THURSDAY, 16 NOVEMBER 2006

                                ____





          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

                                ____

The Council met at 14:02.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Madam Deputy Chairperson, at the next sitting of House, I shall move:

That the Council -

(1) notes the despicable behaviour of the Democratic Alliance during the annual address of the President to the National Council of Provinces in Parys, thereby bringing the Council into disrepute;

(2) notes that this type of behaviour by members of the Democratic Alliance is not only disrespectful to the President of the Republic of South Africa, but disregards the thousands of people who came to listen to the President and Premier; and

(3) strongly condemns this type of behaviour and requests the presidium to urgently conduct an investigation into the behaviour of these members so as to avoid future embarrassing situations for the Council and to protect the decorum of the Council.

GOOD WORK BY THE MINISTER AND DEPUTY MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY

                         (Draft Resolution)

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Madam Deputy Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council –

 1) notes the sterling work done by the Minister and the Deputy Minister
    of Safety and Security, in particular in the Limpopo provincial
    deputy commissioner’s offices, and SAPS members of the SAPS Limpopo
    province for doing their utmost best to prevent, combat and
    investigate crime;
 2) further notes that the Limpopo province constituency registered
    lower crime rates; and


 3) extends a message of thanks and appreciation to all law-enforcement
    agencies for deepening a safe and secure environment for all people
    of South Africa.

I so move.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Is there any objection? Hon Watson.

In light of the objection, the motion may not be proceeded with. The motion without notice will now become a notice of motion.

               REFINEMENT AND LAUNCH OF THE NEW EMBLEM


                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Madam Deputy Chairperson, I move:

That the Council –

(1) notes that -

    (a) the Joint Rules Committee in November 2006 approved a particular
          emblem, while identifying a need for a slight adjustment;


    (b)      a public involvement process and full consultation with
          parties have taken place in the development of this emblem;


    (c)      the Parliamentary Oversight Authority has considered the
          proposal and suggested further refinement; and


    (d)      the launch of the new emblem is planned for early 2007;
          and

 2) authorises the Presiding Officers to approve the emblem
    after consultation with parties, and to formally present it to the
    Houses in early 2007.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I shall now put the question. The question is that the motion be agreed to. As this decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I need to ascertain whether delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present?

In accordance with Rule 71 I shall now also 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. 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 DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Supports.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Gauteng?

Mr E M SOGONI: Supports.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal in favour.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.] The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Supports.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Supports.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): North West?

Mr Z S KOLWENI: Ke ya rona. [Supports.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Western Cape?

Mr C STALI (Special delegate): Supports.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the motion agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

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

            PROVINCIAL WEEK VISIT BY PERMANENT DELEGATES

                         (Debate on Report)

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Hon Chairperson, hon members of this august House, there is a clear indication that we are on course in implementing our programme 2009. Programme 2009 emphasises that the National Council of Provinces must devote more time and resources to the performance of oversight work as a mechanism for following up on the implementation of laws it has passed and continues to pass, as well as government policies and programmes.

As part of this, we have reinstated the provincial week to assist us in monitoring and overseeing the work of government. The provincial week is one of the mechanisms established to solicit provincial interest and ensure that provincial delegates keep abreast with developments, as well as the challenges that are facing their provinces.

After a period of looking at how to improve this mechanism, provincial delegations carried out their work as part of the provincial week from 14 to 18 August this year.

During this period permanent delegates went to their respective provinces where they visited various sites and projects and interacted with political role-players. The objectives of the provincial week were to interact with the provinces and report back on their activities in the National Council of Provinces, which is what we are doing this afternoon in the form of this debate; to provide a forum for the exchange and sharing of ideas on progress made on service delivery; to meet with the Premiers, MECs and departments, provincial legislatures and their Speakers, Chief Whips and chairpersons of committees, and other stakeholders such as local government leaders, including Salga; to undertake an oversight visit to communities in order to ensure that they get information on the needs and challenges of the people; and to visit projects that are implemented by both national and provincial governments in the provinces and the local people.

Today, as we discuss the draft report on the provincial week, we must be able to highlight the developments and those areas that still pose challenges. Some of the challenges may perhaps be those that led us to halt our provincial weeks for some time. We must also be able to indicate how we have resolved and are resolving those challenges, more especially as we experience them on the ground.

I am also keen to hear what practical steps we need to take to ensure that we resolve some of the challenges that are mentioned in the report, such as governance, especially at local government level, and service delivery challenges.

Our utilisation of the provincial week allows us to have more penetration in the provinces in order to understand and deal with issues that affect our provinces, and be able to carry those back to this House for a national debate.

As the Constitution states, the NCOP represents the provinces to ensure that provincial interests are taken into account in the national sphere of government. It does this mainly by participating in the national legislative process and by providing a national forum for public consideration of issues affecting provinces.

Certainly, we will not be able to carry out this important mandate if we ourselves do not know the kind of challenges that are facing the very provinces that we represent.

Last week Friday, during our sitting in Parys in the Free State, the President further challenged the National Council of Provinces to advise government with regard to the whole issue of implementation. I am confident that our committees understand this challenge. I also understand that they are capable of doing this and will do so. In fact, they have been doing work in this area already.

The challenge of assisting government to speed up the delivery of services is central to our goal of ensuring a better quality of life for all.

I would like to promise you that we are going to be alert to the issues that you will be raising during this debate so that as presiding officers we can see where we should assist to improve our provincial week.

Let me take this opportunity to thank you for the work that you did during the provincial week. It is much appreciated. I also thank you for displaying unity of purpose. As Karl Marx, a well-known social scientist and revolutionary, once said: “Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains.” As members of this unique House, we must unite and face the challenges that are facing our new society. We have nothing to lose. I thank you. Ke a leboga. Enkosi. [Applause.]

Mr B J TOLO: Chairperson, I was not aware that I was participating in the debate today. It is the first time I hear of that. Be that as it may, I will just say a few words because, as a delegate from Mpumalanga, we also follow the …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon member, I am sorry. It is not my mistake; all of you have seen it too. This is what I have on the table. It has got hon B J Tolo on it. The other speaker listed here, which I hope is the correct one, is F Nyanda.

Ms F NYANDA: Chairperson, like hon B J Tolo who was standing here, we were supposed to have a delegate from Mpumalanga. Unfortunately, we were told at the eleventh hour about it. Anyway, I don’t have a written speech before me, but I will talk anyway. [Interjections.]

We went to Mpumalanga and when we arrived there, we met the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and the Chairperson of Committees and the Whippery. We met the Premier and we went on site visits where we went to see the eradication of the bucket system.

Of all the places we visited, we found only three where the eradication of the bucket system had not yet taken place. Two of those were Ekulindeni and Piet Retief.

On 29 October the MEC for Provincial and Local Government launched the eradication of the bucket system at Mbalentle. So, in Mpumalanga, at least there is something that we have done.

One other problem is that of housing. There were problems with the RDP houses. The MEC reported that they are not using enough cement in those RDP houses, because some of the houses are falling apart. He took the decision that he is going to deal with these small contractors. That’s why they said that they don’t want these small contractors. They want the main contractors to deal with this issue of building RDP houses. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

Mr A T MANYOSI: Madam Deputy Chairperson and hon members, I thank the hon member Mrs Nyanda for taking only two minutes so that I can add her time to mine. [Laughter.]

The report of the Eastern Cape NCOP permanent delegates to the Eastern Cape dated 14 to 15 August is as follows. The terms of reference of the delegation were to interact with and report back on its activities in the NCOP to such role-players as the Premiers, the executive members and their departments, the provincial legislature, the Speaker, the Chief Whip, the Chairperson of Committees and other chairpersons, as well as local government structures, the SA Local Government Association and community projects.

The delegation conducted meetings with the structures of government at pre- arranged venues and also conducted site visits to interact with stakeholders.

Meetings took place with the following role-players: the provincial government at a Cabinet lekgotla on 13 to 15 August 2006 at the Wild Coast. It also met the Portfolio Committees on Local Government and Housing in Bisho. It met stakeholders at the Nelson Mandela Metro and visited their project.

The Cabinet lekgotla was aimed at receiving presentations from provincial clusters on their performance and challenges, and strategies to deal with those challenges. Clusters referred to above are the governance and administration cluster, economic growth and infrastructure and economic needs. We alos look at the utilisation of institutions of higher learning in the province. We also met to look at the service delivery by municipalities. Let us now proceed to look at each cluster in terms of its activities and challenges, starting with governance and administration. The presentation by the governance and administration cluster pertained to the institutions of higher learning in the province in relation to their contribution to economic growth, capacity-building through skills development, facilitation of research and rural development.

There were challenges that were raised by the institutions of higher learning, and these are reflected in the consolidated report in front of hon members.

Our findings and recommendations with regard to that are the following: from the presentation, the vision and the mission of the institutions of higher learning is quite rightly to develop democratic institutions. The delegation feels, however, that it is not adequate or sufficient to develop democratic institutions. They must be capable of capacitating learners and communities to participate in their economic development and economic growth through the development of appropriate skills. That is precisely because these institutions have to strive to be of service to the government and the people.

There has to be a continuous interaction with government in general and the service delivery departments, municipalities, other service providers and the communities within which they operate in particular. Through these structures and continuous interaction, these institutions can be kept abreast of the needs of the communities, and deliver relevant academic services and curricula to address the vexing challenge of skills development and capacity-building.

Critical issues raised by the economic growth and infrastructure cluster are also reflected in the consolidated report, and I will not go through them here. Their plans are also in the consolidated report in front of the hon members, as are their challenges. I will jump to the findings and recommendations.

The delegation found that generally the province had clear and objective plans for implementation. Of interest and a giant step forward is the employment of unemployed graduates by way of on-the-job training and skills development. This is a major initiative that must receive all possible support from the national government to create work and reduce unemployment.

Also to be applauded is the promotion of communication and the breaking down of bureaucracy, and also the removal of the wall between the ordinary members of the public, other stakeholders on the one hand and the government offices on the other through customer care units. However, such units have to be strengthened and fully capacitated. Accelerated economic growth as a challenge is addressed by the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa as the government’s plan, and all should put their shoulders to the wheel to ensure the success of the initiative.

On the issue of the involvement of marginalised communities in economic activities, without a doubt, this problem is growing in rural areas and can only be addressed through government actively engaging rural communities in public education on economic development. This should particularly be the case with regard to the problem of communities not participating in independent development plans.

On the issue of participation in state campaigns against crime, there is a need to uniformly address the need of meeting community policing forums halfway financially; that is, giving them travelling allowances, and subsistence allowances, provision of which is a condition without which the CPFs will always be there, but will be dysfunctional.

On social needs, the social needs cluster made its presentation on its activities with regard to partners and stakeholders, its achievements on the critical priorities with regard to the provincial growth and development plan, PGDP, and the national government’s programme of action. The objectives of the cluster are also contained in the consolidated report. I can say that the cluster objectives on paper and, when articulated, perfectly respond to the needs of the province and its people. They need to be translated with maximum speed to address the extreme underdevelopment and poverty in the province, especially in the rural greater part of the province.

The delegation met with the Portfolio Committees on Local Government and Housing and mainly discussed petitions that have been received from the following municipalities, which are also reflected in the consolidated report: Buffalo City, Mnquma and Qokobe.

In terms of the findings and the recommendations, the petitions relate to the dismissal of a municipal manager in Buffalo City Municipality, the community administrative and political crisis in Nguma Municipality, and an exit package in Qokobe Municipality.

On the two labour-related matters, the delegation expresses its concern that if these and similar situations elsewhere are not promptly, adequately, efficiently and effectively addressed, the government will always be dragged into unnecessarily expensive litigation, and steps have to be taken to ensure that those who are responsible for human resource management are indeed well equipped, fit and proper persons for the job.

On the continuing and persistent administrative and political crisis in Mnquma, the delegation recommends and recognised that the … [Time expired.] Thank you.

Mrs E S MABE: Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, hon NCOP members, special delegates, ladies and gentlemen, section 40(1) of the Constitution provides that in the Republic government is constituted as national, provincial and local spheres of government, which are distinctive, independent and interrelated.

Section 40(1) of the Constitution also provides that all spheres of government and all organs of state within each sphere are to co-operate with one another in mutual trust and faith by assisting and supporting one another, informing one another and consulting with one another on matters of common interest.

The concept of the NCOP provincial week plays a vital role in adhering to these principles. A further important purpose of the NCOP provincial week is to ensure that provincial delegates keep abreast with the developments as well as the challenges that are facing their provinces.

The Free State permanent delegates have always had a good working relationship with both the legislature and the executive. This was recently illustrated when the Free State permanent delegates were invited to participate in consideration of the provincial and departmental annual reports by the portfolio committees of the legislature.

The permanent delegates were also requested to assist the Chairperson of Committees in compiling a template of the questions to be put to all departments and their entities. The provincial week that took place during 14-18 August 2006 served to strengthen this relationship.

The permanent delegates met with the Chairperson of Committees in the legislature to get a broader understanding of the activities of the legislature in providing oversight to the executive. Various issues were discussed during this meeting, including the need to do follow-up visits to municipalities that were underperforming as well as participation of special delegates in the activities of the NCOP.

The Premier also briefed the delegation on the Free State Development Strategy. The Free State government is currently in the process of reviewing the strategy and the overall programme for implementation is on track.

During the provincial week the permanent delegates participated in the activities of two portfolio committees in the legislature. The delegates accompanied the portfolio committee on public works, roads and transport on their site visits to the Malute Bus Services and the Government Garage in Qwaqwa. A meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Education, Sport, Arts and Culture was also attended. The committee formulated its negotiating mandate on the second Fifa Bill and met with the Free State Department of Education regarding allegations about the granting of the information technology bid.

A further meeting was held with the South African Local Government Association, Salga, and the National House of Traditional Leaders. The need for the participation of Salga in the activities of the legislature was emphasised, especially on matters affecting municipalities.

In overview, the provincial week was a resounding success. It was just disappointing that the DA could again not see their way clear to participating in the activities during the week.

Mr E M SOGONI: I am sorry, Deputy Chairperson. Hon Deputy Chairperson, the provincial week visits gave the members the opportunity to liaise with the provinces and in particular with the municipalities. This also afforded the members the opportunity to evaluate what was happening on the ground.

As the Gauteng delegation, we met with the MEC for local government. From the discussions with the MEC for local government, we found that a lot has been done in terms of service delivery. If you look back from where we started in 1994, however, there are still some challenges. Some of the challenges that are faced by the municipalities are that municipalities in Gauteng differ in terms of size. Therefore, the Gauteng province was looking at absorbing some of the other municipalities into the remaining metros so that service delivery can be made available to every citizen in Gauteng.

The other challenge was the issue of other smaller municipalities that are not able to deliver three basic needs, especially electricity, which is sometimes delivered by Eskom. All in all, we discovered that life in Gauteng is better than what it was 10 years ago, as far as municipal services are concerned.

The other department that we met with was the department of safety and security. This occurred immediately after eight thugs and four police officers were killed, and the MEC then asked the people of Gauteng to give him six months to address the problem of crime in Gauteng. We also find that police stations have embarked on a project called Project Iron Fist in order to deal with this issue. Many police stations have already started seeing the results thereof, especially with the arrest of criminals who were being sought.

We visited a number of police stations. There were best practices, but the Moroka Police Station, for example, has its own challenges. One of the challenges that was raised there was the issue of a time lag between when a census is undertaken and when resources are allocated by government. They thought that that led to some kind of underfunding.

There were also the worst police stations, like the Reiger Park Police Station. In the case of the Reiger Park Police Station, it was clear that it was no real police station. The Minister will have to pay attention to Reiger Park. In fact, a new police station altogether needs to be built. On that note, we thought that the visit by members was a very fruitful visit. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr J M SIBIYA: Comrade Chairperson, colleagues, comrades, ladies and gentlemen, our delegation fully agrees with the Chief Whip of the NCOP, Comrade Windvoël - if I don’t pronounce your surname properly, please forgive me - who characterised the provincial week …

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Hon member, will you please direct your comments through me.

Mr J M SIBIYA: I apologise. Comrade Windvoël characterised the provincial week as a strategic mechanism for strengthening the representation of provincial interests in the NCOP. These are strategic words: “strategic”, “representation” and “strengthening”. We find these very befitting.

In the provincial week we met the provincial executive council as well as the provincial legislature. We agreed in that meeting that the immediate objectives were, firstly, to exchange views and opinions on the functionality and effectiveness of the two; secondly, to assess progress on the service delivery front; thirdly, to discuss and map out strategies to deal with problems encountered; and fourthly, to get feedback from the communities on the impact that government policies have had on their lives.

We understood these objectives to be part and parcel of the thrust the government is making towards realising our slogan, “A better life for all”. We took time to meet with community-based organisations, nongovernment organisations and other organisations and institutions that are taking care of the interests of our people.

At the end of the meetings with the legislature and the MECs, together with the provincial executive committee we agreed that communication and co- ordination need to be strengthened because they opened a gap where we were not in a position to know exactly what it is that the provincial government is doing at any given moment so that if we have a chance we could go and participate since we obtained our mandate from the province.

At the end of the discussions we agreed on the following recommendations: firstly, MECs should make an effort to attend the provincial caucus here in the NCOP. Secondly, permanent delegates should receive briefings by provincial committees on matters before Parliament, especially if such matters impact directly on the province. Thirdly, basic documentation should be made available timeously to enable relevant parties that are available in the legislature to make comments and to answer questions when they arise in the House.

On the service delivery front, we met NGOs such as Itshepeng Community Health Care and Aids educators who are involved in rural regeneration, empowerment, social skills development and the prevention of HIV/Aids, while the Sentahle community home-based care organisation supports orphaned and vulnerable children, as well as HIV/Aids affected people and child- headed and poverty-stricken families.

In our discussions with NGOs, we realised that they have done very good work and more still needs to be done. Nonetheless, there were some shortages, which needed to be addressed so that their performance could be more effective. One of these was, firstly, shortages of health care professionals, medical supplies, and funding. The second was keeping pace with the demand for services. The third was the training of new and current staff, and the fourth was accommodation upgrades, as well as future security for the programme.

The delegates also visited projects like the Lafata Agricultural Youth Project, the Makumeke Integrated Enterprise at Vhembe district, the Murunwa bakery projects, as well as the Nkumpi housing project. On the housing project, we found that it aimed to build a further 200 units within the 2005-06 financial year. By the time we arrived we found that only 125 had been built, and in our opinion more than that should have been built.

Nonetheless, there were some shortcomings, which we noted, namely poor workmanship, shoddy materials used and cracks and openings in the walls. Now based on those observations, we gave a very stern warning to the authorities involved that it will pose a danger for our people, especially the young and the elderly, to be allowed to occupy those houses unless the detected pitfalls are addressed.

On the youth project, the delegations noted that there was a lack of communication between beneficiaries and agricultural department officials. Secondly, some beneficiaries were absent from the project and the same goes for trustees. Then we asked the following question: If indeed this is the situation, what then becomes of the people who work there, who do the monitoring, and how are they being assisted so that the project proceeds on well and achieves the desired results?

It was therefore recommended that extension officers from the department should visit the project regularly. It was also indicated that since the trustees were absent, and as far as we are concerned defunct, they had to be dissolved and a new body put in place and a bank account opened in their name.

We were very happy with the progress scored in the EPWP, Expanded Public Works Programme, fencing projects, where 191 people are employed, and the outstanding success story about Makemeke integrated enterprises, which combines poultry farming and vegetable production. These to us were very, very successful stories and we hope we can have some of our projects in the province taking a leaf from their book.

However, the vegetable production project had a problem that perhaps might need some long-term planning, namely that they do not have the skills and the management knowledge to deal with soil fertility management. They will need to be assisted in that regard because otherwise in the end their vegetable plots might cease to be productive. We realised also that there was no monitoring and assistance by the government to a certain level, as would suit the people in the project.

We also detected that the government in some cases allowed the tender to lapse, while they know that the tender will need to be renewed before it lapses because if that happens, in our opinion, it will also mean the collapse of the project itself.

The Lepellane catchments project, which covers 34 villages, has a problem of silting, which up to now has affected 80% of the capacity of the dam, which then tells us that only 20% of the capacity of that dam will be used for the communities around it. [Time expired.] Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mnu D D GAMEDE: Sihlalo, umbiko mayelana nokuvakashela isifundazwe wakhishwa, washicilelwa futhi uyatholakala kuma-ATC. Ngakho-ke ngizothi nqampu nqampu.

Ukuvakasha kwamalungu esifundazweni ngesonto lokuvakashela izifundazwe kwakunalezi zinjongo ezilandelayo: Okokuqala, kwakuwukuthola ukuthi isifundazwe senzani ukwenza izimpilo zabantu zibe ngcono. Okwesibili, kwakuwu kuqinisa ubudlelwano phakathi kwesishayamthetho noMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe. Okwesithathu, kwakuwukubona ukuthi izinqumo ezithathwa uhulumeni kazwelonke zinamiphi imithelela ezifundazweni. Okwesine, kwakuwukuthola isimo samalungiselelo eNdebe Yomhlaba ngonyaka we

1. Okokugcina, kwakuwukuzama ukuthola ukuthi isifundazwe sona singalekelelwa kanjani ekuqhubeni umsebenzi waso.

Sibe nemihlangano-ke eminingi nezinhlaka ezahlukene ezinjengalezi ezilandelayo. Sibe nomhlangano nehhovisi likaSomlomo, uSomlomo nePhini lakhe, oSotswebhu bonke noSotswebhu bamanye amaqembu - umhlonishwa uNgcolosi ungufakazi futhi nangu ukhona lapha eduze kwami njengoba ngikhuluma nje. Sahlangana noSihlalo Wosihlalo, ikomiti eliqondene noMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe, abezemidlalo, abakwa-Kwanaloga, abaphethe ohulumeni basekhaya, uMnyango Wohulumeni Basekhaya, ikomiti lezemidlalo, abaholi bendabuko kanye noNdunankulu neKhabhinethi lakhe. Kuthe ekugcineni sethamela nembizo eyayiseMondlo ngaphansi kukamasipala wasebaQulusini.

Nakhu-ke esakutholile ngendaba Yendebe Yomhlaba. Sitholile ukuthi kukhona okwenziwayo ukulungiselela le midlalo. Ihhovisi likaNdunankulu umhlonishwa uSbu Ndebele lasungula ikomidi eliqondene nezemidlalo. Leli komidi lifaka yonke iMinyango efanele. Sithole futhi ukuthi isifundazwe sibe yingxenye yokucubungula uMthethosivivinywa omaqondana neNdebe yoMhlaba ye-Fifa yange- 2010 kangangoba ngalezo zinsuku kwakuvakashelwa imiphakathi eminingi, uMgungundlovu noGu, ngenkathi kuyolalelwa imibono yemiphakathi.

Ekwenzeni izimpilo zabantu zibe ngcono, sithole ukuthi isifundazwe sinazo izinhlelo zokubhekana nobuphofu nokuntuleka kwemisebenzi, ezokulwa nesifo seNgculaza kanye nesofuba, ezokudala amathuba emisebenzi nohlelo lokwenza iKwaZulu-Natali ibe nokuthula nokuphepha. Sithole futhi ukuthi kukhona uhlelo olusetshenziswayo olubizwa nge-Provincial Growth and Development Strategy.

Ngasebudlelwaneni noMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe, sithole ukuthi ubudlelwano nabo bunezinqginamba ezithize engizokhuluma ngazo maduze nje, kodwa ukusebenzisana sekube ngcono kakhulu kanti noMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe ususematheni esifundazweni.

Maqondana nezinqumo ezithathwa uhulumeni omkhulu, sithole ukuthi izinqumo ziyahambisana nemigomo yesifundazwe. Yize noma abantu bengayi nganhlanye kuhle kwamanzi kodwa iningi liyazamukela. Inselelo kuphela kuba amasiko bese kwesinye isikhathi kuba yimigomo ngenxa yesimo, kwesinye isikhathi, sezombusazwe.

Mayelana nokulekelelwa kwesifundazwe, sithole ukuthi isifundazwe sithi sona siyingxenye yezwe laseNingizimu Afrika, ngakho-ke konke okwenziwa nguhulumeni omkhulu kanye nezinye izifundazwe kuyenzeka KwaZulu-Natali.

Nazi izinselelo esizitholile - phela kuye kuthiwe alikho isoka elingenasici. Nokho zikhona izinselelo nezinqinamba isifundazwe esibhekene nazo. Mayelana neNdebe Yomhlaba, sikholelwa ekutheni kufanele zithinteke zonke izinhlaka nezakhiwo, isibonelo: iMinyango efanele, ohulumeni basekhaya, izinhlangano zebhola - singabala lapha eyejwayelekile okuthiwa u- Safa, abaholi bendabuko nazo zonke ezinye izinhlaka ezikhona ukuze lo mcimbi uhleleke kahle.

Kuye kwavela ukuthi kunezinqinamba ngokuthunyelwa kwezithunywa zesifundazwe uma uMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe kufanele uhlangane lapha eCape Town. Lokhu kudalwa ukuza sekusele isikhathi esifishane kanti kwesinye isikhathi kubuye kudalwe nawukuthi sisuke sisincane kakhulu isikhathi abazofike basikhulume, uma uqhathanisa nezindleko. Okunye ukungaphumeleli kokufika kwabanye oNgqongqoshe besifundazwe ngenxa yokungatholi isimemo ngesikhathi kanye nokungafiki kwabo ukuzobamba iqhaza kwizinkulumo mayelana nesabiwomali.

Sengizogcina, imbizo yesifundazwe eyayiseMondlo, kuhulumeni wasekhaya okuthiwa Abaqulusi, yahamba kahle nangempumelelo futhi yanika nezakhamuzi ithuba lokuxhumana nohulumeni. Le mbizo yakhombisa isimo esihle phakathi kwesifunda saseZululand nesifundazwe maqondana nokubambisana ekusizeni abantu ngokuletha izidingo zabo nokubekezelelana.

Uhulumeni wesifundazwe wabuye wacela ukuthi uma amakomiti oMkhandlu Kazwelonke nawoMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe ezoya kwisifundazwe, kuhle asho kusenesikhathi ukuze alungiselelwe kahle ngoba naso isifundazwe sisuke sinezinhlelo zaso.

Isonto lokuhambela isifundazwe lihambe kahle kakhulu noma savelelwa umshophi wokushiwa umshayeli owayesisiza. Kulokho, sithi kwabakwaMsindazwe abalale ngenxeba.

Sihlalo, siyabonga. Umsebenzi wamalungu ethu uhambe kahle. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu speech follows.)

[Mr D D GAMEDE: Chairperson, the report on our oversight visit to the province has bee tabled. The report is also available in the ATCs. And for this reason I will be very brief and concise.

The follow-up visit to the province by members of this House had the following objectives: Firstly, it was to find out what the province was doing to make the people’s lives better. Secondly, it was to strengthen the relationship between the legislature concerned and the National Council of Provinces. Thirdly, it was to see the effect that decisions taken by the national government have on the provincial governments. Fourthly, it was to assess out the situation regarding the preparations for the 2010 Fifa World Cup. And finally it was to try and find out how that particular province could be helped in performing its core functions.

We had numerous meetings with the following different role-players. We had a meeting with the office of the Speaker, the Speaker and his Deputy, all the Whips and the Whips from other parties, and the hon Ngcolosi is a witness to this, and he is just here next to me as I speak.

We also met the Chair of Chairs, the National Council of Provinces Matters Standing Committee, the sports fraternity, Kwanaloga, officials from the local government, the department of local government, housing and traditional affairs, the sports committee, traditional leaders, the Premier and his Cabinet. And after all this we then, attended an imbizo, which was at Mondlo, which falls under AbaQulusi Municipality.

Regarding the 2010 Fifa World Cup, we found the following: We found that at least something is being done to prepare for this tournament. The office of the Premier, the hon Sbu Ndebele, formed a special committee for sports. This committee comprises all relevant departments. We also learnt that the province took part in the drafting of the 2010 Fifa World Cup South Africa Special Measures Bill. They held public hearings in places like Pietermaritzburg and Ugu.

On the aspect of making the people’s lives better, we found that the province has programmes in place to fight poverty and joblessness, HIV and Aids, and tuberculosis, and to create job opportunities so as to make KwaZulu-Natal a haven for peace and security. We also learnt that there was a programme in place called the provincial growth and development strategy.

In as far as the relationship with the National Council of Provinces is concerned, we learnt that the relationship had certain hiccups, which I will mention shortly. But of late the relationship has been very good and the province in general is quite pleased with the National Council of Provinces.

Regarding the decisions taken by the national government, we found that the decisions are always in line with the policies of the province. Even though it is common cause that, unlike water, people’s opinions do not always flow into one direction, in general people accept these decisions. The only challenge, though, was with the cultures and of course with certain policies because of political diversity in the province.

In so far as helping the province is concerned, we learnt that the province acknowledges that it is part of South Africa, and therefore, whatever the national government and the other provinces do, the KwaZulu-Natal province also takes part in.

There were challenges that we found there, and as we all know, to err is human and, as the saying goes, even monkeys fall from the trees. There are of course challenges and hindrances that the province is facing. Regarding the 2010 FIFA World Cup, we believe that all relevant stakeholders should be kept abreast of every development, for example the relevant government departments, local government, sports organisations like Safa, traditional leadership and all other relevant stakeholders who can make this whole tournament a resounding success.

It also emerged that there are challenges with the provincial delegates which the province has to send to the National Council of Provinces in Cape Town. This is partly because of the short notice that the delegates receive when they have to come to Cape Town and also the time allocated to these delegates is often too short if you compare it with the expenses involved. The other problem was the conspicuous absence of the MECs in our debates because of the short notice that they receive, and their non-appearance during the Budget Votes.

In conclusion, the provincial imbizo which was held at Mondlo, in AbaQulusi Municipality, went very well and it even gave the people of Mondlo the opportunity to directly communicate with government. This imbizo showcased the smooth communication channels between the Zululand District and the province as a whole and the dedication to working together in addressing the people’s needs.

The provincial government also asked that if committees from the National Council of Provinces intend visiting the province, they should announce their intentions long beforehand so that proper arrangements could be made for them, as the province also has its own programme of action.

The study tour to the province went smoothly, even though we were saddened by the passing away of the driver who was helping us. On this sad note, we say to the Msindazwes may they find comfort in the situation they are faced with.

Chairperson, I thank you. The work of our members went smoothly. I thank you. [Applause.]]

Rev P MOATSHE: Hon Deputy Chairperson, hon members, it is indeed an honour and privilege to participate in this revered House today on the topic of the National Council of Provinces’ provincial week, which was held from 14- 18 August 2006. As we all know, this oversight exercise - and future provincial weeks - was not just undertaken for the sake of it, but in terms of our constitutional obligations which mandate us, as public representatives, to exercise oversight intervention in both the national and local government spheres.

It is in the public interest that we pronounce ourselves on the objectives of these visits. Among other things, we set out to determine the following: assessment of the activities of the North West province; strengthening of the relationship between the provincial legislature and the National Council of Provinces; to listen to the people about problems needing attention and to identify blockages in the implementation of policy areas that may need review; to establish how decisions taken by national government impact on provincial government; and to ascertain progress with regard to preparations for the World Cup in 2010 in terms of the readiness of municipalities and partnerships, if any, between the various stakeholders in the provinces.

We kicked off our week with a meeting with the Chief Whip and the leadership of the North West to engage and inform them about the strategic objectives of our visit. Furthermore, we were all in accord that provincial weeks were a valuable tool to harmonise provincial, national and local interests. We also emphasised the role of traditional leadership in this regard.

Our visit included the following areas and sectors: the Zeerust Police Station, the Groot Marico Police Station management, the Lehurutshe Magistrate Board, the chief and community of Shupingstad, the North West Deputy Speaker, the Bophelong Hospital, and the Mmabatho Police Station.

Let me elaborate on our visit to the Zeerust Police Station. The Zeerust Police Station is situated about 150 kilometres from Botswana in the Ramotshere Moiloa Municipality. This is a predominantly rural area and consists of farms and villages. It also experiences migration and immigration like any other town in South Africa, although not on a large scale. Like any other police station in the country, the station endeavours to protect and serve the community around it.

The Zeerust Police Station faces the following challenges: a shortage of police vehicles – this has to be looked into very seriously; a shortage of police officers; insufficient and incompetent detective services, and female holding cells. In addition, stock theft is a great problem and the problem of ghost police officers is also experienced.

Among other things, the following criminal activities were mentioned, which are of major concern to the community: armed robbery, common robbery, housebreaking, common assault, car theft and theft in general. However, during our discussions it also became clear that capacity constraints severely hamper the noble efforts of the overwhelmingly committed police corps in the area. As public representatives we made it clear to the SA Police Service that we were there to support them and to experience for ourselves these challenges.

Similarly, in terms of our visit to the Groot Marico Police Station, our experience was also a refrain of what we hear in the media, public hearings and our oversight visits in general. We are not insensitive to these challenges.

We have given our inputs during discussions with the police management, and we undertook that we would deepen our commitment. Alas, we are also not oblivious to the impact of the socioeconomic conditions in the area and the North West province in general.

We then proceeded with an engagement with the Lehurutshe Magistrate Board. I will briefly outline to the House some of the pertinent issues that were raised. The court building is in a dilapidated state despite recent renovations. The public suffers the indignity of having to distinguish for themselves between the criminal and the civil courts. There is a shortage of courtrooms.

The issue of magisterial boundaries is still to be decided and, as a consequence, the public must travel long distances. This stems from the previous Bophuthatswana homeland. There is a lack of information and communication technology capacity, and there is an absence of a place for the safekeeping of cash. Maintenance money in particular should be kept in a safe place.

There is a shortage of security personnel and an absence of social workers to deal with social grants, etc. There is a security risk as holding cells are adjacent to the magistrates’ offices. The list goes on, but I will stop here.

Although we noted the concerns in their entirety and undertook to engage with the provincial department of public works, we are concerned that there is clearly a lack of an integrated approach to these challenges. We hope to raise this once we convene as a cluster very soon.

Our engagement with the chief and community of Shupingstad was, in fact, very constructive. Among other things, it highlighted the importance of co- operation between the local authority and the traditional leaders, particularly after this year’s local government elections. It must be said that the chief was particularly supportive of this. Also, the lack of capacity and skills among councillors needs urgent attention.

At a community level, the concerns are more serious and direct. A lack of infrastructure, a water shortage, poor road conditions, unemployment, poverty, crime and other social pathologies are the order of the day. The community was also particularly concerned about the behaviour of the chief himself.

Among the recommendations made were the following. The NCOP will engage with the health department about the unavailability of an ambulance service and the poor condition of hospitals. We will pay attention to the challenges … [Time expired.] Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

Mnr L H FIELDING: Voorsitter, lede van die Huis, besoekers, dames en here, met die besoek aan die Noord-Kaap deur die NRVP-lede en lede van die wetgewer in Kimberley, is besoeke afgelê by gemeenskappe, munisipaliteite, skole, hospitale en die weermagbasis.

Tot ons teleurstelling het ons afgekom op ’n weermagammunisiebasis op Jan Kempdorp waar ons slegs twee weermagoffisiere kon kry. Die teleurstellende situasie daar was dat daar sedert 1941 ammunisie gestoor was en hierdie ammunisie gaan oor ’n tydperk van 35 jaar eers uitgefaseer kan word. Die ammunisie word gestoor in Ammunisiebasis Vastrap en Ammunisiebasis 93.

Hierdie offisiere was baie gefrustreerd en het onder baie spanning gely. Offisier Van As het aan ons verduidelik dat hy ’n magtiging van R1 000 per gebruikslag het en nie oor daardie begroting mag werk nie. Dit was baie teleurstellend.

Ons het verder gegaan na die Primêre Skool Warrenton waar ons ’n vergadering gehad het met die skoolkomiteelede en opvoeders en ook die mense wat daar die kos voorberei. Daarna het ons vergadering gehou waar mense vir ons verduidelik het dat hulle opleiding kry teen R500 per maand na ’n 12-maande kursus. Daarna het ons gegaan en na sommige kinders geluister, asook na ouers teenwoordig en hierdie ouers het aan ons verduidelik dat hierdie kinders R1,00 per dag vir voedsel ontvang, waaroor hulle ’n klagte ingedien het by ons en duidelik gesê het dat dit onaanvaarbaar is om vir R1,00 per dag vir ’n kind kos te gee en daarom vra hulle meer geld in hierdie opsig.

Van daar is ons na die Phokwane-munisipaliteit en hier het ons gevind dat die werkloosheidsyfer onder die gemeenskap 43% is. Die behoeftebepaling wat daar gemaak is, is dat 4 395 mense werkloos is; die agterstand per jaar vir huise is 4 093; die tekort aan water per huisgesin is 3 708; sanitêre dienste is 3 699; tekort aan elektrisiteit per huisgesin is 4 755; verwydering van vullis per huisgesin is 4 382, en dan het hulle ’n gruispad van 79km wat hulle moet gebruik.

Daarna het ons gegaan na ’n vergadering in Jan Kempdorp. Die agterstand met die paaie daar is dat daar 2 013km gruispaaie is. Daar is ’n probleem tussen die munisipaliteit en Eskom oor die kwessie van krag, want Eskom skuld nog die munisipaliteit geld. Eskom is tans die kragvoorsiener. Vullisverwydering in Hartswater is ’n probleem, en sodoende veroorsaak dit onhigiëniese toestande in die gemeenskap.

Met betrekking tot behuising lewer sommige kontrakteurs swak werk met goedkoop materiaal. Daar is ’n tekort aan grond vir behuising. Daar is genoeg landelike grond, maar geen grond om huise te bou nie en die mense het ’n probleem met landbougrond om huise daarop te bou.

Die mense skuld die munisipaliteit sowat R23 902 860. Die mense is bekommerd, want uit die begroting van daardie munisipaliteit is maar 17,5% vir infrastruktuur bewillig en van die res is sowat 30% bestee aan salarisse.

As ons kyk na die Noord-Kaapse behuisingsprobleem, waar ons kry dat jy ’n Noord-Kaap Behuisingsfederasie kry en die geaffilieerde Suid-Afrikaanse Huislose Mensefederasie. Hierdie liggaam en die munisipaliteit is in konflik met mekaar, want die mense wat op die federasie se waglys is, is nie noodwendig dieselfde mense wat op die munisipaliteit se waglys is nie, so daar is konflik tussen hierdie twee groepe.

Dan het ons gegaan na waar ons verneem dat sekere raadslede toestemming uit hulle eie wil gee aan gemeenskappe sonder dat die munisipaliteit die toelating of die magtiging gee om met hierdie mense te praat en dan wys hy gronde of persele uit wat glad nie op die waglys is nie en dit skep ’n probleem vir die gemeenskap daar.

Die Dumisane African Trading-verskaffers is geld vir materiaal vir behuising uitbetaal, maar hulle het nooit die materiaal gelewer nie en daarom is hierdie projek al geruime tyd agter.

Ons het ’n terrein besoek by die Sol Plaatje-munisipaliteit waar veronderstel was om 960 huise gelewer te word. Tot op hede is daar maar 550 huise gelewer. Die kontrak is oor die termyn van 2003 tot 2006 gesluit, maar daar is net 555 huise gebou. Die teleurstelling was, op die ter plaatse ondersoek daar, dat die huise van ’n baie swak gehalte materiaal gebou was. Die stene is swak, dis geperste sand en geperste klei waarmee die huise gebou word, en daar is maar 2% sement bygevoeg. Dit skep ’n probleem vir die mense en nie net dit nie, die stene is, “interblocks” nie stene wat normaalweg mee gebou word nie, maar inmekaar gepak word.

Ek het foto’s geneem wat ek die een of ander tyd aan die Raad sal voorsien om die krake uit te wys en die leemtes wat daar bestaan. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ja … Ja. [Tyd verstreke.] Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Mr L H FIELDING: Chairperson, members of the House, guests, ladies and gentleman, during the visit to the Northern Cape by members of the NCOP and members of the legislature in Kimberley, we visited communities, municipalities, schools, hospitals and the Defence Force base.

To our disappointment we came across a Defence Force ammunition base in Jan Kempdorp where only two Defence Force officers were present. It was disappointing to find that ammunition has been stored there since 1941 and would only be phased out over a period of 35 years. The ammunition is stored at the Vastrap Weapons Range and 93 Ammunition Depot.

These officers were highly frustrated and suffered severe stress. Officer Van As explained to us that he has authorisation up to R1 000 at a time and is not allowed to exceed that budget, which was very disappointing.

We then travelled further to the Warrenton Primary School where we held a meeting with members of the governing body and teachers, as well as the catering staff. Thereafter we held another meeting where people revealed that they received training at R500 per month after finishing a 12-month course. Thereafter we left to listen to some of the children as well as parents who were present. These parents explained to us that these children are receiving R1,00 per day for food which led them to lodge a complaint with us. They clearly stated that it was unacceptable to feed a child on R1,00 per day; hence their request for more funds in this regard.

From there we proceeded to the Phokwane Municipality and here it came to light that there was an unemployment rate of 43% among the community. The needs assessment that was carried out there indicated that 4 395 people are unemployed; there is an annual housing shortage of 4 093; the shortage of water per household amounts to 3 708; a lack of sanitary services amounting to 3 699; a shortage of electricity per household amounting to 4 755; refuse disposal is 4 382 per household; and a gravel road of 79km is servicing the community.

We then proceeded to a meeting in Jan Kempdorp. There is a shortage of roads and the area has a 2 013km network of gravel roads. Currently there is a dispute between Eskom and the municipality with regard to power supply, as Eskom is financially indebted towards the municipality. Eskom is supplying the power at the moment. Refuse removal in Hartswater is a problem and consequently this results in unhygienic conditions in the community.

With regard to housing, certain contractors have rendered work of inferior quality by using cheaper materials. There is a shortage of land for housing. However, there is enough agricultural land available but no land to build houses on and the residents have a problem building houses on agricultural land.

The residents owe the municipality approximately R23 902 860. They are concerned as only 17,5% of the municipal budget has been allocated to infrastructure and approximately 30% of the budget is spent on salaries.

If we have a look at the Northern Cape’s housing problem, we find that we have two bodies to deal with, the Northern Cape Housing Federation and the affiliated South African Homeless People’s Federation. This body and the municipality are in conflict because the residents on the federation’s waiting list are not necessarily the same as those on the municipalitiy’s waiting list. This results in conflict between the two groups.

We then went to an area where we found that certain councillors want to give permission to communities of their own accord without authorisation from the municipality to speak to these people. They would then identify land or plots that do not even appear on the waiting list and this creates a problem for that community.

The Dumisane African Trading Suppliers were paid for housing material which they never delivered; hence the project has been behind schedule for a long while.

We visited a Sol Plaatje Municipality site where 960 houses were supposed to have been delivered. To date, only 550 houses have been built. The contract covered the period from 2003 to 2006 but only 555 houses have been built. It was very disappointing, during an in loco inspection of the site, to find that the houses were built with material of a very poor quality. The bricks were of poor quality, compressed sand and compressed clay were used to build these houses and only 2% cement was added. This creates a problem for residents, and not only that, but also the fact that these bricks are “interblocks”, not bricks that are normally used to build, which mean they are stacked into one another.

I have taken photographs that I will show to the Council, at some stage or another, to point out the cracks and flaws that exist. [Interjections.] Yes … Yes. [Time expired.] Thank you.]

Mr L RAMATLAKANE (Western Cape): Deputy Chairperson, we are privileged to participate in this NCOP debate on the NCOP week in the Western Cape. The visit of the NCOP in the Western Cape mainly focused on vexing issues around gangsterism - plans to deal with gangsterism in the province and of course from there to deal with matters of local government such as roads and freeway bypasses that create concern in our community.

The legislature in fact had a discussion on these matters at the end of the visit of the members to all the areas to consider these issues that have been raised and also to comment as to what constitutes the way forward in dealing with some of those issues.

In my comment I would also be saying that, in terms of government consideration on some of the issues that need to be dealt with, these are the things that have been suggested. Firstly, on gangsterism, with regard to the issue of the NCOP engaging with the management of the police, the delegates have done that, in fact, in focusing on Mannenberg and gangsterism and what is happening in Mannenberg.

You would know that the situation in the Western Cape, particularly when it comes to the issues of gangsterism and drugs, is quite worrying and members were quite concerned about whether the plans that have been put in place are adequate to deal with the matters relating to gangsterism, and whether the plans are not necessarily too general.

In the engagement, following the representation of the concern, we’ve been able to demonstrate that indeed the plan that has been put in place to deal with gangsterism is in fact quite detailed to deal with gangsterism, particularly the issue of dealing with high-flyers – those who were believed to be untouchable in the past – who don’t touch drugs but continue to make money from drugs. That strategy is focusing on and dealing with them as well as with the street gangs.

In that detail, we have been able to show that the movement in terms of the conviction rate that has been increasing around that particular strategy is beginning to pay dividends.

I may want to add that the issue about the continuing usage of houses as outlets for drugs was another issue. As we speak today and having had an engagement with the Mayor of the City of Cape Town today, some of those houses that are used as outlets for drugs are a worrying issue. At least an action is beginning to emerge that the first and foremost, local government

• as the legal owner of the houses - has to take action. Failure to take action necessitates the assets forfeitures to intervene in terms of those houses.

One of the issues that they have raised is the issue around infrastructure in the form of police stations, where they are located and whether they have proper resources, and the issues of personnel in general.

As you all know, the concern that we particularly all have is that the inheritance of our 1994 democratic breakthrough has been the institution – where the infrastructure of the police has been all the years. Therefore, the police stations have been dislocated from where the major crime happens, particularly with regard to violent crime areas. There would be far more out in the city, not necessarily where they are.

Members were very concerned about the issues regarding Bongolethu in Oudtshoorn, where the police station there is a contact point and not necessarily a station that is well resourced. We have been able to indicate that in the plans that we put in place in terms of dealing with it. It’s a matter that we’re handling in terms of infrastructure but generally this is a phenomenon that requires some attention all over the province. I guess all other provinces are in the same league in terms of infrastructure - new infrastructure that is closer in proximity to where crime happens.

The committee also raised issues about partnerships, particularly partnerships that deal with other national departments located in the provinces, and the concerns that are not necessarily addressed. In this case Home Affairs was raised as an aspect around the issues of illegal immigrants, their involvement in drugs or allegations that involve them in more general terms.

Of course, the demonstration of the interdepartmental committee – an intergovernmental arrangement that has already been established in the provinces - demonstrated that we are handling those particular matters.

The issue of a witness protection programme has been raised as a key issue in the province, particularly in dealing with gangsterism and drugs. That programme needs closer attention. We agree with that. In fact, it does need closer attention, particularly when we deal with that issue.

The other issues are associated with education, bail, drugs and people who are habitual offenders in respect of gangsterism. It concerns communities that those who commit crime go in and come out of jail.

Again, we have been able to say that what is most important is moving forward. There has to be education, and empowering of communities to be able to participate in those matters when they come before court, so that they are able to oppose bail together with the police.

We therefore think that the recommendation that the NCOP delegation has made in terms of dealing with gangs and gangsterism will in fact continuously have to put us together as government in an intergovernmental way in terms of dealing with the challenging issues. The sphere of government in question, particularly where it relates to the other issues, is in the national department. But I think this issue is an issue that the members of the NCOP will probably have to deal with.

I will now address the last two issues. With regard to local government, members were concerned about the abilities of local government in Project Consolidate, and whether the necessary capacity exists.

One of the most burning issues that requires attention has been the issue of bypasses, particularly the conduct or alleged conduct of Sanral in the engagement of the province or engagement of the community around the issues of consultation and factors that may affect, in the long term, future public transport commuters.

I think that particular issue is a matter that requires attention. We said it needs an intergovernmental approach. We have agreed that local economic development is important and the provincial development strategy is beginning to pay attention and deal with that.

All in all we think that the visit has been a good one – a good one that must be continued to engage both the spheres of government around those interests. I thank you. [Applause.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon Deputy Chairperson, I must confess that most of the issues I intended to talk about have been covered by members and have been raised from as early as 28 April 1994.

As one debates this report of the provincial week, one is most excited to realise that it constitutes the evolving maturity of the National Council of Provinces as a unique House within our parliamentary system, because the NCOP is not a provincial legislature and the NCOP is not the National Assembly. It is a very complex organism that, one must say, through the collective wisdom and efforts of all of us assembled here today, we have been able to define and for which we have been able to find a niche within the broader spectrum of parliamentary politics within our country.

There is no doubt that the reintroduction of the provincial week is one of the most critical programmes that finds a niche for the NCOP, differentiating it from other Houses of Parliament. This is because it is the only House that straddles, according to President Thabo Mbeki, the three spheres of government. Accordingly, it cannot engage in and enquire about issues in the manner in which provincial legislatures do. It cannot enquire about and engage on issues in the manner in which the National Assembly does or is supposed to. If we fail to grapple with that particular challenge, we will have failed the test of our relevance and become open to those critics who say that they don’t see the relevance of this House. I don’t think we want to take that particular route.

Overall, we have been able to rise to a number of challenges, but they continue to be challenges. I want to pick up on a few challenges. I think out of all the speakers that have spoken, three spoke about an issue … I’m not oversimplifying this: In 1994 the African people in this country had never been provided with housing. It was only after 27 April 1994 that we had the programme of RDP houses.

When you build these houses - when you build 5 000 houses in a year – it’s a victory for our people, it’s a victory for our government, and all of us must celebrate. The problem is that when you build these 5 000 houses, only 100 are habitable. Human beings can see that. The hon Moatshe spoke about the cracks; another member spoke about …

What I am saying is that those are issues that the NCOP, in my view, must focus on for future purposes as we engage in these types of programmes. I have never, unless I am ignorant - and I must not be seen to be making any judgments … Hon Shiceka, I have never seen on our Order Paper regarding committees, even of this House, that we pass the budget every year for the Department of Housing and in terms of that budget we pass what we call the National Home Builders Registration Council, the NHBRC – a quality assurance mechanism to deal with the problem of the quality of houses.

One goes to the Free State and there is the Virginia problem. You know about it, hon Mabe. The Virginia problem of 1996 is still unresolved. Every time the President goes there that problem is still unresolved. In the North West there are similar problems, where people have pocketed money and built poor quality houses that our people cannot even inhabit. They say, “It’s better to stay in my shack than to stay in this house.”

Now who can carry out this task except the National Council of Provinces, and that by calling the NHBRC? This is because it has the legal mandate to do quality checks on those houses. It can do quality checks, for example, on a particular contractor who does a certain kind of work. There are legal recourses.

Maybe I am ignorant. I’ve never read in the newspaper, neither have I been provided with information, which says: These are the contractors whose properties, houses and bank accounts have been frozen because of a failure to comply with building regulations. I have never heard of that; maybe other members are aware of that. So what I’m saying is that the NCOP in terms of its excellent niche can actually be seized with that task.

Hon Shiceka, no doubt we are a unitary state despite the three spheres of government. The people of Tumahole in Parys have spoken, and the people in the North West have spoken through our programmes. They speak about the same things, even if you were to go again the following week you would hear the same things.

Now the challenge is: How do we as the NCOP begin to respond to those expectations and aspirations of our people in our programmes, particularly a programme like that of the provincial week, without being seen - I am aware other hon members are afraid to talk about this - to be encroaching on the role of provincial legislatures, without being seen to be conducting oversight over the provincial executive, but ensuring in a very qualitative way that we are actually positioned to do this work of representing provincial interests in this House?

An hon member from the Northern Cape spoke about a hazard in an old army base. I am not really sure whether this has been brought to the attention of the Department of Defence and, if so, what steps are going to be taken.

I’m basically saying that we have done lots of excellent work, but we really need an improvement and collective minds to improve on what we are doing, because it is something else to listen to the people and make observations, and then come back here and talk among ourselves. It’s another thing, because the key test of a revolutionary people’s Parliament – I want to emphasise revolutionary people’s Parliament – is about its capacity to inspire the confidence of the masses. This is so that when this Parliament, when these public representatives go out on an outreach programme to interface with the electorate, the electorate is confident that their lives will be better tomorrow, after we have met our elected representatives, than they are today.

Overall, there are a whole range of issues. Planning is one of the key issues confronting our government as a challenge. To what extent have we checked whether, when we pass budgets at different levels for a school or for housing, we are actually satisfied that all other due processes, like environmental impact studies, have been undertaken? This is because it is an oversimplification of reality to say that provinces are not spending.

There are real problems, not only of capacity. At times you find that people budget for something when they have not done certain feasibility studies to check whether where they want to establish infrastructure is environmentally feasible to have that kind of project.

You find that when the feasibility study has been conducted, you already have the money and you want to establish the infrastructure, but the environmental study says you cannot. So how do we assist as the National Council of Provinces in terms of addressing those challenges?

Lastly, I am sure most members here are aspirant BEE whatevers. We have the Construction Industry Development Board, which falls under the Department of Public Works, if I’m not mistaken. Have we looked at the challenges facing that particular body, because in its grading, hon Shiceka, it actually perpetuates …

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Hon member, will you please direct your questions through the Chair, not directly to the members.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Thanks, hon Chairperson. We are talking about broad-based black economic empowerment, and all companies that are supposed to be undertaking business within the construction industry are required by law - this CIDB - to register. But the experience is that every new company that registers there, particularly those that were historically disadvantaged, is graded at an entry level.

If you do audits across nine provinces, I am sure through you, Madam Deputy Chairperson, that the hon Ramatlakane would agree with me that there is no historically black empowerment company that could be awarded a contract of more than R100 million because of those constraints. It is we who have passed that particular law. And how do we address that, because it is a challenge?

This delivery is in the provinces, but this legislation is national legislation so it has direct bearing on the delivery capacity of our provinces. So those are the issues that I thought were critical, and maybe we need to engage more robustly amongst ourselves.

Finally, I want to say that our budgeting systems have improved and matured, and I am sure that we are amongst the best in Africa and the world. But how do we link these budgeting systems to the planning and output of a particular budget? Have we been able to ensure that in our planning for these provincial weeks we actually include those particular issues that arise from the budget and the strategic plans of various government departments as we go down and interface with our provincial legislatures?

I have been trying to highlight some of the challenges, and these are my modest thoughts aimed at improving our efficiency and our capacity in fulfilling our constitutional mandate of being a House of provinces; nothing more, nothing less. I thank you very much. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Report noted.

                   CARRIAGE BY AIR AMENDMENT BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mnr F ADAMS: Huisvoorsitter, kollegas en vriende, graag wil ek aan u voorlê die verslag van die Gekose Komitee oor Openbare Dienste oor die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Lugvervoer, soos vervat in die aankondigings en tertafelleggings van die komitee op 3 November, vir die goedkeuring van die Huis. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr F ADAMS: Chairperson of the House, colleagues and friends, I would like to submit the Select Committee on Public Services’s report on the Carriage by Air Amendment Bill, as contained in the announcements and tablings of the committee on 3 November, for the approval of the House. I thank you. [Applause.]]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall 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.

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.]

The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

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

                   ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL

                (Consideration of Votes and Schedule)

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Chair, the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, makes provision for a national adjustment budget. In terms of this Act the Minister of Finance may table an adjustment budget in Parliament. The Adjustments Appropriation Bill, Bill 32 of 2006, appropriates an adjustments amount of money for the requirements of national departments for the financial year ending on 31st March 2007.

The objective of this Bill is to appropriate an additional amount of money from the National Revenue Fund for the requirements of the state for the financial year ending on 31st March 2007.

State-owned enterprises have a strategic role to play in our efforts to transform the economy. Some state-owned enterprises receive substantial allocations. These include the following: Denel, R567 million; Infraco, R627 million. This Infraco is a broad telecommunications company. This additional amount will reduce the cost of broadband in South Africa and thus give more people access to this technology. Alexkor has received R80 million and the SA Rail Commuter Corporation has received R620 million.

The Bill also makes provision for the emergency funding of R674 million in response to the flood damage. The allocation will cover repair costs of roads, infrastructure and housing. The adjustments are offset against contingency reserves, unallocated amounts, declared savings and projected underspending. Actual underspending in this financial year ending on 31st March 2006 is R5,6 billion, which is 2,4% of the Budget.

The provinces failed to spend R4,4 billion in the same financial year. That is why, as the Select Committee on Finance, we urge this House to support this money Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon members, I have been informed that there will not be any questions.

I shall now put the Votes in the order in which they appear in the schedule to the Bill. Vote No 1 – The Presidency – put.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Alliance dissenting).

Vote No 2 – Parliament – put.

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

Vote No 3 – Foreign Affairs – put.

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

Vote No 4 – Home Affairs – put.

Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution. Vote No 5 – Provincial and Local Government – put.

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

Vote No 6 – Public Works – put.

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

Vote No 7 – Government Communication and Information System – put.

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

Vote No 8 – National Treasury – put.

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

Vote No 9 – Public Enterprises – put.

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

Vote No 10 - Public Service and Administration – put.

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

Vote No 11 – Public Service Commission – put.

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

Vote No 12 – South African Management Development Institute – put.

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

Vote No 13 – Statistics South Africa – put.

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

Vote No 14 – Arts and Culture – put.

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

Vote No 15 – Education – put.

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

Vote No 16 – Health – put.

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

Vote No 17 – Labour – put.

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

Vote No 18 – Social Development – put.

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

Vote No 19 – Sport and Recreation South Africa – put.

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

Vote No 20 – Correctional Services – put.

Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Chairperson, the DA would like to object, and also to call for a division.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): How many seconds to that? [Interjections.] I’ll make a ruling that we won’t go for a division, because in terms of the Rules an individual member must be supported by four members. [Interjections.] No, hon members - hon Mazibuko, I wouldn’t like to call you by name – when I was asking, it was only Mr Fielding, Mr Thetjeng and another member who seconded the call for a division. [Interjections.] They are three, right? [Interjections.] Wait! [Interjections.] Therefore I was making the ruling on the basis of that, but now I do recognise that maybe some other members were not concentrating, right? It’s only now that they are raising their hands. This is the point that I want to clarify, okay?

Division demanded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T Setona): So the seconds have met the necessary requirements, so, hon members, a division has been called on Vote No 20. I have ascertained that four or more members are in favour of the division. I would like to caution members that during a division no debate will be allowed. Those in favour of the Vote will take their seats to my right. Any delegate wishing to abstain from the voting must sit in the back corner to my left. Hon Terblanche, can I request that this area should be reserved for abstentions. You can sit this side. Are you abstaining? [Interjections.]

As tellers to my right I appoint the Chief Whip of the Council and as tellers to my left I appoint the hon Terblanche. When tellers have finished counting they should hand the results to the Chairperson. Can I proceed to call upon the tellers to do the counting and to forward the results to the Chairperson?

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I’m not opposing your ruling, but I want to look at whether it’s procedural for a member who has called for a division to also be referee at the same time while he or she’s a player, because it would be good to have someone who is independent.

I’ll propose that we use some of the duty Whips who are here in the House …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Chief Whip, what you are raising is quite fundamental. Hon Watson, can you be the teller on this side? [Interjections.]

The Council divided.

AYES – 23: Botha, D J; Gamede, D D; Hendricks, N; Mabe, S E; Manyosi, A T; Madlala-Magubane, N M; Matlanyane, H; Mazibuko, N F; Mkhaliphi, B J; Moatshe, P; Mokoena, M L; Ntuli, Z C; Nyanda, F; Oliphant, M N; Ralane, T; Shiceka, S; Sibiya, J; Sogoni, E M; Themba, M P; Tolo, B J; Van Rooyen, C J; Vilakazi, J N; Windvoël, V V Z.

NOES - 9: Chen, S S; Fielding, L H; Krumbock, G R; Le Roux, J W; Terblanche, J F; Thetjeng, O M; Van Heerden, F J; Watson, A; Worth, D A.

Vote accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 21 - Defence - put.

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

Vote No 22 - Independent Complaints Directorate - put.

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

Vote No 23 - Justice and Constitutional Development - put.

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

Vote No 24 - Safety and Security - put.

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

Vote No 25 - Agriculture - put.

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

Vote No 26 - Communications - put.

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

Vote No 27 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism - put.

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

Vote No 28 - Housing - put.

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

Vote No 29 - Land Affairs - put.

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Chairperson, I would like the reservations of the FF Plus to be noted.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Excuse me, hon member, I didn’t hear what you said?

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Chairperson, I said we had reservations in the FF Plus.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Okay, I’m not sure whether we have reservations as an option. Your reservation is noted.

Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Chairperson, I would like to note an objection and also call for a division.

Division demanded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon Terblanche is objecting and is calling for a division. Seconders? [Interjections.]

Hon members, the bells are being rung to alert those members who are outside to come and vote, and fulfil their party-political mandates, because this is a critical exercise of democracy. However … Hon Watson, you want to say something?

Mr A WATSON: Chair, I’m not in the Chair, so I don’t know, but what is the quorum for this House?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): The quorum of the House, as far I’m concerned, is one third of the House. I’m so used to the House that I don’t have to count to see that we’re a quorum, but if hon members want to satisfy themselves, we can do that.

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Chairperson, I want to confirm that this House is fully quorate, and any decision which it will take will be binding even on those who are opposing it in voting.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Thanks your point is noted, hon member.

Hon members, those in favour of the Vote will take their seats to my right and those against to my left, and those who abstain must go to the far left corner. I’ll appoint the hon Chief Whip of the Council as the teller to my right, and as teller to my left I’ll appoint the hon Watson. [Interjections.] Excuse me, Mr Krumbock, what’s your point? [Interjections.]

Mr G R KRUMBOCK: [Inaudible.] … I should be counted as voting against.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I want to assure you, you have been counted.

The Council divided.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon members, the results are as follows: Those who agreed, 24; those who objected, nine. [Interjections.] The majority have voted in favour and the Vote is accordingly agreed to. [Interjections.] Plus one reservation by the FF Plus, so that’s eight. [Interjections.]

Mr A WATSON: No, no, Chair, objections and reservations are handled first. When a division is called, even you can vote against it. Dr Van Heerden voted against. He had a reservation, but when the division was called for and the bells were rung he could vote. [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon Dr Van Heerden, can you take your seat. [Interjections.] I listened quite clearly and I wasn’t sure whether we have such a thing as reservations. I know you either vote against or in favour, or you abstain, and he said he had reservations, and I recorded it procedurally, right? Can I hear from you, hon Van Heerden, or have you appointed the hon Watson as your spokesperson? [Interjections.]

Dr F J VAN HEERDEN: Chairperson, no, I indeed indicated right at the beginning the reservations of the FF Plus. After that a division was called for and I was not aware that a division would be called for at that stage, and I am quite entitled, after I had noted my reservations in this regard, to change my mind and vote either for or against, thank you, and I voted against.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon member, can you take your seat. I don’t need a lecture on that. Hon members, please don’t make my work difficult. When the hon member said he had reservations we were not voting yet, and quite clearly, I ordered that those who vote against must sit this side, and from my viewpoint and in my judgment it was clear that he was part of the people who were objecting to the Vote.

AYES – 24: Botha, D J; Gamede, D D; Hendricks, N; Mabe, S E; Manyosi, A T; Madlala-Magubane, N M; Matlanyane, H; Masilo, J; Mazibuko, N F; Mkhaliphi, B J; Moatshe, P; Mokoena, M L; Ntuli, Z C; Nyanda, F; Oliphant, M N; Ralane, T; Shiceka, S; Sibiya, J; Sogoni, E M; Themba, M P; Tolo, B J; Van Rooyen, C J; Vilakazi, J N; Windvoël, V V Z.

NOES - 9: Chen, S S; Fielding, L H; Krumbock, G R; Le Roux, J W; Terblanche, J F; Thetjeng, O M; Van Heerden, F J; Watson, A; Worth, D A.

Can we proceed to … Yes, hon Watson?

Mr A WATSON: May I just register my objection to the fact that you appointed me as a teller, as you call it, and then you called my counting into question without consulting me. [Interjections.] I don’t think that’s parliamentary.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Excuse me, can I hear your point? Mr A WATSON: My point is, the authority in this House is in that Chair and you in that Chair appointed me as a teller. I gave you a count of nine on the division that occurred. You then proceeded, because there was heckling and whatever, to then count …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona) Hon member, can you sit …

Mr A WATSON: Hang on, can I finish saying what I want to say?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Can you sit down.

Mr A WATSON: No, you asked me to explain!

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona) Can you take your seat, please.

Mr A WATSON: But you asked me to explain my point, and I haven’t finished.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon member, can you take your seat. [Interjections.] Hon Watson, can you take your seat? [Interjections.]

Hon Watson, you are quite correct that there was heckling. That is why I wanted to hear from a member, who had earlier said he had reservations, how he had voted, and my ruling is not contrary to what is …

Mr A WATSON: That’s not the point.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): What is the point?

Mr A WATSON: The point is that you appointed me as a teller, and if my counting was then called into question, you should have called me, not a member from the floor. I’m the counter.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): No, you’re out of order, hon member. Can you take your seat. [Interjections.] Can you take your seat. [Interjections.] Can you take your seat.

Mr Krumbock, I think the decorum of this House and my integrity is very important. I’ve never pointed a finger at you, right? I hope it’s an omission on your part. We must proceed accordingly, right? You have called for the division, the division is done, then the temperatures rise. What do you expect me to do? [Interjections.] Fine.

Vote accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 30 - Minerals and Energy - put. Vote agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

Vote No 31 – Science and Technology - put.

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

Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry - put.

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

Vote No 33 - Transport - put.

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

Vote No 34 - Water Affairs and Forestry - put.

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

Schedule put and agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.

                     REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL


                 REVENUE LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL


           (Consideration of Bills and of Reports thereon)

Mr E M SOGONI: House Chair, my initials are E M. I do not know an E S Sogoni.

The attainment of democracy in 1994 presented the people of our country with an opportunity to build a better life for all. Our government has since embarked on a programme to accelerate growth, advance social development and reduce the worst inequalities by adopting a fiscal policy that has profoundly contributed to the sound overall microeconomic environment.

Over the past decade we have succeeded in reducing interest rates and lowering the debt inherited from the apartheid regime. In 1997, for every rand of revenue collected, 24 cents was spent on servicing state debt. By 2004 debt cost was reduced to 14 cents. By 2009 it will be down to eight cents. This implies that a platform is created for an expansionary fiscal stance that is sustainable, predictable and growth enhancing.

The ANC government has created certainty through an efficient tax regime that brought relief to the downtrodden and also simultaneously supported the first economy.

The Revenue Laws Amendment Bill gives effect to the main tax proposals announced by the Minister of Finance on Budget Day in February this year. The Revenue Laws Amendment Bill refers to items that must be dealt with by way of a money Bill, while the Revenue Laws Second Amendment Bill refers to the item relating to the administration of tax regime.

The highlights of the Bill are that research and development expenditure is detachable by a taxpayer. In fact, the report is in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports. In 2005 the Department of Trade and Industry enacted a new corporatives Act to facilitate the operation of corporatives.

Thirdly, South Africa has maintained a special fiscal incentive regime for oil and gas exploration and production for over 40 years. This special incentive is to encourage potential investors to conduct oil and gas exploration for deposits.

In 2001 government passed legislation, which required surplus to be apportioned to ex-pension fund members. These ex-pension fund members will now have a choice when receiving these post-retirement benefits. They can withdraw benefits immediately but be subjected to tax, or roll over those benefits into another retirement fund free of taxation until the incumbent has reached the age of 35.

Government has also amended provisions relating to the income tax status of public benefit organisations. The trading activities of PBOs will be subjected to taxation. It must be recorded that the trading activities of PBOs that compete with the private sector for market share only will be taxed at a rate of 29% and not 34%.

With reference to subsistence allowance or travel allowance for members, which is paid to members or employees to meet expenses when away from their normal place of residence, an allowance of $190 is allowed as a tax deduction. Members of this House should take note that this uniform rate for all foreign travel will change because different countries have different travel costs.

This Bill therefore allows foreign rates to be set on a per country or per region basis. What this means is that when members travel to the United States of America on work matters, they would be allowed to deduct $190 per day. This is a deduction from their gross income.

This rate of deduction would be reduced if you travel to any other country that is not mentioned here. The commissioner for SA Revenue Services will set the travel allowance rate.

Lastly, the bid to host 2009 Confederations Cup and particularly the 2010 Fifa World Cup required bidding countries to sign a series of guarantees. The Revenue Laws Amendment Bill includes the following: certain goods, for example, broadcast and other media equipment imported specifically for hosting the 2010 Fifa World Cup will be free of import taxes.

Secondly, certain consumables and semidurable goods such as t-shirts and souvenirs sold within the confines of designated sites such as stadiums during the event, and the profits of such sales, will not be subjected to income tax or VAT.

Fifa officials who are nonresidents, for income purposes would be exempted from income tax on income that is directly connected to the championship. Fifa officials will pay income tax in countries in which they are resident, which is a normal procedure.

This practice is consistent with our legislation on worldwide income passed in this Parliament around 2001. This implies that Safa officials such as Mr Irvin Khoza or Danny Jordaan, like any other citizen in this country, would be eligible for income liability.

Fifa’s subsidiaries and participating national soccer associations will also be exempt from South African taxes.

Therefore, the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill is a demonstration of our goal to achieve equity. The Select Committee on Finance recommends that this House passes both your section 75 Bill and your section 77 money Bill. I thank you.

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon members, thank you very much. You may note that we are dealing with the fifth and the sixth Order. The table here has advised me that I have the wrong speakers’ list in front of me. I have the wrong document.

In terms of the Order Paper we were supposed to deal with the Adjustments Appropriation Bill by the hon Goeieman; however, because hon Sogoni has already dealt with Orders five and six, I will beg hon members’ indulgence that we proceed with the voting on that and then we will call hon Goeieman. Will that be okay?

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 an opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. In the absence of declarations of vote, 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.] The majority of members have voted in favour and I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.

Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution. The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question in respect of the sixth Order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63 I shall first allow political parties an opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Any declaration of vote? 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.] The majority of members have voted in favour and I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S SETONA): I am told that we must deal with the Adjustments Appropriation Bill and in terms of the order that has been provided to me, hon C M Goeieman must make a statement on behalf of the committee.

                   ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Thank you, Chair. I’m putting this Bill to a vote and I’m asking this House to support it. Thank you, Chair. [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 section 63 I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. There is none. In the absence of declarations, 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’’. [Inaudible.] 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.

            FURTHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING COLLEGES BILL

            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Ms N F MAZIBUKO: I’m on another report, Chair.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): What is this Order? Is it further education and training?

Ms N F MAZIBUKO: Yes, there is no debate on that order. I’m on another report and not on the FET.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Hon members, can somebody come and verify the papers that I have here. They don’t speak to each other. The staff have the correct papers, but I don’t. I’m not sure how I’m expected to proceed. [Interjections.] No, it’s not sabotage. Is this the correct one?

Order disposed of without debate.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill 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.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration? We shall proceed to the voting in alphabetical order. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: The Eastern Cape supports.

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

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

Mr E M SOGONI: Gauteng ilethu. [Gauteng supports.]

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

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: KwaZulu-Natal rejects it.

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

Mr D J BOTHA: Supports.

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: Noord-Kaap ondersteun. [Northern Cape supports.]

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

Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West in favour.

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): Eight provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES - OVERSIGHT VISIT TO GAUTENG

Nk N F MAZIBUKO: Sihlalo, ngizokwethula umbiko Wekomidi Lezemfundo lalapha kule Ndlu yoMkhandlu Kazwelonke Wezifundazwe omaqondana ngenkathi sivakashele isifundazwe saseGauteng kusukela ngomhla zinga-27 Agasti kuya mhla wo-1 kuSeptemba. Inhloso yalokhu kuvakasha bekungukuthi siyozibonela thina mathupha ukuthi ngabe imithetho esiyenzayo lapha ePhalamende kanye neminye nje imithetho eyenziwa uMnyango isifundazwe siyayisebenzisa yini.

Ukuze sikwazi ukuthi sicwaninge kahle, siye sazipha isikhathi, sahlangana ngqo noNgqongqoshe wezemfundo wakhona esifundazweni, uMama u-Angie Motshekga, kanye nabasebenzi boMnyango. Kunjalo nje siye savakashela nezikole eziyisishiyagalolunye. Inhloso yalokhu kuvakasha bekungukuthi besingafune kubona okuhle kodwa, kepha besiqonde khona ukuthi sibheke zona izikole ezisemaphandleni ngoba ikakhulukazi yizona ezinganakiwe.

Kuwo umhlangano wethu, ngenkathi sihlangene noNgqonqoshe nabasebenzi behhovisi, siye sathola izinhlelo zoMnyango kanye nokuthi benza kanjani ukuze ezemfundo zihambe phambili kulesi sifundazwe. Sizokhumbula ukuthi yingenkathi lapho laba abashayela amabhasi athutha izingane zesikole kade betoyiza, bethi abayitholanga imali yabo. Kodwa uNgqongqoshe wesifundazwe ukwazile ukusicacisela ukuthi lokho kubangelwa yini.

Kuye kwacaca ukuthi abanye babashayeli bamabhasi baye bafake izimali ezingekho, bese bethi bahambisa izingane zethu kepha bona bezihlalele kwezabo izindawo. Maqondana nabanye, yebo, bekungamaphutha enziwe nguwo uMnyango ngokuthi awubakhokhelanga abantu ngesikhathi, njengoba nazi ukuthi abashayeli bamabhasi abasafufusa baye bahlupheke uma bengenayo imali. Yilokho-ke okuye kwabangela ukuthi izingane eziningi zingahanjiswa esikoleni. Kulo lelo viki bekuyinkathi lapho kade kunesibhicongo, abasebenzi baka- Sadtu betoyiza ngoba befuna omunye wabasebenzi osebenzela uMnyango wesifundazwe asuswe emsebenzini ngenxa yemisebenzi eyenzeka ngesandla semfene futhi ngobumnyama. Wacacisa naye uNgqongqoshe wesifundazwe ukuthi, cha, empeleni yibona abathole ukuthi baningi abasebenzi abangaqashwanga uMnyango kepha kukhona abantu abazenzela imali, bedla imali yoMnyango Wezemfundo.

Siye sakwazi-ke ukuhlangabezana nezinye izinselelo eziye zabekwa uMnyango ngenkathi sesivakashele izikole. Ngizozibeka lezi zinselelo ngolimi lwesiNgisi ukuze abaningi abangaluzwa lolu limi engilukhulumayo bakwazi ukuzizwela ngokwabo. Okokuqala, siye sabheka yona inqubomgomo yokuthi abafundi abantulayo mabangakhokhiswa imali yesikole. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[Ms N F MAZIBUKO: Chairperson, I am here to table the report by the Select Committee on Education that deals with the oversight visit by the committee to the Gauteng province from the 27th of August to the 1st of September. The purpose of the visit was to see for ourselves if the legislation that we pass here and the other legislation by the Department of Education in general is enforced by the province.

In order for us to analyse the whole situation properly, we gave ourselves enough opportunity, and met directly with the education MEC in Gauteng, the hon Angie Motshekga and the department officials. We also visited at least eight schools. The purpose of this visit was not just to see the glittering schools, but also to visit the schools in rural areas because they are the least taken care of.

In our meeting with the MEC and the officials from her department we learnt about the programmes that the department has and the way they are working to make education a priority in that province. We will all remember the dispute between the bus operators and the provincial department of education in which the bus operators were saying they had not received what was due to them. The MEC clearly explained the reasons for all this.

It became clear then that some bus operators defrauded the system, claiming that they were transporting the schoolchildren whereas they were not. But as far as other bus operators are concerned, it became clear that the department was to blame. Sometimes the bus operators were not paid on time, and you all know that the emerging bus operators struggle a lot if they do not have any money coming in. These are the reasons which led to many learners not being transported to schools.

This all happened in a week when Sadtu members were on the rampage, barricading the entrances to offices because they wanted one official working for the Department of Education to be suspended on allegations of fraud and corruption. The MEC also explained that it was the department that managed to find out that there were ghost employees and thus certain people were being paid by the Department of Education for nothing.

We also came face to face with certain challenges which were mentioned by the department when we visited schools. For the record, I will mention these challenges in English so that those who do not understand the language that I am talking now may understand them as well. Firstly, we looked at the policy of exempting poor learners from paying school fees.]

The policy of exempting poor learners from paying school fees in some of the schools was not properly implemented at all. In the majority of the schools, some of them knew about the policy but could not properly understand it. It is our considered view that the departmental officials are not doing enough to monitor and help the schools to implement this policy.

Inselelo yesibili imaqondana nezinhlangano zokuphatha ezikoleni ezibizwa ngama-SGB ezikoleni zasemaphandleni. Iningi labazali, ngenxa yokuthi abahlali eduze kwesikole, kuba nzima uma ngabe kubizwe umhlangano ukuthi beze kulowo mhlangano. Iningi labo kugcina sekufanele kusetshenziswe amabhasi ukuze balandwe emakhaya balethwe emihlanganweni.

Inselelo yesithathu imaqondana nokulethwa kwamanzi kanye nezezindlu zangasese. Ngempela inselelo inkulu ngoba nizokhumbula ukuthi izikole zasemaphandleni azinazo izindlu zangasese lezi ezishaywa ngamanzi, kepha zisebenzisa lokhu esikubiza ngokuthi amabhakede noma kube izindlu zangasese zomgodi. Abanawo amanzi nompompi, kufuneka basebenzise amapitsi ukuze bakwazi ukuthola amanzi. Kuthe-ke ngenkathi sixoxa noNgqongqoshe wesifundazwe washo ukuthi, cha, bayazama ukuthi izingane eziningi zithole amanzi. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[The second challenge was concerned the school governing bodies in schools in rural areas. Most parents in these schools do not attend school meetings when they are called because they reside far away from schools. Sometimes buses are even used to ferry them if there are school meetings.

The third challenge was concerned water and sanitation at schools. There is indeed a huge challenge as far as these issues are concerned, because you will remember that rural schools do not have flushing toilets, but use what we call pit toilets and the bucket system. They do not have tap water and they have to rely on boreholes to get water. When we were talking to the MEC regarding this, she said they are trying very hard to make sure that all learners get clean water.]

Regarding learner scholar transport, not all deserving children are transported to school. In one school, about 17 learners had to stop attending school owing to this problem.

When it comes to security, the department supplies almost all schools with computers in Gauteng, through the programme called Gauteng Online. The challenge is that there are a lot of burglaries and the schools lose their valuable assets.

Njengoba sazi ukuthi ubugebengu budlangile, otsotsi noma izigebengu ziphuca izingane zethu wona lawa makhompiyutha. [As we all know, crime is on rampant and criminals steal the very computers that we install for our learners.]

We also noticed that quite a lot of schools have multigrade classes. It is our view that there cannot be proper learning in a situation in which one teacher teaches two or three classes in one room. This is because the government policy for teacher provision applies in a similar manner everywhere, thus disadvantaging small farm schools. Our view is that the MEC, together with the national department, must review this policy so that farm schools can get enough teachers.

It is our opinion that the schools visited may not be a representative sample of the schools in the province, but they provide us with some insight into the state of education in the province, especially the rural schools.

Despite these challenges mentioned above, we are of the view that the department of education in Gauteng is hard at work to provide our learners with an education. The MEC and the officials of the department have assured the committee that they will stop at nothing to address these identified challenges.

Thina njengekomidi sithanda ukubonga yena uNgqongqoshe wesifundazwe kanye nabasebenzi. Yize noma kade bematasatasa kodwa baziphile isikhathi sokuthi beze bazokuba nathi ukuze siqinisekise ukuthi umsebenzi wethu siwenza kahle. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)

[We as a committee would like to thank the MEC and the officials of her department. Despite their busy schedule, they managed to put some time aside for us so that we could do our job well. I thank you [Applause.]]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): We shall now proceed to the vote. 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.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration? We shall proceed to the voting in alphabetical order. Eastern Cape? Mr A T MANYOSI: The 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 E M SOGONI: Gauteng ilethu. [Gauteng supports.]

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

Mrs J N VILAKAZI: KwaZulu-Natal in favour.

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

Mr D J BOTHA: Supports.

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: 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.]

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

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS - WITHOLDING OF REMUNERATION OF MAGISTRATE M MATEREKE

Ms F NYANDA: Chairperson, this is a statement on the occasion of consideration of the report of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs on withholding the remuneration of Magistrate Matereke. Building a society in which all masses of the people, including magistrates, enjoy a better life must never make us lose sight of the significance of magistrates and judges in our constitutional democracy. While we must build this society as representatives of all people of South Africa, both black and white, we have a political responsibility to protect the integrity of the judiciary process in our country, whose responsibility must be discharged fully so as to promote public confidence in the courts of our country.

Central to protecting the judiciary processes must be to ensure that those who sit on the court benches are men and women of high moral standing in society. Those who preside over cases would not be questioned and doubted because of their unbecoming conduct in society. That is why we consider issues of criminal behaviour, and other serious acts of misconduct on the part of the magistrates in a very serious light. We must communicate an unmistakable message to the masses of our people and the international community that this House condemns any conduct which compromises the integrity of the judiciary process.

Given the seriousness of misconduct on the part of the magistrate in this case, I appeal to this august House to accept a recommendation of the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Affairs to confirm the withholding of the remuneration of Mr Matereke. However, we must understand that more suspension of magistrates and withholding their salaries cannot be sufficient on their own. We must ensure that magistrates are educated about judiciary behaviour, which promotes integrity of judiciary processes in our country. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Order! I shall now put the question in respect of the ninth order. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present. In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make declarations of vote if they so wish. There are no declarations of vote. We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: Eastern Cape supports.

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

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: We support.

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

Mr E M SOGONI: We support.

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

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal in favour.

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

Mr D J BOTHA: We support.

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

Ms F NYANDA: Siyavuma. [We support.]

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

Mr M C SULLINAM: We support.

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

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

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

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

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

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE - MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET POLICY STATEMENT

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Thank you very much, hon Chairperson and hon colleagues. This is the tenth Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement that this democratic government has ever laid before the nation. We can equally state that South African budgets, regardless of whether they are provincial or local, are no longer made behind closed doors. A recent coalition of international NGOs has recognised our strides in this regard and has ranked this country as number four in the entire world in as far as budget transparency is concerned. South Africans can also include this recognition of budgetary transparency as one of our accomplishments in the 12 years of our democracy.

The document continues to support an energetic interaction between Parliament and the executive in reviewing our economic and social priorities. It also provides citizens and taxpayers with information about services they pay for and the data required to analyse and monitor government and policy and spending choices. This allows the general citizenry to engage with any other budgetary matter.

The Joint Budget Committee’s mandate, with reference to the MTBPS, requires it to consider the distribution of available financial resources for expenditure against government policy priorities. It also mandates the Joint Budget Committee to review the impact of expenditure allocations in the MTBPS on the effectiveness and efficiency with which departments can respond to those government-stated policies and priorities. It also needs to inform us whether departments are making tough decisions, tailoring their planned expenditures to priorities, choosing effective strategies and seeking efficiency in the implementation of their programmes.

During our interaction, we were able to interact with eight national departments who made either written or oral submissions to the Joint Budget Committee. The 2006 MTBPS, inter alia, does the following: Firstly, it takes us up to another rung of the ladder of social and economic progress and, secondly, it reinforces growth and investment over the period ahead.

Investment in roads and ports infrastructure, more efficient communication and the acceleration of the pace of investment in housing will enjoy priority during this period. General government investment is driven by the need for improved public transport, and better education and health services. Of course, our commitments to the 2010 Fifa World Cup also require our considerable investment in stadiums and supporting infrastructure that will continue to benefit future generations well beyond this anticipated World Cup.

Against this backdrop, real economic growth is expected to rise to 4,4% in 2006 from 1,8% in 2003 and it will average about 5% over the next three years.

The provincial equitable share grows by 7% in real terms over the MTEF period and additional conditional grants are made. The additional allocations to provinces are aimed at improving the quality of and access to education, health and social development through a range of targeted policy interventions. Municipalities are the first line of contact and it is significant that the 2006 mid-term budget policy statement makes reference to this very important sphere, that is local government. Local government receives an additional allocation of R1,1 billion in the current financial year which commenced on 1 April 2006. An additional R18,9 billion is proposed for local government over this period. The local government equitable share grows by 11% in real terms over the same period.

This increased allocation to local government will supplement spending on the following issues: firstly, the rollout of free basic services to the disadvantaged communities. Secondly, it will replace the revenue that was lost through the abolition of the Regional Services Council levies until a suitable replacement is found. Thirdly, it will assist in accelerating infrastructure investment in the underserviced areas of our communities; and lastly, it will also see to the requirements of the cities that are earmarked to host the 2010 Fifa World Cup.

The Joint Budget Committee, after its deliberations, made the following recommendations, among others: Firstly, it wishes to reinforce and expedite the resolutions it made in 2005 which concern the provision of adequate resources and technical capacity to this committee. Secondly, it calls upon this House and Parliament as a whole to review the time that has been allocated in dealing with the MTBPS so that sufficient time is available to engage with this process as well as stakeholders. Thirdly, the human resource capacity within national departments should improve, noting the high vacancy rate, which necessitates the need to shift funds. Invariably, these funds are retained in their departments and reflected as savings, thus misleading our oversight activities. Departments should take appropriate measures to recruit and retain the necessary skilled personnel. The present high turnover rate impacts negatively on service delivery. Fourthly, national departments should be more vigilant when monitoring conditional grants that are allocated to provincial and local government. Lastly, systems should be put in place in order to ensure that the objectives of the equitable share are not lost at provincial level.

Departments should in future, before appearing before us with regard to the MTBPS, not only consider the budget of the current financial year but also give attention to the budgets of two outer years.

We also have to implore the Department of Public Works to compile an extensive report as to how it is updating its National Assets Register in order to ensure that government’s assets are in safe hands.

The Joint Budget Committee recommends that this House accept this report as it appears in the ATC of Wednesday, 8 November 2006. I thank you very much. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T 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.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces an opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration? We shall proceed to the voting in alphabetical order. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: The Eastern Cape supports.

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

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

Mr E M SOGONI: Gauteng supports.

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

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal in favour.

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

Mr D J BOTHA: Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.]

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

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga ondersteun. [Mpumalanga supports.]

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

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Noord-Kaap ondersteun. [Northern Cape supports.]

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

Rev P MOATSHE: North West ke ya 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 have 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 CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW COMMITTEE - ANNUAL
                 CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW REPORT, 2006

Mr S SHICEKA: House Chairperson, I want to lodge a grievance. My grievance is that I have been harassed. The harassment has come from members who want the House to adjourn quickly. [Laughter.] I understand that they are fatigued, but at the same time the message that we are putting across here must be understood so that no one can say they never heard what was spoken about in the House, so that when we go to our constituencies, we are able to put across what is happening in Parliament very clearly without any ambiguity.

Regarding my task today, I had a 23-page typed document, but I managed to reduce this document to one and a half pages to articulate the views that are expressed here.

My task here is to present, on behalf of the committee called the Constitutional Review Committee, the report of 2006. This committee derives its mandate from section 45(1) of the Constitution, which provides that this committee must be able to review the Constitution at least once a year.

In giving effect to this constitutional provision, the committee, on 1 May 2006, called for submissions from the public in relation to the views that they want to propose for the amendment of the Constitution. We focused mainly on the equality clause, given the fact that we have said that this year is the year of equality in terms of rights. At the same time, we focused on the Chapter 9 institutions to ensure that these institutions that support constitutional democracy are being looked at.

In that process, we received 11 submissions. These submissions were from the public. Amongst these submissions, we received a submission from the National Assembly Rules Committee and from the Free State provincial legislature. I will focus on these two to give you the flavour of what has been raised on these issues.

The National Assembly Rules Committee requested that the committee consider the appropriateness of the recognition of the leader of the largest opposition party in the Assembly as the Leader of the Opposition, as contained in section 57, subsection 2(d) of the Constitution.

The committee deliberated on the matter, and took a decision. With regard to its decision, it took its decision and referred it to the Rules Committee to further deliberate on the matter. If you want to know what the decision was, you can ask me in the passage.

The other issue was raised by the Free State legislature, which submitted that section 105, subsection 2 of the Constitution be amended. The amendment requested is with respect to the size of legislatures being increased so that they are able to do efficient oversight, and ensure that the public participates. I think you know that, in these small provinces, everybody is a leader. There are no people who are doing the work. Therefore, they must ensure that they have foot soldiers who are able to do the work.

Our recommendation that we have made is that we are convening a workshop in the first term of next year, 2007, where we are going to call on all provinces to make submissions with regard to the issue at hand so that this matter can be discussed in a holistic way, and can be discussed in a way that is satisfying to all parties.

The rest of the report of 23 pages is in the ATCs. What it means is that somebody must engage with that. I want to say that as the House of provinces we are discussing the issue of provinces, whether provinces should remain as they are, or whether they should be clustered or reduced in terms of numbers and so on. I think by December 2007, we will be clear on the answer. Thank you. [Applause.]

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 accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Since there are no declarations, we shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in alphabetical order per province. 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 E M SOGONI: Supports.

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

Mr Z C NTULI: Iyalethu. [Supports.]

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

Mr D J BOTHA: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

Ms F NYANDA: Supports.

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

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Siyavuma. [We support.]

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

Rev P MOATSHE: Ke a rona. [We support.]

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

Mr F ADAMS: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

       CONSIDERATION OF FIRST REPORT OF JOINT RULES COMMITTEE

Order disposed of without debate.

Question put: That the Report be adopted.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): As there is no speakers’ list, I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted.

As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber. 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. 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 E M SOGONI: Ke a rona. [We support.]

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

Mr Z C NTULI: In favour.

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

Mr D J BOTHA: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

Ms F NYANDA: Supports.

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

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Ke a rona. [We support.]

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

Rev P MOATSHE: Ke a rona. [We support.]

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

Mr F ADAMS: Ondersteun. [Supports.]

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

The Council adjourned at 16:38. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Bills passed by Houses – to be submitted to President for assent

(1)     Bills passed by National Assembly on 16 November 2006:


      a) Firearms Control Amendment Bill [B 12D – 2006] (National
         Assembly – sec 75)


      b) South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill [B
         7D – 2006] (National Assembly – sec 75).


(2)     Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 15 November
    2006:


      a) Postal Services Amendment Bill [B 22B – 2006] (National
         Assembly – sec 75)


      b) Measurement Units and Measurement Standards Bill [B 21B – 2006]
         (National Assembly – sec 75)

      c) Accreditation for Conformity Assessment, Calibration and Good
         Practice Bill [B 29B – 2006] (National Assembly – sec 75).


(3)     Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 16 November
    2006:


      a) Carriage by Air Amendment Bill [B 18 – 2006] (National
         Assembly – sec 75)


      b) Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B 32 – 2006] (National
         Assembly – sec 77)

      c) Revenue Laws Amendment Bill [B 33 – 2006] (National Assembly –
         sec 77)


      d) Revenue Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 34 – 2006] (National
         Assembly – sec 75)


      e) Further Education and Training Colleges Bill [B 23D – 2006]
         (National Council of Provinces – sec 76).

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. Report of the Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women on Special Report from the South African Women Entrepreneurs- A burgeoning force in our economy for 2005, dated 14 November 2006:

The Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and
Status of Women, having considered the Special Report from the South
African Women Entrepreneurs- A burgeoning force in our economy for
2005, referred to it, reports that it has concluded its deliberations
thereon.

1. Report of the Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women on Report and Financial Statements of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) for 2004-2005, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2004-2005 [RP 120- 2005], dated 14 November 2006:

The Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and
Status of Women, having considered the Report and Financial Statements
of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) for 2004-2005, including
the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2004-
2005 [RP 120-2005], referred to it, reports that it has concluded its
deliberations thereon.

National Council of Provinces

1. Report of the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs on the Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2005/2006 of the Department of Agriculture, dated 31 October 2006:

   The Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs, having been briefed by the Department of Agriculture on its Annual Report and Financial Statements of Vote 26 for 2005-2006, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote 26 for 2005- 2006, referred to it, reports that it has concluded its deliberations thereon.