National Assembly - 14 June 2007
THURSDAY, 14 JUNE 2007 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:57.
The Deputy Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.
WORLD DAY TO COMBAT DESERTIFICATION AND DROUGHT -17 JUNE 2007
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes that —
a) Sunday 17 June 2007 marks the World Day to Combat
Desertification and Drought; and
b) the day is meant to deepen awareness amongst South Africans and
the world community about the impact of drought and
desertification;
2) recalls that—
a) desertification occurs in arid, semi-arid and sub-humid areas
where the soil is especially fragile, vegetation is sparse and
the climate is particularly harsh and that are inhabited by one
fifth of the world's population; and
b) one third of the earth's land surface (four billion hectares)
is threatened by desertification, over 250 million people are
directly affected by desertification, 24 billion tons of
fertile soil disappear annually, and that from 1991 to 2000
alone droughts have been responsible for over 280 000 deaths
and accounted for 11% of all water-related disasters;
3) remembers that desertification results mainly from variations in
climate and from human activities but that many other causes can
interact to create conditions likely to lead to desertification,
including the movement of refugees during periods of conflict,
inappropriate land use or environmental management and specific
socio-economic and political factors;
4) further remembers that international trade patterns are based on the
short-term exploitation of local resources for export, which acts
against the long-term interests of the local people, and that
poverty leads to desertification, which in turn leads to poverty;
5) commends the work done by the United Nations and environmental
organisations in their efforts to combat desertification and to
raise awareness amongst people; and
6) calls on our government to intensify environmental education
programmes to rekindle our people's love for the land and to
increase environmental consciousness amongst our youth.
Agreed to.
15 JUNE 2007 - WORLD ELDER ABUSE AWARENESS DAY
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes that tomorrow, Friday 15 June 2007, is the second anniversary
of the World Elder Abuse Awareness Day;
2) further notes that the day is dedicated to raising awareness about
the abuse of the elderly, which encompasses neglect and maltreatment
throughout the world;
3) recalls that abuse, neglect and financial exploitation of the
elderly are much more common than societies admit, and that there is
a link between this abuse and disempowerment and discrimination;
4) believes that—
a) all of us have to work together to raise awareness and ensure
that perpetrators of this crime are brought to book;
b) we must love, protect and care for our elderly; and
c) we must recognise and appreciate that they play a critical role
in our communities, as many orphans and vulnerable children in
our country are cared for by grandparents who continue to be
the backbone of many families, giving children a sound
beginning in life, and many elders also continue to contribute
to the economic development of our country and remain
economically active;
5) further believes that there is a need to encourage closer and
positive contact between generations and foster positive attitudes
among the youth, and that the social isolation and neglect of older
adults need to be broken through, among other things,
intergenerational relationships;
6) urges our youth to remember that they have a responsibility to look
after the elderly in general and their grandparents in particular;
and
7) calls upon the youth of our country, during this Youth Month, to
ensure that the abuse of the elderly in our society comes to a stop.
Agreed to.
APPOINTMENT OF R MALI AS ACTING PRESIDENT OF THE ICC
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Deputy Speaker, we move without notice:
That the House—
1) congratulates Mr Ray Mali on being appointed as acting president of
the International Cricket Council (ICC);
2) recognises that he was the first black African president of Cricket
South Africa when he was appointed in 2003;
3) further recognises the fundamental role he has played in making
South African cricket a truly national sport that is played and
supported by all South Africans;
4) notes that he has taken over the leadership of the ICC at an
exciting time for South African cricket that includes the upcoming
ICC Twenty20 World Cup tournament to be held in the country; and
5) wishes him well in his new position until the appointment of the new
ICC president in 2008.
Agreed to.
DEBATE ON YOUTH DAY TO STAND OVER
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, as agreed by the programme committee this morning, I move that Order 7, which is the debate on Youth Day, stand over.
Agreed to.
TRADITIONAL HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT AND THE CHOICE ON TERMINATION OF
PREGNANCY AMENDMENT ACT
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move the motion as it stands on the Order Paper, as follows:
That the House, having regard to the resolution adopted by the National Council of Provinces on 8 June 2007 - 1) notes that –
a) on 18 August 2006 the Constitutional Court declared the
Traditional Health Practitioners Act (Act No 35 of 2004) and
the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Act (Act No
38 of 2004) invalid, and that the order of invalidity is
suspended for a period of 18 months to enable Parliament to re-
enact these statutes in a manner that is consistent with the
Constitution;
b) the 18-month suspension period expires on 16 February 2008;
and
c) the Rules do not provide specifically for Parliament to deal
with legislation that has been declared invalid; and
(2) resolves that -
a) the above-mentioned statutes be re-enacted, in compliance with
the court order;
b) the legislation be deemed introduced in the National Council
of Provinces, as the first House; and
c) the Acts, as they now exist, be deemed as the text before
Parliament, as extensive work has been done during
Parliament’s previous consideration of the legislation; and
3) further notes that the Select Committee on Social Services has been
put in charge of the Bills before the Council.
Agreed to.
SECOND READING DEBATE ON TAXATION LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Draft Resolution)
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, I move the motion as it stands on the Order Paper, as follows:
That Rule 253(1), which provides inter alia that the debate on the Second Reading of a Bill may not commence before at least three working days have elapsed since the committee’s report was tabled, be suspended for the purposes of conducting the Second Reading debate on the Taxation Laws Second Amendment Bill [B 19—2007] (National Assembly—sec 75) today.
Agreed to.
OPENING OF MAMELODI POLICE STATION
(Member’s Statement)
Nom D C MABENA (ANC): Isitetjhi samapholisa sePumalanga ye-Mamelodi savulwa ngokomthetho nguNgqongqotjhe wezokuPhepha nokuVikeleka, umHlonitjhwa uCharles Nqakula, mhla zili- 12 kuSihlabantangana -April 2007.
Ukwakhiwa kwesitetjhi samapholisesi kwenze ukuzibandakanya okuqakathekileko ukuqinisekisa ukufikeleleka kwemisebenzi yokuthula nokunzinza. Lokhu kuqakathekile ekuthuthukisweni kwemiphakathi yethu.
Umphakathi waveza ukwaneliseka kwawo bewamukela nephrojekthi leyo ngelanga lokuvula, kibo, lokhu kutjho ukupheliswa kokusebenza kwesikhatjhana kwamapholisa nemisebenzi yangasikhathi yabomakhamba ngendlwana besipholisa nemisebenzi yesipholisa elawulwa ngaphandle kwe-Mamelodi.
Kufanele kwazeke kobana nangaphambi kokwakhiwa nokuvulwa ngokomthetho kwesitetjhi samapholisesi, umsebenzi wesipholisa endaweni le bewuraga kuhle, begodu ukwakhiwa kwesitetjhesi kuzokungezelela umsebenzi omuhle owenziweko wokulwa nobelelesi.
Sithi usebenze kuhle umnyango wezokuPhepha nokuVikeleka begodu sithokozisa abantu bePumalanga ye-Mamelodi ngetuthuko le, begodu siyababawa kobana basekele ngokuzibandakanya okukhulu eenhlanganweni zesipholisa emphakathini wangekhabo. Ngiyathokoza. (Translation of isiNdebele member’s statement follows.)
[Mr D C MABENA (ANC): The police station in Mamelodi East was officially opened by the Minister of Safety and Security hon Charles Nqakula on 12 April 2007.
The establishment of this police station made this important participation possible, to ensure that services for peace and stability are accessible. This is important in the development of our communities.
The community expressed its satisfaction and accepted the project on the day of opening; this meant the end of temporary policing and occasional services provided by police mobile units that are controlled outside of Mamelodi.
It must be known that even before the establishment and official opening of this police station, the work of the police in this area continued very well and the establishment of this police station will add to the good work done in the fight against crime.
We applaud the Department of Safety and Security and congratulate the people of Mamelodi East on this development and we request them to support it by participating, specially in Community Policing Forums in their community. Thank you.] RACE-BASED APPOINTMENTS AT HOSPITALS
(Member’s Statement)
Mr G R MORGAN (DA): Madam Deputy Speaker, during his response to the Budget debate yesterday, the President made two key points: The first was that the DA was incorrect to claim that race-based appointments were being employed in the Western Cape, and the second, that race-based appointments would be “eminently unacceptable”.
As he conspicuously failed to disprove that race-based appointments are a reality in the province, he now needs to strongly convey to the provincial authorities that these practices are in fact unacceptable.
The DA initially raised concerns about three posts, two at Tygerberg and one at Valkenberg. In his response the President dealt specifically with only one of these claims, relating to a principal specialist’s post at Tygerberg. By the President’s own admission, the post at this hospital has still not been filled, despite the availability of a suitably qualified candidate.
If we accept the reality of race-based appointments at public hospitals in the Western Cape, and we accept that the President was speaking with conviction yesterday when he claimed that such appointments would be “an eminently unacceptable outcome of our policies to build a nonracial society”, then it is clearly incumbent on the President to stop the practices employed by the Western Cape government. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
CABLE THEFT
(Member’s Statement)
Mr H J BEKKER (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, I’m referring to large-scale cable theft to obtain the valuable copper and other metal cores in this dubious industry, and wish to congratulate the authorities for arresting some culprits involved, particularly in the sabotage at the Manenberg sub- power station.
This criminal activity has increased by leaps and bounds and represents a clear obstacle to sustained economic growth. Major disruption is caused by an overhead train cable being stolen which leaves workers stranded and disrupts production; or theft of an electrical cable leaving an entire industrial area without power and forcing businesses to shut down.
There are clear indications that cable theft is organised and that scrap dealers might be involved. The IFP therefore wants to propose that only approved recycling businesses such as Eskom, Telkom and large municipalities should be allowed to deal in reclaimed copper and other metals derived from cables. In this way, perverse economic reasons for the thefts could be controlled.
Furthermore, copper could be classified as a precious metal thereby restricting general merchandising on the open market with this metal.
Cable theft is clearly a form of economic sabotage and the IFP also wants to propose that the legal definition of sabotage be expanded to include cable theft, which is indeed the destruction and sabotage of infrastructure. Severe sentences and penalties should be imposed on those found guilty of this economic crime in order to stamp it out, once and for all. I thank you, Madam Speaker.
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Member’s Statement)
Ms M P MENTOR (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, this statement serves to condemn violence, intimidation and disinformation during the course of the current public sector strike.
The current public sector strike has turned out to be violent, intimidating and characterised by terror and disinformation. We have noted how patients die due to being denied access to health. Learners are frightened, throttled by teachers, etc. False bomb threats are made to disrupt schooling as well as transportation of those who are not on strike.
We have seen teachers toting guns, threatening the lives of colleagues, as well as learners and parents. Nurses are trashing and vandalising hospital corridors and property, including operating theatres and we call for all this to come to a stop.
We call on the striking workers to desist from intimidation and violence and to stop unleashing terror on the poor people of our country who depend solely on the state for access health care, education and other services.
We remind workers that whilst they are within their right to strike, it is also a right not to strike, as well as the constitutional right to access services like health and education and the right to be free from fear, terror, intimidation and violence.
We call on the leadership of organised labour to call the striking workers to order. We request them to condemn violence, intimidation and defamation in strong and continuous terms every day until this unacceptable behaviour comes to an end. I thank you. [Time expired.]
A UNITED STATES OF AFRICA
(Member’s Statement) Mrs C DUDLEY (ACDP): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Due to the ACDP having one minute to debate on the unification of Africa, we will use this opportunity to place our comments in the debate in context.
On 31st May this year, the ACDP gave notice that they would move that the House call for a debate on the Pan-African Parliament’s discussions on a “United States of Africa”. This debate, in our opinion, is long overdue in light of the apparent pressure being exerted in this direction.
The fact that this debate, up till now, has taken place exclusively at the level of heads of state and excludes the people of Africa is of great concern to the ACDP. It is the people of Africa, indeed South Africans, who should be applying their minds rationally to this concept, as it is the people who stand to gain or lose the most.
In July 2006 during the AU Summit in Gambia a report on an AU government towards a “United States of Africa” was presented. Later a decision was taken that this would be discussed at the 2007 Summit in Ghana. The term, “United Nations of Africa”, was first used in 1924 and was expanded on in a secret agreement, signed in Accra, on 8 August 1960 by the Prime Minister of Congo, Patrice Lumumba, and the President of Ghana, Dr Nkrumah.
Their vision was for a union of African states with a republican constitution within a federal framework, a single head of state and a parliament responsible for foreign affairs, defence and a common market with a common currency. The present integration of African states resembles the EU rather than the United States of America. That is not much different from the secret Accra agreement in its goal of eliminating tariff barriers. Thank you. [Time expired.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Your time has expired and you are introducing a very dangerous attitude to the times that people are allocated in that you are using the slot for the statement to anticipate what is going to be happening in a later debate. I think that is actually saying to us that even if you have a minute, you will use other means of Parliament to extend that minute.
Imagine if everybody did that or if the ruling party did that? We would all have to sit here the whole night because everybody was extending his/her time. So, I’m just saying that we allowed the hon member because we thought that it was a statement and we just discovered in the middle of it that she was actually extending the time that she would be given in the later debate.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker, just on a point of order. We knew immediately that the hon Dudley was in breach of the rules. There is a rule against anticipation. She was talking on a matter which is on the Order Paper for later today. We didn’t want to come across as intolerant to their views, but clearly she was out of order and we would ask that you rule accordingly in order that this kind of thing doesn’t happen again.
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs P DE LILLE (ID): Madam Deputy Speaker, the public servants’ strike cannot continue. It is crippling our country. We want our teachers back in our schools teaching our children. We want our nurses back in our hospitals saving lives. It is totally unacceptable that after eight months of negotiations we are standing in front of a wall. The government has negotiated in bad faith.
I just cannot understand how it is not possible to talk to people within your own movement and try and find a solution. By refusing to pay public servants a decent wage, you are destroying your own vision of a developmental state. Government and unions must now come to the fore and back positions to settle. The ID is suggesting that they must settle at 9%.
The government must use some of the extra millions that it has raised in revenue to finance this. The unions must also accept that the 9% is part of their substantive conditions of employment and not just across the board. Lastly, Madam Speaker, I call on Parliament to look at a structural problem. The structural problem is this; that in March we adopt the Budget where that increase is already worked in. So, by the time they start with negotiations, there is already an agreed amount. It is a structural problem that we, as Parliament, have to look at. Thank you.
COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM FOR AFRICA SUMMIT
(Member’s Statement)
Mr S J NJIKELANA (ANC): Deputy Speaker, the theme of the World Economic Forum for Africa Summit that commenced yesterday is: “Raising the Bar”. I think that, however, triggers the question: In whose interest is Africa raising the bar? Whilst Africa has been experiencing a positive growth, there is also another persistent, burning question which every able and concerned African within the continent and the diaspora should help answer. And that question is: Is Africa on course in reversing economic marginalisation?
Deputy Speaker, allow me just to remind this Parliament about many unfulfilled promises of the previous G8 summit – a very painful thorn in the African flesh. However, the time has come for us as Africans to provide leadership in defining programmes that will arise out of this summit. In keeping with the strong drive for reversal of economic marginalisation, I trust that our South African delegates will make significant contributions, specially on identified priorities, including genuine economic partnerships, enhancement of investment climate, intensive focus on the African market itself, boosting the competitiveness of Africa and accelerating social infrastructure.
Lastly, we all wish the summit a resounding success for a better Africa for all. I thank you. [Applause.]
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Member’s Statement)
Mr M T LIKOTSI (PAC): Deputy Speaker, the PAC in principle supports the public servants’ strike action. The workers have rights to a decent salary package to meet the ever-increasing, socioeconomic demands. The PAC is calling for both parties to reach a mutual solution on the salary matter as it is affecting the masses of our people on the ground.
This strike action has a direct impact on the learners who have now missed their half-yearly examinations. The strike has affected and still continues to affect health centres around the country, and may have resulted in the loss of lives of people who needed immediate medical attention. The PAC is calling for government not to take retaliatory measures against striking workers such as expulsions and other disciplinary methods.
Let the government publicly nullify the letters of expulsion and other related threats as a form of negotiating in good faith, on the one hand. The workers union, on the other hand, should bring their side to meet the government halfway.
The PAC is calling for an end to the public grandstanding and spat between the labour federations and government as it does not do our country any good. All parties should sober-mindedly go back to the negotiation chambers with one aim of reaching an amicable solution were no party will be regarded as a loser. Both parties must rise above the occasion and make it happen. I thank you.
WORKERS’ RIGHT TO STRIKE
(Member’s Statement)
Mr L M GREEN (FD): Deputy Speaker, the current strike exposes two sets of rights, both clamouring for ascendancy. In this regard, government and the unions are contesting the wage issues from different policy approaches. Both claim legitimate grounds for their actions. There are no courts to adjudicate whose rights should enjoy greater ascendancy, but a compromise is possibly the best deciding factor creating space for both parties in which to pursue their respective mandates in an open and democratic manner.
The FD is of the view that the right to strike should not be accompanied by violence and intimidations. Otherwise the process will be derailed by criminality and opportunism. Furthermore, the strike should also not be too protracted and a stay-away from essential services should be managed to cause as little harm as possible to the community.
Similarly, the state should be sparing with its intimidation and not antagonise an already tense standoff between it and the unions. Therefore, it was unacceptable to watch on television, a few nights ago, the brutal manner in which the police hit and teargased elderly women who peacefully exercised their rights to strike.
The images took me back to the 1980s when the machinery of state was used to attack defenceless women. We have entered a new era and this is no way for the organs of a democratic state to govern its people. The state must also act with caution with regard to intimidation and threatening workers. All workers in a strike do so in solidarity with one another and therefore penalising some instead of the whole is not the solution.
Finally, both government and the unions must be flexible and negotiations must be done in the interest of the country as a whole. As a sign of goodwill all workers must return to work while a suitable settlement is quickly negotiated. I thank you. [Time expired.]
IMPACT OF STRIKING EDUCATORS ON EDUCATION
(Member’s Statement)
Mr G G BOINAMO (DA): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Educators are an important human resource, rendering a service second to none on the entire globe. The DA is sympathetic to educators’ plight and calls upon government to act swiftly and positively in addressing the educators’ genuine demands in order to restore normality in the public service. The DA fully supports the right to demand better salaries, but we cannot accept this demand to be voiced by disrupting exams, tearing up exam papers and intimidating children and nonstriking educators.
If an agreement must be in place before educators go on strike it will give education authorities a greater ability to manage the completely unacceptable disruptions that are affecting several schools around the country. Under no circumstances can bullying and threatening during strike action be permitted; or the losers will be children who are in no way responsible for the current dispute.
The reality is that the school curriculum does not allow any room for time lost for any reason. Already there are far too many schools that do not complete the matric curriculum by the end of the year even without external disruptions. It is about time the government and the unions sat around the table and found a solution that is not only satisfactory but also humanitarian. Thank you.
HUMAN SETTLEMENT
(Member’s Statement)
Nksz B N DAMBUZA (ANC): Ndiyabulela Sekela Somlomo. Xa urhulumente okhokelwa nguKhongolose esithi uyazibophelela ekunikeleni ngezindlu kubantu abangathathi ntweni, aqhube avule amathuba kuluntu lonke lweli, ukuze lufumane izindlu ngokuzikhethela nangokuhambelana neepokotho zalo kananjalo neendawo oluthanda ukuhlala kuzo, sukube engadli imbadu ngasebuhlanti.
Ngomhla we-8 kuMeyi ka-2007 iKomiti yeziNdlu apha ePalamente ngokubambisene neSebe lezeziNdlu, iye yamema zonke iintlaka ezithabatha inxaxheba kulwakhiwo lwezindlu ukususela kundlunkulu ukuya kwiphondo, uRhulumente wezeKhaya kuqukwa nezinye izigqeba noluntu ngokubanzi. Baye bahlanganisa izandla kusakhiwa, kwaza kwanikezelwa ngezindlu ezimbini kumaxhoba eentlekele zemvula nezikhukula eDutyini, eMount Ayliff, kweleMpuma Koloni. Apha ke ndithetha ngoNkskz Ntombile Luthwitsha kunye noNkskz Ntshingiwe Mbulawa. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[Mrs B N DAMBUZA (ANC): Thank you Deputy Speaker. The ANC-led government is not playing marbles when it says that it is committing itself to providing the poor people with houses and continues to open opportunities to all the people of this country in order to enable them to get houses of their choice, and in accordance with what they can afford, as well as choose areas where they would like to stay.
On 8 May 2007, the parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Housing, in collaboration with the Department of Housing, invited all the groups participating in the building of houses at national and provincial level, the local government including other structures and the community at large. They joined hands in building houses and two were handed over to victims of disaster and floods at Dutyini, Mount Ayliff, in the Eastern Cape. Here I am talking about Mrs Ntombile Luthwitsha and Mrs Ntshingiwe Mbulawa.]
The objective of this campaign was to demonstrate that provision of human settlement to our communities is a reality, and through the people’s contract things can happen. The portfolio committee would like to express appreciation to Minister Lindiwe Sisulu and her department for their commitment and leading role in the provision of resources to make this campaign a success. I thank you. [Applause.] IMPACT OF HARSH WINTER CONDITIONS ON THE POOR
(Member’s Statement)
Mr W M SIBUYANA (IFP): Madam Deputy Speaker, the IFP notes with concern that every year many people in our country, especially the poor, are exposed to and suffer from the harsh conditions that the winter months bring. This causes much discomfort, suffering, displacement, and in some cases even death. Parts of the Western Cape have recently been exposed to these harsh realities as heavy rains have resulted in flooding and the displacement of thousands of people. The homes of thousands of residents have been flooded and those informal settlements have been adversely affected.
According to the province’s disaster risk management spokesperson, a total of 18 areas were severely affected by the rains with Gugulethu the worst hit with more than 2000 residents struggling to waterproof their homes with plastic sheets. An unfortunate aspect of this flooding is that some residents have become accustomed to them as they experience the same hardships every year.
This is totally unacceptable as the government together with the relevant authorities should plan in advance for these unfortunate situations, and put plans and programmes in place that will lessen or even prevent these people from suffering the same hardships every year. [Time expired.]
BANKS AND ATM COSTS
(Member’s Statement)
Mr B A MNGUNI (ANC): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to raise my concerns about the billions of rands that banks make from the ATM costs. The technical team busy with the enquiry into bank charges has found out that more than R30 billion is made by banks from ATM fees, of which R2 billion comes from consumers using another bank’s ATM infrastructure.
Cash withdrawal fees make up the majority of bank charges for lower income earners who transact primarily in cash. Penalty charges of as high as R12,50 per transaction are charged to Mzansi cardholders, if they exceed the monthly transaction limit. Of the fees charged under the guidelines of Saswitch costs, only a small percentage goes towards clearing the transaction. The bulk goes to the bank providing ATMs.
The ANC urges the competition commission to speedily look into that monopoly of ATMs by the Payment Associations of South Africa or Pasa, and the transparency of the call structure of banks, in order to lower bank fees and improve competition in this sector. I thank you. [Applause.]
MISSING CHILDREN
(Member’s Statement)
Mr M WATERS (DA): Deputy Speaker, the abduction of six-year-old Mikayla Rossouw on Sunday night, once again highlighted the constant danger that our children live in, and the desperate need for a national, targeted, intervention strategy such as the Amber Alert System in the United States.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to Mikayla and her family. According to official government figures, three children are murdered per day in South Africa, and there are practical and affordable steps we all could be taking to protect our children better. By all, I mean government, the private sector and the society at large.
The DA reiterates its proposal that a voluntary partnership between the police and cellphone companies be adopted, using photos and SMS messaging to transmit information about missing children, particularly in the area of the abduction. A similar partnership between the police and broadcasters should be set up, so that radio stations can immediately broadcast all available information as soon as they receive an alert from the police.
Petrol stations and fast-food outlets along major routes should display the photo of the missing child and the alleged abductor; and in large shopping centres and retail stores, procedures should be put in place to immediately alert customers and staff, to a child reported missing. I thank you.
TRUMAN PRINCE AS MUNICIPAL MANAGER
(Member’s Statement)
Mr J D ARENDSE (ANC): Deputy Speaker, despite the DA’s constant so-called battle against corruption, that party is actively busy reinstating Truman Prince as municipal manager of the Central Karoo District Municipality. Truman Prince was found guilty of the abuse of mayoral funds to pay bail for a friend; the payment of a performance bonus to himself without proper authorisation; false claims of accommodation expenses; and involvement with girl-child prostitution.
The DA has now aided and abetted Prince to succeed with a bogus appeal against all charges. The DA must walk the talk and not just grandstand on corruption. We call on the DA-led Central Karoo District Municipality to provide a detailed public statement on the process and reasons for the exoneration of Truman Prince on very serious charges. I thank you. [Applause.]
HUMAN SETTLEMENT
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the hon Dambuza for the comments and the contributions she has made. Indeed, I’m very grateful that the portfolio committee added two houses to the total that we now count as 2,4 million houses we have built since 1994.
I’d like to respond to the issue that was raised by the hon member, I think from the IFP. Hon member, on a daily basis we are very concerned about the plight of our people. That’s what keeps us up all night. This is what we do. This is our job. We are trying very hard to ensure that every single South African is in a house so that these disasters do not destabilize our societies.
However beyond that, what this government has done was to create within the Department of Provincial and Local Government a Disaster Management Fund so that when there is a disaster, we are able as government to respond very quickly. We hope that in time we will ensure that we do not have these disasters. But that is what we do and this is our concern on a daily basis. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
RACE-BASED APPOINTMENTS AT HOSPITALS
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY: Madam Deputy Chairperson, with your permission, I’d like to come back later to the public servants’ strike.
I’d like to deal with the matter that was raised by the DA, because it is very difficult for me to understand what is it that they want. You see, yesterday the President pointed out that more than 70% of these specialists in the Western Cape hospitals are white. Now do you want him to tell the Western Cape government to chase those whites away? Sir, what do you want, because you say he must not interfere? [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order, hon members!
The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY: No, no, just be clear on what you are asking for, because clarity of mind will help you. The second thing is that I thought the DA was the biggest supporter of federalism, but now they are saying that the President must go and impose on the Western Cape government. That can’t be correct. That really can’t be correct. [Interjections.]
No, that’s how policy works. I’m not talking about us, but about the question that was raised.
So, let me make this very clear again: It is only the DA that has the capacity to decide that somebody is suitable for the post and not the panel that is supposed to interview the candidates. Maybe you know that the candidate that has applied for the job is more suitable. We will find out after the panel has sat and made the decision.
Lastly, let me repeat again and again and again: The Constitution demands of us that we must transform all of South African society. And that transformation is going to continue to take place, whatever you say. [Applause.]
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Deputy Speaker, I thought I should respond on the matters that have been raised with respect to the educators and the strike, specifically the comments of the hon Boinamo. The hon member is fully aware that government is committed to improving the remuneration of the teachers in our country. It is for that reason that the across-the- board increase proposed comes along with an occupation specific dispensation that sets aside educators, nurses and other professionals in the Public Service from others who work within the Public Service. You‘ve never had a dispensation that recognises that you actually have a profession and should be remunerated in terms of that particular status.
This is new and therefore when you calculate the overall package that an individual would receive, do not look at the across-the-board percentage proposed - look at the entire package and in particular this new Framework of Occupation’s Specific Dispensation, because that is a new element in the payment of professionals within the Public Service.
I would also ask that the hon members take on board both the need to provide for these professionals to be recognised in order that we retain them in the Public Service, but also be alert to the kind of framework in the Public Service that government intends to create where you have adequate remuneration matched alongside the performance requirements that we have, because our task is to deliver to the people of the country. Therefore, the model that is put forward accommodates all these requirements and obligations that we seek to achieve.
I am sorry, Madam Speaker, that the other member who is the leader of one of the opposition benches left the House after making that populist speech. It is very nice to come and speak in populist terms and seek some cheap electioneering opportunity. [Applause.] What you have to do, is actually address the hard issues that confront the country. And, this is what we are addressing.
So, while it is absolutely vital to ensure that there is adequate remuneration and adequate recognition of the hard work that many public servants do, we cannot shy away from the need to ensure that alongside that provision, we build the Public Service that actually targets development and delivers to the people of our country. Nor should we shy away from being critical and mentioning, not here in popular statements, but out there mentioning that it is wrong that a child died; that it is wrong that a person in a wheelchair is hit over the head; that it is wrong that a mother is shot at when she goes to pick up her child from school and that it is wrong that a child’s examination paper is torn up!
We shouldn’t shy away from saying these things. It’s absolutely normal in every society in the world that there are those workers who are labelled and in law set aside as essential workers. This is not foreign and it’s something that we must all recognise and accept. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY: Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Let me just say government has not negotiated in bad faith and government continues to negotiate in good faith. I think all of us in this House will agree that the teachers should go back to teaching and those nurses who are not working should go back to work. Yesterday the Minister of Health informed us that actually, the majority of our nurses are not on strike. So we shouldn’t label all our nurses as if they were on strike. The majority of our nurses are not on strike.
With respect to what was said by the representative of the PAC, either you want a law-governed society or you don’t. If the Constitution and the law are clear that essential services workers are not allowed to go on strike, you can’t come here and then say, let us condone an illegal act. It is an illegal act! It is unconstitutional! In that case we are going to run into difficulties about how we fight crime. What does crime mean? Crime means committing an illegal act. We cannot and we should not in this House condone acts that are unconstitutional and acts that are illegal. Essential workers cannot go on strike and they should not go on strike!
We all agree that as soon as possible, hopefully, our teachers, as the Minister of Education has just pointed out, should go back to school so that our children can get back to proper learning and our hospitals can get back to work. But, I want to say here, please understand that the majority of our nurses are not on strike. Thank you.
PUBLIC SERVICE STRIKE
(Minister’s Response)
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Speaker, the matter that I wanted to address is a matter that the Minister of Education has dealt with comprehensively. Unfortunately, hon member De Lille is not here, because I want to deal with just one technicality.
One of the things I agree with is completely populist: There is the conception that we ought to fund higher percentage demands, because we have a surplus. Just to address that: A surplus is a result of a phenomenon in a business cycle that generated higher revenues from higher corporate taxes because there was a boom, higher commodity prices and also VAT.
Hence, that is what generated this, and we also say VAT because we live in an environment of lower interest rates. That is beginning to change, and what happens if there isn’t this high revenue and you have committed to expenditure on the basis of a boom period? Who is going to fund that?
It reminds me of when I was growing up in Pimville, where people bought hi- fi radios and hi-fi sound systems because they received a bonus in December, and we all knew that come February, Ellerines is coming around for repossessions. Is that what we want to put this country through? Thank you. [Applause.]
FILMS AND PUBLICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I now call the hon Minister of Housing. [Applause.] I’m sure she’ll explain what films are doing in Housing.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING (on behalf of the Minister of Home Affairs): Madam Deputy Speaker, please allow me to explain this quirk of history. I was responsible for the Films and Publications Bill. It now turns out that it was not quite what it should have been, and the Minister of Home Affairs has set it right. She has asked me to stand in for her, because for reasons beyond her control she is unable to be here. So I’m about to set right what I did not do a few years ago when I should have done it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, hon members, almost all of us present here in the House today arrived here in a vehicle of some sort or another, whether we drove ourselves or were driven here. We arrived safely because almost all of the drivers in our country accept, almost all of the time, that we in South Africa drive on the left side of the road. They accept that we keep to the left, not for political reasons even though we might want to, but because this is, in fact, an old colonial rule that we have inherited. We accept that we keep to the left because that requirement forms part of the rules of the road laid down in the laws of our land. And, although the law is uncompromising about which side of the road we drive on, it leaves a lot of leeway to the judgment of the individual as he or she regulates the speed, negotiates intersections or changes lanes. But whatever our professions, whatever our personal preferences in many aspects of life, all of us have accepted that traffic drives on the left side of the road, because there is a law in place for the good of all of us.
I make this point about the general acceptance of the rule that we have to drive on the left in order to illustrate that the state does indeed have a right and, in fact, a constitutional duty to regulate certain aspects of the life of the community in the interests of the safety and welfare of all of us.
If the approach were to take hold that some commentators and critics took during the consultative process on this Bill before it went through, it would be up to each motorist – alone and without guidance – to decide each time he or she gets into the car which side of the road to drive on. We can imagine the catastrophic results.
So, because we do not want a similar free-for-all with often tragic consequences for individuals in the arena of films and publications, this Bill sets out to put up road signs and to regulate what must be regulated in the interests of the community of the over 40 million people in this country. We accept that this Bill is not about the integrity of life and limb of our citizens as they use the roads; that is true. But it is about ensuring the safety and the long-term welfare of some of our most vulnerable citizens, our children and our young people; and about the emotional safety – and, unfortunately, all too frequently by extension - the actual physical safety of our children and young people forced into involvement in pornography.
It is about saying that children and young people have a right to grow up in an environment which gives them the space and time to be children and adolescents – an environment in which they can play and learn, find their way safe from predators and protected from the excesses of industries which are generally understood to contribute to the brutalisation of attitudes and behaviour patterns, particularly towards women and girl-children.
So we are talking about the fundamental question of the kind of society we want to build. We are not talking about censorship here. We are not talking about the heavy hand of the state. We are talking about that which we fought for: the right of the child. We are not talking about censorship because we fought against that. We have no intention whatsoever of bringing it back.
The Bill says very clearly that it is our duty as legislators and as government to give meaning and content to our constitutional order by spelling out where and under what circumstances we will protect our children and young people and the dignity of women. Indeed, it says very clearly that it is our right and our responsibility to build a society in which there is a constitutional precept to the right and dignity of the people that we have just indicated.
Allow me to remind members of the objects of the Act in this context, as spelt out in the Bill before us today. The objects say that the Act will “regulate the creation, production, possession and distribution of films, games and certain publications” in order to –
… provide consumer advice to enable adults to make informed viewing, reading and gaming choices, both for themselves and for the children in their care …;
to “… protect children from exposure to disturbing and harmful materials and from premature exposure to adult experiences”; and to “make the use of children in and the exposure of children to pornography punishable”.
I doubt that it would be possible to be much clearer on this matter than the Bill already is. It is very clear that it is the job of the Bill to make punishable the use of children for pornographic purposes. I doubt whether anyone besides the most wayward libertarian would have a problem with that. The Bill says very clearly that its job is to ensure the provision of consumer advice to enable adults to make informed viewing, reading and gaming choices both for themselves and especially for the children in their care.
I doubt whether anyone could discover anything in that paragraph but an attempt to empower adults in their lives as caregivers of children. There is no heavy hand of an authoritarian state that I can perceive here, and the Act says that it aims to protect children from exposure to disturbing and harmful materials and from premature exposure to adult experiences.
Once again, Members of Parliament, we are talking about protecting the vulnerable, and about creating the space for children and young people to grow up in. Young people already have innumerable impressions, demands and stimuli crowding in on them every day through advertising, education, cellphones and the Internet.
We submit that it is in the interests of our society and of our very young people to pass legislation that provides the basis for the state to protect, inform and, where necessary, to intervene in the interests of the vulnerable.
I doubt that there is a single person in the House who is not aware of the uproar that has been created by sections of the media around this Bill. I doubt any of you could have missed it, even though you may have missed some of the other views expressed in the communities across the country as the consultation on this Bill was progressing. This is because we have had a one-sided interpretation of most of the sections by the media.
This was, in some ways, a very sobering experience. It was a sobering experience because it told us that the media is indeed a part of our country, and not some fourth estate ordained by a higher order. It is a part of our country which is as passionate and often as partisan as any other group, whether they be government or opposition parliamentarians, or city or village dwellers.
So, there has at times been robust debate, typically passionate South African debate. We are grateful to all who contributed to it, because it is our culture of debate, our culture of addressing the issues seriously, which is at the heart of our democracy.
The media did, in fact, have some important points to make, and very early in the process of fashioning the Bill we told them that we had heard them. But we also told them that our respect for the parliamentary order which lies at the heart of our very hard-won democracy meant that we had insisted that the Bill make an orderly way through the processes of Parliament, which it has done. We insisted that the consultative processes, run so ably by the portfolio committee, take their course because that is how people in our country are able to express their views.
We were a little surprised at the volume coming from these sections that seemed to get a kick out of tilting at windmills. So, as we soberly have this debate and contemplate the Bill coming into law, we should not be led to believe that it was the hot air that got these windmills turning; they were turning already.
Last week during the Budget Vote of the Department of Home Affairs, it was made clear that Cabinet and the ANC leadership were firm believers in the freedom of the press and that we would defend this as an integral part of the democracy we fought for. But, at the same time, we make no apologies for saying that we must and we will expect more from those who daily work and exercise these freedoms we are discussing, because that is indeed a compromised position that we have arrived at today.
This compromise says: as much state regulation as necessary, together with as much self-regulation as possible. We have kept our side of the bargain. Now it is up to the practitioners to keep theirs, whether they are active in the traditional print and electronic media, or whether theirs are the newer spaces involved in the Internet and in mobile telephony.
The point is simple: Self-regulation involves a conscious and willing acceptance of an obligation to ensure - and, here, Members of Parliament, I quote from the Press Code of Professional Conduct – “ … accuracy, balance, fairness and decency”. We might add, in the spirit of the Constitution, that self-regulation involves the conscious and willing acceptance of an obligation to hold the principle of the individual’s right to dignity very, very high, particularly in a country like ours with its history of trampling on the dignity of individuals.
We are all familiar with the argument that the broadening of the media landscape has seen the advent of a type of tabloid journalism in our country, which makes certain types of reporting and the use of certain types of images inevitable. There is, in our view, nothing inevitable about pictures of naked women on the front pages of our newspapers. There is nothing inevitable about the salacious style of reporting under the guise of informing and mobilising communities who are all too aware of the ills in their midst.
Anyone who argues that a society which requires of its media that it take these matters seriously is demanding censorship of some sort is simply out of touch with reality. And, let us remind ourselves, it is not the heavy- handed government of this Parliament which demands higher standards of care from the media on these issues; it is the people in their communities for whom it is a necessity that the media contribute, through serious self- regulation, to a de-escalation of violence, gangsterism and the abuse of women.
Yes, we have heard the arguments and seen the documents from the media houses, but the Bill before you is designed to streamline processes within the Films and Publications Board. Those processes streamlined by the Bill will contribute to the development of policies, for example, the classification guidelines that reflect the changing views and morals of our society.
To those of you who have expressed concern that it will no longer be possible to appeal decisions to the High Court, the Bill provides for internal remedies for those who feel that their rights or interests have been infringed. Once these internal remedies have been exhausted, it is always open to the aggrieved party to take the decision of the Films and Publications Board on review.
So, Members of Parliament, colleagues, I am sure that over the coming months and years we will together, with all the industry segments affected by this legislation, find ways in which the compromises found with the active assistance of Parliament will become a viable reality, enriching our society and our constitutional reality. Madam Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Home Affairs, I ask you to support this Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr H P CHAUKE: Deputy Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. It is a privilege again to stand before this House to address the issues of films and publication. Since 1996 these issues have been very controversial. From the beginning when we decided to lift the ban on pornography in the name of freedom of expression we have had problems throughout.
Therefore, in 2005 a conference was convened by the Department of Home Affairs in consultation with the Film and Publication Board in Port Elizabeth to address the current challenges that the board faces with regard to the issues of distribution in particular of child pornography. That report was tabled in this Parliament and it was noted. Comrade Andries, this report was noted and not adopted. This means we still have to go back to that report at some stage.
The report addresses a number of areas that need to be looked at. Part of it addresses the issue to capacitate the Film and Publication Board. Clearly, this board could not cope with the work that it was faced with. Therefore, the board had to be capacitated. The confusion that has been created within the structuring of the board is that examiners were members of it and the people who were checking on how films are classified were themselves part of the board. Therefore, the Bill was proposing that we establish a separate body to look at the issues of governance.
When this Bill was tabled before that committee last year, we decided to go on public hearings as a normal practice that the committee does, and we visited all the provinces in the country. Members of the public were given an opportunity to make their inputs. It was clear from their inputs that the issue of pornography in newspapers and on televisions and cellphones was of great concern. If you look at the kind of gadgets that we use today, young children as young as ten can easily access pornography on their cellphones.
When you look at the television nowadays you have to sit with a remote control if you watch it with your children because time and time again pornographic material will be shown and you will have to switch off the television, or you will be embarrassed.
There are problems with the media, and in particular with what the Minister has referred to, the so-called tabloid newspapers. Here in the Western Cape we have the Daily Voice, where they deliberately distribute child pornography featuring children that are raped. Nobody condemns that and it is fine because it is in the name of freedom of the press.
The committee called that very newspaper to appear before it and to account for that, and they apologised. The same applies to the renowned newspaper called The Star. It advertised a black 12-year-old, curvaceous Brazilian girl. The committee again called the editor of The Star newspaper and he appeared before the committee and apologised.
Clearly this problem comes in the name of the freedom of the press; it comes in the name of freedom of broadcasters and cellphones. Therefore, even whatever we have tried to address in this Bill we have not as yet addressed the problem. Part of what the conference resolved was that there is a need to have a national debate on issues of pornography, because from 1996 when this whole thing started, it came in as an amendment.
Therefore, much time was not given to the issues that we have to grapple with today. You saw as Members of Parliament that even across from Parliament there was an attempt to open this kind of business. It is a very big business that involves trillions and trillions of rands and I am not surprised that when we try to address this problem the DA will object. I am not surprised that it is only the DA that objects to what we are trying to address, obviously because of the business interests. [Interjections.]
The issue of consultations between the executive and the print media came up during the public hearings that we organised in Parliament. It was very clear that between the executive and the media there was no co-ordination in the manner in which they deal with the issues pertaining to the media. The committee has really made a call that there must be wider consultations between the print media and broadcasters generally with the executive in which the Minister in the Presidency has confirmed that they are engaging with Sanef.
But the broadcasters, the print media and the cellphone service providers in fact agreed that in their self-regulation they are going to look at this matter which is quite serious. We engaged with Icasa, and it agreed with us that it is not as such the terrain of Home Affairs to deal with issues of a code of conduct because Icasa is in place to deal with issues of broadcasters. But in the new development of a code of conduct Icasa is going to take into account the issues that we have raised as Parliament to make sure that within the code of conduct they address the issues as we see them.
The watershed period which e.tv insists very much is their terrain, and therefore nobody should come in and advise them, is something that is of a concern and as we engage e.tv and other broadcasters, either we need to extend it that this kind of material can only be shown at three in the morning; or it has to be debated in the House whether the issue of pornography in free-to—air television is necessary or not.
These are things that we must engage on because if you look at the material that comes out of e.tv, not of same-sex marriages, but of e.tv, you will find that it is material that is harmful and abusive especially to women. What one finds most of the time is that it is women who are at the receiving end, in particular white women. [Interjections.] The member says she doesn’t mind. I thought that is what she said. [Interjections.] Shut up!
Therefore, if you don’t mind, for us it is a concern because as the ANC we have a responsibility to build a society that is free from this kind of harmful material that would expose and abuse our women and children. Therefore, the call that I want to make in the minute I still have, is that let us have a national debate on these issues, and the Minister has rightfully said that it is the majority of us trying to address this problem. Let us have a national debate and debate these issues of pornography. We need to debate whether there is a need to have pornography in the name of freedom of expression. Is there a need to have pornography in the manner in which we see it and its impact that we see in the country?
The media agrees that it is a problem that is why that within their own self-regulatory framework they will try to address this problem, but their interest is one: profit. Their interest is nothing else but profit. Therefore, as legislatures …
… baba, kufanele ukuthi senze imithetho ezovikela izingane zethu nabantu besifazane ngoba yibo abasetshenziswayo kulezo zenzo ezinjalo. Ngokwesiko lesintu, akuvumelekanga ukuthi ubone umama ehamba nqunu laphaya emgwaqweni bese uthi, “Hhayi, kuhle lokhu futhi inkululeko yokuzenzela okuthandayo.” Akusilo isikompilo lase-Afrika ukuthi umuntu osekhulile ahambe nqunu emgwaqweni noma enze lezi zinto ezenziwa komabonakude, phambi kwezingane zethu. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[… hon member, we have to make laws that will protect our children and women because they are vulnerable to such acts. In an African custom, it is unthinkable to see a woman parading naked down the street and cheer her on and say, “Well, this is good and it is freedom to do as one pleases”. It is not an African custom to see an adult person walking down the street naked or doing these lewd acts that are done on TV, in the presence of our children.]
Sex is something sacred and children should not be exposed to it. This is what we now do, we cry over child rape and all the things we complain about and we forget that the people who distribute these things do that in the name of freedom of expression. The DA will stand up here today and reject this amendment because it encroaches on the freedom of expression and of the press, which is not true. Currently, the print media and broadcasters are very happy about the outcome of what we have done. I am not sure on whose behalf you are going to speak today, but they are happy that we were able to address their concern without infringing upon the rights of media and the rights of broadcasters.
I want to thank members of the committee for the wonderful contribution they are making. Let us have this debate and let us engage. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]
Mrs S V KALYAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, the core mandate of the FPB is to ensure the protection of children by the classification of films, interactive games and publications which go out to the public. So when this amendment Bill was first presented in draft form, and the reasoning behind it was that it was aimed at rooting out and eradicating child pornography, one could not help but applaud the noble intention. No right-thinking person would support or condone any form of child pornography. [Applause.]
However, upon a closer, detailed reading of this draft Bill, it became clear that the original intention was not so honourable after all and that there seemed to be an attempt on the part of the drafters to muzzle free speech. The principal Act of 1996 exempts newspapers and broadcasters from having to submit material to the board for pre-publication approval. The proposed amendment wanted to end the exemption. This intended censure on newspapers and broadcasters was nothing short of the old-style censorship typical of the apartheid era. Many public submissions spoke of a possible hidden agenda on the part of government to clamp down on media freedom.
The comment by the CEO of the FPB that it was her intention to create a regime to police the industry was indeed cause for concern and helped to confirm this perception. Broadcasters are regulated by Icasa, the Newspaper Press Union regulates newspapers, so, why the FPB felt the need to extend its own mandate and give itself extraordinary new powers, and unconstitutionally at that, was beyond the comprehension of many.
Yet another mystery is: How did the state law advisors certify this Bill? Do they not go through a basic check list first? It was always the contention of the DA that the removal of the exemption was unconstitutional and we declared that to continue deliberating on the Bill as it was, was an exercise in futility. Fortunately, good sense prevailed and sanity as well, and the exemptions in respect of newspapers and broadcasters were reinstated and the right of appeal retained.
Clause 16 of the Bill requires that all films be classified. The manner suggested introduces prepublication censorship and this is unconstitutional. Classification of a film as a refused publication would prevent that film from being broadcast on television and this is equivalent to a prior restraint on expression and constitutes a limitation on the freedom of expression.
A film may be classified as refused if the film contains depictions or sequences of child abuse, propaganda for war or incites violence or advocates hatred based on any identifiable group characteristics, unless the film judged within context, is a bona fide documentary or a film of scientific merit on a matter of public interest. So virtually every movie or documentary of World War II would be refused or banned under this Bill. How ridiculous is that?
The Bill as it stands increases quite substantially the scope of publications which must be submitted for classification. A pamphlet, which may have the mildest form of erotica, for example, breastfeeding or breast examination for cancer or a pamphlet on sexual health would be required to be submitted for classification.
Those HIV/Aids pamphlets issued by the Department of Health showing how to fit a condom would need to be classified. What about the life orientation booklets issued by the Department of Education? Pamphlets around sexual violence will need to be classified and will limit public discussion on vital issues. Surely this cannot be the intention of the Bill.
As the Bill stands, a simple publication disseminated by Sactu or Cosatu calling for their workers to engage in a strike or in mass action could be construed as incitement to imminent violence. It is unfortunate that the FPB in seeking to eradicate child pornography has altered classification categories and criteria so significantly that it could lead to self- censorship and stifle important sociopolitical debates central to a functioning democracy.
The hon Minister of Housing spoke about which side of the road we are on. Minister, I’d like to tell you: It is a stop sign. The broadness of the classification criteria, and the fact that it is so subjective and moralistic, in that it decides for any liberal adult what is harmful sexual behaviour and classified accordingly, will, in reality result in many sexually explicit films surfacing on the black market. We should be promoting healthy sexual attitudes rather than encouraging people to break the law.
The principal Act was good enough as it was. A single amendment regarding the Internet and cellphones and their impact on child pornography would have been sufficient. Instead, the department chose to contaminate the principal Act and bring in provisions, which are already more than adequately covered in the current Act, the Constitution, the Sexual Offences Bill and the Equality Act. In doing so, free flow of information is significantly restricted.
The DA is not opposed to the introduction of tighter measures to control child pornography, but the Bill as it is currently proposed does not actually achieve its objective and is open to constitutional challenge. Furthermore, the reality is that the FPB does not have the capacity to deal with its own ambitious proposals in the Bill and is actually on the road to nowhere.
We note the absence of both the Minister and the Deputy Minister. If they are that serious about child pornography, they should have been here. And I would like to say that video outlets countrywide have voiced their concerns at the functioning of the FPB. A petition was drawn up and I was asked to forward it to the Minister. I will send it to her house.
The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: On a point of order, Chairperson, it is well within the Rules of Parliament for a member of the executive to request another member of the executive to represent them in a matter in the House. It is within the Rules. To suggest that the member of the executive for Home Affairs is abrogating responsibility, actually denies … [Interjections.] … I am speaking to the presiding officer and not to the loud voices on the roof. It is within the Rules.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C S Botha): I don’t think there is a dispute whether it is within Rules. I agree with you but I don’t think it is a point of order.
Mr W P DOMAN: Madam Chair, may I also address you on the point.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C S Botha): Excuse me, hon Doman, but the hon Minister has already been there.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: This is a point of order. I think it is completely out of order that the hon member should stand up there and not even have the hindsight of why these members are not here and say the kind of things that she said. It is completely out of order. You are impugning the integrity of these members and they would not have made the necessary arrangements if they did not care.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C S Botha): Thank you, hon Minister. It is not a point of order.
Mr W P DOMAN: Madam Chair, I just want to point out that it is absolutely in order for the hon member to express her view on how she feels about the absence of the Minister and the Deputy Minister responsible for this portfolio. [Applause.]
Mrs I MARS: Chairperson, we all know and we do not have to go into this, how the original draft of the Film and Publication Bill caused enormous concern and debate, not only within the affected media, but within the public in general. At the onset of this debate we would like to reiterate our commitment to the constitutional definition of freedom of expression contained in section 16 of the Bill of Rights and also its limitations.
We would also say that we entered the debate wanting to exempt content in section 22(3) of the existing Bill to be retained. In our discussions with the media, and I must agree with the Minister, they were very robust, very informative and I for one, felt that there was a very sincere commitment - and possibly because of the amount of publicity this Bill has already received - by the print media to enhance its self-regulatory processes. And I would suggest to the committee and to all of us that we pursue this matter with them and stay in contact with them and share the discussion around this matter. All the discussions we had were very open and constructive. We would like to say that despite all the extra meetings that were necessary to arrive at the conclusions we have today, because the Bill extends child protection laws criminalises creating, distributing and possession of child pornography through the Internet and cellphones, and Internet and cellphones providers no longer being self-regulatory yet subject to offences for noncompliance with regulations, we can agree with it.
I would like to separate issues here. Child pornography is a major issue not only in South Africa; it is a global issue which most of the country and I have looked at legislation and the debates on the subjects of pornography, and the answers are not there yet.
On behalf of the IFP, I would want to record our commitment to finding workable solutions to limiting access by young people to all forms of pornography. And I must say there is a somewhat cynical description. We heard during our discussions that there was real pornography which should be stopped, but it was alright to have virtual pornography. I mean all these things affect our children and we have a duty to protect our children.
So I have given you the reason why we support the Bill but I need to concentrate on this: On the things that the Bill is doing and the things it does not do. And I am of course referring to controlling juvenile access to all pornography, of course, especially child pornography.
We know juveniles have found ways to bypass existing access systems which are meant to prevent them from viewing pornography on the Internet or cellphones. We have to realise that whatever new control systems will be designed, they will try their utmost to find ways of bypassing them too. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr L W GREYLING: Hon Chairperson, this Bill attempts to balance the rights of freedom of expression with the protection of children. This was never going to be an easy task and it must be said that there have certainly been some improvements made to the original Bill, such as the restoration of exemptions.
These exemptions, however, only apply to the members of the Newspaper Association of South Africa. There are roughly 500 other publications in the country which are not members and have to comply with the conditions laid down by the Act.
As the ID, we fully support the objective of the Act to deal with the scourge of child pornography but we question whether this Act will, firstly, adequately deal with the scourge and, secondly, whether the right to freedom of expression will not be severely curtailed. We therefore at this stage cannot support the Bill and believe that its constitutionality should be tested in a court of law.
The ID agrees with the assessment of the chairperson that we need a national debate on this issue and that legislation like this should emanate from this debate rather than the other way round. This is the approach that the ID is taking towards MXit. We will be holding an international conference soon, to obtain the views of all parties on this issue. I thank you.
Adv S N SWART: Chairperson, the ACDP has emerged as the unlikely champion in fighting to protect media freedom considering our opposition to all forms of pornography. In our view, pornography is the theory but rape is the practice. In view of this approach one would have expected the ACDP to have supported the Bill as tabled. However, we shared grave concerns expressed by the media that the Bill as tabled would have amounted to prepublication state censorship of all print media and broadcast material. This would have severely restricted the media from being able to report on news items.
Television and radio broadcasters would have been required to submit all programmes to the board before broadcasting. All live news, parliamentary current affairs, sport and music coverage would cease.
The common good is best served by the free flow of information. It is a vital function and indeed the duty of the press and other media to make available information on every aspect of public, political social and economic activity. The Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expressly includes freedom of the press and other media.
The media has a duty to investigate and be a watchdog of society and more particularly of government. It has played a crucial role in exposing crime, corruption, mismanagement and nepotism in both the public and private spheres. It is only where competing ideas are freely aired, debated and challenged that the truth can be attained. As the SA National Editors Forum, Sanef, pointed out: “The restriction on dissenting opinion impoverished the search for truth”.
Vast members of the majority party did not agree with all the ACDP’s proposals, particularity to reinstate the total exemption, with the media being subject to criminal sanction relating to child pornography. We were able to persuade members of the portfolio committee to accept certain vital amendments, not only exempting the press from private classification and criminal sanctions but also to strengthen the fight against pornography. We were however still concerned about the very broad hate speech provisions, and whilst the additional test was insisted on, we still believe that there could be a constitutional challenge on this aspect. In conclusion, we wish to express our gratitude to the chairman of the portfolio committee for being so indulgent and even allowing the ACDP at a very late stage to argue for the insertion of a very vital amendment. Whilst we still have reservations regarding its constitutionality, we do believe that the Bill in its present form should be supported particularly in view of its fight and its aim to fight child pornography. We, therefore, as the ACDP will support the Bill. I thank you.
Ms S H NTOMBELA: Chairperson, I don’t think that there is any rule that requires any Minister to explain his or her whereabouts. I just wanted to mention that one. Aristotle said:
At his best, man is the noblest of all animals, separated from law and justice, he is the worst.
As the ANC-led government we have long said that we are on a noble course and we will never allow our little loved ones to be exploited and corrupted by ruthless, irresponsible and careless people out there.
This Bill is long overdue. In Sesotho: E siilwe ke nako. [It is long overdue.]
The noble objectives are to protect our kids from the potential dangers of digital technology, especially pertaining to child porn. If we do not stand up as parents and responsible adults and say, enough is enough, we are busy destroying ourselves and the future of our children. I don’t know what the DA is doing.
If this government does not put its foot down on child pornography as displayed on the Internet, cellphones, films, computer games and magazines, we will go down as the most irresponsible government that ever ruled this country, and we cannot afford that.
Ha re no e dumella ntho eo. [We will not allow that.]
Furthermore, the Bill seeks to bring the broadcasters of the films within the scope of the Act so that there is compliance. There should be compliance officers who will monitor this business, which produces such dangerous material. These officials should be given authority to enter any premises of distribution at any given time, for the purpose of requesting certificates of registration.
Akuna “mangamanga” lapha. [There “ain’t any lying business” here.]
This Bill further seeks to provide the compliance officers the authority to examine or inspect the premises used for conducting businesses, ensuring that they comply with conditions stipulated by the Act. In addition, compliance officers should be given the powers to examine or inspect any film or computer game offered for sale.
One of the objectors to the Bills says:
The proposed legislation is unconstitutional it reminds us of the past, it threatens the democracy and freedom for which many South Africans fought and lost their lives.
Is it true? It cannot be true. Chairperson, please, our brothers and sisters did not fight and die for the so-called “democratic freedom” in order to corrupt our children. They did not die for the so-called “democratic freedom” for sexual exploitations. Surely, they did not die to make our beloved kids cannon fodder for the unscrupulous business people. It cannot be right, we are not going to allow it.
Batho ba heso, re keke ra kekisa bana ba rona jwalo ka Judas Iskariota lebitsong la tjhelete. Re keke ra e etsa taba eo.
Modulasetulo, bekeng e fetileng ke ne ke dutse le setloholo sa ka se ka bang dilemo tse tsheletseng ho isa ho tse supileng, re shebeletse televishene. Ha re ntse re bohile, ha hlaha thobalano e tshabehileng, setloholo sa ka sa mpotsa sa re: “Mama, ba etsang, na ebe ba a lwana”? (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)
[Good people, we cannot betray our kids like Judas Iscariot, in return for money. We will never do such a thing.
Chairperson, last week I was sitting with my grandchild - who is about six or seven – watching television. Whilst we were still watching, a shocking sex scene came up and my grandchild then asked me: “What are they doing, mum? Are they fighting?”]
What kind of a fight is that one? She also said: “Mama ke a kgolwa hore ena ha se resiling.” [Mum, I’m sure that this is not wrestling.] It is embarrassing! How are you going to explain that to a six-year-old? Please, I do give my children advice, so I do not want anyone to destroy them.
Modulasetulo o tla ntshwarela, ka Sesotho manyala ke manyala, ha a dumellwe, mme ho tla dula ho le jwalo. [Chairperson, with all due respect, in Sesotho an abomination will always remain an abomination, it is unacceptable and will always stay like that.]
One little child said: “Parents, you have a right to reprimand us, but please do not abuse us, as our mothers and fathers do not turn yourselves into our enemies.”
Ka Sesotho re re: “Thupa e kojwa e sa le metsi.” Setjhaba se sa hlompheng bana ba sona, se sa rateng bana ba sona, se tla ya timelong jwalo ka bona bana ba tseleng e yang timelong. Le a ba bona le lona. (Translation of Sesotho paragraph follows.)
[In Sesotho we say: “Spare the rod and spoil the child”. A nation that does not respect its young, which does not love its young, will perish just like these who are doomed to perish. You can see them yourselves.]
Most of our objectors, especially business, are mostly worried about the effect of the Bill on their businesses. This government is more worried about building a society that is stable. I don’t want to comment on the dissatisfaction that I pick up from the members in here, because the very same person who is busy shouting “Ke bana ba mang mebileng?” [“Whose kids are those?”] knows the reality very well. The person is just doing this to satisfy somebody.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C S Botha): Hon member, please take your seat.
Mr M B SKOSANA: Thank you, Chairperson.
Ke tshwareha hampe ha ke utlwa nkgono a re sheba ka mona, a re jwale reya timelong. Ke ne ke batla ho tseba hore na le mme Feiki o ya timelong na? Hobane o dutse ka kwano le ena.
Modulasetulo, setjhaba se sa hlompheng bana ba sona, lebitsong la thobalano, se ya timelong. (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)
[I feel bad to see the old lady looking in our direction, saying that we are on the road to perdition. I would like to know whether Mrs Feiki is also heading for perdition, because she is sitting on this side as well.
Chairperson, a nation that does not respect its young, where sex issues are concerned, will perish.]
A certain Mr Hamon is right when he says that children in South Africa are exposed to pornography and violence on television and in advertisements. Attention should be given to the future generation, since they are to be our future presidents, governors, and public representatives.
Instead of producing X-rated publications, which are degrading to human beings and sexual explicitly, the service providers such as Telkom and others, should develop more packages for kids, especially designed to improve their education. Those who oppose this Bill, should not stand here and pretend that there is infringement of freedom of expression, when they know very well that it is not the intention of the government to delve into media censorship, but it is indeed the intention of the government to protect children against sexual implicitly publications.
I wish those people who oppose the Bill in their submission of consensus should also have race as a counter measure. What actually constitutes a moral society? Madam Speaker, please let us not instil a culture of pornography especially in the minds of our kids. It is immoral, it is evil, it is irresponsible, it is a shame, it is cruel, it should not be allowed. It ends here, today. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr R B BHOOLA: Chairperson, with the rapid pace of development and advancement of digital technology comes a responsibility to ensure safe and morally correct accessibility of services. It is a fact that access to sexually inappropriate sites on the internet, cellphones, film and interactive computer games are also accessible by children.
The MF is pleased that this Bill serves to put in place a number of provisions that should address the situation. While the MF believes that parents and guardians also have a very important role to play in preventing the kids from accessing such material, we think that services need to come up with firewalls that will filter such access to pornography.
The MF also feels that with a view to cellphones, parents should be equipped with the means of blocking their children from getting access to these sites. The MF supports this Bill.
Mr C M MORKEL: Thank you, Chairperson. The objectives of this amending Bill deal with the capture, editing and transfer of pornographic material amongst children, as well as from adults to children, which is a major challenge. Technology already exists to address some of the problems identified and it is possible for programmes like Internet-based and mobile instant messaging to filter pornographic material, which may find its way to children.
However, this is only to a limited extent, especially on mobile phones. One mobile instant messaging service, I will not mention its name, has no autofiltering mechanism based on a clear link between the registration details of such users and their date of birth in particular. The identity number or the age of registered mobile phone users should be recorded in terms of the Electronic and Communications Transaction Act, and the interception and monitoring Act with its amendment Bill.
Such a filtering and linking mechanism can be introduced through appropriate regulations under the Amendment Bill with the assistance of the EST Act and the interception and monitoring Bill, which is being considered by the Portfolio Committee on Communications at the moment. The application, service provider, the Film and Publications Board and the Independent Communication Authority of South Africa must co-regulate this oversight.
Another major challenge that needs to be regulated by the FPB, Icasa and the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa is the broadcasting of certain music videos that may fall foul of the definition of child pornography or erotica. Freedom of expression does not justify one’s rights to abuse children in pornographic profiteering.
These finite rights must be limited when they posses a threat of child abuse as this other legislation protects children, such as the Divorce Act and the Child Care Act amongst other things. The Progressive Independent Movement will therefore support the Film and Publications Amendment Bill and I dedicate this to my children who are aged three and two. Thank you.
Mna K W MORWAMOCHE: Modulasetulo le maloko ao a hlomphegago, Molaokakanywa wo o bolela ka taba ya go šireletša ditokelo tša bana – o bolela ka taba ya go širelet ša gore bana ba se ke ba bontšhwa tša phaku gape o tloga o bolela ka taba ya gore bana ba se ke ba bontšhwa tša bošilo.
Seboledi sa go tšwa ka lehlakoreng la DA, mohlomphegi Sandy, ga a mmakatše ge a be a bolela mo pele ga lena a laetša gore yena ga a thekge taba ye ka ge e le motswadi e sego mmelegi. Ka moka bao ba rego ga ba thekge Molaokakanywa wo ke bao e lego batswadi e sego babelegi. Motho yo a belegago e le motswadi, ga go ka mokgwa wo a ka se thekgego Molaokakanywa wo.
Mohlomphegi Sandy wa DA o laeditše gore go ya ka mokgwa wo pušo ya rena ya ANC e bušago ka gona, ga e ba kgotsofatše. O a rereša ka ge maikemišetšo a DA go tša pušo e le go šireletša mahumo a bona. (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)
[Mr K W MORWAMOCHE: Chairperson, hon members, this Bill is about the protection of children’s rights – it is about protecting children from being exposed to bad and silly things.
It is not surprising that the speaker from the DA, the hon Sandy, indicated that she does not support this Bill because she is a parent but not a child bearer. All those who do not support this Bill are parents but not necessarily child bearers. There is no way that a person who is a parent cannot support this Bill.
The hon Sandy from the DA indicated that they are not satisfied with the manner in which the ANC-led government rules. She is correct because the aim of the DA in government is to protect its wealth.]
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chairperson, on a point of order: I am prepared to accept that there is a kind of cultural difference, perhaps, between the speaker and myself and I’m not quite sure of the point he is making, but it seems odd to me … [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): What is the point of order?
Mr M J ELLIS: I am making a point of order. It would seem odd to me that a person can talk about being a parent without being a child bearer. [Interjections.] I am asking …
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Ellis, honestly, it cannot be a point of order.
Mr M J ELLIS: But it is a point of order, Madam Chair. I am asking you to look into this, because I don’t understand what the point is that he is making. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): But, hon Ellis, excuse me, if you don’t understand what he is saying, that doesn’t make it a point of order.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chairperson, may I ask you something? Do you understand it?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Ellis, that is certainly not under discussion.
Mr M J ELLIS: It is under discussion. I am asking for an explanation.
An HON MEMBER: Don’t argue with the Chairperson!
Mr M J ELLIS: I can’t believe this woman.
Mr H P CHAUKE: Chairperson, on a point of order: I think you need to be respected as the Chairperson. It is the DA’s strategy. Very often when we bring forward important issues, they want to divert from those issues.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Chauke, I appreciate your support and protection of me, as I must protect you, but I think it is in order and we will continue with the debate. Thank you.
Mr W J SEREMANE: Chairperson, may I please ask a question? Is it parliamentary to actually attack the parentage of any member of a church? I understand the idiom used. It is uncalled for and it is unparliamentary to speak in such a way to another adult. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member, I will refer you to the Rules, to both persons who have raised points of order: It is not for the Chairperson to judge the accuracy of a statement. This is a matter for debate and not a matter of procedure and it is out of order for a member to rise on a point of order to contest the truth of a statement by the member speaking. Please, may we now proceed? Hon member, please continue.
Mr K W MORWAMOCHE: Voorsitter, die DA kan maar lê en gaap en droom, want die ANC gaan regeer! [Chairperson, the DA may lie around yawning and dreaming, because the ANC will govern!] [Interjections.]
Modulasetulo, ANC e thekga Molaokakanywa wo gobane o ganetša mekgatlo ya dikuranta le dithelebišene go laetša bana tšeo di tla go senya dikgopolo tša bona. ANC e thekga Molaokakanywa wo gobane ga o dumelele botšhupša golola tša dinaka di hlabane. Gape Molaokakanywa wo o gana tša bo hlaga swaa re je tša bo pilo. Molaokakanywa wo o gana tša bo huwane molapo’a ditaba ba rego ba kwele ba re ba bone. [Legofsi.]
Ke na le kgatišobaka ya molao yeo maina a bao ba boletšego mo pele ga lena ba le botša ka ga ``constitutionality’’ a sego gona ka go yona. Ke kgatišobaka ya bao ba šomago ka melao ya Molaotheo.
Molasetulo, ANC e a buša gomme ebile ga e kgopele tumelelo ya go dira bjalo go motho yo mongwe. ANC ge e kwele gore setšhaba se lla ka taba ya gore dilo tše di amanywago le lepono di se laetšwe mmušong wa yona, re ka se kgopele tumelelo go Seremane; re ka se kgopele tumelelo go DA gobane ga se seboleledi sa boradikuranta.
Seo ba bego ba swanetše go le botša sona, Modulatulo, ke gore ka ‘tšatši leo Komiti ya Photefolio ya tša Selagae e kwanego le boradikuranta ka tšeo di sa nyakegego gomme gwa be gwa hlongwa khansele yeo e tlago hlokomela gore melao ya maitshwaro a bona e šome gabotse, bona ba ile ba ngala ditherišanong tša ntshe. Ka fao, seo ba bego ba swanetše go le botša sona mo ke gore ba tšwile ka ditherišanong tša komiti.
Morena Greyling, yo le yena a boletšego mo, ke tšea gore ke yo mongwe wa bao ba ngwalelago bangwe tšeo ba swanetšego go di bolela dingangišanong tša Ntlo ye. Le ka ‘tšatši la mohlolo ga se ka ke ka bona a tlile komiting ya rena go tla go ikwela ka tša gagwe gore kgoro e sekaseka bothata bjo bja lepono la bana bjang.
Modulasetulo, mohlomphegi Sandy o boletše mo gore Molaokakanywa wo ka mokgwa wo re o boilego re le ANC o mo gopotša melao yela ya go bewa mehleng ya apartheid. Seo se makatšago ke gore dikonokono tša DA lehono ke batho ba go tšwa go apartheid. O dulelang le bona ge e ba o a rereša gore ga a kwane le apartheid?
ANC e thekga Molaokakanywa wo gobane “manyala” ga re a tsome. Di ile le muši wa dikwekwele. Ke a leboga, Modulasetulo. [Legofsi.] (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)
[Mr K W MORWAMOCHE: Chairperson, the ANC supports this Bill because it prevents the media from exposing children to images that would adversely affect them. The ANC supports this Bill because it does not allow powerful people to fight at the expense of powerless ones. This Bill also does not allow people to gain at others’ expense. The Bill is against people who act without knowledge of the issue in question. [Applause.]
I have a document in which names of those who addressed you, telling you about constitutionality, do not appear. This is a document of people dealing with constitutional rules and regulations.
Chairperson, the ANC rules and it does not require permission from anyone to do that. If the public demands that pornographic programmes not be broadcast in the country, we will never ask for permission from Seremane, we will never ask for permission from the DA because they are not spokespersons for the media.
What they should have told you, Chairperson, is that when the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs agreed with the media people about things that must be censored and an authority to monitor their code of conduct was established, they withdrew from those negotiations. Therefore, they were supposed to tell you that they withdrew from the committee’s negotiations. I believe that Mr Greyling, who also spoke here today, is one of the people who prepares speeches on behalf of other speakers for debates in this House. I have never seen him on a single day in our committee meetings to hear how the department is dealing with this issue of child pornography. Chairperson, the hon Sandy said that the manner in which this Bill was presented by the ANC, reminds her of the laws of the apartheid era. What is surprising is that the powerful DA members today are from the apartheid era. Why is she seated on their side if indeed she is anti-apartheid? The ANC support this Bill because we do not want immoral acts. That is all. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Minister, members, before I call the hon Minister to address us, I would just like to indicate that on account of discussions I have had with the Table, I am going to consult Hansard on the issue raised by the two Ministers and will come back to you in this House on it. Please, the two Ministers who raised points of orders, the Minister of Education and the Minister of Housing. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: Thank you, Chairperson, I am very aware of the fact that I have very serious time constraints here. I had waived my right to come back and close this but I thought that after listening to the debate, it was important for me to come back here. I want to thank the hon members who have participated in this debate constructively.
I was very disturbed by the bile that was spewed out by the hon member of the DA. It is understood that perhaps the DA might have its own views but I think that the spirit in which she conducted the debate was so destructive that I needed to come back here and indicate that, in fact, it is completely unacceptable. I would like you, Chairperson, to consult Hansard and actually rule on the matter. [Interjections.]
I want to point out a number of things that had been distorted here because it is important that we leave this House understanding what it was that we were saying. We have a Constitution that this House passed and to which we all share allegiance. It is very specific on some of the things that we have in this Bill here. Our constitutional responsibility is set out in section 28(1)(d). It is very clear on our responsibility to the child and says that it is the right of the child “to be protected from maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation.”
Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: We support that.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: Chairperson, I think you are in an invidious position as a leader of the DA and having the DA going on like that. I would be extremely embarrassed if I were in your position.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon members, please. Hon Minister, do not reflect on the position the Chair takes as if it could be partisan. I will really appreciate that. As for the members on the left hand side, please give the Minister an opportunity to be heard.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: A child’s interest is of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child, as it is set out in the Constitution. What we seek to do, the hon member has deliberately decided that she is going to exaggerate. We should not accept that. There is no way that we on this side would have fought the kind of struggles we have.
She stands here and says that we would like to muzzle the media. We have said so from day one that it was not our intention to do that. It is a very fine balance that we seek to achieve here. We have worked very hard to arrive at this point. [Interjections.] Even beyond that, it is important that we note that even the Promotion of Equality Act limits publication of anything which impinges on the dignity of persons on the basis of race, religion or gender. This is not to be challenged. The right is absolute.
I am appalled at the conduct of the DA and I really think … [Interjections.] … I think you are in an invidious position, sitting there with your members misbehaving like this.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Minister, I must call you to order. [Applause.] Hon members, it is absolutely not acceptable to reflect on the objectivity of the Chair. I cannot accept that. I will repeat what I have said before: Interjections come from all sides of the House but to harass a speaker by making him or her inaudible, is not acceptable. I hope that everybody will retain that in their minds. Hon Chauke, on what point of order are you rising?
Mr H P CHAUKE: On a point of order: In this debate today I am surprised as to why hon Sandy is wearing a mini skirt. [Laughter.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Chauke, please stand up. I have least four people who want to make a point of order. Before I recognise them, I would like to respond. Please withdraw that particular statement.
Mr H P CHAUKE: I withdraw.
The MINISTER OF HOUSING: Hon Chair, I just wanted to indicate that I hope you were misunderstanding me when you indicated that I was implying that you were not objective. That was not my intention. I wouldn’t do that.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Thank you very much.
Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Chair, in the same spirit in which the Minister has rised, I just want to say that I sincerely hope that the ANC will take that matter further, the one mentioned by the hon Chauke. It is absolutely unacceptable.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C S Botha): Hon Ellis, I have already ruled and he has withdrawn. Can we please continue? [Interjections.] I cannot compete with a full House. I can’t raise my voice any more. That concludes the debate. Are there any objections to the Bill being read a second time?
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance and Independent Democrats dissenting).
AFRICAN UNION GOVERNMENT DEBATE
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Madam Chair and you Madam Speaker sitting over there, Ministers, Deputy Ministers, hon members, I’d like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to the hon members for taking this time to engage in this important debate on the African Union government.
A few weeks ago, during our Budget Vote debate, we did indicate that it would be good for the House to debate this matter. But let me hasten to add that the debate is not new, but what is new is the level of participation by civil society, parliamentarians and different socioeconomic formations on the continent.
At Ghana’s independence 50 years ago, the President of Ghana at the time, Kwame Nkrumah said, and I quote: “Our independence is meaningless if it is not linked to the total independence of the African continent.”
After that speech there were many discussions and many meetings, from 1958, to generate consensus around this issue. These important meetings took place in Brazzaville, Casablanca, Monrovia and Lagos, and would culminate in the founding of the OAU.
Maybe the questions we should ask are: Why the integration? Why was the OAU established besides its task to decolonise Africa? Again, I think the answer lies with what Kwame Nkrumah said in 1963, the year in which the OAU was formed, and I quote:
Our continent gives the second largest stretch of land in the world. The natural wealth of Africa is estimated to be greater than that of almost any other continent. To draw the most from our existing and potential means for the achievement of abundance and a fine social order, we need to unify our efforts, our resources, our skills and intentions. We need unity to secure total African liberation. We need to carry forward our construction of a socioeconomic system that will support the greater mass of our steadily rising population at a level of life that will compare with those of the most advanced countries.
He further argued that:
The forces that unite us are intrinsic are greater than the superimposed influences that keep us apart, and our goal must be the establishment of Africa’s dignity, progress and prosperity. 0 Here is a challenge, which destiny has thrown out to the leaders of Africa. It is for us to grasp what is a golden opportunity to prove that the genius of the African people can surmount the separatist tendencies in sovereign nationhood by coming together steadily for the sake of Africa’s greater glory and infinite wellbeing into a union of African states.
The golden opportunity of which Kwame Nkrumah spoke with such urgency was not fully realised during his lifetime. “We must act now,” he said, “tomorrow may be too late”. It is therefore obvious that while the collective political will was strong, the right conditions had not yet been attained.
The integration process started in earnest with the OAU, even though it was not through the “union of African states” that Kwame Nkrumah, Sekou Toure and others had pressed for. The question is: Are those conditions now met? Maybe we should remind ourselves of what President Mandela said at his first meeting of the OAU as a head of state in Tunis in 1994. He said, and I quote:
Finally, at this meeting in Tunis, we shall remove from our agenda the consideration of the question of apartheid in South Africa.
Where South Africa appears on the agenda again, let it be because we want to discuss what its contribution shall be to the making of the new African Renaissance. Let it be because we want to discuss what materials it will supply for the rebuilding of the African city of Carthage.
More importantly, he went on to say:
One epoch with its historic task has come to an end. Surely, another must commence with its own challenges. Africa cries out for a new birth, Carthage awaits the restoration of its dignity. If freedom was the crown, which the fighters of liberation sought to place on the head of Mother Africa, let the upliftment, the happiness, prosperity and comfort of her children be the jewel of the crown.
The current leadership of the continent, realising that the OAU belonged to the epoch with its historic task that had ended and that another had commenced, with its own challenges, launched the African Union, the AU, with clear objectives that included: one, the acceleration of the political and socioeconomic integration of the continent; two, the promotion of peace, security and stability on the continent; three, the promotion of sustainable development at the economic and cultural levels; four, the integration of Africa’s economies; and five, embracing gender equality.
The question, therefore, is: What model of integration is best suited for us to realise these objectives? Maybe we need to look at what the EU did. The EU came together with the objective of making sure that there would never be another war and ending conflict within the region using iron and steel. Furthermore, they wanted to create free economic space where there would be movement of people and eventually a common currency. They are on course.
They also had their own vehicles that drove that process, and those were initially France and Germany. Therefore, we may need to look at Africa and ask: What is it that we want to achieve eventually?
Having seen some of the objectives of the OAU again, the African leadership decided to develop Nepad. Nepad was to accelerate Africa’s social and economic transformation, and it had the following objectives: one, eradication of poverty; two, placing African countries, both individually and collectively, on a path of sustainable growth and development; three, halting the marginalisation of Africa in the globalisation process; and four, accelerating the empowerment of women.
Madam Speaker, I must say that we must also understand that the integration of Africa started in earnest with the OAU. It is a continuous process. As we speak, we have our own Peace and Security Council and we are in the process of establishing a stand-by force for peacekeeping, in order to deal with the conflicts on the continent. This is part of integration.
The Pan-African Parliament is located in this country. Again, that shows that integration is proceeding. The establishment of the Human Rights Court is further evidence of this. Indeed we need to integrate. The question is: What model do we need to use to accelerate this integration, which is already taking place as we speak?
The questions that we must ask, Madam Speaker, are: Are we ready for the African Union government? Has the time come to form the united states of Africa or the union of African states?
Some people say, “Yes, it has come”. Amongst those who say it has come, there are some slight differences in emphasis. Some say that we must start with just a few areas, such as trade, finance, transport, foreign affairs, amongst other things. However, others feel that we should just go on a fully-fledged union government.
The questions are: Are we ready? Do the conditions exist for a union government? Or should we do more in rationalising and strengthening the regional economic communities as building blocks? Should we strengthen the AU commission’s capacity, both human and financial? Should we give it stronger mandates? Should we do more to mobilise financial resources for the implementation of infrastructure, human resource development, agriculture, and so on, which are the priorities of Nepad?
If we agree to form a government, which areas will be covered in the union government? Of course if we do agree to form a government, it will mean that we have to harmonise all the policies so that we can have continental policies in the areas we choose. There would have to be proper funding of this government and all that a government entails.
Madam Speaker, it would not be desirable for me to pre-empt this important debate, so I have just posed questions and given options to allow the House to have proper deliberations. The forthcoming Ghana summit will consider nothing but this question of the African Union.
Should it be established now? And if “yes”, then all the attendant questions will need to be considered. If not, what then needs to be done to accelerate integration?
All governments across the continent are consulting their respective citizenry on this matter, because as yet there is no consensus on how to accelerate the integration; hence the grand debate that will take place in Ghana. Maybe I should just conclude my opening remarks by reminding us of what President Mbeki, then Deputy President, said in his famous speech when we adopted our own Constitution, “I am an African”. He said, and I quote:
I am an African I am born of the peoples of the continent of Africa. The pain of the violent conflict of the peoples of Liberia, Somalia, the Sudan, Burundi and Algeria is a pain I also bear. The dismal shame of poverty, suffering and human degradation of my continent is a blight that we share. The blight on our happiness that derives from this and from our drift to the periphery of the ordering of human affairs leaves us in a persistent shadow of despair. This is a savage road to which nobody should be condemned. This thing that we have done today, in this small corner of a great continent that has contributed so decisively to the evolution of humanity, says that Africa reaffirms that she is continuing her rise from the ashes. Whatever the setbacks of the moment, nothing can stop us now! Whatever the difficulties, Africa shall be at peace! However improbable it may sound to the sceptics, Africa will prosper! Whoever we may be, whatever our immediate interest, however much we carry baggage from our past, however much we have been caught by the fashion of cynicism and loss of faith in the capacity of the people, let us err today and say - nothing can stop us now!
So how best can we achieve this peaceful and prosperous Africa that President Mbeki spoke about? I look forward to a fruitful debate. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms F HAJAIG: Chairperson, Minister, Speaker and colleagues, since Africa’s independence from colonial rule, various initiatives have been explored, aimed at trying to forge closer continental co-operation for the purposes of African unity. Such calls are not new in Africa, on the contrary, the very formation of the Organisation of African Unity saw the emergence of two schools of thought which differed on the exact path that Africa should take towards her eventual unity.
The current debate regarding the creation of an African Union government must therefore be seen within such a historical context whereby there are different visions and ideals in Africa on how best to strengthen and forge greater continental co-operation, integration and unity.
Given the significance of this matter, the African Union Summit of Heads of States to be held in Accra in Ghana, will only have this issue on its agenda in July 2007. The July 2007 summit is to be preceded by different forums and meetings aimed at allowing different stakeholders to engage in discussions regarding this idea.
One of such meetings is the recently concluded gathering of the AU Ministers of foreign affairs held in Durban, South Africa, from 8 to 9 May
- The report released at the end of this meeting suggests that the issue of the African Union government was thoroughly debated during the meeting. The report noted that during the deliberation the delegates raised a number of issues, concerns and suggestions in paving the way for the African Union government. It was agreed that there was a collective commitment to political and economic integration of the continent. Beyond this, there was divergence on how this should be achieved.
The Minister has already spoken about the European Union, so I won’t go into that. The African Union Commission released the framework document in 2005, which outlined the set of principle guidelines for the creation of the African Union government. Among other things, the framework document makes the following proposals:
The Union Government will be a political transitory arrangement towards the United States of Africa; and that the union government shall consist of a more focused assembly and an executive council and commission.
The above structures will be supported by an effective permanent representatives’ committee and result-oriented, specialised technical committees. The framework document for an African Union government also states that the creation of such a government should derive its strength from Africa’s shared values, common interests and constraints.
These shared constraints entail, for instance, the fact that Africa continues to be overdependent on the external world for its economic development and that the continent continues to suffer due to the underexploitation of its enormous development potentials at national, regional and continental levels. However, it is worth mentioning that this observation is not new and that in fact efforts by the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, Nepad, are meant to specifically address these and other challenges.
The commission of the African Union government would share executive functions together with the assembly and the executive council. This, it is observed, would be a departure from the current arrangement whereby the commission functions as secretariat. The framework document also calls for the review of the Pan-African Parliament in the context of article 25 of the protocol of the Pan-African Parliament. It also calls for provisions to be made for the direct elections of the Pan-African Parliament MPs through a proportional representation system. That of course has to be debated. How does that happen? All of the above proposals would require some revision of the Constitutive Act of the African Union. In context of the proposed African Union government, one of the key amendments to the Constitutive Act would be the inclusion of the principle of a community domain through which members of the union will agree to delegate, authority partially or totally, to a continental body. The question that we need to ask is: To what extent are African states ready and willing to even partially relinquish their state sovereignty?
The question of sovereignty is complex, especially in Africa where states do not share similar levels of economic and political independence; where there are small and strong states operating side by side. The question of sovereignty must therefore be approached with outmost care and it may be too ambitious a goal to expect that in a short space of time, all African states will be willing to give up their sovereignty.
The creation of a union government also has implications for the continental financial institutions such as the proposed African Central Bank and the African Monetary Fund. For instance, it is envisaged that the African Central Bank would play a role in ensuring that there is greater co- operation among African states in the sphere of monetary policy.
The Framework Document proposes that a United States of Africa should be created by the year 2015, following a three-phased road map each lasting for three years. That, of course, is up for debate. As far as the challenges with the proposed African Union government are concerned, one of the questions that should be asked concerns the timeframes that have been outlined for the creation of a United States of Africa. That is, Parliamentarians should be able to evaluate whether or not 2015 is a realistic timeframe for the successful conclusion of such a project?
The above question must have as its background the fact that in terns of the Lagos Plan of Action the process for the creation of an African economic community was to take 34 years. Thus the question becomes, what is it about the current sociopolitical and economic conditions in Africa that warrants a belief that the United States of Africa could be created in such a short space of time? This is one of the important questions, because the African leadership has the responsibility to ensure that past mistakes are not repeated, where unrealistic plans and timeframes are outlined without the necessary machinery to ensure their realisation.
Furthermore, parliamentarians and other African stakeholders should be able to reflect on whether the AU has been able to achieve the objectives for which it was created. The AU has not concluded a decade since it replaced the OAU as a continental body. Thus, the question should be: Are those pushing for the replacement of the Union government convinced that enough work has been done to meet the objectives of the African Union and therefore warrants the transformation into an African Union government?
Is there a study that has been conducted that thoroughly informs the African people about the strides or failures therefore, by the AU to achieve its tasks? It appears that it would defeat the purpose to transform the AU without such a study being done and without providing an opportunity for a third examination of the progress by the AU.
One of the foreign policy priorities in South African government is the consolidation of the African agenda. Amongst other things, one of the key objectives of this priority is to strengthen the AU, its relevant organs as well as specialised technical committees. From the point of view of the South African government, more work is still required to ensure that the African Union functions effectively. Therefore, it may well be that the AU still requires strengthening before Africa decides to forge co-operation by creating an African Union government.
I am going to pass on to the decisions taken by the Pan-African Parliament. The Pan-African Parliament sent the recommendations to the African Union, and they are as follows: the first is that the transformation of the Pan- African Parliament into a legislative organ be accelerated to enable it to contribute to the integration of the continent, through among other things, the harmonisation of policies, laws and regulations relating to the various issues of development.
The second is that the evolution towards the Union government should take into account modern global forces and pressures, and that the AU sets a realistic calendar in order to facilitate the evolution of the AU towards the creation of the union government. Third, is that as a prerequisite to setting up a union government, the AU redouble its efforts in order to accelerate the establishment and the strengthening of existing institutions and those which are in the process of being created.
The fourth is that the present process of rationalising and harmonising the AU institutions and regional economic communities which are the actual building blocks, as well as their policy programmes and projects be accelerated and finalised following a realistic calendar. The fifth is that African political leaders show their political will to move towards the union government by paying the respective country’s contributions to AU’s budget and subsequently to the union government.
The sixth is that the African Union clarifies the type of union government it has in mind. The Pan-African Parliament for its party, is in favour of a federal type of union. The seventh is that the nomenclature “United States of Africa”, with the English acronym of USA, be replaced by another acronym which better reflects the history of the continent.
Eighth, the AU takes all the necessary steps to encourage and promote the full participation of peoples of Africa in the debate and process towards the creation of a union government. Ninth, the Nepad, APRM and other similar specialised institutions should be incorporated as specialised technical institutions of the future union government with appropriate levels of autonomy of powers and resources.
I want to very quickly come to the meeting held in Addis Ababa by civil society, trade unions, some legislatures, the military and some women’s movements. The meeting articulated the commitment to the unity and the development of Africa. The delegation agreed that efforts towards integration should be informed by the basic development needs of the people of Africa within a peaceful and stable environment.
It expressed support for the decision to order the AU and its institution and organs. Furthermore, it was argued that greater efforts should be made to harmonise continental policy frameworks, particularly within the judiciary and economic domains. Furthermore, greater convergence in government framework should be encouraged and developed among African states through greater support of the APRM framework. Lastly, with the few minutes left, I want to put in that one of the things that was said was that to consolidate continental unity, the people of Africa must be included in the debate in the union government. We should broaden the participation of the debate to civil society and the decision should be taken by the people of Africa. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr W J SEREMANE: Madam Chair, hon Minister and hon members, coming from a visionary perspective, may I say and state that today we stand, not at the edge of a cliff but on a rolling hill staring far into the distant horizon – so near yet so far. It is the far-off goal which we must work towards today.
Many on the African continent, including South Africa - you know, we are part of Africa and I state this to remind all and sundry – may not live to see the goal attained. But as Africans loyal to Africa’s renaissance, growth and destiny, we must be part of the roadmap to Africa’s unification, peace, stability and prosperity by laying the first stones – the building blocks! Being African is not dependent on skin pigmentation or necessarily race or tribal origin. Mama Africa embraces all her children from Cape to Cairo, Morocco to Malagasy in all their hue and splendour. Deny yourself or deny others of this parentage at your own peril.
Before we can start building a unified Africa, we must start to build and strengthen the very African Union, which is sadly lacking in various departments. The AU is lacking, not because there is anything inherently wrong with the structure or the mandate of the organisation, but because some member states continually let the other member states down. Too many wars are fought; too many governments are corrupt, undemocratic and abusive of human rights when in fact other governments have sworn to mend their damaged countries and behave with a sense of morality and benevolence.
The AU must be bolstered by vibrancy and sustainability based on positive attitudes and actions from our leaders on the continent and also supported by all citizens otherwise the AU effort will be flawed.
In striving for unification of Africa, we must not shy away from learning from other nations’ experiences lest we repeat or make mistakes that were made in these areas. Take note of the journey thus far travelled by the EU and our own regional bodies and related efforts. Surely the EU’s journey has been long and fraught with stumbles, missteps, and misadventures but the Euro has been introduced to the world. The lesson for us in our quest for Africa’s unification is this: No learning is accomplished without stumbles, missteps and even misadventures. The intrepid yesteryear lads know that ``faint heart never won fair lady’’! So, Africa, we have to be courageous.
When looking back at the difficult history of the EU, where major mistakes were made and paid for by developed First World countries, it becomes clear how far Africa must go before the concept of African unification has any real effect on our day-to-day actions. Until then, we must strengthen or fortify the processes and institutions already put in place towards making the continent a better, safe and secure place to live in, before we think of merging. Each sovereign state or country or building block, as I have said, must be strong in the democratic tenets and protocols that we so ably verbalise and espouse.
Take heart though, the picture is not that bleak. There is hope even if it is flickering hope to some, and there is also the will and courage to forge ahead to the ultimate goal - the unification of Mama Africa.
Closer to home, many countries in the SADC region would be good candidates for a free trade area. Peaceful countries like us, Namibia, Botswana - to name but a few – are beacons of hope. Tanzania, Mozambique, Kenya and Malawi could be incorporated in the near future in this free trade sphere.
I hope this happens one day - and very soon. It would be a great privilege to watch African countries slowly joining, like the plates of a tortoise shell moving together to create one strong and formidable whole. The African dream, the African mosaic and tapestry has great potential! A mmaruri, ngenene, ngempela. [Truly.]
Until that time comes, we must focus our efforts on improving the ability of the AU to lead the way. This can only be achieved by member’s improving their diligence and commitment to the AU and following through with the promises they made when signing the various treaties. I thank you, Madam Chair. [Applause.]
Mr M J BHENGU: Madam Chair, guided by the Pan-Africanist philosophy, the African continent has, since independence from colonial rule, consistently pursued the twin objectives of unity on the one hand, and collective self- reliance in the field of economic and social development on the other. These twin objectives aimed at promoting socioeconomic development, protection from neocolonialism and reduction of its dependence from the countries of the North.
As African states finally became independent, they recognised the need to establish an organisation that would act as a vehicle for African unity, and this was realised in 1963 when the OAU was established. The founding fathers of the OAU envisioned a united Africa functioning under a union government with a common defence, common diplomacy, common currency, an African monetary zone, an African Central Bank and a common African citizenship.
The formation of the AU in 2000, replacing the OAU, was necessitated by, among other things, the new context marked by globalisation, the partial end of colonialism in Africa and the end of the Cold War.
The AU established Nepad, which was supported by the Constitutive Act, the objectives of which were inter alia, to achieve greater unity and solidarity between the African countries and the peoples of Africa; defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and the independence of its member states and so on.
The AU Assembly, then mandated the AU Commission to pursue the projects of the United States of Africa by holding the All-Inclusive Continental Consultation Conference on 29 to 31 May this year in Addis Ababa, where participants, including civil society organisations, agreed that there was a need for the establishment of a union government as the political transitory arrangement towards the United States of Africa.
Many member states, with the exception of few, agreed to the project of the United States of Africa. Their fundamental motivation was that such an eventuality was going to effectively address the issues of underdevelopment, eradication of mass poverty, the promotion of democracy and the rule of law and the defence of their political independence and position in the world.
All participants agreed that that process would be a gradual, incremental and multilayered approach, bearing in mind that of course there are sensitive issues such as the African Bank and sovereignty which are very crucial, the removal of trade barriers, African armies and defence, judiciary systems, African security issues, common currency, common language, etc.
It was further realised that there can be no integration of the continent without strong regional economic communities which would serve as building blocks towards the realisation of that dream.
The biggest challenge is in aligning, synchronising and harmonising the integration efforts of member states, the RECs and the AU. Therefore, a roadmap for the attainment of deep continental integration and the establishment of union government should learn, first, from the difficulties experienced with the two previous roadmaps – the Lagos Plan of Action and the Abuja Treaty. Thank you very much, Chair. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr L W GREYLING: Chair, Julius Nyerere once said that African nationalism is meaningless, dangerous and anachronistic if it is not at the same time Pan-Africanism. The ID wholeheartedly supports this view, and we believe that we have to continuously fight for the long-held dream of a united and prosperous Africa.
I stand before this House as a proud African who has travelled the length and breadth of this continent. I’ve been struck by the enormous creativity and resilience of ordinary African people, which I believe must be unlocked in any future governance structure of Africa.
It is often said that Africa is resource-rich but governance-poor. We must set about changing that. Seeing that today is my birthday, I want to make a wish. [Interjections.] That wish is that in my lifetime I will see Africa merge as a united superpower that can lead the world on a new path of sustainable development.
It might be just a wish, but 10 years ago, after travelling through the despair of the then Congo, I never believed that I would be sitting in Parliament listening to the poignant address of a democratically elected President of that country. In Africa the impossible is possible. Let us all work towards the vision of a united and prosperous Africa. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: Chair, Madam Speaker, Minister, the present integration of African states resembles the EU rather than the United States of America, but is not much different from the secret Accra Agreement in its goals of eliminating tariff barriers, forming one customs union, the creation of a single African bank and a single currency.
It may be useful in this debate to look at some perceptions with regard to the impact of the EU on its member states. These include centralisation of power in Brussels, loss of sovereignty and interference in decision-making. For example, 80% of German legislation since 1998 has its origin in Brussels directives.
With no EU community of people to give it a democratic legitimacy, EU control is seen as an assault on nation states and the national democracies that underpin them. Rampant corruption has been acknowledged by EU auditors and on the EU’s own figures, the single market costs three times as much as the benefits.
It is estimated that EU membership cost the UK between £15 billion and £25 billion each year, or £1 000 per household. That would be around R1 000 per month here in South Africa. The UK’s membership has been described as an economic and social disaster.
A Zimbabwean delegate at a public seminar on Africa Day was reported as saying that he was attracted to the optimism of continental integration and that the idea of a united states of Africa was good. Very likely, from the perspective of some failed states, the benefits will look good, but what are the implications for South Africa?
The fact that this debate, up till now, has taken place exclusively at the level of heads of state and excludes the people of Africa is, as we have said, of great concern for the ACDP. It is the people of Africa and indeed South Africans who should be applying their minds to this concept as it is the people who stand to gain or lose the most. [Time expired.]
Dr P W A MULDER: Mr Chairman, the Minister asks: How best can we achieve one, united, prosperous Africa? We answer as the FF Plus by being realistic and not overambitious when we talk of one United States of Africa.
If we are unrealistic in our dreams, we shall fail. Everything will be delayed by many years. Are we really ready at this moment to choose one leader for Africa? I’m afraid not. You know, we struggled to decide who must represent Africa at the Security Council, and it was much easier to do that.
Are we ready for one single currency, meaning putting together the strong pula with a weak Zim dollar? I’m afraid the answer is no. So these are unrealistic dreams.
The European Union started in 1957 with six members and then built up slowly. After 50 years, they now have 27 members. So what is our advice, if I may put it that way? Let’s keep the dream alive; let’s be realistic. Start regionally with SADC. Build up the infrastructure of SADC. There are lots of possibilities there. Get co-operation going at regional level, start dreaming about the bigger one and then slowly build up to that. I think that’s realistic, that’s within our reach and can be achieved within, hopefully, our lifetime.
Dr S E M PHEKO: Chair, the unification of Africa is not a choice; it is an imperative. Africa must unite or perish. Through a courageous policy of unification, an integrated economic and technological development continentally, Africa can take her rightful place among the powerful nations of the world.
It is for this reason that, from our inception in 1959, we in the PAC strongly identified ourselves with the entire Pan-African Movement and advocated a union of sovereign states.
A united states of Africa does not mean loss of sovereignty by independent states. On the contrary, as Kwame Nkrumah stated: A united states of Africa will strengthen the sovereignty of the individual states within the union. The longer we wait, the stronger will be the hold on Africa by neocolonialism and imperialism.
Africa has been a great actor in history. She must come alive again and take her destiny in her own hands, once more. The African Union government is a catalyst in this noble journey. Forward to a giant, monolithic state of Africa! Forward to a social order original in conception and Africanistic in orientation! [Applause.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chair, Madam Speaker, hon Minister, the MF affirms that it is Mama Africa with all our brothers and sisters that was raped by colonialism. While some of us were led into harsher trenches, such as apartheid, many of us managed to haul ourselves to recovery. Furthermore, some on the continent remained savaged by political agendas, poverty, exploitation and cruel, inhumane social retardation.
Those of us who have managed to escape these shackles need to realise the duty we have to rescue Mama South Africa and give her the opportunity to sprout into the continent we were derailed from.
We cannot allow Western opportunists to fix Africa as this would not be done without an agenda. Africa needs to unite through the AU, PAP, Nepad and independent democratic initiatives to liberate Africa. Let us be the mediator between the colonial aftermath and the future political agenda.
Allow a united Africa to take up its place in this world as the strong Africa that we are. We emphasise, however, that the colonial masters of Africa be held responsible for the African debts as these were accumulated under duress from colonialism.
The MF calls for a united Africa and better Africa. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr P J NEFOLOVHODWE: Chairperson, in honour of President Kabila, Azapo wishes to start off by quoting from a secret agreement that was signed in Accra on 8 August 1960 by Kwame Nkrumah and Patrice Lumumba, and I quote:
The President of the Republic of Ghana and the Prime Minister of the Republic of Congo have given serious thought to the idea of African unity and have decided to establish, with the approval of governments and the people of their respective states, amongst themselves, a union of African states. The union will have a republican constitution within a federal framework. The federal government will be responsible for foreign affairs, defence, the issuing of common currency, the economic planning and development.
There will be no customs barriers between any part of the federation. There will be a federal parliament and a federal head of state.
In Azapo’s terms this agreement represents a vision that is relevant today as a point of departure towards the unification of Africa.
Africa has come a long way from the time of colonialism, followed by the political revolution ending direct colonial rule to the period we are in now. The period is in essence a prerequisite for the revolution to bring about a radical transformation of Africa.
With the national liberation struggle to get rid of colonialism over, it is now possible to come to grips with the struggle against the continued exploitation by former colonial powers of African resources and wealth.
Azapo believes that this is the more difficult and protracted struggle, where the enemy is less obvious and is supported by the more complex international, monopoly-financed capital. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr S SIMMONS: Chair, hon Speaker, Minister, Deputy Minister and colleagues, for many years Africa has suffered from its horrifying colonial past, and in the recent past many of our liberated states suffered under the greed and self-interest of many of their own people in leadership positions.
It therefore stands to reason that we, as Africans, face huge internal and external challenges if we are to consider the notion of a united states of Africa. The debate around these issues is always marked by comparisons with the European Union and even the United States of America. These are comparisons that would be very misleading. These two models have very distinctive variables contributing to their respective economic and social successes or failures.
The most important variable for successful African unification is quality and visionary leadership that has the necessary political will. Sadly, our recent history reflects a relatively negative response to this requirement. Far too many of our African countries lack leadership that is accountable to its own citizens, a fundamental prerequisite for the intended goal. We need African leadership that will put African people at the centre of the project.
Therefore the African people have to be at the centre of decision-making and implementation of public policy – in short, respect for democracy. I thank you.
Mr M P SIBANDE: Chairperson, Ministers, hon members, I want to start by saying to the hon Dudley from the ACDP: I understand why you were trying to parachute your speech into statement time. It was because you were not prepared. You debated about the EU instead of the African Union government.
Sihlalo, kule nyanga kaNhlangulana, kule nkulumompikiswano yanamuhlanje ngizothanda ukwethula inkulumo ehalalisela intsha yonke yase-Afrika, ikakhulukazi intsha yaseNingizimu Afrika ngegalelo layo emzabalazweni wethu wenkululeko, nangendima esayiqhuba ekuvikeleni amalungelo abantu.
Sihlalo, ngivumele ngicaphune amazwibela amanoni avela kwenye yezinkondlo ezingasoze zabuna zoxoshidada, esakhula ngazo, esihloko sayo sithi UNomtobhoyi:
We Nomtobhoyi Kukhiwa amanzi Uyafa uyafa Kuyaphekwa Uyafa uyafa Kuyagezwa Uyafa uyafa Kuyadliwa Chwi umlenzana!
Lokhu ngikusho ngoba kule Ndlu yesishayamthetho sinabo oNomtobhoyi. Uhulumeni oholwa yi-ANC umile uthe qingqo, ulokhu ephuma phambili kuhle kwesixhumo senyamazane ngokuhola abantu baseNingizimu Afrika ngezinkambiso nemihlahlandlela yokuletha intuthuko kuleli lengabadi ye-Afrika yonkana.
Isibonelo kulokhu yingesikhathi uhulumeni ehlaba umkhosi wokuthi kunezinhlelo azenzayo zokufinyelela ebantwini , ngalokho-ke zonke izinhlangano nomphakathi wonkana kumele zisebenzisane, okungukuthi “tiriswano”. Waphinda futhi wenza uhlelo lwe-Asgisa okuqondwe ngalo ukuvula amathuba emisebenzi. Khona emuva kwalokho nje wenza nohlelo lwe-Nepad, okuqondwe ngalo ukuthuthukisa izwekazi lethu lase-Afri-ka.
Kodwa-ke koNomtobhoyi yonke le mizamo iyize leze kubo, abayigqizi qakala; kufana nokuthela amanzi emhlane wedada nje kubo. Balokhu bedukuza oswini, behlezi phansi bethe dekle. Abanagalelo abalenzayo, kodwa uma bebona izintatheli zamaphephandaba, ezemisakazo kanye nezomabonakude bavele bathi chwi umlenzana.
Ngithanda ukukhumbuza iNdlu ukuthi uMongameli wethu, uComrade Thabo Mbeki bekuthiwa uhamba isikhathi eside futhi uhlale esemazweni angaphandle, akahlali lapha ekhaya. Bacabanga ukuthi kumele ahlale lapha ekhaya kuphela kube sengathi iNingizimu Afrika iyigatsha labo ngoba bona abanawo amagatsha. Bona-ke abakuboni ukubaluleka kokuthi kudingeke ngani aphume ahambele izwekazi lonke nomhlaba wonke jikelele. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[Chairperson, as it is the month of June, I want to honour all the youth of Africa, especially from South Africa, for the role they played in our struggle for freedom, and the role they continue to play in protecting human rights.
Chairperson, allow me to quote briefly from one of the classical poems which is meant for the kindergarten grades which we also grew up reciting. The title of the poem is Nomtobhoyi:
We Nomtobhoyi Kukhiwa amanzi Uyafa uyafa Kuyaphekwa Uyafa uyafa Kuyagezwa Uyafa uyafa Kuyadliwa Chwi umlenzana!
I quoted from this poem because in this House we have people who behave like Nomtobhoyi. The ANC-led government is standing firm, and it is, like a young buck, leading the pack when it comes to making policies and guidelines for the people of South Africa and Africa as a whole.
An example here is when the government made a clarion call that there are programmes that are being implemented to reach to the people. Therefore it was up to the community organisations and the community at large to work together, hence the word “tiriswano”. The government also came up with Asgisa with its chief intention of creating job opportunities. And Nepad was also started with the intention of developing the African continent.
And yet all this seems to be nothing to the Nomtobhoyis. They do not care. To them, it’s all just like water off a duck’s back. They have neither the direction nor the action. They play no role, and yet when they see the media, they jump with joy.
I want to remind the House that our President, Comrade Thabo Mbeki, is said to be always out of the country. And his critics say he spends most of his time out of the country. Those who say this believe that the President must idly sit in this country like they do in their branches. These people do not see the importance of visiting other African countries and the world.]
Allow me to remind the House that it would be a great mistake in our history to forget the great heroes of our continent who have contributed to the African dream that Africa must unite. There have been leaders like Dr Kwame Nkrumah who championed the clarion call for the African Renaissance in the 1960s.
This led to the creation of the OAU on 25 May 1963. This call was accepted by African leaders who pushed it in different ways. I need to mention other leaders like Julius Nyerere who initiated Ojama – African socialism – not forgetting Milton Obote who allowed the Makerere University to flourish.
What Dr Kwame Nkrumah verbalised was already in the blood of Africans. The clarion call he made was also embraced by African communities. In Africa there were many communities that had distinguished themselves before Western civilisation arrived, particularly in culture, technology, education, economics, etc.
Umbono wokwakhiwa kwe-AU wavuselelwa ngabaholi base-Afrika ngo-1990, okwalandelwa yi-Sirte Declaration eLibya mhla ziyi-9 kuMandulo ngo-1999. Leso simemezelo sasicela kwakhiwe ubumbano lwe-Afrika ngokuthi kwakhiwe i- African Union.
Leso simemezelo salandelwa yingqungquthela yaseLome ngo-2000, lapho kwavunywa khona umthethosisekelo wokwakha ubumbano lwe-Afrika eLusaka ngo-
- Ngalowo nyaka kwenziwa imizamo yokwakha iNepad. Inhlangano yobumbano lwe-Afrika yethulwa eThekwini mhla zi-2 kuNtulikazi, 2002. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[The idea of forming the AU was revived by the leadership of Africa in 1990 which was followed by the Sirte Declaration in Libya on 9 December 1999 which pleaded for the formation of the Africa Union.
This announcement was followed by the Lome conference in 2000 after which the constitution of the African Union was adopted in Lusaka in 2001. In that very year endeavours to form Nepad were made. The African Union was launched in Durban on 2 July 2002.]
The AU seeks to unite Africans as they have a common and shared identity. The first task is to achieve unity, solidarity, cohesion and co-operation among all the people of Africa and the African states.
The AU also aims to end ignorance on our continent by investing in education and research in all fields and it endeavours to develop capacity in science and technology. A key challenge it has to contend with, is to end the levels of unemployment that have been characteristic of almost all societies.
Regarding development, the AU has established the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, Nepad, as a vehicle for development.
Ngiko nje namuhla onkhe emave ase-Afrika atibophelele ekutseni umnotfo wawo ukhule udlondlobale ulandzele imigomo yeNepad. Tinyenti tinhlelo letentiwako letenta kwekutsi timbiwa nalokunye kungatfunyelwa emaveni angesheya kuseluhlata kepha kucolisiswe bese kuyatfunyelwa-ke. (Translation of Siswati paragraph follows.)
[That is why, today, all African countries have undertaken to ensure socio- economic growth according to the Nepad objectives. Numerous programmes have been initiated to ensure that minerals and other raw materials are now processed locally and not exported in their raw form.]
With regard to cultural development, in Limpopo the Venda people of Mapungubwe mastered the technology of melting gold that was used to paint, among other things, the world-famous artificial wooden rhino which experts have dated back to 1 000 AD.
In the Eastern Cape there were miners diggers called “Amambo” who were also able to melt iron and manufacture a lot of things from it. All these innovations were inspired by the spirit of the African Renaissance.
Emave ase-Afrika atiwa kakhulu ngekubambelela emasikweni awo lekuyintfo lengatiwa eYurophu, eMelika naseKhanada. Loku kwenteka nakhona umoya waseNshonalanga walinga ngawo onkhe emandla awo eminyakeni leyengca lengu- 500 kubulala emasiko, tilwimi kanye nenkholo yebantfu base-Afrika.
Badzeshi bebakwenta loku ngobe basitsengisa ngesikhatsi sebukholoni. Bawuchuba lomkhankhaso wabo nangesikhatsi semamishinani lapho emasiko, lulwimi nenkholo bebakubetsela ngesipikili balinga kukubulala. Bebatsela emanti emhlane welidada ngobe nalamuhla loku emasiko solomane asekhona.
Angisho kwekutsi ngelishwa lamanye emave, lawa labetfujwe yiFrance nemaPhuthukezi alahlekelwa ngemasiko, tilwimi nenkholo yawo. Phela, kubulala emasiko, tilwimi kanye nenkholo yebantfu, kukubulala buntfu babo. Umuntfu longenabo buyena ufanana nemuntfu lofile. Umuntfu lonjalo uhlala njalo adla ematse ebelumbi.
Lamuhla bavakashi labanyenti bavakashela i-Afrika batewubona imihambo ye- Afrika kutsi ichutjwa njani. Lubumbano lwe-Afrika lubukene nensayeya yekugcugcutela nekutfutfukisa emasiko. Injongo lenkhulu kwakhiwa kabusha kwebu-Afrika.
Kubonakele futsi kuyatiwa kutsi intfutfuko nebuchwepheshe lebebukhona e- Afrika kadzeni abukefiki kulivekati laseYurophu nakulamanye emavekati.
Lucwaningo lusivetela kutsi imphucuko yeMagrikhi yavela e-Afrika. Inyuvesi yekucala yasungulwa eGibhithe. Ngubani longaphika kwekutsi tibalo betivele tifundvwa kwakadzeni e-Afrika. Imibhalo yaseTimbuktu, eMali iyakhombisa kutsi belumbi bangesheya babetele kutewukwendzela lwati lwesayensi, lwetemitsi, lwetebunjinela nalokunye kubantfu labamnyama.
Loku kuniketa Hulumende Welubumbano lwe-Afrika insayeya yekutsi kucedvwe lenkholelo lengenaliciniso yekutsi i-Afrika bekulive lelatfolwa belumbi, imnyama, ingati lutfo kube kunebufakazi bekutsi beyinotsile, inako konkhe kwekutiphilisa kepha labamhlophe baweba wonkhe umnotfo wayo.
Asingakhohlisani bekunene, i-Afrika beyikwati kwenta yonkhe imisebenti yebuciko. [Saphela Sikhatsi.] [Tandla.] (Translation of Siswati paragraphs follows.)
[African countries are famous for clinging to their culture, something which is very unusual in Europe, America and Canada. This is so despite Western elements trying by every means over the past 500 years to invade and destroy the culture, language and religion of the people of Africa.
White people did this because while we were colonised they owned us. The campaign to subdue us was continued by the missionaries where culture, language and religion were being crucified in an effort to destroy them completely. This proved to be like water off a duck’s back because we still have our traditions today.
I should say that unfortunately, other countries that were colonised by the French or the Portuguese lost their culture, languages and religion. To take away ones culture, language and religion is to destroy one’s identity. A person who has lost his identity is like a dead person. And a person like that remains a slave to foreign ways.
Today most visitors come to Africa to experience the different cultures and to see how we live. As such the AU is faced with the challenge of encouraging and developing our cultural heritage. The greatest aim is to return Africa to its former glory.
It is a known fact that ancient civilization and technology available in Africa in the ancient days have spread to continental Europe and to the other continents. According to research, Ancient Greek civilization came from Africa. The first university was started in Egypt. Further, who can deny that mathematics was being studied in Africa since ancient times? The writings of Timbuktu in Mali are evidence that white people had come to acquire knowledge of science, medicine, engineering and other things from the black race.
This gives the AU another challenge of eradicating the false belief that Africa was discovered by white people even though there is proof that Africa had been very wealthy. She had everything necessary to sustain herself before all the wealth was stolen by the whites.
Ladies and gentlemen, let us be honest with ourselves; Africa has always produced artefacts. [Time expired.] [Applause.]]
The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I thank all hon members who are taking part by speaking or listening to this debate. Africa is the cradle of humanity and Africa is a continent of hope and endless possibilities. But the future of Africa depends on what we, the Africans do with these possibilities.
Now, Africans was defined by one of the speakers as whoever claims his birthright as an African is an African. So, in this debate what seems to be clear is that there is consensus that Africa needs to unite and even some young and old people amongst us cherish the hope that it happens in their life time. It is clear that there is a strong view that if we do not unite, Africa, as we know it will perish.
But there are also reports that by 2050 Africa will probably have the largest young population whereas Europe will have an aging population. Africa has the second largest land surface as a continent, has large amounts of natural resources but individually we do not seem to the able to harness all these possibilities.
So it seems again that we are all saying yes to integration, but some are saying we should strengthen and rationalise the economic communities as building blocks and that we should also strengthen the AU and its institutions.
In concluding this debate, it seems that we are also saying that there are issues that can be dealt with at a continental level, as Nepad has isolated those already. Therefore, we need to have a kind of twin track: firstly, strengthening the building blocks at the regional level whilst at the same time doing what we need to do at the continental level, especially around the Nepad priorities. We need to mobilise resources because without the resources we can’t even begin to integrate the continent.
I am glad to say that at the insistence of our own President, South Africa is leading in the establishment of the Africa Development Fund, which is looking at using some of the pension funds and some of the private sector funds to put together a fund that will build the infrastructure to start with on the continent, because without infrastructure we cannot even begin to integrate. So, infrastructure development is very crucial for any integration.
We hope that this House will support this fund as a way of accelerating the integration. But I also heard that you as parliamentarians, including me are saying, that this debate must not end here - it must go out to the public so that South African’s should pronounce on it. But who is best placed other than yourselves as public representatives to go back to the people you represent and ask them what their views are, because I take it today that these were your views? Now, we need to go out and ask our constituencies what their views are on this matter. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(First Reading debate) The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, hon members, quite obviously, to build a strong Africa we need taxes. The Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2007, enacts some of this year’s main tax proposals and changes announced in February 2007. Some of these changes include tax relief for individuals and as we all know, include measures to encourage saving. The Bill also extends the small business tax amnesty for a limited period, until the end of June 2007.
The Bill provides individuals with an across-the-board personal income tax relief. The first R43 000 of income tax, as we all know, will be tax-free, up from R40 000 last year. The 18% bracket now ends at R112 500 instead of the previous R100 000. At the top end, the 40% rate now kicks in for taxable incomes above R450 000 instead of R400 000. The net result is over R8,4 billion’s worth of personal income tax relief.
The end of the tax on retirement funds is one of the key measures introduced. This was a tax on the interest and rental income of retirement funds, to the extent that it was argued that this tax impacted negatively on long-term savings, especially of those at the lower end of the income scale. I’m sure this is a welcome development. Long-term savings for pension, provident funds and individual retirement annuities can now grow tax-free so as to maximise the savings of future retirees.
The National Treasury has also effected regulatory reforms so that these savings ultimately work for the benefit of hardworking individuals, not for the benefit of intermediaries and financial institutions. In that vein, the National Treasury has previously ensured three sets of compensation for individuals. The first one is the surplus apportionment compensation for the wrongful employer withholding of pension retirement benefits; the second one, a statement of intent with the insurance industry so minimum values will be preserved for those wrongfully deprived of their retirement savings; and the third intervention being the compensation for the bulking of pension interest rightfully belonging to pension fund members.
While the above measures will no doubt help to undo past wrongdoings, the taxation of these payouts would be unfair because they seek to ensure that individuals get what rightfully belongs to them. This Bill therefore assists these individuals by ensuring that current payouts of these compensations provided are indeed tax-free in as far as the income tax is concerned.
An amendment that will be of great interest to future retirees, and I think a number of us in this House are approaching that generation, is the new tax regime for lump sum payouts on retirement or death. The current tax regime for these lump-sum payouts is long out of date – not having seriously been revisited for at least the past 20 years. The formulae are so complex that they are hard even for expensive advisors to translate. In response to these problems, a whole new simplified regime is introduced.
The basic aspects are as follows: The first R300 000 lump-sum amount will be tax-free; the amount between R300 000 and R600 000 will be subject to a 18% tax rate; the amount between R600 000 to R900 000 will be subject to a 27% tax rate; and all amounts above R900 000 will be subject to a 36% tax rate. Retirees will also not be taxed to the extent they recover nondeductible contributions. The regime will apply equally to pension, provident and retirement annuity funds.
Permissible lump-sum payouts by pension and retirement funds will be received upon retirement, and also in terms of ensuring that we also deal with issues around the small retirement interest. As we all know, retirees are able to withdraw a third of their retirement interest. In addition, retirees may withdraw the remaining two thirds provided that this amount does not exceed R50 000, the equivalent of an annual annuity of approximately R4 500 per annum. This means that a person with a retirement interest of R75 000 or less in a fund, will be able to withdraw the full amount in the form of a lump sum.
Currently lump-sum payments paid by retirement funds to persons earning less than the tax threshold are subject to an 18% withholding tax, even though these amounts would otherwise be exempted. These persons have to then register as a taxpayer and claim back the tax withheld. In many instances these individuals are not familiar with the process and effectively suffer a tax which is not due when they fail to claim back. The Bill provides that lump sum payments from retirement funds paid to persons who earned less than the tax threshold in the immediately preceding year of assessment will be exempt from withholding tax.
The interest and dividend exemption for individuals of age below 65 will increase from R16 500 to R18 000 and the exemption for older individuals will increase from R24 500 to R26 000. The estate duty exemption increases from R2,5 million to R3,5 million, and the donations tax exemption increases from R50 000 to R100 000. Most of these changes should stimulate savings so that individuals have sufficient funds upon retirement or be able to pass these onto future generations.
The Minister of Finance has already indicated that the small business tax amnesty application period ran from 1 August 2006 to 31 May 2007. As I indicated earlier, the deadline has been extended for the application, up to the end of June 2007. In addition SARS will allow applicants until 31 August 2007 to submit all documents supporting their amnesty application.
The Bill provides further tax relief for public benefit organisations. The deductible ceiling for donations to qualifying PBOs will be increased from 5% of taxable income to 10% as we all know. Also what is important is that the income of public benefits organisations derived from a business undertaking or trade is exempt from income tax if, inter alia, the undertaking or activity is directly and integrally related to the sole object of the organisation’s activities. The operative word is “sole object”.
The Bill targets corporate amalgamations that undermine the tax base. Under current law, taxpayers have attempted to use amalgamations to strip out profits free of the secondary tax on companies. This potential loophole, as we all know now, has been closed. However, legitimate transactions should not be unduly affected or penalised.
Finally, the Bill includes a number of technical amendments to the Income Tax Act, the Stamp Duty Act and the Value Added Tax Act. In closing, once again I would like to thank the Portfolio Committee on Finance under the chairmanship and the steady hand of Mr Nhlanhla Nene. I thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr B A MNGUNI: Chairperson, as we are debating these issues - for the third time to be precise - it becomes very difficult not to become repetitive. The Taxation Laws Amendment Bill and the Taxation Laws Second Amendment Bill are pieces of legislation that are dealt with annually and affect the Division of Revenue Act. As the Portfolio Committee on Finance we have deliberated to our satisfaction on the two Bills and thus seek the wisdom of the House to pass these Bills.
Taxation is one of the key distributive instruments that any government uses to allocate resources, especially to the poor. In our case, government is faced with the mammoth task of equitably distributing these resources. Our people’s government also has to deal with the legacy of socioeconomic imbalances brought about by the previous racist minority regime under the cloak of a closed economy and projectionist trade policies.
As a vanguard of the people determined to better the lives of the masses, blacks in particular, the caring ANC has managed to resurrect the docile stagnant economy to its current robustness that has yielded over R490 billion in tax revenues. The ability to create a responsible citizenry that pays its dues is one of the cornerstones of a developmental state.
The ANC’s deployment of visionary and disciplined cadres ensures that the interests and aspirations of the people are progressively realised. Therefore key strategic issues underpinning tax proposals to be effected by these pieces of legislation were tabled by the Minister earlier this year in his Budget Speech and they are: supporting economic growth, investment and job creation, business development and confidence; promoting financial security of households and reducing their vulnerability through retirement reforms that encourage savings; and supporting macroeconomic policy objectives.
I would like to single out just a few proposals from the strategic objectives mentioned above and the rest of the key proposals will be dealt with by my colleagues. I will start with section 11(d) of the Income Tax Act of 1962 that deals with tax incentives on research and development. Research and development are the cornerstones of socioeconomic development without which the poorest of the poor will remain on the peripheries of growth and development.
In order to achieve socioeconomic development goals, this section allows individuals and/or entities involved in research and development rebates of up to 150% of expenditure incurred for the purpose of scientific and technological research and development. It further enables depreciation of assets directly used for research and development. There are also adequate checks and balances to ensure that incentives are not abused by those who see these as a panacea for self-enrichment.
Being the month of the youth this incentive should pose a challenge to our youth to venture into the science field, knowing that they will be able to quench their thirst for knowledge with government fully behind them. Notwithstanding personal gain and advancement in this field, the youth will be the pride of the nation as they will be contributing immensely to the development and global competitiveness of the country in general.
Amendments to section 10 of the Income Tax Act of 1962 relaxes the conditions under which public benefit organisations can raise funds and also increase the threshold of taxable income for such entities. The threshold has been increased from R50 000 to R100 000 or 5% of the gross income of the PBOs. Further, companies and individuals who donate to these PBOs will be entitled to 10% of the taxable income. The threshold has been increased from 5%. The objective of this proposal is to encourage charitable contributions. In so doing the ANC-led government is indirectly enhancing and constructing values that will define cohesion, human solidarity and equity in society.
Lastly, the economy remains capitalist in character with a dual economic structure and huge inequalities inherited from the past. Black economic empowerment, and of recent times broad-based black economic empowerment, is the broader government strategy to deracialise the economy. Section 11 of the Income Tax Act of 1962 seeks to ensure that corporate reorganisations and black economic empowerment restructuring do not face additional tax costs that could undermine necessary financing, for instance sub clause (1)(b) limits the cost of property between the connected persons in order to prevent increases in costs for enhanced tax depreciation. However, are we building a caring society if black economic empowerment companies that have built strong balance sheets continue to benefit from the equity element of the score card? Thank you.
Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson, the Minister of Finance was widely complimented subsequent to his Budget Speech in February this year and we as the DA, through my colleague hon Davidson in his response, expressed our support for the Budget Review and its content as conveyed by the Minister. We as the DA, have been part and parcel of the follow-up process where the Portfolio Committee on Finance has listened to submissions by industry and affected role-players and where we have interrogated not only the evidence submitted to us but we have also had interaction sessions with the representatives from National Treasury, Sars and others.
Voorsitter, die uitdaging vir ons as die komitee was dus grootliks om te verseker dat uiting gegee moet word aan die ondernemings en die beloftes van die Minister. Dit is nou veral waar dit nie net gehandel het oor net die wel en weë van die meerderheid van ons gemeenskappe nie, maar ook waar dit struktuur en steun moet gee aan die besigheidsektor om te verseker dat die makro-ekonomiese doelwitte onverpoos nagestreef word. Daar is verskeie regulasies, administratiewe en tegniese aspekte wat moet verseker dat die oogmerk met die relevante wetgewing uitgeleef en georganiseer, gestruktureer en korrek toegepas word.
Dit is nodig dat verskeie wysigings aan bestaande wette betreffende belasting gemaak moet word, sodat die voorstelle vervat in die Minister se Begrotingsrede bemagtig word en verseker word dat dit korrek verstaan en geïmplementeer word. Die sigbare en tasbare effek vir die belastingbetaler sal sekerlik nie net die belastingverligting en–konsessies wees wat aangekondig is nie, maar ook die welkome verkorte en vereenvoudigde belastingopgawevorms vir individue.
Van die belangrikste aankondigings wat in hierdie wetsontwerp vervat is, is beslis die hantering van die belasting op aftreefondse. Dit handel bepaald oor die deurlopende belasbaarheid van pensioenfondse, al dan nie, asook spesifiek waar enkelbedrae aan begunstigdes van pensioenfondse by aftrede of dood uitbetaal word. Ander relevante sake wat aangeraak word, sluit die volgende in: ter voorbereiding van die Sokkerwêreldbekertoernooi in 2010 is sekere konsessies nodig om te verseker dat die beste Sokkerwêreldbekertoernooi ooit nog aangebied kan word.
Ons ondersteun ook die Minister se aankondiging van die verlenging van die amnestietydperk vir die kleinsakesektor tot 30 Junie en dit is nodig dat wetgewing steunkrag daaraan moet verleen.
Dit sal die praktiese probleme van die kleinsakesektor aanspreek en sodoende hierdie sektor meer positief laat om vrywillig belastingopgawes in te dien. Goedgestruktureerde oorgangsmaatreëls is ook nodig om te verseker dat die voorgestelde implementeringstelsel vir die heffings en vrystellings daarvan op die uitvoer van diamante verleng word van 1 Julie 2007 af, om sodoende saam te val met die wysigings aan die Wet op Diamante. Eerstens moet die heffings op diamantuitvoere geskei word van ander regulasies om te verseker dat die hantering van die heffingsbeleid realisties en geordend toegepas sal kan word.
Die wetsontwerp gee ook aandag aan die in- en uitvoer van goedere en die algemene oorgrens-handel en die korrekte betaling van aksyns en ander relevante belastings aan die staat. Sars en Doeane en Aksyns moet vooraf die versekering kry oor die inhoud van houers via dokumentasie, maar ter plaatse inspeksies moet as ’n verdere voorvereiste gestel word om hieraan stukrag te gee.
Die DA was nog altyd ten gunste van maatreëls, nie net om die bereiking van die makro-ekonomiese doelwitte na te streef nie, maar ook ten gunste van ’n stelsel wat dit makliker en meer bekostigbaar maak vir Jan Burger om vrywillig belastingsopgawes te voltooi. Net so is ons ten gunste daarvan om meer entrepreneurs en lede van die kleinsakesektor binne die belastingnet in te trek, asook om ondersteunend op te tree teenoor die groter Suid- Afrikaanse sakesektor, die grootste verskaffer van werk en welvaart in Suid- Afrika en die grootste katalisators vir die groei van ons ekonomie en ons waardevolle demokrasie.
Hoewel belastingwetgewings van tyd tot tyd aangepas moet word om nuwe en moderne veranderings en uitdagings binne die globale markte aan te spreek, moet ons nooit die waarde vergeet wat die sakesektor vir ons inhou nie. Ons moet hulle nooit afskeep nie en moet hulle as vennote van die staat behou. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Chairperson, the challenge we as the committee were faced with, was therefore largely to ensure that expression be given to the undertakings and promises by the Minister. This would apply particularly where it did not only involve the fate of the majority of our communities, but also where it has to lend structure and give support to the business sector to make sure that the macroeconomic objectives would be pursued without fail. There are several regulations, administrative and technical aspects that should ensure that the objective is realised, organised, structured and correctly applied through the relevant legislation.
It is necessary for several amendments to be made to existing laws regarding taxation, so that the proposals contained in the Minister’s Budget Speech can be ratified; thereby ensuring that they are understood and implemented correctly. The visible and tangible effect this has for the taxpayer will certainly not only include the tax relief and concessions that were announced, but also the welcome, abridged and simplified individual tax return form.
Among the most important announcements contained in this Bill, is definitely how it is dealing with tax on retirement funds. It deals, in particular, with whether or not pension funds should be continuously taxable, specifically covering the area where a lump sum payment is made to beneficiaries of pension funds at retirement or death. Other relevant matters that were touched upon include that, in preparation for the 2010 Fifa World Cup, certain concessions are necessary to ensure that the best ever Soccer World Cup can be staged.
We also support the Minister’s announcement of extending the amnesty period for the small business sector to 30 June and it is essential that legislation provides support to this effect.
This will address the practical problems of the small business sector and in that way create a more positive climate for this sector to freely submit tax returns. Well-structured transition measures are also necessary to ensure that the proposed system for the implementation of levies and exemptions thereof on the export of diamonds be extended as from 1 July 2007 so that it could coincide with the amendments to the Diamond Act. In the first instance, the levies on diamond exports should be separated from other regulations to ensure that the policy on levies is applied in a realistic and structured manner.
The Bill also addresses the import and export of goods, general cross- border trade, the correct payment of excise duty and other relevant duties to the state. The content of containers should be declared beforehand in the form of documentation to Sars and Customs and Excise, but in loco inspections should be set as a further prerequisite to provide the necessary driving force.
The DA has always been in favour of measures, not only to pursue the attainment of the macroeconomic objectives, but it also favours a system that makes it easier and more affordable for John Citizen to complete tax returns voluntarily. Likewise, we are in favour of drawing more entrepreneurs and members of the small business sector into the tax net, as well as being supportive towards the South African business sector at large, which is the biggest provider of jobs and prosperity in South Africa and the most important catalyst for our economic growth and our precious democracy.
Although tax legislation has to be amended from time to time to accommodate new and modern changes and challenges within the global market, we should never forget the value that the business sector holds for us. We should never disregard them, and should retain them as partners of the state.]
Please allow me to extend my sincere gratitude and appreciation to both the National Treasury and Sars for the open and co-operative manner in which we have dealt with all the challenging issues. I am confident that the table has been set for more proactive and growth-enabling interaction between the Portfolio Committee on Finance, the Ministry of Finance and the mentioned institutions.
Also to the members of the Portfolio Committee on Finance and our chairperson specifically, I want to show my appreciation for the stimulating and co-operative spirit in which we deliberate issues and accept the credibility and value of the input of each member. Minister and Deputy Minister, you are certainly privileged to be supported not only by outstanding staff in Treasury and Sars, but most certainly also by the quality of the members of this committee. The DA supports these Bills. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr H J BEKKER: Chairman, the Bills before the House merely translate the tax proposals made by the Minister of Finance during his Budget Speech in February into law.
The abolishment of taxation on pension funds has been applauded by the IFP but now the further reassessment of the lump sum of pensions and retirement funds is again a very, very positive move. As the Minister indicated, the mere fact that the R300 000 levels are brought in at R300 000, R600 000 and R 900 000, an elementary calculation in terms of this would translate into an actual saving on the first R900 000 of 50% of the actual monies and after a rough calculation, the individual can save about R150 000 in terms of this. That is really a very, very positive move. One of the key recommendations of the Katz Commission was the use of special amnesties to broaden the tax base and to encourage tax compliance. Sars has used a variety of these special amnesties over the years which could be one of the reasons why the tax base has grown so much and why tax revenue is constantly underestimated.
The small business tax amnesty is an example of the special amnesties to broaden the tax base and on its announcement, the IFP expressed strong support for it. We must therefore welcome the extension as indicated by the Minister in terms of this. We must also congratulate Sars, not just for its efficiency in tax collection but also for its transformation from the once dreaded Receiver to a trusted, compassionate and professional organisation that clearly has the confidence of the public as taxpayers.
The IFP noted that the Minister had announced on 4 June that he was requested by five organisations to extend the amnesty deadline for small businesses. These organisations were: the SA Institute of Professional Accountants, the SA Institute of Chartered Accountants, the SA Chamber of Business and the SA National Taxi Association. But then very mysteriously the National Professional Teachers Organisation of South Africa, Naptosa, was also among the small business representatives. Maybe I am just confused, but I don’t see any relevance in teachers applying for amnesty in terms of the small business amnesty proposals. Or maybe I am not so confused and that it is the teachers that are confused. Maybe the teachers have confused small business with teaching to small children in primary schools.
The IFP would like to urge the Minister to consider other special tax amnesties in future, which may include the teachers in this case, on the evidence of the small business amnesty. There must be a very good chance that others in different categories would also prove to be as successful in broadening the tax base and the expected increases in revenue. I thank you. We in the IFP will support this Bill. [Time expired.]
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, these amendments effectively put the Budget proposals into law; one of the most important of which relates to the repeal of tax on retirement funds. Long-term savings can now grow tax-free. So, this maximises savings for retirees. The ACDP notes that the retirement fund industry welcomes the changes.
In their view, Sars and the industry had insufficient systems and resources to administer the tax because it had been introduced as a temporary tax. Deputy Minister, is this not something that Sars and Treasury could consider? We appreciate, however, that the intention was to do away with the tax on growth and all that remains was the final tax upon withdrawal.
As far as the small business amnesty is concerned, in view of the overwhelming response, it makes sense to support the extension of the deadline. We as the ACDP also support the increases for PBOs. We trust that these steps will promote charitable giving to improve our society as a whole. The ACDP will support these Bills. Thank you. Mrs M E MBILI: Chairperson, hon members of this august House, comrades and colleagues, the ANC is committed to the creation of a better life for all. That is the first point of departure, and professional and sustainable revenue collection is the principal device that the government through Sars must use to promote its growth of social and transformation.
Sars’ user-friendly image accompanied by professional ethics has won the admiration of all South Africans. These approaches encourage existing taxpayers to honour their obligations whilst it seeks to broaden the net to those previously outside the tax system. Annually the Minister presents his Budget Speech which has tax implications.
This then requires Sars to compile its contents and present the proposal to this House, hence today we seek to endorse the Tax Laws Amendment Bill
- One thing about the ANC is that we put meaning in what we say. In the meantime this Bill seeks to help the lower levels of our society to comply with the tax regime without putting an extra burden on their hard-earned income.
Therefore the tax reform proposal is geared towards the poor and the vulnerable in our society, which is what the ANC is all about. Personal income tax relieves individuals as the Minster has already alluded to in this point. Those who earn less than R43 000 will not be paying tax. You remember in February 1996, only individuals earning less than R14 600 per annum where not required to pay tax. This is a 300% relief over a 12-year period aiming at alleviating hardships to our people. And again, this is what the ANC is all about. Tax on retirement funds has been repealed. Long- term savings for pension provident funds and individuals’ retirement annuity can now expand free tax, thereby maximising the retirement benefits of the future retirees.
The total effect of these changes is that individuals, not intermediaries or financial institutions, will benefit from the retirement fund investments and the proceeds thereof. The new tax regime provides for lump sum payouts for retirees.
This legislation provides for the following: the first 300 lump sum will not be paying tax; 300 to 618%, 600 000 to 927% and the above 900 000 will be subjected to 36% and this applies to pensions from the retirement provident funds and other annuity funds.
The interest on dividends exemption for individuals below 65 will increase to R18 000, and this is up from R16 500, and for these above 65, as again the Minister has alluded to, to R26 000 from R24 500. Last year the amnesty for small businesses, including taxi operators was approved. This amnesty period has now been extended to 30 May and it was approved from 01 August 2006 until 31 May 2007.
To necessitate this extension, we therefore call upon our small businesses in particular, to optimally use this window of opportunity to apply for this amnesty. We were then assured that there will be no further extension in this regard.
Yingakho nje ngifisa ukukhuluma nabantu bakithi. Kukhona abantu lapha abakhuluma inkulumo eyize yokuthi mhlawumbe kukhona abafuna ukubanjwa. Sisebenze kanzima ngenkathi sicela ukuthi kube khona ukwelulwa kwesikhathi ngenhloso yokuthi abantu bakithi beze bonke. Kubalulekile ukuthi abantu babhalise amabhizinisi abo. Akekho umuntu ofuna ukubanjwa.
Sicela ukuthi osomabhizinisi bethu nezinhlangano zabo ezifana nabo-Nafcoc nabanikazi bamatekisi ukuthi beze bazofaka isicelo salo shwele ukuze baziwe ukuthi bakhona emabhukwini. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[That is why I wish to talk to our people directly. There are people here who insinuate that this is done solely with the intention of defrauding people. We worked hard when we asked for the extension of tax amnesty so that all our people could come forward. It is important for people to register their businesses for tax. No one wants to defraud anyone here.
We request business people, including taxi owners and certain organisations like Nafcoc, to come forward and apply for this amnesty so that it can be known that they are in our filing system.]
In light of the above, we believe that the insinuation by some that because we have a tax overrun, we should consider corporate tax reduction is not supported. We believe that it will be irresponsible for a country where two economies exist. We should narrow the gap between the two economies.
Moreover, our corporate tax regime is compatible with our trading partners in both developed and developing countries, like for instance, New Zealand is 33%; Belgium is 33,9%; the USA is 40%, and Japan is 40%. Those are the developed countries while our developing partners, such as Argentina, are 35,9 %; Egypt is 40% and India is 35,9%.
We therefore argue that reducing it further will be very much out of line, considering the many challenges that the country is facing with regard to social economy transformation. This then remains on top of the agenda for the ruling party for we are of the opinion that this is what our people demand of us.
Siyavumelana lapha. [We agree on this one.]
Yes, people’s lives hold equal value and this Bill seeks to achieve just that. Thanks for listening. I thank you.
Mr M T LIKOTSI: The Chairperson, tax is a significant catalyst to the revenue of the state to be passed onto all citizens of the country in the form of fixed deliverables, basic services, internal protection, health services, economic development and social security.
The Taxation Laws Amendment Bill and Taxation Laws Second Amendment Bill are aimed at serving the socioeconomic security of the citizens of our country by amending its many tax-related Acts.
To safeguard the interest of the nation in our developmental state, the Minister of Finance should at all times do research on how the nation may have maximum benefits from taxation, both nationally and internationally. The Minister of Finance must fully acquaint himself with the tools of this trade of taxation to prevent unscrupulous individuals, companies and trusts that are using all the tricks in the book to avoid taxation.
The PAC welcomes these amendments that will also benefit the low-income individuals whose threshold of taxation has been determined to their favour. The tax rebates will come as a relief to deserving citizens of our country who work tirelessly to improve the economy during these economically challenging times.
Taxation rebates to business entities may, if taken advantage of by the incumbent, address issues of housing, medical care, educational bursaries, small business and agriculture. I thank you. The PAC supports the Bill. [Time expired.] Mr R B BHOOLA: Chairperson, the MF applauds the tax relief that this Bill brings to working class South Africans and it will certainly serve to make a difference in the savings and expenditure of households.
The MF is most pleased with the repeal of tax on retirement funds. This means that our retirees may rest comfortably knowing that their savings for their old age have grown without any tax burden and they will have more funds to live a more comfortable retirement.
The number of applications for small business amnesty received by Sars is phenomenal. We are pleased that the Bill has in consideration of this, extended the amnesty deadline to 30 June 2007. In consideration of this, we need, however, to encourage small businesses to see that this amnesty is in their favour and they need to seize the opportunity.
The MF is pleased with accommodation made by the Bill regarding the public benefit organisations and corporate amalgamations. The MF will support the Bill.
Ms J L FUBBS: Yes, hon Chairperson, I’d like to address the House on the Taxation Laws Amendment Bills before us and the use of revenue as an instrument of redistribution for a better life. Within the framework of our developmental state, the Bill seeks to encourage savings and so enable all sectors of society, business and other organisations and individuals to share with the state the responsibility for themselves and their workers.
I shall focus on two of the Bill’s objectives: retirement funds and lump sums and tax avoidance related to secondary tax on companies. It is useful to note that this Bill had widespread support in the House but there is a reservation by the ACDP on the drawn-out process related to retirement funds and not the completion. The reality is this, that debt requires a very complex set, a whole suitcase of legislation. We now have to unpack it and try to make sense of what was previously drawn up 15, 20 or 40 years ago.
It is very complicated and we do not want, in any way, to deprive elderly people in the future or now of what should rightfully be theirs, so let us look at it more carefully and cautiously.
Tax incentives have been used to encourage local skills development and infrastructure upgrades for local research and development. This does not extend to foreign businesses, which frankly, do not contribute to these two developmental imperatives.
Significant savings are realised with the repeal of the Tax on Retirements Funds as we’ve heard from everyone. This means long-term savings for pension and provident funds, and individual retirement annuities can now grow tax free. The harder you work, the greater the benefit in the future. Just a couple of points to underline the silver lining provided for those who retire in the future under the new taxation lump sum’s payout - I think the Deputy Minister has already pointed out the R300 000 tax free, etc. You can now reinvest this, pay off your house and settle your debts. Only 18% on the next R300 000 will be taxed. For those who have the good fortune to have amounts of over R900 000, a mere 36% tax is all that that will be subjected to.
Indeed, everyone who is enjoying capital gains gets to benefit, but this has been increased for those over the age of 65.
There is also another area I just want to mention, and that is the Diamond Export Levy Act, which is still to be promulgated. To prevent a vacuum being created prior to the promulgation of the Diamond Export Levy Bill, this particular Bill amends sections 63 and 59 of the Diamonds Act.
To get back to the main part of the speech, you can see that what Sars has set out to do is to ensure that all employees have affordable access to appropriate retirement funding, that there is protection for pension resources against corrosion that is caused and the promotion of the adequacy of retirement fund provision.
What is interesting for all of us, even those South Africans who only have to pay a R100 on tax, is that everyone who pays all of the taxes have contributed to a fiscal space. What does fiscal space mean? In short, it means you have bought bricks to build houses for our people. [Interjections.] Yes, you have paid for some of our children to get an education.
You have paid for some of the babies, pregnant mothers and children under the age of seven to get free primary health care. You have paid towards the treatment and support of those with HIV/Aids. Indeed, you have paid for some social grants and you have paid towards providing free basic water and other services. Yes, by paying all the tax that you have been paying, you’ve shared in the reduction of poverty and helped to grow the economy and to create jobs.
Small businesses will be able to grow even bigger once they have legitimised their status. Corporate SA can indeed reach phenomenal heights in headline earnings, balance sheet profits and optimal after-tax profits in a politically stable, economically sound country and a socially robust nation.
However, despite significant increases in tax collection between 7% and 12% a year due to the efficiencies - we heard the DA so eloquently put across to the House - and structural improvements, Sars continues to grapple with the reduction of the tax gap. This tax gap, we may have forgotten, is in a region of R15 billion to R25 billion; roughly 40% of government revenue remains uncollected largely through the vigorous pursuit of tax avoidance schemes. This translates into between 50% and 100% of the total provincial spending on education in the 2006-07 financial year. Imagine what we could do with this money, fighting even the HIV/Aids challenge!
We wish to urge the private sector to desist, to stop these practices preventing them from full compliance with tax measures. We urge them to recognise their role in reducing poverty and building a nation of South Africans in which all share legitimately in the wealth of their paid and unpaid work.
Government can no longer tolerate the reckless disregard of some companies to wriggle through the gaps in the secondary tax on companies legislation. Those that have been using amalgamations to strip out the profits, free of the secondary tax on companies will have to find other waters to swim in. The ANC supports this Bill, which will encourage savings and also free up more fiscal space for increased social expenditure. I thank you.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, as all hon members who participated in this debate have correctly observed, tax policy is indeed a critical element of fiscal policy. Amongst the principles that were highlighted by members that, I believe, all of us agree upon, is around the need for this policy to be transparent in order to encourage compliant savings and ensure equity in terms of contributions amongst citizens that earn unequal incomes and also ensure that it is basically simple. Tax reforms, as hon member Swart would correctly observe and appreciate, must be undertaken in small, manageable steps in order to reduce attendance risks in as far as revenue fluctuations are concerned. Hence the steps that we have taken today are a clear indication of the intention of this government to manage the tax policy, particularly the fiscal policy generally in a manner that serves the interest of the people of South Africa.
Once again, I would like to thank all the members for participating in this debate. Quite clearly, there are high levels of unanimity in as far as the impression of support is concerned. This is clearly a good sign for South Africa and a clear message for all South Africans that we should all comply and contribute to the development of our country. Thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a first time.
Taxation laws amendment bill
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate. Bill read a second time.
TAXATION LAWS SECOND AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
PENSION FUNDS AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, I think looking at the levels of attendance and participation in this room, quite clearly, it’s an area of interest for those of us who chose to remain in this House.
The Pension Funds Amendment Bill of 2007, which is being debated in this House today, addresses the urgent technical and regulatory issues in the Pensions Funds Act of 1956.
The House will recall that in 2001, the Pensions Fund Second Amendment Act was passed. That Act primarily dealt with two important issues, namely that of the apportionment of a surplus in a pension fund and minimum benefits for pensioners and members on withdrawal. The second amendment took a number of years to be finalised given the emotive issues concerned with the use of pension fund surpluses over the past few decades.
This House would also remember that the Act was vigorously debated at Nedlac and it was recognised that, in many instances, former members of pension funds were important contributors to the building up of pension fund surpluses over time. As a matter of equity in any distribution of surpluses the former members would have to be considered if that process begins. An equitable apportionment of surplus therefore involves all stakeholders in the fund: former members, current members and employers.
This process naturally involves large sums of money, which in some cases could require an employer to repay surpluses utilised improperly by the fund. The vast majority of pension funds have complied with the spirit and intention of the 2001 Pensions Act in apportioning the fund surpluses. But not unexpectedly, given the sums involved, some legal challenges have been brought forth since 2001, as quick legal minds and those seeking to avoid liability scoured the Act for any form of legal loopholes.
Chairperson, in many ways these challenges seek to subvert the spirit of the original legislation passed by this very House. By interpreting the law in the narrowest sense possible we would not do this House justice if we did not seek to reinforce and to entrench the provisions and the spirit of the 2001 legislation with regards to surplus apportionment, thereby protecting the most vulnerable in our society.
The Bill before this House therefore attempts to close the legal loopholes by clarifying certain provisions related to surplus utilisation, particularly if it was done in the past by employers and other provisions relating to surpluses generally. The proposed changes contained in the Bill follow the same principle rectified by this very House in 2001: namely, that surpluses apportionment is not a so-called ``witch-hunt’’ against employers but rather it ensures fairness in surplus apportionment processes. It is about ensuring that a proper balance of interest is struck between all stakeholders involved.
I should add that although the Bill primarily involves a clarification of a variety of the provisions relating to surpluses, it also addresses a number of other important issues, including bringing bargaining council funds within the ambit of the Act, thereby affording their members the protection and oversight offered by the Registrar of Pension Funds and recourse to the pension funds adjudicator; codifying the duties of pension funds administrators which follows debates and investigation in so-called secret profits retained by administrators; changing the provision governing the pension funds adjudicator which seeks to clarify the jurisdiction and operations of that office; ensuring a more equitable treatment of a non- member spouse in the case of divorce. This will see an end to the inequitable treatment of divorcees, whereby little or no growth is attached to the portion of the pension monies allocated to them by the order of the court.
The Bill also incorporates relationships recognised under the recently promulgated Civil Union Act and makes allowances for other court orders such as maintenance orders. These changes, hon members, therefore provide further protection to dependants and other beneficiaries.
Importantly, the Bill also significantly increases the power of the Registrar of the Pension Funds, including the power to impose administrative penalties. This House is well aware of several instances of abuse in the pension funds and insurance sector, which have been exposed in the past few years. Such abuses are often due to lax governance, inadequate disclosures, conflicts of interest and poor trusteeship. In the face of such difficulties, not only do these problems need to be addressed, but the regulator requires sufficient powers to intervene where necessary to protect the interest of members.
The provision of this Bill will bring supervisory powers of the Registrar in line with international standards and also with best practices. In conclusion, this Bill is indeed an important step in the continuing effort to protect the monies members faithfully contributes towards their retirement over their working lives. It will ensure that the original intention of this House in 2001 is adhered to and that all stakeholders, including former members, will be treated fairly in the apportionment of pension fund surpluses. We also owe it to members to build not only a sound governance and legal framework but also to provide those who police participants in the industry - in this case the Registrar of Pension Funds
- sufficient powers whereby they can efficiently execute their responsibilities and duties.
These are indeed urgent improvements to the regulatory architecture that can be instituted now for the benefit all while we simultaneously set about a broad social security and retirement fund reform process.
Before closing, once again I would like to thank particularly the Portfolio Committee on Finance under the chairpersonship and the steady hand of the hon Nhlanhla Nene. Thank you, hon Chairperson. [Applause.]
Mr K A MOLOTO: Chairperson, hon members, allow me to give you a historical background to this Bill. In 2001 organised labour and business could not come to an agreement on the ownership and distribution of the surplus funds that arose as a result of members of pension fund migrating from a definite benefit fund to a definite contribution fund.
Business was of the view that the whole surplus belongs exclusively to business. Their argument rested on two assumptions. The first assumption was that business carried all the risk as final guarantor of the definite benefit scheme. The second part of the argument rested on the view that business had honoured their obligations to members as they migrated from a definite benefit funds to a definite contributions fund and therefore whatever remained in the fund belonged to business.
On the other hand, organised labour also wanted the surplus exclusively for workers or members. Their argument rested on the premises that workers did not receive their fair share when they migrated from a definite benefit fund to a definite contribution fund. The matter was finally brought before Parliament in 2001.
Parliament took a more balanced approach on this matter after listening to a comprehensive submission from organised labour, the National Treasury and the Financial Services Board. I must also mention that organised business did not make any submission on this matter.
Parliament came to the conclusion that the surplus funds belonged to the pension fund and that a legal framework should be put in place to distribute money to various stakeholders as defined in the Pension Fund Amendment Act of 2001.
Parliament considered that indeed workers did not get their fair share as they migrated from the DB fund to the DC fund.
Parliament went further to agree that the employer also has a right to the surplus after we considered good actuarial advice from the Financial Service Board. Parliament’s intention in 2001 when passing this legislation was that the origin of the surplus funds should be investigated from 1 January 1980. This period was chosen after being informed by various stakeholders that this was the period when most funds were converted from definite benefit fund to definite contribution funds.
It also came to the attention of the Portfolio Committee on Finance that the surplus funds could have been used improperly by employers in the process. The Pension Funds Amendment Act of 2001 indicates four categories of improper use of surpluses by the employers: firstly, the giving of additional benefits to executives in excess to what was given to other members; secondly, the allocation of additional pension benefits to a selected groups of members to the total exclusion of other members; thirdly, employers contributing less than what was recommended by an actuary and even in certain instance, ceasing to make a contribution to the fund thus eroding the surplus; lastly, the cost of recognising prior personal services to selected members.
This Bill aims to clarify uncertainties regarding the true intention of Parliament around the investigation of the improper use of the surplus by the employer, among other issues. It came to the attention of the Portfolio Committee on Finance that there is confusion amongst certain stakeholders on the true intention of Parliament when you passed the legislation in 2001.
Clearly, we need to confirm the decision Parliament took in 2001 that the investigation on improper use of surpluses should go back to 1 January
- We have to say clearly that the intention of Parliament’s legislation then was that it should be retrospective.
Business Unite South Africa made a submission before this committee challenging the constitutionality of backdating proper use to 1989 on the grounds that it is retrospective. After considering various legal opinions presented before the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the constitutionality of the matter of improper use of surpluses, the committee took a view that the decision of Parliament in 2001 was a correct decision. The view of the committee on the provisions of this Bill on this matter is rational and fair.
The Portfolio Committee on Finance was also of the view that Parliament in the past passed legislation aimed at redressing the past inequities. This Bill aims to redress the inequities of the past as I have already outlined.
Allow me to turn to a very important matter of divorce orders. The current Pension Act does not allow for the immediate payment of a pension benefit to a nonmember spouse upon dissolution of a marriage. Nonmember spouse benefits remain locked in the member’s funds until retirement. The problem is that the spouse benefit does not grow in value while the member’s fund grows in value. This puts the spouse in a disadvantaged position.
To remedy this untenable situation the Bill provides for the clean break principle: The nonmember’s spouse shall have the option to elect an immediate payment of his or her portion of the pension benefit. The spouse would then pay tax on the payment received or alternatively the spouse can elect to transfer the payment to an approved fund.
A pension fund named in there must effect the deduction upon receipt of the divorce order.
Let me also turn to the issue of powers of the Registrar of Pension Funds. The recent episodes of financial misconducts warrant that this House give this matter urgent attention. Under the current Law, the Registrar of Pension Funds cannot remove trustees without first applying to the courts in terms of section 26 of the Pension Funds Act.
The problem in such a position is that court processes take a long time while member’s interests are placed at risk. According to this Bill, the registrar may remove a member who is not fit and proper to hold office. The registrar has to notify the trustee and give the trustee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
In terms of this Bill, the Registrar of Pension Funds is empowered to intervene in the management of pension funds. The registrar may direct that the rules of pension funds, including rules relating to the appointment, remuneration and removal of board members after considering the interest of the members of the funds.
The registrar can direct that the rules be amended if the registrar is of the opinion that the fund is not in a sound position or does not comply with the provisions of this Act; secondly, in case the board has failed to act where the fund is in an unsound financial position; thirdly, when the fund is not managed in accordance with this act or the rules of the fund.
Currently, there are certain pension or profitable funds established in terms of the Labour Relations Act or collective bargain agreement. These funds are not compelled by the current legislation to register with a Financial Services Board and most of these funds are registered voluntarily with the Financial Services Board.
The committee is concerned that some of these funds do enjoy the protection afforded by the Pension Funds Act. This Bill stipulates that all provident funds established under the Labour Relations Act must be governed by the Pension Funds Act. The portfolio committee is convinced that the financial board has the capacity and expertise to regulate collective bargain funds.
The current office of the Registrar of Labour Relations will not have the capacity to inspect these funds and enforce the rules of the funds. The Bill also instructs the administrator of a pension fund to endeavour to avoid conflict between the interest of the administrator and the duties of the administrator to the fund.
The administrator is required to disclose that conflict of interest to the trustee and explain fully how such conflict of interest is going to be managed. The administrator is required to manage the fund in a responsible manner. Lastly, the registrar is given the power to suspend or withdraw the approval granted to the administrator. The ANC supports this Bill.
Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairman, a large portion of South African citizens has the same objective in life and that is to contribute to a secure pension fund that will provide for their needs when they go on pension. They are honest, law-abiding citizens who work hard in often very difficult circumstances for the day they can sit back and enjoy life as a senior citizen, knowing they have secured monetary provisions to cater for their everyday needs.
It is therefore not strange that it is expected of government to provide a framework to organise the pension fund industry to ensure that the savings and livelihood of members of pension funds are secured.
Voorsitter, bestaande wetgewing moet van tyd tot tyd aangepas word om aan die hedendaagse uitdagings en omstandighede te voldoen en om te verseker dat lede van pensioenfondse seker kan wees van hul regmatige voordele wat hulle toekom.
Daar is ongelukkig voorbeelde waar afgetredenes krepeer van die ellende en armoede, ongeag die verwagtings wat hulle gekoester het vir ’n sorgelose oudag. Baie van hulle is nou die staat se verantwoordelikheid. Dit is ons plig as Parlement om te verseker dat hul beste belange deurentyd vooropgestel word.
Die primêre doel van die wetsontwerp is juis om verdere ondersteuning en stukrag te gee aan die optimale en volhoubare beskerming van die belange van huidige en oudlede van pensioenfondse. Die voorgestelde veranderinge is baie dringend, hoewel grootliks tegnies en administratief van aard. Dit spreek nie net die bestaande voorsienings in die wet beter aan nie, maar bring dit ook in ooreenstemming met bepalings en toepassings in ander verwante wette. Dit bring duidelikheid oor die voorsienings en verklarings van surplusfondse in die bestaande wetgewing.
Uit die interaksies van die komitee met verskeie relevante bedryfsrolspelers en geaffekteerdes is dit duidelik dat die voorgestelde veranderings apart gesien moet word van die beloofde hervormingsproses van pensioenfondse en die sogenaamde “social security” stelsel. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Chairperson, existing legislation has to be amended from time to time to measure up to present-day challenges and circumstances and to ensure that members of pension funds can be assured of the rightful benefits that are their due.
There are unfortunately examples where retired persons find themselves destitute, in spite of the hopes they cherished for a carefree old age. Many of them are now the state’s responsibility. It is our duty as Parliament to ensure that their best interests are constantly placed first.
The primary purpose of this Bill is precisely to give further support and momentum to the optimal and sustainable protection of the interests of existing and past members of pension funds. The proposed amendments are very urgent, though primarily of a technical and administrative nature. Not only does it address the existing provisions in the Act more appropriately, but it also fits in with the provisions and applications of other related Acts. It sheds light on the provisions and declaration of surplus funds in existing legislation.
From the interaction of the committee with several other relevant role- players in the industry and those affected by it, it is clear that the proposed amendments should be viewed separately from the promise of a pension fund reform process and the so-called “social security” system.]
The objective of this amendment Bill is to protect the pension interest of existing and past members. For instance, it clarifies the apportionment of the surplus utilised improperly in terms of section 15(b) of the Act. The amendments will provide clarity to boards of trustees responsible for apportioning surplus funds and to close loopholes that allow for creative interpretations that was not the intention with the Pension Funds Second Amendment Act.
It brings the regulations of retirement funds established through bargaining council arrangements under the regulatory auspices of the Registrar of Pension Funds. It addressed the required powers of the registrar to increase regulatory effectiveness. It addresses the specific duties of pension fund administrators and clarifies the jurisdiction of the pension fund adjudicator. It also brings clarity on how to deal with divorce orders and maintenance claims in respect of pension fund benefits and it aligns the Act to accommodate the changes in regulatory policy and practical considerations.
Van die grootste uitdagings vir die komitee was vir seker die evaluering en beoordeling van die uiteenlopende insette deur verskillende bedryfsrolspelers. Kontroversieel was vir seker die bepalings dat kapitaal van pensioenfondslede oorgeplaas kan word van tradisionele of onderskryfde pensioen- en annuïteitsfondse na die sogenaamde nie-onderskryfde fondse. In so ’n geval sal fondse waarvan reeds vooraf volle kommissie verhaal is, oorgeplaas word na fondse waarop daar deurlopende koste verhaal sal word op grond van die verdienste van die fonds of soos met die lede van die fonds ooreengekom is.
Die terugwerkende beginsel van verdeling van pensioenfondsreserwes, soos vervat in hierdie wetsontwerp, kan lei tot duur en uitgerekte hofsake wat selfs tot in die Konstitusionele Hof beveg kan word. Hoewel die aanwending van die fondsreserwes nie in die verlede noodwendig teen die reëls van die betrokke fonds of die bepalings van die finansiële diensteraad was nie, kan die terugwerkende beginsel by die aanvaarding van die wet impliseer dat sekere aanwendings in die verlede nou as onvanpas en onreëlmatig verklaar word. Dit kan die gevolg inhou dat sekere multinasionale organisasies nou baie onbegrote en onbeplande miljoene rande tot die betrokke pensioenfondse moet bydra, wat ’n negatiewe impak op die prestasies van die organisasies en moontlike beleggings kan beteken.
Ons moet egter onthou dat dit reserwes is wat verdien is op die bydraes van die spesifieke lede, maar aan wie dit nie noodwendig toegedeel is nie en dus nie die voordeel gekry het nie. Behalwe dat die wetsontwerp handel oor die finansiële voorspoed van pensioenfondslede moet ons ook nie die morele relevansie hiervan uit die oog verloor nie.
Pensioenfondstrusts en – trustees steun hierdie wetsontwerp en was sulke voorleggings ook in die komitee gemaak. Hoewel die DA sensitief is vir veral die korttermyn ekonomiese impak op veral multinasionale organisasies, het ons geen twyfel dat die inhoud en die bepaling van hierdie wetsontwerp geregverdig is nie en dat dit sal lei tot die verbetering van die lewenskwaliteit van baie pensioenfondslede. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Some of the greatest challenges for the committee were certainly to evaluate and review the diverse inputs from various role players in the industry. The provisions that were certainly controversial were those which stipulate that pension fund members’ capital can be transferred from traditional or underwritten pension and annuity funds to the so-called non- underwritten funds. In this instance funds on which the full commission has already been recovered beforehand will be transferred to funds from which continuous costs will be recovered on the basis of the earnings of the fund or as agreed upon with the members of the fund.
The retrospective principal of apportioning pension fund reserves, as contained in this Bill, could lead to costly and drawn-out lawsuits that could even be contested right up to the Constitutional Court. In the past, even though the appropriation of fund reserves did not necessarily contravene the rules of the relevant fund or the regulations of the Financial Services Board, the retrospective principle could, with the passing of the Act, imply that certain appropriations of the past could now be declared inappropriate and irregular. This could result in certain multinational organisations now having to contribute millions of unbudgeted and unplanned for rands to the relevant pension funds, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the organisations and possible investments.
However, we must remember that these reserves have been earned from the contributions of specific members to whom it was not necessarily apportioned and therefore they could not benefit from it. Except for the fact that the Bill deals with the financial wellfare of members of pension funds, we must also not lose sight of its moral relevance.
Pension fund trusts and trustees are supporting this Bill and such submissions were also made to the committee. Although the DA is particularly sensitive to the short-term economic impact on multinational organisations in particular, we have no doubt that the contents and the provisions of this Bill are justifiable and that it will lead to the improvement of the quality of life of many members of pension funds.]
I want to express my appreciation again to National Treasury and the Portfolio Committee on Finance for the thorough and decisive way that this Bill and the various submissions were interrogated and the transparent manner in which we could interact with the specialists from Treasury. The DA supports this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr H J BEKKER: Chairperson, the retirement industry in South Africa is a very large one with hundreds of billions of rand invested in it. Most formerly employed people use these funds and their products to save for their postemployment retirement.
In this matter, these citizens provide privately for their retirement and should therefore as a rule not become a financial burden to the state. However, the regulation of the industry has not always been as tight as it could have been and, as Treasury puts it, some very creative legal interpretations have been used to circumvent the spirit and letter of the law.
Key challenges for government in the regulation of the retirement fund industry include lowering costs, improved governance, improved performance by trustees, the correct application of the surplus legislation, improving the supervisory powers of the financial services board and encouraging the culture of compliance. The Bill aims to address these challenges and the IFP, therefore, supports it.
In general terms, retrospective application of legislation can be construed as being against the fundamental principles of the rule of law and the certainty of the legal environment that it creates. The IFP, however, accepts that the Minister and Treasury have used retrospection in this case to increase the protection afforded by the law to former members, particularly as it is alleged that cases of abuse took place well before the cut-off date as proposed and it will continue to do so in the future.
The IFP also supports the amendments of bringing the pension funds adjudicators in line with the Prescription Act and that the Minister may appoint one or more deputy adjudicators and that an acting adjudicator could improve operational efficiency in that office. I’ve got a lot to say. I have a long speech here, but I can see that the hon members are really tired, at this stage, being put to the limit and I think that I would like to set an example by tabling the rest of my speech for inclusion. Before I do that, I just hope that the same dedication that the committee and the Ministry have shown in terms of this, will also apply when looking at Members of Parliament’s own pension funds. Let them just see if they can’t do something about that, because it is truly miserable and we need to have a look at it. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, I will follow the previous speaker’s example and limit my comments to one minute.
South Africans are not a nation of savers. The national savings ratio has steadily declined to a level previously seen in 1949. Most citizens in the formal sector contribute towards their retirement, often over their whole lifetime. This then serves as the most significant source of savings for these individuals.
The retirement fund industry has been under the spotlight in recent years due to various concerns. The purpose of this Bill is to enhance the protection of pension interests of members, which the ACDP welcomes and supports. We do, however, note that the Bar council raised concerns regarding the registrar’s ability to impose penalties of up to R5 million per day. They argued that it would take away people’s right to a fair trial.
Treasury, however, argued that administrative penalties were a well- respected tool internationally. We also trust that the retrospective application of certain provisions, though extraordinary and justifiable, will be upheld by a court should they be challenged. We, as indicated earlier, will support this Bill, as it seeks to protect the interests of members of pension funds. I thank you. Dr S E M PHEKO: Chairperson, the PAC supports the Pension Funds Amendment Bill. As can be observed, the Pension Funds Act is a very old law. Much has happened since 1956; this Act is over 50 years old.
The Act is being amended to clarify certain expressions and provisions in line with the practical application and elite outdated provisions. Some of the expressions that are defined are “administrator”, “beneficiary”, “spouse”, “employer’s surplus account”, etc. The object of this Bill is to protect the pension interests of members and indeed to align the Act to accommodate the changes in regulatory policy and practical considerations.
The Pension Funds Amendment Bill has no constitutional implications and the PAC supports this Bill. It is in the interest of pensioners who have served this country well and now rely on this kind of financial source for their living as senior citizens. Thank you.
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, the MF notes the importance that pensions plays in the lives of many contributing South Africans and their dependence on these funds once they have retired. Even though the Taxation Law Amendment Bill has made way to repeal taxes on retirement funds, it is a legislator’s duty to ensure that the necessary legal instruments have been put in place to secure these savings of contributions to the fund.
In view of the Bill, the MF finds the provisions made to clarify the role played in management of the fund as suitable. The MF, however, uses this platform to reiterate its call for a better liveable pension for all retirees. We would consider R1 800 pension to be far more suitable to fulfil the needs and basic necessities of our pensioners.
Free basic health care and a special pension rate for a number of government services and amenities such as food should be considered. The MF supports the Pension Amendment Bill. I thank you.
Mnu S E ASIYA: Siyabulela Mhlalingaphambili; le ntetho ndiza kuyenza namhlanje ndiyenzela ooVukayibambe ababesakubizwa ngokuba ziiYoung Lions, ulutsha lwangeeminyaka yoo-80, nelabona ukuba maluzale ezitalatweni, olwe- ANC kunye neminye imibutho eyayivalwe imilomo ngoko, lusenzela ukuba abone urhulumente wamaBhulu ukuba akenzi nto. Abantu beli loMzantsi Afrika abathi bahlangana eKliptown bayicacisa mhlophe eyokuba uKhongolozi unenkathalo kubantu beli lizwe ngokuthi umbutho wabantu uthabathe izigqibo zokuba abantu baya kulawula, kwaye akukho rhulumente uya kuzingomba isifuba athi umele abantu ngaphandle korhulumente onyulwe sisininzi sabantu.
Lo mbutho unguhobolozela okanye uGalelebhayini awuzange ube nedyudyu, kwaye wazibonakalisa ngokuthi uwushicilele ube sisihlomelo soMgaqo-siseko woMzantsi Afrika uMqulu waMalungelo. Le Ndlu ihloniphekileyo yoWisomthetho yathabatha isigqibo kwisikhokelo sayo esithi njengoko kwanyulwa abameli babantu benyulwa ngabantu boMzantsi Afrika isikhokelo sethu sale Ndlu sithi, kumele ukuba sisebenzise ilizwi labantu ekufezekiseni izifungo zoMgaqo-siseko esazithatha kule Ndlu kunye nasekuphunyezweni kwemithetho nokuba ngamagqabi kumasebe karhulumente.
Kweminye yemisebenzi emininzi kukho nejongene neSebe lezeziMali eluxanduva lokwenza inguqu ngakumbi kwezezimali nakubuncwane beli lizwe jikelele. Masiye apho kufele khona ithole ke. ISebe lezeziMali lithe thaca kule Ndlu iziphakamiso zenguqu kuMthetho wezoMhlalaphantsi njengoko kungazi kuba lula ukwenza njalo. Okokugqibela phambi koku kwakungonyaka wama-2001. Kungoko sisithi lo mngeni awunakuthatyathwa njengowethutyana ngoba iinguqu zenziwa ngokuhamba kwethuba nangokutshintsha kwamaxesha. Iimeko ziyanyanzelisa ukuba kwenziwe iinguqu. iPalamente ngoko inethuba lokwenza ezo nguqu zokuthi siphumeze lo Mthetho uYilwayo.
Lo Mthetho ukhusela amalungelo kunye nabo bonke abantu abaza kuzuza kwipenshoni njengokuba ililungelo labo. Onke amalungu anelungelo lokufumana inxalenye yemali kunye nenzala yayo ethe yangena ngethuba imali igcinwe koovimba okanye kushishinwe ngayo ukusuka kwiminyaka yoo-1980. Siyavuma ukuba onke amalungu kuyimfuneko ukuba afane ngokufanayo lawo asasebenzayo kunye nalawo adla umhlalaphantsi singalibali abalingani kunye nabantwana. Umbutho wesizwe uyakhathala ngoba ujongene neemeko abakuzo abahlolo kunye nabahlolokazi abangakhuselekanga ngokusemthethweni. Injongo yethu yeyokubakhusela ukuze bangabi ngamaxhoba ezi meko.
Siyazi ke ukuba xa injalo inguqu ayibikho mnandi kwaphela kwabanye. Ezi nguqu siziphakamisayo thina malungu ombutho wesizwe siyazamkela, kwaye siyazixhasa. Kutheni sisitsho nje? Kungokuba iimali zabantu esizibeke koovimba zezabo kwaye kufuneka bezifumene kunye nenzala yazo. Ngethuba iKomiti yezeziMali ibihlalutya le ntetho bonke oosomashishini bebengenangxaki namakhwiniba kwezinye iinguqu eziphakanyisiweyo. Inye inguqu abangavumelani nayo – njengokuba ebesitsho ugxa wam - yeyokuba ibuyiselwe ngasemva imali.
Bafunge, bamunca iintupha, bathi unotshe, ayinakwenzeka leyo. Bagrogrise bathi baza kuya kwiinkundla eziphakamileyo zeli lizwe, bade baye nakwiNkundla yomMgaqo-siseko. Sithi ke thina asothuswa yiloo nto. Thina senza oko sifanelwe kukukwenza; sikhusela amalungelo abantu, kwaye sikwakhusela nawabo amalungelo, ngoko sithi mabahambe. Huntshu yiyani apho kwezo nkundla! Izigqibo zenkundla siza kuzamkela, kodwa ze niyazi ukuba yekabani le mali niza kuya ngayo kwezo nkundla. Iza kunqanda bani inkundla ukuba angayifumani imali yakhe umnikazi?
IKomiti iyalamkela igalelo elenziwe yimibutho yabasebenzi xa besijula ngengxoxo kulo mba. Kodwa ke siyacela ukuba xa uyekile emsebenzini uba likheswa ungabikho phantsi kwemibutho yabasebenzi nguwe nomqondisi-zincwadi kuphela ukuze kuphicothwe umba wepenshoni yakho. Ngumngeni kurhulumente nakubo bonke ababandakanyekayo ukuba bajonge abo bantu baza kuba bengamaxhoba xa sele beyekile ukuba ngabasenzi. Umhlekazi apha emva kwam, uthe mandigqagqanise, ndixele umgqakhwe usaba ilifa. [Kwahlekwa.]
Abantu kufuneka bajonge kakuhle, bazikise ukucinga kunganjani na ukuba bangalongeza inani labasebenzi kweli bhunga okanye kule bhodi ukuze bakhusele amalungelo abantu. Siyazi ke ngokwasemthethweni, amalungu ayalingana, iba ziziqingatha ezilinganayo kodwa besisithi ukuba kunokongezwa kungangcono. Siyabulela ke njengekomiti, kwaye sisamkela thina malungu ombutho wesizwe. Masibulele nakugxa wam we-DA, uMarais, yena mntu uhlala ehleli nathi xa sijula ngengxoxo. Sithi le ntsebenziswana anayo angayilahli. Siyacamagushela. Camagu! [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[Mr S E ASIYA: Thank you Chairperson. I dedicate my speech to the brave young lions, the youth of the 1980s, the youth who felt the need to take to the streets. That is the ANC Youth League of that time, working together with the other organisations which were banned at the time. The youth made sure that the apartheid regime realised that it was fighting a losing battle. When people of South Africa met in Kliptown that clearly indicated that the ANC cared about the people of this country. The people decided it was they who should govern, and that there would be no government that would claim to be representing people without them.
This august organisation was not intimidated. It showed that by publishing the Bill of Rights as an addition to the South African Constitution. The National Assembly took a decision in its guide that, as the people’s representatives were elected by the people of South Africa, it is necessary to use the people’s voice to fulfil the obligations of the Constitution that we took in this House as well as the passing of the legislation, even if these are good working people from the government departments.
One of the tasks the Department of Finance is faced with, is the responsibility to make amendments especially with regard to finances and to the wealth of this country in general. Let us get straight to the point. The Department of Finance displayed in this House motions of amendments to the Pension legislation, as it is not going to be easy to do that. The last time this was done was in 2001. Therefore, it is for this reason that we say, this challenge cannot be taken as a short term challenge, because amendments are made with the opportunity that comes and as time changes. Circumstances are making amendments obligatory. Therefore, Parliament has an opportunity to make those amendments for the Bill to be approved.
This Bill protects the rights and all people are to benefit from their pension as it is their right. All members have a right to get the money with the interest it gained during the time it was put into investments or when it was used in some enterprise, starting from the 1980s. We agreed that all members should benefit equally: those that are still working and those on pension, not forgetting their partners and children. The ANC cares because it deals with conditions that affect the widows and widowers. They are not protected according to the law. Our aim is to protect them in order not to become victims of these conditions.
We know for the fact that, if an amendment is like that it is not liked by some people. We welcome the amendments that we raised as members of the ANC and we support them. Why do we say that? It is because the money invested belongs to them and they should get it together with the interest. The time the Finance Committee was analysing this speech, all businessmen did not have a problem with some of the amendments that were raised. There is only one amendment that they do not agree with, as my partner has already indicated - that the money should be reversed.
They swore that that would never occur. They threatened to go to the High Court of this country, including even the Constitutional Court. Therefore, we say that we do not feel threatened. We only do what we are supposed to do and protect people’s rights and even theirs as well. Therefore we say let them go, well done, go to those courts! We will welcome the court’s decisions but you should know where this money that you use for transport comes from. Whose money will the court stop from being given to its owner? The committee welcomes the role played by the workers’ organisations, when we debated this issue. Therefore, we request that when you leave your job, you should not not become an outcast. It is between you and your financial advisor to discuss your pensions. This is a challenge to the government and all those who are involved, to look at those people who will be victims when they retire. My brother behind me here said I must be short and to the point. [Laughter.]
People must be very careful and think deep. How would it be if they could bring more numbers of workers in this province on board, in order to protect people’s rights? However, we know according to the law that members are equal, half are equal but we were saying it would be better if they can bring more. Therefore, we express our sincere gratitude as a committee and also welcome that as members of the ANC. Let me thank my colleague, hon Marais from the DA, who is always with us when we debate. We say he must keep up this co-operation. Well done! [Applause.]]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! I think we must commend the member. He spoke for three minutes and 23 seconds shorter than he was supposed to, so I think he was considering you. [Applause.] I did not intimidate him. [Laughter.]
Mr M J ELLIS: Mr Chairman, do you think there’s a chance that the Deputy Minister could speak for three minutes and 23 seconds shorter than he is due to speak?
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: I’ll surprise you.
Chairperson, the hon member here has quite clearly summarised the discussion in the debate. He said: We had to do what we are expected to do. And we did it. I would like to thank the members of this House who participated in this debate as well as the portfolio committee. I also want to say, hon Chairperson, that that is about it from us. It has been a long day. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
Debate on seventh Order — deepening youth participation through service stood over.
The House adjourned at 19:27. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
The Speaker and the Chairperson
- Membership of Committees
(a) The following changes have been made to Joint Committees:
Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Children, Youth and
Disabled Persons:
Appointed: Gore, Mr V C; Mdlalose, Ms M M; Rajbally, Ms S (Alt)
National Assembly
The Speaker
- Membership of Committees
(a) The following changes have been made to Portfolio Committees:
Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Appointed: Green, Mr L M (Alt); Greyling, Mr L W; Ngema, Mr M V
Justice and Constitutional Development
Appointed: Bici, Mr J (Alt); Swart, Mr S N
(b) The following changes have been made to Standing Committees
Auditor-General
Appointed: Simmons, Mr S; Woods, Dr G G
Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions
Appointed: Swart, Adv P S
Discharged: Lowe, Mr C M
- Referral to Committees of papers tabled
(1) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Justice and Constitutional Development for consideration:
(a) Report of the Auditor-General on an investigation into
procurement at the Department of Justice and Constitutional
Development – March 2007 [RP 38-2007].
(b) Report on the withholding of remuneration of Mr M F Mathe,
an additional magistrate at Pinetown, in terms of section
13(4A)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act No 90 of 1993).
(2) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Agriculture and Land Affairs for consideration:
(a) Report of the Auditor-General on a performance audit of
the import inspection services at the Department of
Agriculture – March 2007 [RP 42-2007].
(3) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Finance:
(a) Government Notice No R.368 published in Government Gazette
No 29834 dated 26 April 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 2 (No.
2/287) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(b) Government Notice No R.289 published in Government Gazette
No 29855 dated 4 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 2 (No.
2/288) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(c) Government Notice No R.290 published in Government Gazette
No 29855 dated 4 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 2 (No.
2/289) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(d) Government Notice No R.445 published in Government Gazette
No 29889 dated 11 May 2007: Imposition of Provisional Payment
(PP/127) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No
91 of 1964).
(e) Government Notice No R.397 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 1 (No.
1/1/1335) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No
91 of 1964).
(f) Government Notice No R.398 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 1 (No.
1/1/1336) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No
91 of 1964).
(g) Government Notice No R.399 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 3 (No.
3/611) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(h) Government Notice No R.400 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 3 (No.
3/612) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(i) Government Notice No R.401 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 3 (No.
3/613) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(j) Government Notice No R.402 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 4 (No.
4/305) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(k) Government Notice No R.403 published in Government Gazette
No 29858 dated 11 May 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 5 (No.
5/84) in terms of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91
of 1964).
(4) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Agriculture and Land Affairs for consideration and report:
(a) Report of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights for
2006-2007 [RP 90-2007].
(5) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Transport:
(a) Booklet containing the Department of Transport’s
Parliamentary Questions and Answers for 2006.
(6) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Housing for consideration:
(a) Strategic and Performance Plans for the Department of
Housing for 2007 to 2010.
(7) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Arts and Culture for consideration:
(a) Strategic Plan for the Department of Arts and Culture for
April 2007 to March 2010.
(8) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Provincial and Local Government for consideration:
(a) Strategic Plan for the Department of Provincial and Local
Government for 2007 to 2012.
(9) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Home Affairs and the Portfolio Committee on Provincial and Local
Government:
(a) Report of the Electoral Commission on the 2006 Municipal
Elections [RP 40-2007].
(10) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on
Justice and Constitutional Development for consideration and
report:
(a) Extradition Treaty between the Republic of South Africa
and the Argentine Republic, tabled in terms of section 231(2)
of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Explanatory Memorandum to the Extradition Treaty between
the Republic of South Africa and the Argentine Republic.
(c) Treaty between the Republic of South Africa and the
Argentine Republic on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal
Matters, tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(d) Explanatory Memorandum to the Treaty between the Republic
of South Africa and the Argentine Republic on Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters.
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The Minister of Communications
(a) Protocol on Policy and Regulatory Framework for NEPAD (New
Partnership for Africa’s Development) ICT Broadband Infrastructure
for Eastern and Southern Africa, tabled in terms of section 231(2)
of the Constitution, 1996.
(b) Explanatory Memorandum to the Protocol on Policy and Regulatory
Framework for NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) ICT
Broadband Infrastructure for Eastern and Southern Africa.
- The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
(a) Government Notice No 396 published in Government Gazette No
29864 dated 4 May 2007: Intention to declare the Highveld Priority
Area in terms of section 18(1) of the National Environmental
Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No 39 of 2004).
(b) Government Notice No 438 published in Government Gazette No
29887 dated 11 May 2007: Change of name: Greater St Lucia Wetland
Park and Greater St Lucia Wetland Park Authority, in terms of the
World Heritage Convention Act, 1999 (Act No 49 of 1999).
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Housing on the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill [B 6 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 76), dated 13 June 2007:
The Portfolio Committee on Housing, having considered the subject of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill [B 6 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 76 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 6A – 2007].