With regard to why the commandos were disbanded, I say we are in a democratic country with one Defence Force, whose duty it is to protect this country. We also have one Police Service. We can’t have different security forces, and not even know who is in charge of them.

Mr Mzizi, as far as your issue of the competency certificate is concerned, it should be issued in court. We are making this legislation, Mr Mzizi, so that the police will use it to arrest criminals and bring them to court. A magistrate won’t go there to check those certificates. A person must be brought to court before the magistrate can say whether that competency certificate is real, or ask for its whereabouts.

Regarding the member representing the FF Plus who said that we are fighting people who have legal firearms, I believe that is where we should start. As we are starting by reducing the number of guns owned, we must start with those that are legal. I have repeatedly said that firearms start out being legal and end up being illegal.

With regard to recidivism, in South Africa 80% of crime takes place between people who know each other. That means that it is very difficult for the police to enter our homes as we are saying that crimes take place between people who know each other: between lovers, between blood relatives, and also between neighbours.

What is difficult here in South Africa is that the people who have guns outnumber the police who are safeguarding the nation of South Africa. We know that there are 800 000 people working for private security companies. Of this 800 000, 300 000 are armed security guards. They are carrying firearms. There are also those that are not legal and there are 977 companies that have licences for carrying firearms.

You see, Chairperson, if these people could come together, the police would be nowhere. They could just finish off the police. If you combine all these legal firearms, you will understand how bad the situation is. Therefore, this situation needs to be addressed because it’s clear that we are playing with fire.

That is why, as the ANC-led government, we say that there must be policies which will control firearms. We know that there are many organisations that made submissions before the portfolio committee. Some of these submissions were as different from each other as the east is from the west. Some were saying that firearms must be totally abolished and others were saying they want them, as the DA and FF Plus, for example, say that they need more guns. But we, as the ANC-led government, deemed it fit to meet them halfway and accommodate them.

What we have noticed is that there are many incidents happening in our communities in which firearms are used. The community is always frightened because of these firearms that are abundant, like mushrooms after a thunderstorm. Therefore, Deputy Minister, we commend this amendment of this Bill, because without it they will do as they wish.

We must remember why the DA and FF Plus are wailing about the amendment of this Bill. They are living in the past. In their minds they see whites as being deprived of their freedom to have as many guns as they like. They don’t understand that we are trying to help them. We know that it is the right of any individual to protect himself. But there is a difference if that person is doing that out of fear, because there are some people who end up injuring themselves, claiming that they are defending themselves.

Chairperson, I was told a story by my father about a man who was very nervous and always afraid. They say that when he went to sleep, he would always put a bush knife next to him. One day, he dreamt that there was a criminal inside his house. At that moment, he was sleeping and his knees were up. When he woke up he saw a man standing in front of him. He took the bush knife and cut himself on the knee. [Interjections.]

I would also like to inform the DA and FF Plus that this Act is not directed at them but to all citizens of South Africa. Just imagine how it would be if it could be an open thing for anyone to carry a firearm without any law. How would it be if everyone came to work with their gun and was instructed to take it out and put it there? Would we have a place to keep them? Let us think about whether we would have a place to keep our firearms if we were allowed to come here armed. That would be a problem.

In conclusion, if criminals see you carrying a firearm, particularly a certain type of firearm that is regarded as powerful, they don’t sleep because they are contemplating how they are going to steal it. We who stay in the townships know that if the boys see that you are carrying this type of firearm, they do not sleep because they are trying to figure out how they are going to get it. When they take it, they don’t take it nicely. They start by shooting you because they know that you have it. That legal firearm then becomes an illegal firearm.

The other message that I would like to pass on is that, as people of South Africa, let us stop buying toy guns for our children because we are teaching them violence while they are still young. They grow up thinking about when they are going to buy guns. This is as a result of praising a certain type of a gun that we have at home. How are we going to raise our children? We therefore request you to stop it. Finally, I am saying that the Freedom Charter proclaims that there shall be comfort and peace. Therefore we, as the ANC, support this Bill. ]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Deputy Chairperson, may I take this opportunity to thank the select committee and the members who have supported this Bill and ensured that it comes through to this House. I would also like to thank Kgoshi Mokoena for the stewardship he has shown as he drove the process in ensuring that the difficulties and the various submissions which came to the committee were handled in a way that is responsible and takes this country forward.

I just want to say that we are miles ahead in creating a free and peaceful South Africa through the Firearms Control Amendment Bill today.

In response to hon Worth, may I indicate to you with regard to commandos that we cannot continue living in the past. We have to move on. We are living in a time when we are transforming this country and the majority of commandos have accepted the process of being reintegrated into reservist units. So, you have to bear in mind that you might be the only one who is left behind. So, be careful and be cautioned that as we write our history you are not left behind. But, you can also say to yourself and your future generation that you contributed to the transformation of this country. This is an opportunity. So, don’t lose this opportunity given to you at this moment.

The Auditor-General has indicated the number of firearms which went missing from SAPS. But that’s precisely what this Bill intends to do because the past dispensation never ever made an effort to follow up on what happened to those firearms. That’s exactly what we are doing. We want to take stock and ensure that if any individual possesses a firearm which doesn’t belong to him or her, we take necessary measures. So, that’s the purpose of this Bill and therefore the issue of firearms lost by our members is part of the process of retrieving them in a way that ensures that we are responsible. I must also say that with regard to one of the issues you are talking about

• that we are trying to promote illegal firearms – I don’t know how you can regulate illegal firearms. If you can indicate a way we can retrieve illegal firearms, then you might be having a clue how many illegal firearms we have in this country. We will welcome that submission. We would really appreciate your contribution and input in making sure that we retrieve any other arms, including AK-47s and firearms lost to responsible citizens. If you can tell us where to get them, we would appreciate that information.

So, help us in making sure that we can find any illegal firearms in this country because the purpose of making sure that we legalise and request responsible South African citizens to come forward and declare that they’ve got firearms is precisely to ensure that we take stock as a country and we know who has a firearm and who doesn’t. But not only that – we don’t end there. We also say that we want to know whether those individuals are still fit to possess firearms. We lose our minds and focus because of various reasons in the processes of our lives. On that basis, this legislation says that we must come back and prove to the law that we are not only responsible citizens still, but that we are also fit to carry firearm licences, hon Worth. That’s the reason we want every responsible South African to have his or her licensed firearm reviewed in a particular period.

I must also indicate the issue of us dealing with silencers and muzzlers. This is precisely to ensure that the kinds of people who have those instruments are going to utilise them responsibly. But you can’t exercise responsibility when you don’t know who has what and who doesn’t have what and where to find what. So, the process intends to formalise and regulate an environment of firearms for a better South Africa.

To the hon Van Heerden, may I say that the intention of this Bill is to regulate and ensure that there is no proliferation of arms in our country. I think peace-loving South Africans would prefer an ideal South Africa where we would talk of a gun-free South Africa – that’s what we should be striving for and not individuals who sleep with guns under their pillows because they don’t understand what’s going on in this country. We all wish to sleep with our windows open because we want to sleep peacefully at night without fear. That’s the intention of this Bill.

Baba uMzizi, indeed we are talking to the Department of Education with regard to an Act by which they have declared gun-free or weapon-free zones, or drug-free zones, precisely to ensure that our schools are able to have free learning and that our kids are not to be intimidated by any individual who brings any form of arms or weapon into the schools. But as Safety and Security, currently we are continuously engaging in finding a way of addressing the violence which has engulfed our schools in such a way that our kids can learn in a better environment. It’s one of the issues we are dealing with. We hope we will continuously address that until we are successful.

May I take this opportunity to say that this Bill calls upon all responsible South Africans to be responsible owners of guns. With regard to those who are unfit, as the hon Ntuli indicated, it’s not for the Minister to appeal for a person who has been arrested and declared by the court not to be free to be given a gun again. We know the implications of that. If any individual wants to go through the legal processes of this country, they will have to deal with that particular aspect in a way that will ensure that the Department of Safety and Security, as is happening currently, is not going to be litigated against because they acted irresponsibly.

I agree with you that our police will have to make sure that the implementation of this Bill becomes a success. That’s part of the process of making sure that we improve our capacity and that we also recruit more police officers to join the force because we believe that it’s very important for our members to be disciplined. We also need to make sure that the current situation is such that they are able to execute their responsibilities in a way that meets the demands and the needs of our communities.

Lastly, may I take this opportunity again to thank the select committee through the leadership, as I’ve indicated, of Kgoshi Mokoena for the humbleness and tolerance they’ve shown to the departmental team led by Commissioner Jacobs. We hope that this kind of relationship, the guidance and sharing of experiences and making sure that we improve whatever areas are not very strong, continues between the team and our department because this is the only way which will take South Africa forward and make sure that we have a better South Africa and a country which can be loved by every South African. Through such efforts, we will also continue to make sure that South Africa remains a tourist destination, as it is right now.

We are proud of the work done by the committee and the members who have supported us throughout in this particular fashion. This will make our democracy much stronger and mature in a way that is acceptable globally. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill, subject to the proposed amendments, be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. There is none. We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. Those in favour will say ``Aye’’.

HON MEMBERS: Aye

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Those against will say ``No’’.

HON MEMBERS: No.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I think the ayes have it. The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill, subject to the proposed amendments, agreed to in terms on section 75 of the Constitution.

Bill, subject to proposed amendments, agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

     SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT AMENDMENT BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon members, I am informed that the Deputy Minister of Sport and Recreation, the hon Gert Oosthuizen is with us this afternoon. He was originally not scheduled to speak but, after consultation, we felt that before hon Tlhagale presents a statement on behalf of the committee, the Deputy Minister must be given an opportunity to speak on the thrust of the Bill. I now hand over to you, Deputy Minister.

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF SPORT AND RECREATION: Chairperson, hon members of the House, thank you so much. This is due to some miscommunication on the part of my parliamentary officer. We prepared a speech because the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill comes at a very important time, and this why we would like to make an input in this regard. It is a time in which there is a global fight against doping in sport, a fight aimed at promoting the values of fair play and honesty in sport. Let me say these are values we as government fully subscribe to.

About four months ago, this House passed a resolution for our country to ratify the International Convention Against Doping in Sport. This Unesco- driven initiative is based on the World Anti-Doping Code, which was drafted by the World Anti-Doping Agency, called Wada.

One of the principal functions of the Bill before the House is to align the existing Act with the provisions of the World Anti-Doping Code and the international standards. Let me point out that noncompliance would result in South Africa being refused participation in international sport, including the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

I know of no South African who would like this to happen, yet we read and hear on a regular basis how some of the top sportspeople in the world, some of them world record holders, are tested positive for using performance- enhancing substances.

Recently, we heard of two top cricket bowlers from Pakistan, Mr Akhtar and Mr Asif, who tested positive. This is sad, because doping undermines the spirit of fair play and discipline in sport.

Our own country has not escaped the scourge of doping. We read of our own heroes, like Ezekiel Sepeng, who have fallen foul of doping offences. A few weeks ago the leading article on the front page of the Rapport newspaper on Sunday morning read: “Skolesportskande”, referring to doping amongst schoolboy rugby players.

The article described how parents buy the banned substances for their children so that they can be selected for the provincial schools teams with the hope of getting a contract with one of the senior provincial unions. Carte Blanche did an exposé on their programme on 24 September this year in which young people, many of them still at school, admitted to using steroids and revealed that the practice was widespread in some of our schools.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to determine the reason why top sportspeople resort to doping, which is nothing but cheating to achieve success – and that is the greed for money that drives them! What is shocking is that this greed for money leads people to totally disregard the long-term consequences of such behaviour. We all have a responsibility to ensure that the true values and virtues of sport are protected and preserved. I am sure I do not have to stand here today to expound on the good of sport. Unfortunately, there is also the ugly side of sport and this Bill aims to reinforce our commitment to clean up sport and to ensure fair play.

The SA Institute for Drug-Free Sport, Saids, a public entity associated with the Department of Sport and Recreation of South Africa, will have to be - and I say this with the full knowledge that it is us that will have to find the money - sufficiently funded to redouble their efforts aimed at counteracting this unwelcome tendency of doping in our sport. The testing programme of Saids, and their anti-doping advocacy and education campaigns will have to be intensified to achieve the required success.

It is, furthermore, our opinion that doping in sport is not dissimilar to recreational substance abuse. Our campaigns in sport to fight the scourge of doping can also serve to address drug abuse in our society. In this campaign, we should use our sports heroes and heroines as role models. They must not only be vocal on the topic of anti-doping and drug abuse, they should be the heroes, the champions who set the example. I know that we in South Africa can rely on them to assist us in this drive against doping and any drug abuse.

If and when we identify the real culprits of doping in sport, it is upon us to act decisively against them. It is here where we call on the federations to comply with the Act, because, regarding the failure of the federations to comply with the Act, section 17A of Act 14 of 1997 makes provision for investigation and dealing with national sport federations that do not comply.

The section is very clear, and I will mention the actions that can be taken by the Department of Sport and Recreation. They are: withdrawal of government funding; banning of such federations from administrating sport; and the recommendation that Sascoc withholds the awarding of national colours to members of the federation.

While the Act provides for this, I am convinced that it will never be necessary to use it because our federations have always supported measures aimed at promoting the values of fair play. We therefore thank the federations in advance for their unqualified support in this regard.

South Africa continues to play a central role in the fight against doping in sport internationally and on the African continent. We represent Africa on both the executive and foundation boards of the World Anti-Doping Agency, of which Minister Stofile, the Minister of Sport and Recreation, is a member. In fact, the Minister is not here today precisely because he is busy with a meeting in Canada, in Montreal. We also host the African regional office of the World Anti-Doping Agency in Cape Town. Let me say that that is something we are very proud of.

While it is important to be vigilant about doping practices in sport, it is equally important that we, on the other hand, increase our support to athletes to enable them to perform to the best of their ability without using drugs. Many of our athletes are currently in the national academy programme funded by government and co-ordinated by the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee, where they attend camps in preparation for the All-Africa Games in 2007 and the Beijing Olympic Games in 2008.

At these camps the athletes and coaches receive the necessary scientific and medical support that will help them achieve their optimum potential. Our ultimate objective is to place our athletes and teams in residential long-term athlete development programmes in cycles of four years.

To this end, we hope and trust that it will be within our means as government to shortly announce an athletes’ assistance programme where our top athletes as well as those with the best potential will be financially supported on a monthly basis.

Chairperson, the intention of government by introducing this Bill is clear: we want our athletes to excel in a doping-free environment. We therefore ask the support of this august House in achieving this objective. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr O J TLHAGALE: Hon Chairperson, hon members of the House, this Bill seeks to amend the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Act of 1997 by deleting certain definitions, and inserting, amending and substituting others. It also makes provision for the appointment of staff of the institute by the Minister and aligns the Act with the Public Finance Management Act.

The Bill also establishes a centralised doping control programme, which may subject an athlete to testing with or without advance notice and both in or out of competition.

Provision is also made for the entry of the name of an athlete found guilty of an anti-doping violation in the doping register as well as the disclosure of certain information to sports administration bodies, the public, the SA Police Service and the South African customs services.

The Bill also makes provision for the establishment of an independent board, which shall be known as the anti-doping appeal board. It shall consist of a panel of nine persons possessing special knowledge and expertise relevant to doping from which at least three members shall be appointed by the Minister on the recommendation of the institute and the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee to constitute an appeal tribunal to hear and decide upon appeals against decisions made in terms of Article 13 of the code, where appropriate. It also provides for punitive measures against national sports federations that do not comply with regulations contained in this Act.

In addition, by means of this Bill, our athletes will be alerted beforehand so that they are not caught with their pants down in some of the plots involving the use of drugs by unscrupulous persons who are in competition with them.

In conclusion, I wish to thank the committee, and the chairperson in particular, for their co-operation and friendly disposition during the deliberations. I move that the House accepts this Bill. Thank you.

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Order! That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill, subject to proposed amendments, be agreed to.

In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. We shall now proceed to the voting. Those in favour say “Aye.”

HON MEMBERS: Aye!

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Those against say “No.” [Inaudible.]

I think the ayes have it. The majority of the members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill, subject to proposed amendments, agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution. [Applause.]

Bill, subject to proposed amendments, agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                   POSTAL SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL

             (Consideration of Bill and Report thereon)

Ms M P THEMBA: House Chairperson, hon members, this Bill seeks to amend the Postal Services Act of 1998, in order to bring it in line with the Electronic Communications Act of 2005 and the Independent Communications Authority Act of 2000. In doing this, it inserts new definitions, amends certain definitions and provides for ministerial powers in the issuing of policy directives and the issuing of licences.

There has emerged some discomfort from some quarters about clause 3 of the Bill, which seeks to provide ministerial powers to make policies for the information and communications technology sector in which the postal industry is now located. It is, however, the view of the committee that the postal industry is located within the ICT sector, for which the Minister makes policies in any case.

I must point out that, during the passage of the Electronic Communications Act last year, no one opposed the integration of the postal sector into the ICT sector. Everyone agreed that, with the fast pace of technological development, a large part of the Post Office business has become electronic and this move is unavoidable.

Clause 4 of the Bill aligns the provisions of postal services with the rest of the information and communication technology sector. It further provides for the inclusion of and access to other nonpostal but essential services, under the definition of universal postal services.

Clause 5 provides for the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, Icasa, to accept and consider applications for new licences in the reserved area in accordance with policy directives issued by the Minister. The clause also empowers the Minister with the authority to extend the exclusivity period of the SA Post Office, Sapo, to ensure universal access to postal services, especially in the underresourced areas.

Clause 6 provides for Icasa to determine the fees and charges payable in respect of the provision of postal services by Sapo, whilst simultaneously ensuring that it is subject to approval by the Minister.

It is worth mentioning that the opposition that has been raised against the provisions of this amending Bill are ideological. They are premised on the notion of less government intervention and bigger market control, which we reject with contempt.

It will be a dereliction of duty on the part of the elected democratic government to subsume the interests and aspirations of our people to profiteering in the mix of huge disparities between the developed and underdeveloped sections of our communities.

I therefore recommend the passage of this Bill without any amendments. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63 I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.

Declaration of vote:

Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Chair, only last year the regulation of postal services was given to the electronic communications regulator, Icasa, on the argument that it will increasingly operate electronically.

This year, however, the Minister decided to take back the power to decide when the reserved nonelectronic services will be opened up to competition. She may also now review the Post Office’s exclusivity every five years, instead of every three years.

It is clear that no lessons have been learned from Telkom’s exclusivity period. The DA opposes the Bill.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): The declaration is noted, hon members. Is there any further declaration of vote? None. In the absence of further declarations, we shall then proceed to the voting. Those in favour say “Aye”.

HON MEMBERS: Aye.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Those against say “No”. I think the ayes have it. The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.

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

          MEASUREMENT UNITS AND MEASUREMENT STANDARDS BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

ACCREDITATION FOR CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT, CALIBRATION AND GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mr D D GAMEDE: Chairperson, as read, there are two Bills. So they are twins and we’ll deal with them in that fashion.

The first one, as introduced in 2006, aims to provide for the use of measuring units of the International System of Units and certain other measuring units. It seeks to provide for the designation of national measurement units and standards and to provide for the keeping and maintenance of national measurement standards and units.

In addition to that, it provides for the establishment and functions of the Metrology Institute, regulates the repeal of certain laws, and provides for matters connected therewith.

The second Bill, which is the Accreditation for Conformity Assessment, Calibration and Good Laboratory Practice Bill, focuses on providing for an internationally recognised and effective accreditation and monitoring system for South Africa by establishing the South African National Accreditation System, Sanas, as a juristic person; and recognising Sanas as the only accreditation body for the Republic of South Africa.

The Bill promotes accreditation as a means of facilitating international trade and enhancing South Africa’s economic performance and transformation. It also promotes the competence and equivalence of accredited bodies and of facilities which comply with good laboratory practice.

As a committee, we therefore move that these Bills be supported. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question in respect of the fourth order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to.

In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. We shall now proceed to the voting. Those in favour will say “Aye”.

HON MEMBERS: Aye.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Those against will say “No”. The Bill has been agreed to unanimously by the whole House. I therefore declare it, in terms of section 75 of the Constitution, agreed to. [Applause.]

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question in respect of the fifth order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Any declarations of vote? None. In the absence of any, we shall now proceed to the voting.

Those in favour say “Aye”.

HON MEMBERS: Aye.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Those against say “No”. The ayes have it and the majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.

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

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

• FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN FREE TRADE ASSOCIATION AND THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN CUSTOMS UNION (SACU)

Ms M P THEMBA: House Chairperson, hon members, it is a source of pride that I’m able to stand here today to witness the final step in the South African process of the parliamentary ratification of the negotiated free trade agreement between the Southern African Customs Union, Sacu - including South Africa - and the European Free Trade Association, Efta.

It is a source of pride because it marks an important milestone for South Africa and the immediate region in our evolving trade policy. This is an achievement that has several important dimensions. It is historic because it is the first full free trade agreement that the Sacu region has negotiated as a single entity, drawing together South Africa with Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland.

We’ve made an advance in importing a Sacu common trade policy as is envisaged in the Sacu agreement we concluded in 2004. It is testimony to the ability of the Sacu member states who are able to co-ordinate their negotiating positions, overcome differences and pursue a common set of negotiating objectives.

The Sacu-Efta agreement will establish a legal and institutional framework to conduct and manage trade relations between the parties. A joint committee is established to oversee the implementation of the agreement and address any trade problems that may arise.

The agreement contains a dispute settlement procedure to resolve any difficulty that cannot be solved under the joint committee. The agreement has a review clause through which we will endeavour in three to five years to explore ways to extend and deepen the arrangement.

Let me outline the overall process of the negotiations. Efta members informally approached South Africa in 1999 on the margins of the WTO ministerial meeting in Seattle, to propose the idea of launching negotiations. This was followed by an approach in November 2000 where the Efta secretary-general, during a visit to the Minister of Trade and Industry, proposed that South Africa formally enter into free trade negotiations with Efta.

Following a series of technical exchanges, negotiations were launched directly in May 2003. Part of the delay for the launch was that Efta needed to revise its original mandate to negotiate with South Africa to conclude with all Sacu countries, following the conclusion of the new Sacu agreement in 2004. Seven negotiating sessions were held and negotiations concluded in August 2005.

In conclusion, I should indicate that the agreement has been reviewed and endorsed by our business and labour stakeholders in Nedlac. Cabinet recommended that the agreement be forwarded to Parliament on 24 October

1. We all aim to have the agreement entered into force in January 2007.

We therefore humbly request support from this House for the ratification of the Sacu-Efta agreement. I thank you.

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question. The question is that the Report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber. Are all delegation heads present?

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. The delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour of or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: Eastern Cape supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Gauteng?

Mr S SHICEKA: Supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natali siyawuvuma. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Can somebody work on our sound system in the meantime? I don’t want the sound system to disrupt our proceedings. Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports it.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Northern Cape supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): North West?

Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West ke a rona. [North West supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Western Cape?

Mr F ADAMS: Wes-Kaap ondersteun. [Western Cape supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES - OVERSIGHT VISIT TO WESTERN CAPE, 31 JULY–4 AUGUST 2006

Ms J M MASILO: Chairperson, this is a report on the oversight visit to the Western Cape for three departments, namely Health, Social Development and Home Affairs. The Select Committee on Social Services undertook the study tour to the Western Cape province from the 31 July to 4 August 2006. The purpose of the study tour was for the committee to exercise its oversight function as mandated by the Constitution.

The primary objectives of the provincial visit included conducting oversight over the management and quality of services rendered in respect of Social Development, Health and Home Affairs; inspecting various health, social development and home affairs facilities in order to determine the state of physical infrastructure and equipment; and identifying progress made and challenges that are being experienced by all the stakeholders.

Regarding social development, one of the facilities which the committee visited was the Sarepta old age home in Kuils River and the following was observed and found at the home: The facility has a staff component of 52, consisting of 33 nursing staff, 16 general workers, one administrative officer, one secretary and one manager.

The facility manager stated that all the grant payments of residents are paid to the facility. This translates to an amount of R840 by 146 residents, which equals R122 640 per month. Other sources of financial income are obtained from donations and fund-raising events. The state subsidy is the largest financial support to the facility. The total subsidy transfer to the facility for the period from April 2005 to March 2006 amounted to R1,9 million.

The delegation raised concerns regarding the conditions under which these residents are living in the facility, the reason being that as the delegation toured the facility they found that the blankets under which the residents were sleeping were tattered and ragged, and that there was a lack of monitoring and evaluation by the Department of Social Services.

With regard to the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa, service delivery improvement initiatives were embarked upon by Sassa, which included their application turnaround time. With regard to the visit to the local Sassa offices, the committee was pleased to see that the turnaround time in the Bellville local office has been minimised, and that it is expected to be rolled out to the Worcester and Atlantis local offices, and is envisaged to be implemented at 13 other local offices.

At the Worcester local office the delegation found that Sassa staff and the staff of the provincial department of social development were sharing office space, which was insufficient. Another issue which raised concern was the fact that the files of beneficiaries were lying on the floor where they are kept because of the lack of space in the offices. The Western Cape has identified and prioritised the Worcester local office to be relocated to another building.

Achievements in the office include the implementation of the turnaround time for applications. The increased accessibility of services includes the extension of service points, especially in Montagu, and the extension of home visits, for example to old age homes and institutions, the disabled and elderly, as well as bedridden people. The office is open for longer hours and on Saturdays to accommodate beneficiaries from rural farming areas. An awareness programme in the area with regard to money lenders, misuse of grants, etc, has been launched.

Regarding the Department of Health, the delegation met with the MEC of Health Mr Pierre Uys, who informed the delegation that a budget of R230 million has been set aside for emergency medical services in the province, and he further noted that the assistance of volunteers in the emergency medical services alleviates some of the constraints.

The delegation visited the Gugulethu KTC Day Hospital, Langa Washington Clinic and the Michael Maphongwana Community Health Centre in Khayelitsha.

At the Langa Washington Clinic the facility manager informed the delegation that the availability of space is a major concern at the clinic and that there was a shortage of staff. When the delegation arrived at Michael Maphongwana Community Health Centre at 12:30 in the afternoon the waiting room was full to capacity – approximately 150 people were waiting to be assisted.

The delegation also visited the Eben Dönges Hospital in Worcester, and the hospital is currently undergoing a revitalisation phase, which will be completed in 2008. It will be bigger, with new equipment. In the new outpatient clinic, patients will be able to access doctors, therapists, social workers and counsellors, and the trauma centre will be open 24 hours a day. The delegation was assured that no patient needing emergency medical attention will be turned away. The delegation was informed that a casualty wing, a new outpatients department and a new training centre will be added to the main hospital.

The delegation also visited the George Hospital. A major revitalisation process has been completed at the George Regional Hospital recently. The major medical facility serves as a regional hospital for the Southern Cape and Karoo region, as well as a district hospital for the George area.

The project focused on the improvement of the hospital’s infrastructure and technology. The hospital superintendent informed the delegation that the hospital would like to have a private ward, but owing to bed pressure it would be impossible to do so. She further noted that the hospital did attract private patients and patients who had medical aid, who shared the wards with state patients and she noted that the facilities were so good that they could not actually complain.

With regard to Home Affairs, the delegation visited the Worcester local offices and challenges in the region included the following: to keep rendering the service at mobile points; to expedite the processing of enabling document applications; to provide the relevant training to officials; to secure suitable additional accommodation for the current and new additional staff, and to get uniformity in the application of the Immigration Amendment Act and the Births and Deaths Registration Act.

Achievements include the establishment of permanent service points and mobile venues in the regions, capacitation of offices in the regions, and rendering services to the poorest of the poor in remote areas with the two mobile trucks.

Before coming to recommendations, there are challenges in terms of where Home Affairs keeps illegal foreigners prior to their deportation. All illegal foreigners are kept temporarily in police stations in the Southern Cape for 48 hours. They are transferred to the Prince Albert Correctional Service Centre within 48 hours. Prince Albert is our detention facility where illegal foreigners await their deportation. Prince Albert is about 150 km from George. The centre is 140 km from the George office. The centre is specifically assigned to accommodate illegal foreigners only. Before they could be moved to the centre, they were being accommodated at the George Correctional Centre, which was not a suitable place. Cases of assault against the foreigners were registered. The detained are deported out of the Southern Cape twice a month in a joint operation with the Immigration Inspectorate of Cape Town. I thank you.

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make declarations of vote if they so wish. Any province that wants to do that? None.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour of or against, or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: Eastern Cape supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Vrystaat ondersteun. [Free State supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Gauteng?

Ms N M MADLALA-MAGUBANE: Gauteng supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal votes in favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo votes in favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Die Noord-Kaap ondersteun. [The Northern Cape supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): North West?

Mr Z S KOLWENI: Ke ya rona. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Western Cape?

Mr F ADAMS: Die Wes-Kaap ondersteun. [The Western Cape supports.]

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

The Council adjourned at 15:49. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Speaker and the Chairperson

 a) Report of the Youth Parliament held on 28 – 29 June 2006, Old
    Assembly Chamber, Parliament;


 b) Report of the Women’s Parliament held on 03 – 04 August 2006, Old
    Assembly Chamber, Parliament; and


 c) Report of the People’s Assembly held on 14 – 15 September 2006,
    Oudtshoorn.


    Copies of the reports are available from office of Clerk of the
    Papers and on Parliament’s website www.parliament.gov.za

1. The Minister of Finance

 a) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa
    and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on Mutual
    Administrative Assistance in Customs Matters, tabled in terms of
    section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.


 b) Explanatory Memorandum to the Agreement between the Government of
    the Republic of South Africa and the Government of the People’s
    Republic of China on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Customs
    Matters.

1. The Minister of Transport

 a) Airlift Strategy 2006.


 b) Draft strategy to Accelerate Public Transport Implementation via a
    WIN-WIN-WIN partnership between Government, Existing Operators and
    Labour.


 c) National Road Safety Strategy 2006 Onwards.


 d) Transport Action Plan for 2010.


 e) Road Infrastructure Strategic Framework for South Africa (RISFSA).

1. The Minister for the Public Service and Administration

 a) Memorandum of Understanding between the Republic of Rwanda through
    its Ministry of Public Service and Labour and the Republic of South
    Africa through its Ministry for the Public Service and
    Administration on Co-operation in the Field of Civil Service and
    Public Administration (1 November 2002).


 b) Memorandum of Understanding between the United Nations and the
    Government of the Republic of South Africa through its Centre for
    Public Service Innovations relating to Co-operation in the United
    Nations On-line Network of Regional Institution for Capacity
    Building in Public Administration and Finance (20 July 2004).


 c) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
    Democratic Republic of the Congo through its Ministry of Public
    Service and the Government of the Republic of South Africa through
    its Ministry for the Public Service and Administration on Co-
    operation in the Field of Public Administration (31 August 2004).
 d) Agreement between Sweden through the Swedish International
    Development Co-operation Agency and the Government of the Republic
    of South Africa on Development Co-operation concerning Public
    Service Support in the Democratic Republic of Congo (12 April
    2005).


 e) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
    Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Government of Sweden and
    the Government of the Republic of South Africa on Co-operation in
    the Area of Public Service and Administration (29 April 2005); and


 f) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the Republic
    of India and the Government of the Republic of South Africa on Co-
    operation in the Field of Governance, Administration and other
    Related Areas (12 June 2006).

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Council of Provinces CREDA INSERT REPORT - Insert T061115E-insert2 – PAGES 2729-2759