National Assembly - 20 June 2007
WEDNESDAY, 20 JUNE 2007
____
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:03.
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.
NOTICE OF MOTION
Prince M G BUTHELEZI: Madam Deputy Speaker, I give notice that I shall move:
That the House –
1) notes a letter in the Sunday Tribune of 17 June 2007 titled: “The
Song brings back toilet memories”, which reported that striking
teachers, nurses and municipal workers chanted an abusive and
derogatory song about President Thabo Mbeki;
2) condemns such displays of vulgarity against the Head of State,
which exceeds the right of peaceful demonstration as it impairs the
dignity and reputation of the Head of State;
3) resolves that whilst respecting the right of public servants to
strike, they should refrain from such uncouth behaviour; and
4) notes that such behaviour provides evidence of the need to separate
the offices of the Head of State and the Head of Government
forthwith, as it is spelt out in the Constitution Eighteenth
Amendment Bill.
PUBLIC SERVICE AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Madam Deputy Speaker and members of this august House, the public service innovation advocate Deb Gilbertson has argued that:
Context is the ability to see the bigger picture of what is to be achieved. It is exemplified in the parable of the three stonecutters. The first stonecutter looked miserable and when asked what he was doing he muttered, “Breaking rocks”. The second stonecutter looked more cheerful and when asked what he was doing said, “Earning a living”. But the third stonecutter was ecstatic. He exclaimed he was “Building a cathedral.”
Gilbertson goes on to argue that organisations that lack the ability to see context are often concerned with mundane administrative matters while those that perform better will focus on effectiveness and efficiency. Excellent organisations also concentrate on the rationale of what they are striving to achieve. While many public servants are deeply committed to the purpose of their organisations, this can be eroded through poor management and bureaucracy.
The Bill before you today for a second reading provides an opportunity for Parliament to strengthen the organisational and human resource policy of the Public Service Regulatory Framework in order to enhance the ability of committed public servants to focus on the purpose of what they are trying to achieve.
Section 195 of the Constitution provides that public administration must be governed by democratic values and principles, including:
a) A high standard of professional ethics must be promoted and maintained.
b) Efficient, economic and effective use of resources must be promoted.
c) Public administration must be development-oriented.
d) Services must be provided impartially, fairly, equitably and without bias.
e) People’s needs must be responded to, and the public must be encouraged to participate in policy-making.
Madam Deputy Speaker, we need to recognise that certain organisational and human resource practices in the current Public Service Act directly or indirectly obstruct service delivery. In broadening access to services for the masses of our people, we need to continuously identify opportunities for innovative ways of delivering services.
Currently, some government services are provided by national or provincial departments away from the points of service delivery and without direct accountability and decision-making by those functionaries responsible for their delivery. Other government services are provided by entities outside the public service without being directly accountable to a political head.
We have also come to recognise that compliance with the Public Service Act and its prescripts do not meet the desired standards. This weakens human resource management and results in time-consuming and costly legal proceedings. Employees dismissed by departments for corruption-related and other types of misconduct are often re-appointed by other government departments soon after their dismissal, which means that misconduct does not carry effective sanctions. Employees suspected of transgressions sometimes resign and are appointed in other departments without disciplinary steps being instituted or, if they have been instituted, without being sustained.
The primary aim of the Public Service Amendment Bill is therefore to approve the organisational and human resource framework for the Public Service to address these obstacles to service delivery. A general objective of the Bill is to ensure easier day-to-day administration of the Public Service Act by addressing certain legal difficulties, simplifying or clarifying several provisions, removing obsolete provisions and aligning the Act with other legislation.
However, the Bill also proposes some new substantive provisions. One of these is the introduction of a new institutional form or government component. Government components will be institutions separate from departments but within the Public Service. The aim of these alternative institutions is to enable direct service delivery through a dedicated entity under the direct control of a Minister, Premier or MEC. In addition, provision is also made for specialised service delivery units, ring-fenced within departments.
The Bill contains new measures to improve compliance with the Public Service Act. These measures include investigations and directions in terms of the Constitution by the Public Service Commission and the obligatory implementation of these directions by political and administrative heads. The Bill also makes proposals for the improvement of compliance by providing for compulsory disciplinary steps against transgressors and mandatory reporting in respect of such steps.
The Bill will enhance our anti-corruption initiatives: It introduces anti- corruption measures to prohibit the re-employment of persons in the Public Service dismissed for specified kinds of misconduct, eg misconduct involving corrupt activities, are also contained in the Bill. It is proposed that the prohibition on re-employment should endure for a stipulated period and that different periods may be prescribed by regulation in respect of different types of misconduct.
Some key amendments in the Bill include the introduction of government components that will function as separate institutions within the Public Service with their heads serving as accounting officers in terms of the Public Finance Management Act. The component model is suitable for an institution, with a unique identity that has specific measurable functions that can be logically grouped in terms of a particular service delivery model. Such a component may have original statutory functions or assigned or delegated statutory functions or a combination of these.
A government component is partnered with a principal department, which will assist the executive authority of that department, ie the responsible Minister, in the case of a national department, with oversight of that component on policy implementation, performance, integrated planning, budgeting and service delivery.
While proposing this alternative service delivery model, however, it is important to stress that it is not intended to fragment the state. On the contrary, it responds directly to forms of fragmentation that have already occurred through the establishment of public entities. Indeed, the government component model will also be an institutional mechanism to reincorporate some public entities, where appropriate and if required, into the Public Service.
The Bill also proposes provisions that would enhance alignment and co- ordination between the conditions of service of the general Public Service falling under the Public Service Act, and those sectors which are part of the Public Service but have their own employment legislation, where this is desirable. Such alignment and co-ordination will take place through a committee of the responsible Ministers.
If this Bill is adopted by Parliament and signed into law by the President, it will contribute to the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisational and human resource framework for national and provincial departments, by introducing new service delivery models and enforcement mechanisms as well as by improving the day-to-day administration of the Public Service Act.
While compliance in itself does not guarantee efficient and effective service delivery, it is a necessary step in ensuring the improved performance which all of us seek in the Public Service. Indeed, all the measures proposed in this Bill are designed to enhance governance, accountability and compliance that I am convinced will lead to better service delivery. Thank you.
Mr P J GOMOMO: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill before the House today seeks to amend the Public Service Act to achieve the following: To provide for the alignment of certain conditions of service to enhance service delivery; to strengthen the co-ordination of policy implementation and accountability for effective delivery; to ensure interministerial and interdepartmental co- ordination of services in dealing with certain responsibilities to foster accelerated service delivery; to create structures meant to strengthen the service delivery machinery of the state; to regulate staff mobility in the interest of the public; to regulate Public Service workers as they sometimes perform remunerative work outside the Public Service, so that it is not done in a manner undermining the effectiveness of such workers in doing their daily Public Service tasks.
My comrades and some colleagues will further elucidate as to the practical impact and significance of this amendment. This Bill has been with this Parliament and being considered by the Public Service and Administration Portfolio Committee for some time now and some amongst us may be of the view that we took long to dispose of it. As a portfolio committee we are satisfied that we had to take such a time period, perhaps save for those individuals in the committee and possibly outside, who will only be satisfied with the resurfacing of the old apartheid order of doing things.
I want to remind this House that when this Bill was introduced to Parliament late last year our committee was inundated with submissions to the effect that certain processes were either not observed at all or were not observed adequately. These submissions came from a majority of stakeholders that form part of the Nedlac constituencies.
Some were even calling for the withdrawal of the Bill and others went to the extent of declaring that they would seek legal recourse to challenge the Bill in court on the process of participatory legislation, particularly on the consultation process and on the timing. They expressed their view that their last hope lay in the portfolio committee’s intervention in the matter. While others would like to use the public hearings organised by the committee for a fight in a manner and by parties unprecedented, we realise as a portfolio committee that we had a duty to protect democracy with its inherent notion and rule for the separation of powers amongst the three main organs of state.
We wanted to emphasise that we would do whatever it would take for us to ensure that the role of Parliament in legislation would not be jettisoned to either the executive or the judiciary. We did not opt to refer the Bill back to the executive or instruct that it be withdrawn, for that would have had its own consequences and would have compromised our oversight role.
We did not opt to continue with the consideration process heedless of the possibility of unnecessary confrontation, for that would have had consequences and the position of Parliament as a law-making institution would have been compromised.
We did not opt to ignore submissions challenging the consultation process, for doing so would have put us in a bad light as having failed to insist that the process of consultation is at all times adhered to when we deal with legislation.
We did not opt to ignore the Department of the Public Service and Administration’s explanation on their experience in dealing with the consultation process prior to the tabling of the Bill before Parliament.
Instead we opted for an approach where we proceeded with the consideration of the Bill while encouraging all the stakeholders to have bilateral consultations with the Department of the Public Service and Administration. Such an arrangement was done with a view to facilitating that the parties concerned would be able to find each other and accommodate each other’s views in the process, so as to cover the ground otherwise lost due to alleged inadequate consultation.
We are happy today that, as we recommend the approval of the portfolio committee’s amendment to the Bill as introduced, we are presenting a Bill that is a product of thorough consultation. We want to acknowledge that this is a great achievement for democracy, because out of both the bilateral processes and the public hearings, we managed to accommodate and insert views that gave the shape of the Bill we are debating today.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon member! There are too many meetings taking place in the House.
Mr P J GOMOMO: Nqanda, Mhlalingaphambili, zingabi kho ezi ntlanganiso. [Stop the meetings, Chairperson.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: From both sides of the House, Mr Gomomo. Hon members, let’s refrain from doing that. Otherwise we have the most beautiful lounges in Parliament for you to go and have tea and continue to have your meetings there.
Mr P J GOMOMO: We have to stress our observation as the portfolio committee that despite the fact that we organised two workshops on the Bill with a view to clearing up all possible semantic misunderstandings, we heard throughout the consideration of the Bill that people approached the whole debate as if the Bill before us was introducing a single Public Service concept. People expressed their opinion of the Bill in that manner. It would not be surprising to hear such voices in this debate today. All that we can say about these people is that they are confused.
Of course, we are not saying that this Bill will not address issues that will become the subject of the debate on the Single Public Service Bill when it is finally introduced. But what we are saying is that this Bill currently merely amends the Public Service Act of 1994, with a view to facilitating service delivery in the current dispensation, such that, with or without the introduction of a single Public Service, our agent of change is in a position to deliver responsibly.
We cannot wait because there is talk about the introduction of a single Public Service Bill. We want those changes now and those changes can only come now and not later. We commend the Bill as amended.
Mr K J MINNIE: Adjunkspeaker, agb Minister, agb kollegas … [Deputy Speaker, hon Minister, hon colleagues …]
… during the First Reading debate in November 2006 I stated that the Public Service Amendment Bill is the first shot fired by government to move towards a single public service in 2009, and that’s a fact.
The Bill purports to improve on staff mobility arrangements for the Public Service and introduces government components …
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon members! Meetings again. Please! Next time I will have to call you by name and ask you to please excuse yourself from the House so that we can continue with the business of the House. Hon member, please continue.
Mr K J MINNIE: … as a new institutional form within the Public Service, as well as specialised service delivery units. It also seeks to enhance compliance with the Act through compulsory discipline of transgressors and reporting on such matters.
Die DA gaan in ’n groot mate akkoord met die inhoud van die wetsontwerp, maar daar is rigtinggewende aspekte waarmee die DA nie kan saamstem nie.
Die Staatsdienswysigingswet wat nou dien en die Staatsdienswet van 1994 sal verdwyn wanneer die beoogde enkelstaatsdiens in 2009 ’n werklikheid word. Die wetsontwerp wat op die tafel is, is dus voortydig. Dit is onnodig en het ’n klomp tyd, energie en geld gemors. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The DA, to a large extent, agrees with the content of the Bill, but there are directives which the DA cannot agree with. The Public Service Amendment Bill now before us and the Public Service Act of 1994 will disappear when the proposed single public service becomes a reality in 2009. The Bill presently before Parliament is therefore premature. It is unnecessary and has wasted a lot of time, energy and money.]
The eventual and proposed creation of a single public service is nothing more than placing the Public Service under one central control, leading to a central bureaucracy. Components are the creation of another ANC monstrosity without any indication of any costs involved. [Interjections.]
Dit is so! As ons na die konsepwet kyk wat nou hier voor ons dien, dan sien ons dat die woorde, “government components” het “government agencies” tydens die bespreking van die wetsontwerp in die portefeuljekomitee vervang. Komponente sal slegs gevestig word nadat ’n lewensvatbaarheidstudie gedoen is.
Dit is nie seker wat die doel van die sogenaamde komponente gaan wees nie, aangesien dit geen diensleweringsfunksies verwant aan behuising, gesondheid, voedsel, water en maatskaplike sekuriteit mag verrig nie. Dit mag wees dat daar oor die spektrum van die Staatsdiens heen ‘n behoefte is aan organisasies verwant aan die voorstel op die Tafel en dat ’n oop tjekboek aan al wat uitvoerende owerheid gegee gaan word. Dit is onaanvaarbaar, agb Minister. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[That is the case! If we scrutinise the draft Bill serving before us, we see that the words, “government components” replaced “government agencies” during the discussion of the Bill in the Portfolio Committee. Components will only be established once a feasibility study has been done.
It is not clear what the objective of the so-called components will be, as they may not perform any service delivery functions relating to housing, health, food, water and social security. It might be that across the whole Public Service spectrum, a need might exist for organisations relating to the proposal on the Table and that a blank cheque will be given to all the so-called executive authorities. That is unacceptable, hon Minister.] The function of specialised service delivery units is clear, because they can perform specific functions that would enhance the service delivery of a department within a department. An executive authority may delegate human resource powers to the head of a unit and not to a head of department. The unit head operates on delegated powers.
In terms of clause 7(A)(4)(e) the relevant executive authority, after consultation with the Minister and the Minister of Finance and by notice in the Gazette, may establish an advisory board without executive functions for the component and determine - listen carefully – the board’s composition, appointment procedures and remuneration and all matters required for its effective and efficient functioning and may include any other matters necessary for the effective and efficient functioning of the component.
Ek wonder hoe wyd kan dit gestel word? Die oorplasing en sekondering van departementshoofde is ’n politieke saak vir die enkele rede dat hulle uitvoering gee aan die beleid van die regering op nasionale en provinsiale vlak. In alle gevalle waar hoofde van departemente aangestel word, is die betrokke Minister deel van ’n kabinetskomitee wat aanbevelings aan die President maak. In die geval van provinsies besluit die Premier of LUR wie aangestel moet word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[I wonder how broadly this can be put. The transfer and secondment of heads of department is a political matter for the simple reason that they implement government policy at national and provincial level. In all cases where heads of department are appointed, the relevant Minister is part of a Cabinet committee that makes recommendations to the President. In the case of provinces, the Premier or MEC decides who should be appointed.]
The Premier could come from any of the political parties and this means that a Premier can appoint a head of department in terms of the policies of his/her party that he/she needs to implement. There is a potential for conflict if the President should transfer a head of department to a province where the Premier belongs to a party other than the President’s political party. The argument against this might be that the appointment of heads of department is an administrative matter, but this is not so – it is a political matter.
Wat die oorplasing van amptenary betref, is die wetsontwerp gewysig sodat amptenare se oorplasing nie sonder hul toestemming mag geskied nie. Die vangplek is egter dat indien dit in openbare belang geag word, oorplasings sonder toestemming kan geskied. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[With regard to the transfer of officials, the Bill has been amended so that officials cannot be seconded without their consent. The catch, however, is that if it is considered in the public interest, transfers can be effected without the officials’ consent.] The DA is of the opinion that the wide powers given to the President in the Bill in terms of making appointments at provincial level are inconsistent with the Constitution.
Verlede week se nuus dat die regering van voornemens is om met sy planne vir die sentralisering van die staatsdiens voort te gaan, sogenaamd in die belang van verbeterde dienslewering, laat die alarmklokkies lui. Die ware doelwit moet reguit gestel word: Dit is om die ANC se mag te sentraliseer; om die opposisie minder kanse te gun om alternatiewe diensleweringsmodelle te skep; en om die reeds vae skeidslyn tussen die regerende party en die staat te vernou.
Die beoogde wetgewing sal die Minister vir die Staatsdiens en Administrasie groot magte gee. Dit stel die nasionale regering in staat om oor aanstellings in alle nasionale departemente en staatsagentskappe, alle premierskantore, provinsiale departemente, alle munisipaliteite en munisipale agentskappe asook oor alle werknemers in dié liggame toesig te hou. Daar is geen waarborg dat sentralisering enigiets verbeter nie. Om dié rede kan die DA nie die wetsontwerp ondersteun nie. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The news last week that the government intends to pursue its plans to centralise the Public Service, ostensibly in the interest of improved service delivery, has the alarm bells ringing. Let’s be frank about its main objective: It is to centralise power in the hands of the ANC; to give the opposition fewer chances to create alternative service delivery models; and to narrow the already vague divide between the ruling party and the state.
The proposed legislation will provide the Minister for the Public Service and Administration with greater powers. It will enable the national government to oversee all appointments in all national departments and state agencies, all premiers’ offices, provincial departments, all municipalities and municipal agencies as well as all employees in these bodies. There is no guarantee that centralisation would improve anything. For this reason the DA cannot support the Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]]
Dr U ROOPNARAIN: Deputy Speaker and hon members, at the top of government’s agenda is the need to centralise and consolidate power into a single state bureaucratic machine. While the Bill elucidates a number of important and positive issues such as compliance reporting and consolidating the stability of the Public Service, its overarching objective is laying the ground work for a single public service.
It is here that the IFP finds the devil in the detail. The IFP supports federalism, devolution of power and the decentralisation of power. Decentralisation is an integral part of a pluralist democracy and development. The three tiers of government should respect the constitutional status of the other spheres and not encroach on their institutional, geographical and functional integrity.
Let us not forget that we are bound by the entire Constitution and Chapter 7 elucidates the status of municipalities.
These amendments will begin to make huge inroads into the interdependence of local government institutions. The IFP is of the opinion that the independence and integrity of the three spheres of government should be upheld at all costs, it being a fundamental and entrenched principle of our Constitution.
The legislation demonstrates that government is pressing ahead to gain a centrally controlled developmental state. Therefore, the creation of a single Public Service will achieve national regulation of all spheres of government within a single framework. Not surprisingly, the single Public Service will create a monolithic bureaucracy which will cripple local government’s ability to deliver basic services.
Despite the flexibility of the Bill, especially in terms of outside remuneration and leave of absence, we have to guard against unintended consequences. In order to advance accountability and transparency we need to decentralise control. We cannot, I repeat, we cannot curtail the autonomy of municipalities by transferring decision-making power to a central government. In short, with the creation of a single Public Service, this will discount voters and their ability to hold their elected representatives to account - very much like the crossing of the floor legislation.
The IFP supports the prescripts of good governance. The establishment of government components and specialised service delivery units will fracture service delivery and will almost dislocate them from the principal department. Also we need to ask the question: Does the department have the necessary monitoring and evaluation tools? The IFP believes that the constitutional integrity of the three spheres of government should be maintained, and the Minister cannot and should not unilaterally determine conditions of service. In short, we cannot create a monstrosity.
We have heard in this House today that to oppose the Bill is to wish back the evil and dark days of apartheid. Far from it! To oppose this Bill is to fight for power to be truly devolved to the people of South Africa. The IFP cannot support this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon Ministers, efforts to effect efficient human resource processes and improved disciplinary processes are commendable, but the ACDP does not agree with the fact that a centralised Public Service is necessary, or even desirable, in the quest to improve service delivery. This Bill does just that. It expands the Minister’s and the President’s powers, weakens local accountability and threatens the independence and integrity of individual spheres of government.
While this Bill clearly delivers a blow to democracy it does not in fact address fundamental problems plaguing service delivery. When officials are appointed for reasons other than their ability to do their job and are not held accountable, we can expect service delivery to suffer.
While managers’ salaries are out of proportion with those of the professionals who advise them and in fact carry the department’s institutions and organisations, we are courting disaster. Because experienced and skilled personnel have been overlooked and underpaid and even enticed to leave the Public Service, we are presently paying consultants up to three times what we would have to pay relevant personnel. The few professionals left in the Public Service spend their time managing the consultants and tendering processes and are therefore not able to produce. This is the testimony of one such professional, and I quote:
I recently had a consultant working in my office with one of our computers. I spent the first two months of the 12 month contract training him, he cost us R45 000 per month. That is the cost of not keeping loyal staff.
There are many who believe that a single Public Service will also rob professionals of their identity and sense of pride in their profession. When people think of public servants they think of unhelpful clerks at Home Affairs offices, and not their child’s teachers or doctors, planners, architects and engineers. They believe a single Public Service will increase these perceptions.
When it comes to mandatory transfers, this Bill could bring about the wholesale evacuation of whatever skills remain in the Public Service. The ACDP will not vote in favour of this Bill, which we believe does not address the critical issues … [Time expired].
Mr K K KHUMALO: Before I commence, Madam Speaker, I would like to advise the DA and the other parties to look at the legislation, such as the South Africa Act of 1909, section 141 and onwards. They would find the very same arrangement as proposed in this Bill. Thank you.
It is my belief that the ultimate honour to our liberation struggle for the freedom of our people resides within the content of the quality in the services that we deliver to the citizens of this country. The contingent does not arise in a vacuum, nor is it an invention of sorts, but derives also from the contextualisation of what the preamble to our Constitution enjoins us as public representatives to take cognisance of.
The above preamble enjoins us, inter alia, to lay the foundations for a united democratic state accompanied by social justices based on democratic values, fundamental human rights where every individual enjoys equal protection before the law and which affords the recognition of the individual‘s potential and to improve the quality of life of our people.
It follows, therefore, that the organisation of the state and its institutional delivery arrangements must be positioned such that the improvement in the quality of life of our people is realised, but also that should any challenges to optimal service delivery arise, the system must be responsive enough to rise to the occasion. The question then arises as to whether the Department of the Public Service and Administration in its current organisation is able to meet this challenge.
Madam Speaker, this question must be asked in the context of the basic values and principles governing Public Service administration as enshrined in Chapter 10 of the Constitution which I will not read out in total:
Public administration must be governed by the democratic values and principles enshrined in the Constitution, including the following principles: a high standard of professional ethics must be promoted …; efficient, economic and effective use of resources must be promoted; and public administration must be development-oriented.
We are also enjoined by the Constitution to pass legislation in order to realise these principles. The answer to the earlier question is that despite the numerous milestones achieved by the Public Service in terms of service delivery, for example the provision of services as well as the introduction of the White Paper, introducing the Batho Pele framework as an initiative to improve service delivery, various institutional challenges have presented themselves. For example, underspending of resources that lead to poor or no service delivery - poor planning that is often characterised by bad prioritisation, leading to the abandonment of huge projects with untold socio-economic implications to citizens.
I know of an example in Upington where the construction of the hospital only went as far as the foundation, which really is an indictment in terms of planning. Considering the high levels of unemployment in Upington, the construction of the hospital could have gone a long way not only to address unemployment per se, but could also have contributed to skills development.
Another project which we hope is not also going to flounder is the upgrading of the Upington Airport into a fully fledged international cargo harbour. An agency for this purpose is already in place and we thank the Ministry of Transport in this regard.
What is clear from the above is that delivery challenges are not only being experienced at national level, but at the points of delivery as well. This is evidenced by both the success stories of Project Consolidate and Khaedu. The success of these two could be categorised as follows: Firstly, it exposes senior management service to client-oriented skills development towards improved and effective service delivery; and, secondly, it highlights the urgent need to provide a mechanism to facilitate a sustained and co-ordinated synergy for effective service delivery.
Building of institutional capacity is therefore critical if we are to meet the challenges posed by poverty and underdevelopment. The policy priorities of the DPSA for the 2008 financial year, with respect to the micro- organisation of the state is therefore timely and welcomed. I quote:
This policy serves to assist the state in ensuring that systems of the government work in synergy to deliver services. The strategy is to pave the way for a single Public Service.
But, not now under discussion; envisaged for the beginning of 2009. A single Public Service is a policy project aimed at incorporating policy, but it is not aimed at undermining the principle of the separation of powers between the spheres of government.
What this Bill envisages to realise, among other things, is to allow the mobility of staff between departments where they are most needed, and also to regulate change in the employment capacity where employees are appointed or transferred to other departments. This endeavour is not intended to undermine, as I said, the separation of powers between spheres of government but instead it is directed at giving effect to provisions of co- operative governance and improving intergovernmental relations - read together with the constitutional responsibilities of the relevant Minister and giving effect to the principles of the Public Service.
Madam Speaker, as I said, the streamlining of the work of the Public Service is nothing new and was there as long ago as 1910 and it is to be found in the sections that I have quoted. The ANC supports this Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon Ministers, in respect of the amending Bill, the MF finds the provisions to be promising and establishing proper and effective management in the sector, especially in terms of probation requirements, retirement, absconding and re-employment. We do, however, note the potential of some concern arising regarding the potential construing of the centralisation of power.
We are certain that these terms will suit both the state and the Public Service sector that certainly is serviced with greater security through the amending Bill. We use this platform to cry out to the public sector to reach a settlement on its wage dispute and for unions to closely revise the multi-term wage settlement offered by the department.
The MF greatly appreciates all public servants and the valuable service they render to South Africa. The public sector is, however, suffering as a result of the strike and the MF suggests that the strike action be limited to the boardroom and a one day strike.
With the above reservation and concern the MF supports the Bill. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
Mr N E GCWABAZA: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon Minister for the Public Service and Administration, hon Deputy President, hon Ministers and hon Deputy Ministers, the Public Service Amendment Bill, as it is being debated in this House today, seeks to address, amongst other things, issues relating to the conditions of service within the broader Public Service. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon member! The corner where hon Mr Monareng is, please respect the House or continue with your meeting outside the House. You may continue, hon member.
Mr N E GCWABAZA: The Public Service Amendment Bill, as it is being debated in this House today seeks to address, amongst other things, issues relating to the conditions of service within the broader Public Service.
The proposed Bill seeks to regulate the conditions of employment of public servants in line with the Labour Relations Act, the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the existing collective agreements signed at the PSCBC – Public Service Co-ordinating Bargaining Council - between the Department of the Public Service and Administration and organised labour.
The regulation of conditions of service of public servants through this Bill also takes into consideration the legislation which governs the sector departments and collective agreements entered into between sector departments and the unions. This means, therefore, that there is nothing in this Bill which contradicts sectoral legislative and sectoral collective agreement arrangements. Rather, the Bill facilitates a process leading to the overall regulation of conditions of service of public servants as we proceed towards the creation and realisation of a single Public Service. And, we make no apologies to anybody about envisaging the creation of a single Public Service.
In terms of the Bill the hon Minister for the Public Service and Administration will now determine conditions of service for the entire Public Service with the concurrence of a committee of Ministers. This committee of Ministers will consist of the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, the Minister of Finance and any other Minister or Ministers whose departmental employees would be affected by and through any proposed legislation.
Every determination imposed should comply with the Labour Relations Act and any existing agreements. The Minister will have the power to elucidate or supplement a determination by means of a directive on conditions of service if this would result in proper implementation of collective agreements. This is on condition that the directive would not be in conflict with or does not derogate from the terms of existing agreements.
The Bill emphasises that a head of department should conclude an employment contract within the prescribed period. This means that disclosures regarding vested interests must be made and that a performance contract would be signed within a reasonable period. According to the Public Service Commission, this provision has mostly been overlooked and there are discrepancies, which cause some heads of department not to sign a performance contract and ignore a declaration of vested interests. This, according to the PSC, is because some executive authorities overlook this important provision.
The Bill proposes that the President may transfer a head of department to the Office of the Premier to serve in a similar capacity as a head of department or in any other capacity. This shall happen in consultation with the Premier and shall only take effect if the head of department concerned agrees to this transfer.
Transfers of other employees who are not heads of department shall be made by an executive authority in agreement with another executive to whose department the employee will be transferred. If these two conditions do not exist, a transfer should be in the public interest. There will be requisite consultation with the applicable bargaining council established in terms of the Labour Relations Act, Act 66 of 1995.
The Bill also proposes that an executive authority may appoint an employee on probation for a prescribed period. At the end of the probation period, the executive authority may confirm the appointment on condition that the employee performed satisfactorily and complied with all conditions set for his or her appointment.
With regard to secondments, the same process as in transfers will apply, except that there will be no consultation with the relevant bargaining council but there will be due consideration of representations. Employees would now qualify to apply for retirement from the Public Service from the age of 55 – 60 without being penalised during the pension payout if such application is granted or approved.
For those employees who, by virtue of the nature of their profession, want to engage in other remunerative work outside the Public Service, they would, upon application for such permission, be given or denied such permission within 30 days from the date of application. If the executive authority fails to take a decision within 30 days such permission would be deemed to have been granted.
An employee who feels aggrieved in an employment relationship will have recourse to lodging a grievance with the relevant executive authority. If an employee is not satisfied with the resolution to a grievance the executive authority would have to submit the employee’s grievance to the Public Service Commission, which would make a recommendation. A head of department may lodge a grievance with the authority or directly with the Public Service Commission.
The Bill does not limit the constitutional mandate of provincial governments nor that of local governments as is alleged by our opposition. Instead, the Bill seeks to further strengthen co-operative governance. Therefore, there is nothing in this proposed Bill which is in contravention of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.
Lastly, the Bill seeks to regulate … The ANC supports the Bill. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Madam Deputy Speaker, hon members and the Deputy President, when one listens to the contributions that have come from certain quarters on this particular Bill, it is quite confusing as to what we are really dealing with.
Very clearly, the federalists have stuck their heads out this afternoon and have overlooked what is in Chapter 10 of the Constitution, which reflects on the basic values and principles governing administration, specifically stating that those principles apply to administration in every sphere of government, organ of state and public enterprise. There are various other things that one could take into account.
I want to restate this afternoon that the primary aim of the single Public Service is to increase access to public services for all the people of our country and to integrate and improve service delivery at local level. But this afternoon’s debate is not about whether or not the single Public Service deals with the centralisation of the state, as there were attempts to suggest. Today’s debate is about the Public Service Amendment Bill. I have informed hon Minnie previously that he must hold on to his speech for when the time comes and not use it for this debate. That has actually provoked a comment from a colleague of mine who said: “May I ask you whether you are masochistic? You are getting help from 1,2 million public servants and right now you want a further 1,2 million.’’
It’s because he assumed that this definitely could not have been what came through Cabinet. Indeed, the issues raised are not what came through Cabinet but are a theory á la DA and even the IFP today. Hon Roopnarain, you have really disappointed me because I thought you understood this particular Bill.
What we need to take forward is that we need to ensure that we properly inform stakeholders about the provisions of the legislation that we have before us. We also need to ready ourselves for the debate on the single Public Service that will come up in future and let’s not allow our coloured view of life to interfere with that. [Interjections.] I was talking about colour and not about race. If you have race on your mind, please go ahead and be my guest. I am not going to have that. [Laughter.]
Government components and specialised service delivery units cannot fragment government services as the new institutions are directly accountable to the relevant political heads. The current status quo pertaining to public entities fragments services in the absence of direct accountability. I think there is also a need to state … [Interjections.] The other issue that I should raise … [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon Minister! Mr Lee, I hope the newspaper you are amusing yourself with is relevant to the debate. If not, you have to put it away and … [Interjections.] [Laughter.]
Mr T D LEE: No! Not a speech … [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I don’t need a speech from you. Where I am seated I can see what you are reading and let it be a matter between you and I. Do not tell the House what you are reading about and please take your seat. [Laughter.]
The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker, for that intervention. On the issue of the role of the President in appointments, I would again point out to those members who profess to have studied the Bill, and clearly did not, that it states that the President may only transfer a head of department to a provincial department in consultation with the relevant Premier.
What I consider intriguing in the participation this afternoon is that the DA is now saying that they are all for political appointees. And clearly that means competence and everything else is on the back burner. We note that, as it was raised this afternoon.
I also want to say that, except for transfers, the President is not involved in the appointment of heads of provincial departments. The claim of unconstitutionality is thus unfounded. But I understand that it was not constitutional lawyers who were participating in the debate.
As regards the IFP on centralisation and fragmentation, how can one argue simultaneously that the Public Service Amendment Bill will centralise government and that it will fragment government? Is this logical slippage or what are we seeing here today? I am not quite sure. But I think what we need to take forward is that we should ensure that we take into account what has come forward through this Bill because it will contribute towards the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisational and human resource framework for national and provincial departments by introducing new service delivery models by enforcing mechanisms as well as improving the day to day administration of the Public Service Act.
While compliance in itself does not guarantee efficient and effective service delivery, it is a necessary step in ensuring the improved performance which all of us seek in the Public Service. Indeed, all the measures proposed in this Bill are designed to enhance governance, accountability and compliance, that we are convinced will lead to better service delivery.
I would like to take this opportunity as well to thank stakeholders for their constructive contributions during the public participation process facilitated by the Portfolio Committee on the Public Service and Administration under the chairpersonship of Mr John Gomomo. I would also like to thank all members of the committee for ensuring that the proposed legislative measures in this Bill uphold and enhance the constitutional values and principles for public administration enshrined in Chapter 10 of the Constitution. Notwithstanding the elements of … [Time expired.]
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Bill be read a second time.
Division demanded.
The House divided:
AYES – 199: Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Arendse, J D; Asiya, S E; Balfour, B M N; Baloyi, M R; Bapela, K O; Bhamjee, Y S; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, P; Bhoola, R B; Bloem, D V; Bogopane-Zulu, H I; Bonhomme, T J; Botha, N G W; Burgess, C V; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chohan-Khota, F I; Combrinck, J J; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Dambuza, B N; Daniels, P; Davies, R H; Diale, L N; Dikgacwi, M M; Direko, I W; Dithebe, S L; Dlali, D M; Dlamini-Zuma, N C; Doidge, G Q M; Du Toit, D C ; Fihla, N B; Fraser-Moleketi, G J; Frolick, C T; Gaum, A H; Gcwabaza, N E ; George, M E; Gerber, P A; Gololo, C L; Gomomo, P J; Greyling, C H F; Gumede, D M; Hajaig, F; Hanekom, D A; Hendrickse, P A C; Holomisa, S P; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kasienyane, O R; Kekana, C D; Khoarai, L P; Kholwane, S E; Khumalo, K K; Khumalo, K M; Khunou, N P; Komphela, B M; Kondlo, N C; Kotwal, Z; Landers, L T; Lekgetho, G; Lekota, M G P; Lishivha, T E; Louw, S K; Ludwabe, C I; Luthuli, A N; Maake, J J; Mabe, L L; Madasa, Z L; Maduma, L D; Magwanishe, G B; Mahlaba, T L; Mahlawe, N M; Mahote, S; Maine, M S; Maja, S J; Makasi, X C; Makgate, M W; Malahlela, M J; Maluleka, H P; Manana, M N S; Manuel, T A; Martins, B A D; Mashigo, R J; Mashile, B L; Masutha, T M; Mathebe, P M; Mathibela, N F; Matlala, M H; Matsemela, M L; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Matsomela, M J J; Maunye, M M; Mayatula, S M; Mbili, M E; Mbombo, N D; Mdladlana, M M S; Mentor, M P; Meruti, M V; Mgabadeli, H C; Mkhize, Z S; Mlambo-Ngcuka, P G; Mlangeni, A; Mnguni, B A; Mnyandu, B J; Moatshe, M S; Modisenyane, L J; Mofokeng, T R; Mogale, O M; Mohamed, I J; Mohlaloga, M R; Molefe, C T; Moloto, K A; Monareng, O E; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morobi, D M; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, B G; Moss, L N; Moss, M I; Mpahlwa, M B; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mzondeki, M J G; Nawa, Z N; Nel, A C; Nene, M J; Nene, N M; Newhoudt- Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngcobo, E N N; Ngculu, L V J; Ngele, N J; Ngwenya, M L; Ngwenya, W; Nhlengethwa, D G; Njikelana, S J; Nkuna, C; Nogumla, R Z; Ntuli, M M; Nwamitwa-Shilubana, T L P; Nxumalo, M D; Nxumalo, S N ; Nyambi, A J; Nzimande, L P M; Olifant, D A A; Oosthuizen, G C; Padayachie, R L; Pahad, E G; Phungula, J P; Pieterse, R D; Radebe, B A; Rajbally, S; Ramgobin, M; Ramodibe, D M; Ramotsamai, C P M; Rasmeni, S M; Reid, L R R; Rwexana, S P; Saloojee, E; Schippers, J; Schneemann, G D; Schoeman, E A; Seadimo, M D; Shabangu, S; Sibande, M P; Sibanyoni, J B; Siboza, S; Sikakane, M R; Sisulu, L N; Skweyiya, Z S T; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Solomon, G; Sonto, M R; Sosibo, J E; Surty, M E; Swanson-Jacobs, J; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tobias, T V; Tolo, L J; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, P; Vadi, I; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van Schalkwyk, M C J; Van Wyk, A; Vundisa, S S; Wang, Y; Xingwana, L M ; Xolo, E T; Yengeni, L E; Zulu, B Z.
NOES – 64: Batyi, F; Bekker, H J; Bhengu, M J; Bici, J; Biyela, B P ; Blanché, J P I; Boinamo, G G; Botha, C-S; Buthelezi, M G; Chang, E S; Cupido, H B ; Delport, J T; Dhlamini, B W; Ditshetelo, P H K; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Ellis, M J; Farrow, S B; Gibson, D H M; Groenewald, P J; Joubert, L K; Julies, I F; Kganyago, N M; Kohler-Barnard, D; Labuschagne, L B; Lebenya, P; Lee, T D; Lowe, C M; Marais, S J F; Mars, I; Masango, S J; Mdladlose, M M; Meshoe, K R J; Minnie, K J; Morgan, G R; Mpontshane, A M; Mulder, P W A; Nel, A H; Nkabinde, N C; Opperman, S E; Pule, B E; Rabinowitz, R; Roopnarain, U; Sayedali-Shah, M R; Schmidt, H C; Seaton, S A; Selfe, J; Semple, J A; Seremane, W J; Sibuyana, M W; Simmons, S; Skosana, M B; Smuts, M; Stephens, J J M; Steyn, A C; Swart , M; Swart, P S; Swart, S N; Swathe, M M; Trent, E W; Van Der Walt, D; Van Dyk, S M; Vos, S C; Woods, G G.
ABSTAIN – 2: De Lille, P; Harding, A. Question agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a second time.
QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY
THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Payment by the Presidency of legal fees of former Deputy President Mr Jacob Zuma
-
Mrs S M Camerer (DA) asked the Deputy President:
(1) Whether the Presidency will continue to pay the legal fees of the former Deputy President Mr Jacob Zuma’s legal team in the future; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, for how long;
(2) whether a limit on this expenditure has been considered; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? N1313E
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. The reply is as follows. An application for legal representation by any person who is or was in the employ of the state, including former Deputy President Zuma, is considered by the relevant department’s accounting officer on its merits. The recommendation of the state attorney is taken into consideration in this regard.
If approved, fees to be charged are negotiated at either a retainer rate or a reduced rate, whichever is the most cost-effective. The number of legal representatives to be involved in the matter is also limited to the barest minimum in order to save on costs to be incurred. This reply answers both parts 1 and 2 of the question. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I now call the hon Delport who is standing in for Mrs Camerer.
Dr J T DELPORT: Madam Deputy Speaker, Madam Deputy President, I’m quite sure that the hon Deputy President would have apprised herself of government policy and the principles underlying the assistance given to persons in such instances. I don’t want to talk about specific instances, like the hon Zuma’s situation. I want to address the hon Deputy President on general principles and ask her a question.
What are the criteria that the executive expects to be applied when assistance is given or not given? The problem is that in many instances a person in an official capacity must defend an action – sure, in his official capacity. But in his private capacity, who would be considered to be given assistance – only Ministers, only Presidents, Deputy Presidents, officials, Members of Parliament – and for what: only murder, only rape, or … The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The time for the motivation is up, because you have asked your question.
Dr J T DELPORT: My question is: or, is it the position of he loves me, he loves me not, he loves me, he loves me not? [Laughter.]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I love you not. [Laughter.] As I indicated in the answer, this applies to people who are in the employ of the state. The accounting officer looks at this on its merits. If it has been alleged that the person has committed a crime, the nature of the crime is then looked at on its own merit. So, this is on a case-by-case basis; and, don’t ask a follow-up question.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Deputy President, there is a follow-up, but definitely not from Dr Delport. It is from Mr Swart.
Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Hon Deputy President, without reference to the matter under discussion, is it still the practice in terms of the Treasury’s instructions to recover legal fees spent on cases where public officials are convicted of charges committed when they are in public office? Are such fees recoverable at a later stage? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, hon member, that is still the policy. I do just want to remind the honourable House that Wouter Basson and Magnus Malan were also funded by the state. [Applause.]
Creation of stronger links between government’s imbizo programme and other government programmes
-
Ms B N Dambuza (ANC) asked the Deputy President:
(a) How can the government create stronger links between its imbizo programme and other government programmes and (b) what steps does the government take to monitor action that addresses issues raised by communities during izimbizo? N1315E
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Deputy Speaker, the answer to the question is as follows: Izimbizo are one of the main mechanisms to popularise the programme of action and to provide a platform to strengthen the partnership between government and communities.
The key objectives are to accelerate the implementation of the programme and to identify solutions to problems with regard to service delivery. Izimbizo have become a key institution of our participatory democracy and contribute to the capacity of people to act as their own liberators in changing their lives.
Since 2001 the Presidency has taken part in provincial and district izimbizo in all provinces, and members of the executive in all three spheres of government have participated in the national Izimbizo Focus Weeks each year. At the same time provinces have also held their own izimbizo and interactive outreach programmes as part of the broader izimbizo programme.
Out of the experience of this first phase of izimbizo, it was clear that certain common factors were at play in many of the concerns raised by communities. In particular, it was necessary to integrate izimbizo more closely with municipal processes. This led to us initiating a second phase of izimbizo in 2005 in the form of a municipal presidential izimbizo programme, alongside the continuing national Izimbizo Focus Weeks and provincial outreach programme.
The municipal izimbizo programme served as a support mechanism aligned to Project Consolidate in the identification of problems faced by municipalities and determining what we would do together to address these problems.
The izimbizo programme mobilises stakeholders to contribute to the solution of the challenges facing our municipalities. A fundamental lesson learnt in the following up of the matters raised during izimbizo has been the importance of intergovernmental co-operation and the clarification of roles and responsibilities amongst the three spheres of government. This has contributed to the development of draft guidelines for various spheres of government pre and post the izimbizo process.
The government, the Communication and Information Service and the Department of Provincial and Local Government are capturing all the issues that are arising out of the izimbizo, and the DPLG monitors the issues specific to local government.
A review has recommended that provinces should play an active role in following up issues raised during izimbizo. This should be done in alignment with their integrated plans, that is their provincial and growth development strategies and their national spatial development plans.
In 2005-06 a general finding on the monitoring of post-izimbizo tasks was that there were weaknesses in the following up and reporting systems. Therefore we have put in place procedures that will ensure that we improve on the quality of our monitoring. This has now become part of our strategic agenda, and once we have gathered enough information to report on the trends, we’ll gladly share with you what we are continuing to pick up and whether what we have now put in place is assisting us to monitor much better. Nkskz B N DAMBUZA: Sekela-Mongameli obekekileyo, ndiyabulela ngenkcazo yakho enabileyo nekhuthazayo. Kambe ke umbuzo obalulekileyo ngowokuba: Ngaba ngokolu hlelo uthi sele lukhona, amasebe ayakwazi na ukuba aphendule eluntwini ngezikhalo neembono ezivakaliswa luluntu kwezi mbizo? Oko kwenzelwa ukuba xa siphinda sisiya kubamba ezinye iimbizo, singafiki sihlangabezane neengxaki.
Ukuba asenzi njalo abantu baya kuthi: Benilapha kulo nyaka uphelileyo ningurhulumente kazwelonke, owephondo nowasekhaya. Nithetha into enye, kodwa akubonakali kukho utshintsho. Enkosi. [Laphela ixesha.]
USEKELA-MONGAMELI: Sekela-Somlomo, into endiyibonayo kukuba lo asingombuzo koko ligalelo lokugxin inisa ukuba intle into yokuba sibe nayo indlela yokuba sibe neliso kwaye silande ekhondweni leengxaki ezichazwe ngabantu ukuze singazi kuxakekisa aMalungu ePalamente nabanye abantu abamele urhulumente xa bebuyela eluntwini ngenxa yokuba singalandanga ekhondweni leengxaki ezazichaziwe. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[Ms B N DAMBUZA: Hon Deputy President, I thank you for your broad and encouraging explanation. However, the important question is: According to this programme you say is already in existence, are the departments able to respond to the communities’ complaints and concerns raised at these izimbizo? That is being raised so that when we go there to stage other izimbizo, we do not encounter problems. If we do not do it that way, people will say: You were here last year as the three spheres of government, sharing the same sentiments, but there is still no difference. Thank you. [Time expired.]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Deputy Speaker, what I noticed is that this is not a question but a contribution that emphasises the fact that we should look very carefully, and follow up on the problems raised by communities, so that our Members of Parliament and other government representatives should not encounter difficulties when they return to the communities.]
Mr M M SWATHE: Deputy President, I’m going to ask a follow-up question as to why we see people protesting, vandalising government buildings, looting and destroying the infrastructure of several municipalities after municipal izimbizo, for example in Khutsong?
Secondly, do the government and the executive extend the programmes of the ANC through izimbizo, using public funds? If not, when are we going to see the concerns of communities being addressed, and not have talk shows? Thank you very much.
IPHINI LIKAMONGAMELI: Somlomo, angilazi leli lungu ukuthi ngempela likhuluma ngani, sengathi liyaphupha. Izinkinga esiye sikhulume ngazo uma sisezifundazweni noma sikomasipala yilezo zinkinga esizikhonjiswa omasipala bakulezo zindawo. Izinkinga futhi esizibhekayo yilezo ezisuke ziphuma emilonyeni yabantu esifike sibabone lapho.
Akukaze kwenzeke ukuthi uma siya endaweni thina sifike sesinohlelo lwethu esifike siphoqe abantu sithi abalulandele. Thina sikhuluma nabantu ngalezo zinkinga abanazo bese sibuyela emuva, sifike sizame ukuthi silandelele lezo zinto eMinyangweni kahulumeni, ohulumeni bezindawo nezifundazwe okufanele ngabe babhekene nalezo zinkinga.
Ngiyakwazi ukuthi, njengomuntu osohlangothini oluphikisayo, ukhuluma ipolitiki kodwa-ke le nto oyikhulumayo ayihlangene nalutho. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, I do not know what exactly this member is talking about. He seems to be daydreaming. Concerns which we address when we are in the provinces or municipalities are those that are highlighted by municipalities in those areas. And other concerns that we look into are those that come from the people themselves who have attended.
We have never been to an area and forced people to follow our programme. But we talk to people regarding the problems they have and then we go back, and try to do a follow up on those things at the government departments, local governments and provinces which were supposed to look into those concerns.
I know that since you are on the side of the opposition, you only talk politics but what you are saying has nothing to do with anything.]
Rev K R J MESHOE: Deputy President, when addressing an imbizo, in May last year, in the Bophirima district, one of the areas that had suffered the effects of heavy floods, it was reported that you had promised the people of the Greater Taung area that government would provide 2 000 houses within two months.
This was in response to some of the concerns raised by the people about the lack of houses and care, as well as insufficient schools. What I want to know is whether the Presidency has followed up on those specific matters and whether government has been able to fulfil that promise.
The Deputy President also did say that weaknesses in monitoring the actions required to deal with the concerns raised by communities are being addressed. Now, I want to know: when is the public going to be given the assurance that all the weaknesses that the Deputy President has identified will be dealt with? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Deputy Speaker, in Taung the problem had to do with floods. So I cannot assure you that there will never be floods in Taung. The problem that we were dealing with in Taung at that particular time stemmed from the fact that that place was not suitable for people to build in. We continue to face the challenge of convincing people to move away from that area because it is flood-prone.
The local authority and the province have continued to engage with both the community and the traditional leaders on finding suitable land. The houses, which people continue to occupy, have been repaired. We started with those that were severely damaged. However, we are really urging the community that the long-term solution is for us not to continue having people stay in residential areas like those. My estimation was that in a cycle of 10 years we might see the same situation in that particular community.
Mr M W SIBUYANA: Hon Deputy President, you were at Thulamahashe stadium during an imbizo there. One woman told you of the politically motivated disruption of service delivery by way of vandalising of infrastructure. My question is whether you are going to send a team to go and stabilise the situation in that area.
Given that nothing has happened and the fact that people are suffering, are you now going to send people to go and do something about that situation?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Deputy Speaker, there is ongoing interaction between our province and local government, on the one hand, and the community of Thulamahashe, on the other. We have not been able to persuade all the disruptive elements there to cease their actions completely. It’s not because we have not been trying to do something about the situation there.
You will agree with me, hon member, that the situation has improved considerably. However, we cannot rest on our laurels; we have to continue to be vigilant because the situation has not improved to the level we would have liked. That is the reason we continue to have interactions with them through our provincial and local government structures.
DISRUPTION OF PROCEEDINGS FROM PUBLIC GALLERY
AT START OF SITTING
(Announcement)
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Regarding the disruption in the public gallery of the National Assembly earlier on, hon members, I wish to report to the House on steps that have been taken following the disturbance caused in the House earlier this afternoon by a member of the public in the gallery.
I have in terms of section 11 of the powers and privileges ordered that the person be taken into custody by the South African Police Services for questioning. Once I have received a full report from our security services I will inform the Whips accordingly. I thank you.
We now come to questions addressed to ministers in the economics cluster. Question number 187 has been put by the hon S J Njikelana to the Minister of Trade and Industry.
ECONOMICS
Cluster 3
MINISTERS:
Progress made towards regional economic integration in the South African Development Community
-
Mr S J Njikelana (ANC) asked the Minister of Trade and Industry:
(a)(i) What progress has been made towards regional economic integration in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and (ii) what has been the contribution of his department thereto and (b) how will his department ensure that there will be no duplication in the activities of the SA Customs Union (SACU) and SADC as South Africa is a member of both organisations? N428E
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. The SADC regional indicative strategic development plan is the key policy framework for the advancement of the SADC common agenda, and the attainment of deeper and broader levels of economic integration and development in the region.
One of the most focussed areas of the RISDP is the objective of the SADC free trade area by 2008, the customs union by 2010 and the common market by
- The regional economic programme in SADC aims to combine market integration with policy co-ordination and sectoral co-operation in a broad development project.
Free trade area negotiations were concluded in 2000, in terms of which by 2008, 85% of goods traded will be duty free and by 2012, 99% of goods traded will be duty free. The SADC protocol on trade is the vehicle for pursuing this strategic objective and seeks to increase intra-regional trade and thereby stimulate economic growth and development.
SACU member states negotiated the SADC trade protocol as a single entity. These negotiations were an asymmetrical tariff reduction with SACU member states offering duty free access by January 2008 while other SADC member states would fully liberalise by 2012.
Since January 2006, as per SACU’s commitment under the SADC trade protocol, tariff preferences into SACU are already duty free except for sugar, used clothing and some tariffs in the automotive chapter.
The department is intensifying the implementation of the protocol on trade to achieve a free area by 2008 which addresses the following areas in terms of regional integration: Accelerating tariff phase down offers to ensure deeper regional integration, adopting rules of origin that will be appropriate to the development needs of the SADC region; and resolving outstanding issues such as the elimination of none tariff barriers and negotiating annexes on sanitary and phytosanitary and technical barriers to trade measure.
Lastly, there is the enhancement of industrial competitiveness through the implementation of regional industrial development policies and the establishment of an industrial negotiating forum.
Mr S J NJIKELANA: Sihlalo, ndiyabulela kuMphathiswa ngendlela aphendule ngayo. [Chairperson, I am grateful to the hon Minister for the way he has responded.]
Minister Mphahlwa, I greatly appreciate the work that has been done by the country, the department and you under the leadership of President Mbeki in ensuring that there has been meaningful value added in terms of regional economic integration. However, can I take you further? Let’s just shift a little bit, obviously on the basis of the good work that has been done by the executive. My question therefore is: What is the Minister’s assessment of the contribution of the SADC parliamentary forum to economic regional integration and precisely what are his expectations in this regard?
Khawukhe usiphe apho ke, mhlekazi. Iyabulela ilali. [That is my question, hon Minister. I thank you.]
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Sihlalo, mandibulele kwilungu elibekekileyo. [Chairperson, let me thank the hon member.]
It’s important actually to point out the work of regional integration. For it to advance it means that for each country we must gradually relax the sovereignty that we each have as sovereign states. That is the only basis on which regional integration can work and, therefore, there are lots of things that we need to do in order to enhance regional integration which require legislative and regulatory measures.
This means adjusting our laws, our tariffs, our regulations and it also means creating new institutions, for example, in terms of the new SACU Treaty. We are creating supernational institutions which will be customs union institutions in order to deepen regional integration.
For all of these things to happen, you need the understanding and the support and the participation of parliaments. Therefore, the role of the parliamentary forum is absolutely vital in this particular regard, since the members of parliament from different countries do not understand what the agenda to advance regional integration entails.
Prof E S CHANG: Chairperson, hon Minister, America knows the importance of economic stability for neighbouring countries in Central America and the Carribean. America would also undertake all kinds of efforts to ensure their economic growth. South Africa, as the leader of SACU, is facing serious challenges as a result of the fact that we have least developed countries close to us. These economies are more vulnerable. Minister, you have repeatedly told the WTO that South Africa will unconditionally support these countries. With all these countries in our backyard, Minister: Is your department ready to deal with these countries so close to us?
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Thank you very much, hon member. I think that there’s an important question being raised here, namely that South Africa is a member of the Customs Union in which there are far less developed countries. I think the issue being raised here is: What are we doing in order to advance the interests particularly of the least developed countries among us?
This is an issue that we have addressed on a number of fronts. Yesterday and today we were hosts to the Prime Minister of Lesotho and from that angle South Africa has an active programme with the Kingdom of Lesotho to make sure that within a given period we can assist Lesotho and work together to make sure that Lesotho graduates out of that status as a least developed country to a developing country.
So, at a bilateral level, that’s how we are advancing that issue, but at a multilateral level we are addressing that issue by ensuring that in the negotiations in the World Trade Organisation, we continue to fight for the interests of least developed countries such as, for instance, duty free, quota free market access for products from least developed countries into the markets of the developed world, as well as into the markets of those developing countries that are in a position to do so.
In a regional context, as South Africa we have liberalised and reduced our tariffs at a much faster rate than everybody else in the region, thus allowing those weaker members of our region to access the South African market. So, these are all the fronts on which we are fighting to advance the interest of least developed countries.
Mr L B LABUSCHAGNE: Thank you, Minister. The South African Customs Union is one of the oldest institutions of its sort in the world and SADC has an equally proud history. In light of your answer, Minister, could you — and of course we accept that economic integration is most important at this stage in the global economy — tell us what the details are of the integrated plan of your department in approaching the development of these two institutions. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Alright, thanks. I think it has to be understood that, because these are regional bodies, what we do within each of these bodies is something that is done on the basis of consensus that is reached within these institutions and so, the Department of Trade and Industry wouldn’t have a detailed blueprint for what must happen at Sacu and what must happen at SADC.
But, what happens is that we participate actively and vigorously within each of these regional bodies in order to make sure that the objectives of deepening regional integration are advanced and that we can work towards developing a consistent approach towards the entire project of regional integration.
For instance, one of the challenges that faces us now, is that you’ve got Sacu, which is a fully-fledged customs union, and you’ve got SADC, which has committed itself to achieving a customs union by 2010. In SADC we examining what the road map is that is going to take us to a customs union for the SADC region and what the route is that we are going to follow in that direction and do we use this fully fledged customs union, which is within the belly of SADC, as a building block or do we start on a completely new slate to establish a SADC customs union.
So, really our contribution is in the participation to shape those deliberations. Currently, the Heads of State from the annual meeting of the SADC region that was held in Maseru, Lesotho, last year, established the ministerial task team to work exactly on these issues of what the road map is towards deepening regional integration. What are the obstacles and what are the things that we have to do to resolve them?
Therefore, our work must be understood in that context. It is work within which Treasury participates and it is work within which Foreign Affairs participates in order to advance those objectives.
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, thank you. Hon Minister, most African economies retain very high trade barriers, largely due to weaknesses in revenue collection from other forms of taxation. In view of this we do not agree, hon Minister, that Africa as a continent, with regard to its ability to face globalisation challenges, should focus on basing regional African economic communities on free trade agreements and custom unions of regional neighbours, with each one then being linked to the others through phased reductions of tariffs and nontariff barriers throughout the continent.
Wouldn’t this provide a solid institutional underpinning for the African Union as a whole and for trade negotiations with other countries and regional communities, given the slow progress being made with the WTO negotiations?
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Certainly, we have to accelerate even without looking at what is happening in the WTO, just in the interest of achieving the objectives of Nepad. Within that, one of the things that we need to advance is industrialisation of the continent but, more importantly, to enhance intra-African trade.
The AU, as well as Nepad, have identified the regional economic communities as the building blocks that must take us towards a deeper integration within the continent. This is the stage to which we now need to move. This is the next stage beyond the framework of Nepad to begin to tackle the barriers that constrain the degree of trade taking place amongst us as African countries.
As the different regions, we actually have to work systematically to remove those barriers to trade. We have to do more than that. We have to invest in the kind of infrastructure that will ensure that you can facilitate trade and investment and industrialisation.
Therefore, investment infrastructure, be it road infrastructure or rail or our infrastructure on the borders or at our ports, is what we need if we are to ensure that the infrastructure we have and the ports we have, as well as the tariffs and regulations we have, all work towards the enhancement of inter-African trade and deepening regional integration. I therefore agree entirely with your approach to this matter.
Institution of a land audit
-
Mr A H Nel (DA) asked the Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs:
Whether she will institute a land audit; if not, why not; if so, when? N1276E
The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, yes, I have instituted a land audit of all state land in consultation with all state land custodians and users at national and provincial level. This is required for good land administration and to update asset registers of government. It is for this reason that I have instructed my department to conduct such an audit on all state land in co-operation with all involved stakeholders.
These audits are being led by the various surveyor-general’s offices in all provinces. Land use investigations and more detailed land audits are being done in certain parts of the country, based on identified priorities by the Department of Land Affairs. The aim is primarily to have a clear and complete picture of all state land assets, including current and future use, in order to promote the disposal and development of available state land. I thank you.
Mnr A H NEL: Voorsitter, Minister, ek het my in Afrikaans voorberei. Ek het gedag u is nog in Limpopo besig om grond uit te deel.
Minister, ek is baie dankbaar dat u dit doen, want dit is een van die goeie dinge wat gedoen moet word. Nog ’n aspek van die grondoudit wat ook moet aandag kry, is die volgende: Heelwat grondhervorming geskied buite die departement se pogings, soos aandeleskemas, gesamentlike besit en privaat grondtransaksies.
Toe ek vir die DG van Grondsake gevra het of hierdie grondoordragte ingereken gaan word om die teiken van 30% by 2014 te haal, het hy “ja” geantwoord. Indien dit wel deel uitmaak daarvan, dan sal ons moet weet hoeveel dit is en waar dit is. Daarvoor het ons ook ’n grondoudit nodig, wat meer gaan oor privaatgrond wat oorgedra is. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr A H NEL: Chairperson, Minister, I prepared myself in Afrikaans. I thought you were still in Limpopo busy handing out land.
Minister, I am very grateful that you are doing this, as this is one of the good things that must be done. Another aspect of the land audit that must also receive attention is the following: A good deal of land reform is taking place outside of the department’s efforts, such as share schemes, joint ownership and private land transactions.
When I asked the Director-General of Land Affairs whether these land transfers would be included to reach the target of 30% by 2014, his answer was “yes”. If it does form part of it, we will have to know how much it is and where it is. For this we also need a land audit that deals more with private land that has been transferred.]
UMPHATHISWA WEZOLIMO NEMICIMBI YEZEMIHLABA: Sihlalo, ndiyabulela kumhlekazi. Uphicotho lweencwadi siyalwenza, kwaye ukuza kuthi ga ngoku sifumanise ukuba umhlaba karhulumente uwonke singawuqikelela kwisihlanu okanye isixhenxe ekhulwini somhlaba osafumanekayo ukuze wabiwe okanye kuhlaliswe abantu kuwo. Ngoko ke, xa uthelekisa esi sihlanu ekhulwini somhlaba ndithetha ngaso kunye nala ma-30 ekhulwini, lo mhlaba mncinane lee, ukuba ube ungasetyenziselwa ukufezekisa iimfuno zabantu balapha eMzantsi Afrika abakwisininzi nabangenamhlaba.
Sivumelene kunjalo nje noMphathiswa wezeZindlu kwakunye noMphathiswa wezeMisebenzi yoLuntu ukuba siza kujonga naphaya kulaa masebe abo, ngoba nabo umhlaba bawuphethe kwaye bawunika abantu. Ngoko ke, nokuba umntu ufumana indlu, laa ndlu ayifumanayo yakhiwe phezu komhlaba, nolo ke ikwalolunye uhlobo lolwabiwo lomhlaba.
Ngoko ke, sithi wonke lo mhlaba siza kuwudibanisa ukuze wongeze phaya kulaa ma-30 ekhulwini siwafunayo. Kodwa ke, loo nto ayithethi ukuba abaMhlophe, nabaphethe ama-80 ekhulwini omhlaba woMzantsi Afrika, mabahlale bonwabe, bolule imilen ze bodwa kulaa mhlaba ngeli xesha thina sisazi ukuba ama-80 ukuya kuma-90 ekhulwini yabantu boMzantsi Afrika abanamhlaba. Abantu abaninzi kweli abanamhlaba, ngexa kukho amadoda aneefama ezikuma-20 umntu ngamnye, angaziyo nokuba makenze ntoni na ngazo.
Siyayijonga ke yonke le mithetho, kuqukwa nebinzana elaziwa njengewilling buyer-willing seller, ukuba njengokuba isithwalisa ubunzima nje, masize nawaphi na amacebo ukwenzela ukuba noko umhlaba ufikeleleke kubo bonke abantu. Kaloku uMqulu weNkululeko uthi umhlaba kufuneka unikwe abantu. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I am grateful to the hon member. We are doing a land audit and until now we have found that land that belongs to the government is estimated at between 5% and 7% of the land that is needed for distribution. Therefore, if you compare the 5% and the proposed 30% that we are aiming at, you’ll notice that the 5% is a drop in the ocean and that it can hardly be used to meet the needs of the majority of the people of South Africa who are landless.
However, we have agreed with the Ministers of Housing and Public Works that we look into their departments, as they also deal with land and distribute it to the people. Therefore, whenever a person is given a house, that means land has been distributed, because that house has been built on land. That, we regard as another form of land distribution.
We are therefore saying that we are going to add up that land in order to make the 30% that we are talking about. However, that does not mean that white people who own 80% of the total land of this country should relax while 80% to 90% of the total population of this country is landless. The majority of the people of this country do not have land, while there are men who own about twenty farms each. These people do not even know what to do with this land.
We are looking at all these laws, including the clause that is known as the willing buyer-willing seller clause. We are checking what other options we can use in order to make sure that land is distributed evenly. Remember, the Freedom Charter says land must be distributed amongst the people. [Applause.]]
Mr C H F GREYLING: Hon Minister, there is a perception that vast tracts of state-owned land are available for disposal, but is it not the case that a percentage of this land falls under several state departments, for example, the Department of Public Works? What is the relationship between the Department of Land Affairs and Public Works with regard to such land? I thank you.
UMPHATHISWA WEZOLIMO NEMICIMBI YEZEMIHLABA: Njengokuba besele nditshilo, Mhlalingaphambili, siyasebenzisana neSebe lezeMisebenzi yoLuntu. Phambi kokuba uMphathiswa weli sebe anikezele ngomhlaba, kufanele ukuba ndivume ukuze ndityikitye, ndize emva koko ndinikezele kuye ke ukuba naye atyikitye phambi kokuba awuchithe loo mhlaba. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: As I have already said, Chairperson, we are co-operating with the Department of Public Works. Before the Minister of this department can hand over land, I have to give the green light and sign and thereafter he signs as well before handing over the proposed land.]
I want to say to the hon member that the impression that we have vast tracts of state land that can actually address the needs of the landless people in South Africa is not true. The fact of the matter is that we have approximately 5% of state land assets in the hands of the Department of Land Affairs and various other related departments and therefore it is not possible for us to meet the needs and the requirements of the majority of the population of South Africa. We therefore have to make sure ukuba nokuba siyakhala [that even if we are not fully satisfied], all of us have to make a contribution. We have to take some of the land that belongs to the privileged groups that have had land since 1652 in South Africa. Our people have been waiting for decades if not centuries for their land to come back, and we are pleading with all concerned to support the government it its efforts to ensure a fair and just redistribution of land in South Africa. [Applause.]
Adv Z L MADASA: Mphathiswa, siluxhasa sinjalo olu phando uthetha ngalo, kukho umba endifuna ukuwuveza, wokuba ngokubhekisele kulaa komishoni wawukhe wayithumela ukuba iphande ngomhlaba ukuba ngoobani abaniniwo - ukuba usalukhumbula olo phando, ndicinga ukuba isithethi salo yayinguProf Gutto, endandimphulaphule kunomathotholo esithi baphandile, kodwa abade bafikelele kwisigqibo sokuba ngowoobani lo mhlaba kweli lizwe.
Lilonke ke kukho umhlaba ongaziwayo nokuba ngokarhulumente okanye ngowabantu na, ingoobani abaniniwo. Ndizama ukuthi ke, kolu phando ulwenzayo, kuza kufuneka uyiphande le yalo mhlaba uzimeleyo ndithetha ngawo, nongaziwayo ukuba ngokabani na. Ndicela ke ukuba loo mba uwuse iliso nawo. [Laphela ixesha.]
UMPHATHISWA WEZOLIMO NEMICIMBI YEZEMIHLABA: Siyabulela kakhulu kwilungu elibekekileyo. Ewe, uProf Gutto kunye namanye amalungu ale komishoni uthetha ngayo sele beyinikezele ingxelo yophando obeluqwalasela ukuba lo mhlaba woMzantsi Afrika usezandleni zikabani na. Bafumanisile, noxa bengekalugqibi uphando lwabo, ukuba into engaphaya kwesithathu ekhulwini sabantu bangaphandle ngabanini bomhlaba apha kweli. Siseza kuyisa ke ngokupheleleyo ingxelo leyo kwiKhabhinethi ukuze iyixoxe, siphinde ke siyise ebantwini xa ibuya apho ukuze nabo bahlomle, babeke iimbono kunye neemfuno zabo ngalo mhlaba welizwe lookhokho babo.
Into ecace mhlophe yeyokuba kuza kufuneka simisele imithetho elawula ukuba abangaphandle okanye iindwendwe ziwufumana njani na umhlaba. Kuza kufuneka ukuba sijonge ukuba zikhona na iindlela zokuba bawuqeshe umhlaba ukuze bakwazi ukuba basebenze xa befuna ukusebenza kweli. Kodwa ke izigqibo zokuba kuya kwenziwa njani na ziya kufumaneka zikuhlobo lweziphakamiso ezijoliswe kwiKhabhinethi. Ngoko ke umkhomba-ndlela ngokubhekisele kulo mba uya kuphuma kooProf Gutto. Ezi ziphakamiso ziya kudluliselwa ebantwini ngokubanzi ukuze nabo benze ezabo iziphakamiso … (Translation of isiXhosa of paragraphs follows.)
[Adv Z L MADASA: Minister, while supporting the land audit, there is an aspect that I would like to highlight, with regard to the commission that you had appointed to do the audit with regard to who the land owners are - I don’t know whether you still remember it, I think it was chaired by Prof Gutto. I remember listening to him on the radio. He said they had investigated who the owners of the affected land were, but they could not find out who owned it in this country.
In short, there is land in this country that nobody knows who rightfully owns it. I am trying to say to you that your investigation should also deal with that. I am pleading with you to consider this as well. [Time expired.]
The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: We thank the hon member very much. Yes, Prof Gutto and other members of this commission that you are referring to, have already handed in the investigation report that looked at who owns land in South Africa. They have also found out that about 3% of this country’s land belongs to foreigners. We are still going to table that report to the Cabinet, so that they can discuss it. Thereafter, it will be referred to people, so that they can also make an input on the issue.
What is clear is that we need to formulate an Act that will govern the selling of land to foreigners. We shall have to look at whether they cannot lease the land, so that they can work in this country if they want to. However, the final decision on this will have to come from the Cabinet’s proposals. Therefore, the way forward on this issue will have to come from Prof Gutto. These recommendations will be referred to the people, so that they can also have a say on the matter …]
… in terms of how we want to regulate land ownership by foreigners in South Africa. But, as we all know, in all democracies, whether you go to Germany - I cannot buy land in Germany, for instance, and who am I to do that – or you go to America, they will tell you to go to the state, as this is under its jurisdiction. When you apply to the state, they tell you that you can’t buy land. There are all sorts of tricks that are put in place.
Kodwa ke siseza kuwuxoxa nathi apha eMzantsi Afrika lo mba, sibone ukuba siwuphatha njani na. Kukho umba weenkampani kunye neethrasti nazo ezingabanini-mhlaba kweli lizwe. Bazimele ngazo ke abantu abaninzi. Siyaqhuba ngophando nalapho. Siza kujonga ukuba bekungekhe na kuchazwe ubunini-mhlaba ngabo bonke abantu abanomhlaba, kuqukwa noLulu Xingwana, achaze kuMphathiswa weMicimbi yezeMihlaba naMahlathi, kwanokuba umntu unezindlu ezingaphi okanye unamaplasi amangaphi na, wenza ntoni ngawo, ingawakhe nabani na. Ndiyabulela. [Laphela ixesha.] [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[However, we still have to discuss this in South Africa and decide how we will handle this issue. There are issues of companies and trusts that own land in this country. Many people are hiding behind these formations. We are also investigating that. We are looking at requesting people who own land to declare that. That includes people like the Minister, Lulu Xingwana, and to make people declare how many houses and farms they own and what they are doing about their farms and with whom they own these farms. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]] Measures taken by the National Treasury to overcome negative expenditure patterns in contract management
- Ms J L Fubbs (ANC) asked the Minister of Finance: What measures is the National Treasury taking to overcome negative expenditure patterns in contract management? N1258E
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you very much, Chairperson. The hon Fubbs has explained she has had to go back to Johannesburg and I accept her apologies and wish her well. Let me just explain that the question deals with something that was raised earlier as well, namely contract management.
Now, in the context of the modernisation of government’s services, there is going to be a range of contracts that have to be managed. Some are short- term and, by their nature, some kinds of contracts require a long-term relationship between government and the contractors. In respect of the latter there will be IT services, for instance, where the software is proprietary and vested with the company. You need to be able to manage that because government can’t develop all of the software.
In the case of some contracts, if you need the design of some fancy buildings, dams, roads, etc you go to consulting engineers and they design it for you. Government can’t employ all of these people. In dealing with the numbers, frequently we tend to get all of these mixed up.
What government did and what the National Treasury undertook as early as 2003 was to provide certain regulations in terms of the PFMA, so that departments report on the spending under sub-programmes for all contracts that are actually awarded. The premise of the PFMA, as I have said on a number of occasions, is that the money is allocated to departments, the resource is managed in departments.
The Treasury will, from time to time, issue such regulations, but the oversight responsibility is a responsibility of Parliament and the oversight responsibility in terms of these issues is vested in Parliament in terms of section 32 of the Public Finance Management Act. On a monthly basis, departments or portfolio committees therefore have access to the information of actual spending departments. These are the arrangements and the arrangements cut across all manner of matters under the broad heading of supply-chain management.
So, that is the story. The regulations are there. The regulations have also been put in place, and they have been made much tougher. The hon Bhamjee and the hon Asiya always have debates with me about the toughness of the regulations in the Municipal Finance Management Act. It is the same issue and I am saying the power is vested in Parliament. The regulations are there and they are unequivocal about when contractors can be used and under what circumstances and the reporting requirements.
Mrs L S CHIKUNGA: Let me thank the Minister for such a comprehensive answer. Given that risk management and the availability of sophisticated skills are critical to professional contract management, is the Minister in a position to inform this House whether government will not be found wanting in managing major IT contracts and whether we have the capacity to intervene timeously to ensure that every service provider performs according to the prescripts and specifications of the contract intended by the supply-chain management guidelines?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: It depends on the nature of the contract. Some of these are managed within the public-private partnership unit located in the Treasury. That unit was established after we discovered that some correctional facilities and the previous scheme called APOPS were given to the private sector without all of the norms being in place.
We established that unit and it oversees the relationship and ensures that we contract properly, ensures that we have the best available information that these contracts are so structured that they are to the advantage of the public service understanding, of course, that the profit motive would be there. We have had some very successful contracts that are structured and, for instance, Inkosi Albert Luthuli Hospital would be one such case.
In respect of IT contracts, some are public-private partnership contracts as well. They have been structured in that way. Some contracts are managed by outside agencies and many of the IT contracts are better dealt with by Sita, because they have the IT competencies and can understand some of the issues relating to service provision a lot better than the Treasury can.
In the Treasury we have a technical assistance unit, which is a kind of project management facility, available to other government departments in whatever sphere to support the task of contracting and define the rules for oversight. More recently, in respect of some other contractors outside of IT, there has also been the infrastructure development and improvement programme, as it is called, to ensure that we can get better bang for the buck in respect of the hard infrastructure contracts. So, we understand that the profit motive would tend to maximise returns and minimise the quality of the service. Our interest as a public service must be to try and tip the scales in the other direction and sometimes we get the equilibrium just right.
Mr D H M GIBSON: In the private sector, proper cash flow management and the disciplines of the market ensure that expenditure patterns in contract management are predictable and are very carefully managed. Companies that fail to control negative expenditure patterns tend to lose money and if it continues they go out of business.
In government sometimes it seems to be too easily accepted, especially at provincial government level, that a roll-over or even an increased budget allocation will be granted almost as a reward for failure. Will the Minister agree to support the naming and shaming of those departments, those officials, those Ministers, who are regular transgressors?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: This is a maiden finance intervention from the hon Gibson.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): You are correct, hon Minister. I was a bit worried when I saw his name on the screen but then I recalled him being deployed to finance.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: The short answer is: No, because I believe it’s the responsibility of Parliament. The PFMA establishes different responsibilities. Accounting officers are responsible for the outputs and for finances and that is what portfolio committees must do and that is why we can publish the information in terms of section 32.
Section 32 encourages in-year monitoring. What the standing committee and the public accounts committee do is to do retrospective evaluation and then powers are given to Parliament, in terms of section 88 of the PFMA, including the power to institute criminal proceedings. These issues are there, they are set out in the legislation.
My job sometimes I am an impimpi for Parliament – is to say, through financial accounts, that these are issues and I am glad that Scopa attacks as vigorously as they do from time to time, but then it is handed over to Parliament and I think that that strengthens the oversight role and it gives formal substance to the spirit of the Public Finance Management Act.
Effects of import quotas imposed against Chinese textiles
-
Prof E S Chang (IFP) asked the Minister of Trade and Industry: (1) Whether the import quotas imposed against Chinese textiles resulted in increases in (a) the production output of local textile manufacturers and (b)(i) profits and (ii) employment in the local textile and clothing industries; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case;
(2) what is the monetary value of the 40% decrease in textile and clothing imports, as compared to the corresponding period in 2006, as stated by the Director-General recently;
(3) whether this decrease in imports resulted in a 40% increase in production in the local textile and clothing industries; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? N1294E
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chair, with respect to all three questions, perhaps it is important to say that it is too early to quantify the full impact of the quotas in terms of production, profits and employment, since it has only been five months since the introduction of the restrictions.
Nevertheless, the questions asked are pertinent and we should be able to provide more detailed and precise information as further statistical data becomes available. Having said that, some preliminary data available for the ex-factory value of sales at current prices for the period of January to March 2007, as compared to the same period in 2006, reflects textiles increasing marginally from R4,1 billion to R4,2 billion. Similarly, the clothing sector also grew slightly from R3,3 billion to R3,7 billion over the same period. We are, however, monitoring the trends at present and we will keep the hon member informed as soon as meaningful statistics and information become available.
It is also important for me to say that one of the developments we have had is that this has impacted positively on interactions between stakeholders within the clothing and textile sector - the manufacturers, the retailers as well as labour. Those instances where we have had to relax the quotas, and there have been four such instances so far involving well-known retailers, have resulted from interactions that took place between stakeholders within the sector to identify particular problems that they were experiencing and working out ways in which they would address those problems.
So, there are very good things that have come out of that – commitments that are being entered into among stakeholders within the sector. I believe that this is one of the things required for the survival of this sector. If you cannot improve and be dynamic with interactions among manufactures, retailers and labour, we can kiss the sector goodbye.
So, this is a positive development that I can say has resulted from the fact that we have these restrictions. It is also important to say that one of the things that we could hope for is that at least we may have stamped out the rapid loss of jobs. But, again, this is something we would have to verify with hard data.
I think the final point that I should make is that at the end of the day, this is a temporary measure - a stop-gap measure. At the end of the day, a viable strategy is needed for the sector and we are hard at work to make sure that we can achieve that consensus among stakeholders on a strategy and the interventions that we need to make to ensure the survival of the sector. Thank you, Chair.
Prof E S CHANG: Chairperson and hon … [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Just hold on a second, hon member. Can we ask the hon Bhengu to take his seat.
Prof E S CHANG: Hon Minister, thank you for your answer and I agree with you 100% that it is very early to see how this 40% decrease would impact on our economy. But I want to say that the reason I am raising this question is that I think that when your DG was interviewed by the SABC, he said that the 40% was decreased and absorbed into local production and job creation. That is the reason why I put my question here. But I am happy after your answer.
My question is: When the DTI introduced the quota, did it analyse what the purpose was of imposing the quota? The IFP believes that it is for the creation of jobs, particularly jobs in local manufacturing. Why has 95% of the quota been allocated to importers and retailers? If manufacturers have obtained a certain quota based on job creation, they can use that quota to attract more orders to be made in South Africa by offering a service or providing the quota to retailers. If there was a formula on how to calculate and allocate this, and if it was done through transparent procedures, tell us about the process. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: I think that matters of process were deliberated upon among us – the department and the stakeholders in the sector. These are matters which I think we settled before the coming into operation of the quotas. So, those are matters which I regard as having been settled.
What we may be dealing with right now are particular problems that may have arisen after that. We are addressing some of these problems, such as the example that I was referring to just now, where a particular product would be identified and the stakeholders would interact and agree among themselves that we do not have this particular product manufactured in South Africa.
They would then have those interactions that, at the end of the day, would culminate in them collectively approaching the Minister of Trade and Industry to say that, arising from these commitments that they have made amongst themselves on training of people and so on, they require the Minister to relax the quota on this particular product. There have been four such instances.
But I seem to have heard part of the question being why we did this in the first place. If I take you back, this is something we did on the basis of an approach that was made to us by one of the stakeholders in the sector, Labour. Labour asked us to take the People’s Republic of China to the World Trade Organisation.
Our view was that the relationship between us and China is not only defined by the importation of clothing and textile products. We have a much bigger relationship with China. China sources a lot of things from us. China is also a market which we perhaps aren’t fully exploiting as yet. Therefore, if we had not gone this route of negotiating an arrangement with China that gives us breathing space in order to address the problems of the sector, currently we would be locked up in a very difficult process in the World Trade Organisation to prove whatever charges we would be laying against the People’s Republic of China. But, that’s also something that would have negatively affected the relationship between South Africa and the Peoples Republic of China, politically as well as economically.
So, I think that what we did was the best option available to us in the circumstances. It has given us breathing space and we are attending to the problems of the sector. It is my belief that in the course of this year, we will be coming out with measures that we are going to undertake in order to assist or make interventions that would assist the sector and ensure the long-term survival and perhaps the growth of the clothing and textile sector. Thank you very much, Chair.
Mr L B LABUSCHAGNE: Minister, your department made much of the plight of the clothing and textile industries, which at a certain point were estimated at losing jobs at the rate of about a thousand a month. In light of the fact that import quotas, as you said, are a temporary stop gap and seemingly ineffective - although we take your point that it’s a bit too early to decide - when will your department be introducing the much-wanted customised sector support package which was supposed to be introduced after the inception of the trade restrictions in January? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chair, this is what I was referring to towards the end of my reply. As the department and as the economic cluster in government, following the adoption of a national industrial policy framework by Cabinet in January, we have been hard at work to develop a programme of action for that industrial policy framework.
So, it is in the context of that that we will, in the course of this year and hopefully quite soon, be announcing measures that we are going to be undertaking in a whole number of sectors in the economy, and addressing other matters, such as issues of infrastructure and so on. So, I can’t give you a precise time but this is part of the work that we are doing. Clothing and textiles would be work that we are undertaking in the broader work that we are doing on industrial development.
Ms J L FUBBS: Hon Minister, I think I would like to agree with you that it is too early to quantify the full impact of the quotas in terms of production, profits and employment as it has only been five months since we have introduced these restrictions. I would say that I don’t have any further questions. Thanks.
Measures adopted by National Treasury regarding allocation of financial resources for education and infrastructure projects
-
Ms B N Dambuza (ANC) asked the Minister of Finance:
(1) What is the updated amount of (a) roll-overs and (ii) under- expenditure in provincial education spending between 2002 and 2006, (b) how many instances of inadequate accountability for expenditure occurred and (c) what measures are being considered by the National Treasury regarding the allocation of financial resources to education;
(2) whether the National Treasury has developed any appropriate systems to track project expenditure commitments in relation to infrastructure projects; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? N1259E
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you, Chairperson. The hon Dambuza has been hyperactive in her questioning for today’s question time. Let me just start off by explaining that the process of roll-overs in the context of provinces is managed within provincial legislatures. As the Minister of Finance would be required to have a section of the adjusted estimates in October deal with roll-overs here at national level, provincial executives would approve the roll-overs but they must go before provincial legislatures as part of an adjustments budget. It is for that reason that this matter vests there and those roll-overs would also include those in respect of education.
Preliminarily, the figure we have for underspending in education for 2006- 07 across the nine provinces is R1,35 billion. Provincial departments underspent in 2005-06 by R270 million and in 2004-05 by R1,3 billion; in 2003-04 they overspent by R714 million. They haven’t quite found equilibrium in so far as these issues are concerned.
If you studied this there would be a few areas where you’d probably find some of the underspending. One of the areas of underspending, for instance, is that provinces use a part of the Schools Act, I think section 21, so schools then have the power to order books and take responsibility for their own management.
In some instances, in some very poor provinces, schools that are classified according to section 21 do not submit business plans and therefore cannot receive the money. It is a double whammy for poor learners in those poor schools, but that is how the laws apply. The second area where you’d find a measure of underspending would be in respect of the employment of educators. Sometimes there is overprovision on the resources side. The third area is in respect of infrastructure and fourthly, sometimes more generally, in respect of learner support materials.
Let me complain through you to the Office of the Clerk of the Papers. I can’t work out what the question could mean with regard to the words, “inadequate accountability for expenditure occurred”. I can’t work out what it means. If it means whether parts of the expenditure was actually unauthorised, then Scopa would have to deal with it and for those years when there was unauthorised expenditure, the provincial standing committees on public accounts would have to deal with the issue. If the hon Dambuza meant something else, then I’d be happy to be advised.
Let me conclude by saying that our engagement as the Treasury is primarily in the making of budgets. In the making of budgets we do a number of things. Where there are concurrent functions, we establish what are called 10 X 10s. There would be 10 people from treasuries, both national and provincial treasuries, and there would be 10 people from the line functions. There is an education 10 X 10. We try and ensure that the policy direction that the Minister of Education sets down is implemented and then finds resonance, especially when there are new policy areas. Take for instance the no-fee schools.
The education 10 X 10 meets from time to time. The next meeting is on 10 July and the education 10 X 10 would be very important in informing the Minister’s committee on the budget in the allocation of resources, so that we can have our finger on the pulse of the changes anticipated in education for next year. Education would later come through the Medium-Term Expenditure Committee and make presentations about some of the changes but the Ministers would take responsibility.
When the Budget is tabled here in February, we need to know that the provinces are also in line and in sync with the broad policy direction. That is our primary engagement. Once the money is allocated, we say: Parliament, please do what Parliament needs to do about this. Thank you, Chair.
Ms B N DAMBUZA: Chairperson, thank you, Comrade Minister, for your comprehensive response and it is greatly appreciated. While we recognise and support efforts and strides by the National Treasury in the financial control systems, my follow-up question is as follows: We understand that there is a pilot project that has been undertaken in the Western Cape for tracking infrastructure expenditure. What is the timeframe for the rolling out of this pilot project? We have observed in the Department of Education that for the last financial year, only 72% of the budget was spent on the planning and monitoring systems, due to the continuous delays in the rolling out of the education management information system.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: That is indeed a very important question, hon Dambuza. It is not just the quantum of money, and that is frequently what we try to measure. It is what the money buys. In the area of infrastructure, it is not just the Western Cape, but across all nine provinces where the infrastructure reporting model is being implemented. We want to see how much money is spent, not just in one year but over a multiple of years, sometimes extending even beyond the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework. The current MTEF will take us to 31 March 2010.
This model also helps us with our budget planning. We have introduced a model and it is configured to include the names of each department by province so that we can do cross-provincial comparisons; the budget programmes and the funding sources and classifications, because sometimes there is foreign donor aid that goes into infrastructure as well; the kinds of investments; the unique source of funding; and the project implementation status, and that is then populated by the departments of education and they measure it against the register of school needs.
It might be early days, but one of the things that the Free State department of education has asked us to test – and it is still quite preliminary at this stage – is whether public-private partnerships would work in education. We don’t know yet. It is part of trying to eliminate the hold-ups in respect of ensuring that schools are schools, and the Minister of Education says: We need to see schools as entities that are more than just a collection of classrooms. Schools need to have places of recreation. They need to have laboratories, libraries and a series of other facilities.
That is the route that we want to take. We need to build up the capacity and part of ramping up that capacity is the financial model that we have now introduced. There is a lot of interaction. We will be able to be on line with some of the information. For now it is an in-house monitoring tool.
Mr D H M GIBSON: Chairperson, hon Minister, financial modelling and planning all sound esoteric until we reduce it to what the results are of bad planning and bad expenditure. Every cent voted by Parliament for educational purposes that remains unspent means that thousands of our children are forced into schooling under trees or in overcrowded classrooms, or having to share books. In Diepsloot in my constituency I have schools with up to 87 children in one classroom.
Those in government who fail to plan properly and spend effectively are sabotaging the educational efforts of our country. What steps, may I ask, are you and your department taking to equip education MECs and their senior officials with the financial and management skills they need to do their jobs properly? [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, despite the “hear, hear” from the hon Ellis over there, somewhere they said:
Give me the courage not to judge my neighbour until I’ve walked a mile in his moccasins. The issue is that there are parts of the country where the migration of people is quite unplanned for. It is going to be the same in many informal settlements around the country. You can ask the hon Dambuza about the Western Cape and there would be parts of this province where schools are completely overcrowded. There are parts of this province where learners are bused from areas like Site C in Khayelitsha to Mowbray where there are vacant schools, because this part of planning is proving to be incredibly difficult.
There are other schools, and you can go to some of those areas – in the rural areas in the Eastern Cape, for instance – where the pupil-teacher ratios have fallen precipitously, yet you can’t close down those schools. The planning function is an exceedingly difficult one. Part of the difficulty is that the receiving provinces with high urban populations tend to be playing catch up all the time, and this is the real difficulty.
What the modelling tool does, as esoteric as it sounds, is that while we have an interest as a Treasury in some of the financial information we also have the information available from departments of education, which includes nonfinancial information, and we are starting to build things like the Expanded Public Works Programme, so that we can get through this system as soon as possible. It is a never-ending issue, because part of the challenge is even where these schools are built to go back … [Time expired.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: I thought I would ask a question relating to your 10 X 10 situation, where provinces are not prioritising areas where national policy and Treasury’s budget had intended that spending to be focussed. Portfolio committees are often blocked in their questioning with national departments insisting that they have no say over where provinces spend their money and it can be very frustrating in terms of what you see as our oversight function.
I know that the questions have been thrown out there, such as: Does Treasury hold the key in some way and are there ways of tightening parameters? You probably understand the questions better than I do. It’s just a sense of portfolio committees often getting quite frustrated in their oversight role in these instances. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, let me admit that in some of these areas we in the Treasury are frustrated from time to time. In an address that the chairperson referred to the other day that I made to the NCOP conference, it’s indeed this problem that we are talking about. I used the example in that address of the school building programme. The commitment is there.
We got the President to say on more than one occasion in the state of the nation address that “there shall be no learning under trees”. In fact I said it in the Budget Speech two years ago and I gave a date, but that information is dependent on where government vests. In respect of the concurrent functions – health, education and social welfare – the decisions about the allocation of resources vest with the provinces.
They’re governments; the Constitution gives them the right as governments. So, part of what we need to do is to try and reinforce Chapter 3 of the Constitution on co-operative governance. That is what the 10 X 10 can do. It can try and ensure that the norms are there and are fully understood. We can also try to ensure that we maximise the publicity and the reporting to Parliament about these issues.
One thing that we do each year – and the National Assembly has never dealt with this – is we publish an intergovernmental fiscal review that gives a kind of longer horizon - five years forward and three years back - so that over eight years you can begin to understand the trends in spending, especially on the concurrent functions. The National Assembly has never dealt with it.
I believe that those are important tools. The NCOP does debate the issue, but these tools need to find a place somewhere in Parliament, as Parliament is defined in the Constitution. I don’t think we can pigeonhole these functions into different spheres of government, because education affects all our children and all young South Africans are our children collectively. Thank you.
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, hon Minister, could you help me understand the infrastructure reporting model that you referred to earlier? Does it refer only to the education department, or will it be rolled out to other departments? The reason I ask is because, in the expenditure report for the fourth quarter of 2006-07, the report of the Joint Budget Committee, they refer to certain government capital projects being compromised as a result of poor departmental planning and financial management and slow spending. Would this be a model that would be applicable to address those concerns, or is there another type of model that will be developed to deal with capital expenditure? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, the model goes beyond education. It’s a spreadsheet that supports planning and monitoring. That’s essentially what it is. Among other issues that we have introduced - I referred earlier to the infrastructure development improvement plan – there is another system that we’ve discussed within national government and within the provinces and that is that some infrastructure projects have an expenditure period that doesn’t match medium-term expenditure.
Sometimes people try and get money. They want to build a road, they want the money in the next budget, however, the time that elapses between when the road is announced, when the land is acquired, when the design is done and it goes out to tender, is frequently 18 to 24 months. There is no point in sitting with the money and rolling it over. What Treasury would have had to do would have been to have borrowed the money and pay interest on it while it’s sitting in some government account.
We are taking a very different view with regard to infrastructure and a lot of this is still embryonic. The database is part of it, the IDIP is part of it, but then we’re also looking at infrastructure extending over the timeframe of the MTEF so that departments can plan, knowing that the money will be provided for large infrastructure projects. Thank you.
Announcement of decision on awarding of national operating licence for National Lottery
- Dr P J Rabie (DA) asked the Minister of Trade and Industry: When will he announce his decision on the awarding of the national operating licence for the National Lottery? N1277E
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, on 1 June I did make a statement on this matter. In that statement I said that on 30 May 2007, the National Lotteries Board delivered a report to me that contained its recommendation regarding the awarding of the licence to operate the National Lottery. I did indicate at the time that I would require time to carefully study the report and to apply my mind to all the issues covered to enable me to take a decision. I also said that during this period I would take legal advice and may need to have further communication with the National Lotteries Board.
Accordingly, a statement on the awarding of the licence will be made in due course, because I am currently involved in all of those steps that I indicated when I issued a statement on 1 June. I thank you.
Mr L B LABUSCHAGNE: Thank you, Minister. The purpose of the Lotto was to provide funds to the nonprofit sector, which often provides services which the government fails to deliver or to supplement. There is trouble with the non-appointment or the factors surrounding the operator. Because of these factors and those that have led to the operator not being appointed, what is the impact on particularly the arts, sports and charities that serve the vulnerable by not having an operator at this stage? I thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: The correct answer is that there is no impact, because you recall that when I made a statement at the end of March, I did also indicate that we have sufficient reserves to continue the work of allocating moneys for charity purposes, and that is happening. We haven’t exhausted those reserves. Therefore, there is no impact because we do not have the Lotto currently running.
What is happening is that we are not currently accumulating funds in addition to what we have in place. But there are no charities that would not benefit, simply because the lottery is not running at the moment. There is no problem there.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, far be it from me to disagree with my colleague, but I run a charity called the SA Revenue Service and we are done in because the lottery is not running. [Laughter.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): I have the name of the hon Maake here, but the next speaker will be the hon Madasa.
Adv Z L MADASA: Chairperson, I pressed for myself to speak. I don’t know if my name has appeared.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Sorry, I have as the first response here the hon Maake from the ANC. If this is not the case, I will give you an opportunity. I thank you. You may continue. Adv Z L MADASA: My follow-up question to the follow-up of Mr Labuschagne is that the impact I have seen of the absence of the lottery is that the poor have their money in their pockets, more investments in their households, which means more investments in the economy, more productivity, and more exports. The economy is doing well so far. That is the impact I know about, and hear people mention on radio. The queues I normally saw in the stores are not there anymore. This means people are saving. That is the impact I wanted to report.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, I think I must just take this opportunity to say that we are quite sincere in saying that we are rigorously processing the report of the National Lotteries Board and that we are working as hard as we can to make sure that we can conclude this matter very soon. I must also say that I am not going to be sloppy about this, and rush it at the expense of the quality of the work that we have to do.
I also want to give the assurance to the players of the Lotto and those who have an interest in continuing to play that the Minister and the department are very hard at work to ensure that we can resolve this matter in the very near future.
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, I was going to say that my question has been answered, but after our Minister of Finance made his statement, I am definitely going to ask this question. With various needy organisations that benefited from the National Lottery now being deprived of such benefits, can the hon Minister please tell us how these organisations are being helped, now that the National Lottery is no longer in existence? I thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, if there are instances like that, it would not be for lack of resources. It is something that we would have to examine in the functioning of the distribution agencies. So, I think if we were to be provided with the information as to which organisations have been negatively affected, that is something that we can refer to the relevant distribution agency.
Mr C M LOWE: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, obviously the hon Madasa was quite correct in the point that he made about the fact that because people are not playing the Lotto, they are saving a lot of money. As someone who doesn’t play the Lotto regularly, I can agree and sympathise with poor people, who may have more money to spend on other things. As my colleague Rajbally, who is also from my home town, where we feel these things very keenly, has quite correctly said, there is another side to the story.
There are organisations that normally rely on money for the work that they do, whether they are organisations for children, old people, animals or whatever. The fact of the matter is that they are drowning in paperwork, scared stiff because money is not coming in. With great respect to you, Minister, somebody, somewhere has dropped the ball over this, and we can paper over as much as we like, there has been a huge problem.
We need to give some assurance to those organisations, be they sporting, artistic, humanistic, or whatever. The point is that they are not getting the money and are worried that they might not be. Perhaps some assurance from you this afternoon that that has been taken care of as well, would also go a long way. I thank you. [Time expired.] The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Once again, Chairperson, it would not be on account of a lack of funds. We have to examine the issue of where the problem is. I am saying that the reserves and the money are there. If there is a problem like that, we have to look at the relevant distribution agency. As you know, we have sports and recreation distribution agencies and arts, culture, environment and heritage distribution agencies, as well as a social development distribution agency. So, we would have to identify appropriately where the problem is.
Budget allocated for development of Pebble Bed Modular Reactor technology
-
Mr Y Wang (ANC) asked the Minister for Public Enterprises:
In light of the new opportunities emerging from the ongoing research and development of the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor technology since the start of the project, (a) what (i) amount and (ii) percentage of the budget allocated is spent on the development of (aa) the core technology (electricity generation) and (bb) new opportunities such as process-heat application and (b) what positive lessons have been learnt from this research while working with foreign partners? N1250E
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY (On behalf of the Minister for Public Enterprises): Chair, I am really earning my salary today. I am trying to make up for the amount that the DA said I must be paid - 1c. So, I am trying to earn a bit of extra overtime. The budget for the current financial year for the PBMR is R2,5 billion and 98,7% is deployed on the Electricity Generating Reactor System and the fuel plant.
The specific budget to develop process-heat applications is R32 million, which is 1,3% of the total budget. The process-heat designs benefit greatly from the development of the electricity plant and their design and basic engineering costs are not expected to be nearly as high for this reason.
Fuel plants, for instance, are identical in all cases and, by and large, so are the reactors. It is in the process plant beyond the reactor that the greatest differences lie and in the case of steam generation, for example, the necessary technologies are already highly developed.
Therefore, the anticipated cost of design, engineering and licensing actions for a process-heat system will be less than that for the first reactor at Koeberg. South Africa has participated in the Generation 4 International Forum hosted by the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD in Paris. This interaction has permitted South Africa to secure precompetitive models of aspects of reactor design and costing. It has ensured that our programme is respected and understood globally and that our competitors cannot take a pre-emptive position with their different design approaches.
The PBMR is a full partner in a consortium led by Western House Electric Company. They have secured a contract in the US Department of Energy Programme called Next Generation Nuclear Plant. This participation has allowed South Africa to be seen as a key partner in one of the most respected reactor design and engineering companies globally in a competitive bidding process to provide preconceptual design inputs to this programme.
Finally, the PBMR also draws on the research, engineering and test services of partners in Spain, the Russian Federation, the Netherlands, Germany and Japan, among others. These inputs enhance the confidence of our current and future clients and regulatory authorities that we draw on global skills and good practice in developing a leading reactor system while ensuring the critical intellectual property is retained in South Africa as a platform to develop our own industry. Thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Thank you, Minister. Hon Wang. Or is it hon Wong? Please tell me. Please help me.
Mr Y WANG: Yes, Chairperson, it’s supposed to be Wang. Some people pronounce it differently; it depends where you come from. So, yes, it’s Wang. Hon Minister, I am not too sure I should pose this question to you because in your reply it seems that the PBMR projects are still on track and 98% of the budget is still targeted on the core technology, which is electricity generation.
However, it seems to be in the committee or from the study groups, some of the funding is being diverted to the process-heat or additional applications. I am just wondering as to how this is going to affect our fiscus in future? Regarding these additional applications, are we going to have any fiscus benefits in terms of possible income and international agreements, if any, of our partners in the US or the agreement with the Chinese counterpart? I think there is Chingwa University that we are working with.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Well, we would refer the question to the relevant Minister. I know his officials are also present. I can say that the stage that we are at in terms of the development of the PBMR is really a stage where we are investing resources in the development of this highly advanced nuclear reactor technology.
So, we are not at a stage where we are looking at any immediate returns, because the timeline that we are looking at to produce even the first plant is somewhere around 2011-12. And so, we aren’t at that stage where we will be looking at the flows to the fiscus. But we have to ensure that the money with which the fiscus supports us is appropriately deployed to develop the core technology and therefore if there are issues about moneys being diverted to other applications, I think that will be something which I would hope the Minister for Public Enterprises can come back to Parliament on. Thank you.
Dr S M VAN DYK: Chairperson, I don’t know whether the Minister will be able to answer this question in the absence of Minister Alec Erwin, but maybe Minister Manuel can assist him. With regard to the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor or PBMR, I just want to know what measures have been planned to protect both the communities and the environment against possible exposure regarding the operation of such technology. Secondly, for what specific purpose will the more than R1 billion for this financial year be allocated?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon Minister, I don’t see this being a supplementary question. You are welcome to answer it but you are not obliged to.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Yes, Chair. With regard to the issue of the environmental impact of the PBMR, I think that in South Africa we historically have had a good track record in terms of the use of nuclear technology. I don’t think that we have had any disaster that has had the kind of impact that the disaster at Chernobyl did.
Secondly, even though our environmental impact assessment dispensation is new, I think it is fairly robust and enables us to ensure that going forward, as we move more and more into this area of the necessary nuclear technology because of the energy challenges of the day, there are the necessary environmental impact assessments. This as a technology which has a reputation for higher levels of safety than some of the existing nuclear technologies, is also something that gives us confidence. We are moving into this technology with a reasonable degree of confidence that we are not and will not be exposing South Africans unnecessarily or carelessly to the dangers of nuclear configurations that do happen on occasion.
On the amount that’s been allocated, I think that the question that I responded to at the beginning does answer that question of where the money is going to. It is to develop the core technology.
Provision of gas stoves to disadvantaged communities, and contribution thereof to relieving the energy crisis
-
Mr Y Wang (ANC) asked the Minister for Public Enterprises:
(1) Whether Eskom continued to supply replacement gas stoves to the disadvantaged communities in 2007; if not, why not; if so, (a) how many (i) communities received gas stoves and (ii) units were given (aa) in 2006 and (bb) during the period 1 January 2007 up to the latest specified date for which information is available and (b) what was the rationale to give these gas stoves;
(2) whether any other options were considered; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether this project contributed significantly to relieving the energy crisis; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(4) whether Eskom engaged the gas industry to keep prices down; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? N1251E
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY (On behalf of the Minister for Public Enterprises): Thank you, once again. During the 2006 Cape electricity supply outage, a major accelerated Demand Side Management Programme was launched by Eskom to reduce electricity usage, particularly during peak times, which is from 6pm-8pm in the evening.
Given the fact that household cooking is a significant contributor to this evening peak use, a programme that specifically targeted the conversion of electric cookers and stoves to LP gas stoves and cookers was designed and launched for all households in Cape Town. Disadvantaged communities in the Cape were included through an electric two-plate exchange programme. The electric-to-gas programme was for a specific timeframe and therefore was not continued in 2007.
A number of lessons were learned from this exercise and these lessons are being incorporated into the overall demand side management roll-out programme. This will ensure that the most effective interventions are pursued.
Yes, alternatives were considered and adopted. The LP gas programme formed part of a broader energy savings programme in the Western Cape, which included the issuing of energy efficient lights, the insulation of geysers, retrofitting of commercial buildings with energy efficient equipment and incentivisation of the usage of back-up diesel generators owned by commercial and industrial undertakings. The programme played a significant part in relieving the energy crisis, particularly during the crucial peak consumption periods with an overall attributable saving during the winter of approximately 20 megawatts.
Eskom had discussions with LP gas suppliers and it was agreed that prices would be kept at a preferential rate. Thank you, Chair.
Mr Y WANG: Chairperson, hon Minister, my query in terms of these gas stoves is the safety concerns, because the way I see it, we are taking away electric stove plates from the communities and we are giving something else, which is not as safe. You can’t tell me that gas stoves are 100% safe. We have gas explosions all the time in other countries - I don’t know about here yet - but that’s why I was asking the rationale for giving gas stoves rather than other more energy saving electric plates as one option.
I was wondering if the Minister can perhaps answer in terms of future consideration. Are we ever going to consider that and education on the safe use of gas stoves in the community? Are there any educational programmes?
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Thank you. Obviously, you would have heard from the response that the essential motivation was demand management, which is a huge challenge that is facing South Africa at the moment. What it means is that we have to undertake a variety of initiatives that will all work in the direction of containing excessive use of electricity.
Obviously, one of the things that we have to do as we encourage people to use less electricity and find better ways of limiting the use of electricity is the use of alternative sources for such things as heating, for example. So, the gas stove initiative must be seen as one such alternative source.
We have, however, to undertake intensive education campaigns, both to teach people on safety when they do use gas, but also to educate people about the need to contain and reduce the use of electricity. All of those things are a balancing exercise, the ultimate objective is to really ensure that we can preserve the energy resources that we have.
Dr S M VAN DYK: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, what was the cost involved in replacing gas stoves? And, taking that into account, how much will Eskom, at the end of the day, save in substituting gas for electricity in this exercise? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, I do not know what it cost Eskom to undertake this exercise, but I think that it is important that part of the response indicated that a saving of 20 megawatts was realised as a result of this initiative. You can impute some rand value, I guess, to that, but I don’t really know the direct cost to Eskom of undertaking this exercise.
Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister, I’m not sure if you’d be able to respond to this, but during the Minister of Minerals and Energy’s previous budget speech, reference was made to a total of some three million households receiving LPG cookers and the question was: How is this progressing and is Eskom part of this delivery?
Additionally, a comment has been made that very few countries have electric cooking as it is energy inefficient - 30% versus 65% - and, therefore, is there a plan to convert our current electricity-based household cooking to other fuel such as LPG gas, bearing in mind the comments about safety that were made. Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Yes, obviously, I cannot answer the question exactly, except that the Department of Minerals and Energy is actually the main driver of the programme to ensure that we can increasingly encourage South Africans, and we can actually come up with a complete programme that is aimed at the management of demand and the diversification of sources of energy and heating.
I wouldn’t have an exact answer as to how the programme is going, but this is actually an important initiative, which I think is going to require the participation of various faculties. It is a multidisciplinary process, because the Department of Minerals and Energy is driving it and Eskom has to play a role. We may also have to play a role as the Department of Trade and Industry to the extent that in some of these areas, you may actually have new possibilities to manufacture and produce things as part of supporting that overall drive towards alternative sources and diversification of sources of energy. Thanks.
Mr C L GOLOLO: Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you very much, Minister for your response. Given the tight supply of electricity in the country, does it mean that natural gas is going to play a prominent role in the South African energy supply? Thank you.
The MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Again, hon member, I’m sure that the Minister of Minerals and Energy would probably give you a more accurate response than I can give you, except that I can really reaffirm the need for South Africa to diversify sources of energy.
If natural gas is going to be a major source, we would, obviously, have to look at the issue of supply of that natural gas, but I think the basic point is that South Africa has tended to rely excessively on electricity for its own energy needs and cooking and heating. As a result, because South Africa is also a low-cost electricity producer and, therefore, people have had this cheap access to electricity, there has been the tendency to be careless and to be wasteful. Part of what we have to do is to teach people ways of saving electricity. You have geysers that are on for the whole day when people are not at home but at work. So, these are the sort of things that South Africans have to begin to appreciate. They must not take for granted the availability of electricity. They must know that it is a finite resource that can run out and we’ve got to begin to inculcate that culture of energy saving amongst South Africans, including the drive towards the diversification of our energy sources.
Conclusion on separate government–led skills development interventions
-
Mr C M Lowe (DA) asked the Minister of Labour:
Whether he has found that separate government-led skills development interventions in each economic sector are too resource and capacity intensive; if not, how did he reach this conclusion; if so, what are the relevant details? N1272E
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Madam Chairperson, I do understand some English, but unfortunately it was very difficult to understand the question. Suffice it to say that we use a collaborative approach.
As government, we work with employers and trade unions. So, we do not have a skills development intervention which is only by government. I tried to look into all kinds of dictionaries to find out what is it that the hon member really wanted from us, because we use everything on skills development, including social dialogue. Even the money on the National Skills Fund has not been agreed by government alone. It was a matter of consultation and I have not received any complaint about the collaborative approach and the fact that we are using social dialogue from anyone. Therefore I cannot cherish a single-track approach to skills development. That’s all I can say.
Mr C M LOWE: Thank you, Chairperson, and thank you, hon Minister of Labour, for a very good response. I must apologise, sir, because this question was dictated back to South Africa when I was with you in Geneva recently and it has, possibly, not come out as I would have liked it to come out.
Let me try to explain what I am trying to say, Minister. The DA is very concerned that we are trying in various areas of government to address the skills problem, with a government that has serious capacity problems. I think we need to be frank about this: Government is not able to do as many things in certain areas as we would like it to do. Because of that there is a concern in the DA that we are trying to provide an answer to skills solutions across many fronts. That really was what was behind my question to you, sir.
Let me give you an example. If we deal with skills development and Setas and identifying scarce skills in South Africa, the Deputy President’s Office is dealing with that under Jipsa. Your own department, sir, is looking at where the necessary skills are that we need to attract and what are they and how we deal with it, and Nedlac is dealing with that issue. The Setas - all 23 of them individually - are looking at what skills we need to be addressing … [Time expired.]
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Chairperson, I don’t know whether that is what Parliament must do, looking at what is behind these questions, because you must ask me a question and I must come and answer, not what is behind the question. I want what is in front of the question.
I don’t know what I am going to do with the hon member. It is quite a pity that he is probably asking me the question for the last time, because he is now going to Home Affairs. [Interjections.] No, no, sir, please, English is your home language. The question that I have in front of me says: “Whether he has found that separate government-led skills development interventions in each economic sector are too resource and capacity intensive; if not, how did he reach this conclusion; if so, what are the relevant details”?
We do not have a separate government-led skills development intervention. I have answered the question. Ms O R KASIENYANE: Chairperson, there is confusion. I am actually satisfied with the Minister’s response, when he says that interventions are based on a collaborative model and I agree with what the hon Lowe is saying, when he says that government cannot do things alone. He is quite right. One can ask the hon Minister: Do you think government can address this issue of service delivery alone? This is a matter of partnerships.
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: It is always through partnerships that we can succeed as government, in particular, on the matter of skills development. We cannot, as government, do this alone. That is why I was stressing that we are using a collaborative approach; we are using social dialogue; we are using tripartite; we are working with employer organisations; we are working with trade unions, in order for us to succeed. It can’t be government only.
We even took advice, for that matter, from opposition parties - those that are not informed by newspapers on what ideology they must follow. Those who have an ideology and principles will obviously advise us and make comments, but those who just read newspapers and listen to journalists who are driven by their own ideology will obviously have difficulties with people like myself.
See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES.
VISIT TO BRANDVLEI AND DRAKENSTEIN PRISONS
ESCAPE OF ANNANEAS MATHE FROM C-MAX IN PRETORIA
(Consideration of Reports of Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services)
Mr D V BLOEM: Thank you very much, Chair. I am presenting to this House on behalf of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services the report on a visit to Brandvlei Prison and Drakenstein Prison.
The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services visited the Brandvlei and Drakenstein Maximum Security Prisons in January 2007. The committee had visited these facilities before, but the focus in the earlier visit was on juvenile offenders. This visit focused on offenders held in the maximum security facilities.
These prisons are both maximum security facilities, which hold serious offenders, many of whom have committed violent crimes. In addition, due to the location of these prisons in the Western Cape these centres also hold many gangsters with close ties to and networks with gangs outside the prison walls. It is thus very important that the security arrangements at these prisons should be tight to ensure that these gangsters cannot bring drugs and other illicit articles into the prison.
Key problems identified by the committee, include overcrowding. Both Brandvlei and Drakenstein Maximum Security Centres are very overcrowded. The Brandvlei Maximum Security Centre currently holds over 1 100 serious offenders and it is 175% overcrowded.
The Drakenstein Maximum Security Centre holds 665 offenders and it is 175% overcrowded. It is actually designed to hold 386 offenders. It is clear that high levels of overcrowding make it extremely difficult for correctional services staff to effectively control the offenders, and these problems make it more difficult when one takes into account the high number of gangsters and gangsterism activities within these centres.
Let me come to gangsterism. The problem of gangsters is rife in the Western Cape and both of these maximum security facilities hold high-profile gangsters from the region. A few weeks before the visit of the committee, a group of these gangsters attacked four warders at the Drakenstein centre.
I think I must say something about this. Two months ago, three inmates were killed in the Krugersdorp Prison after they were allegedly assaulted by prison officials. It made headlines in all the media. This is wrong! We have said that it is wrong and we are condemning it, but we must also be very honest. Our officials are being attacked, day in and day out, and nobody is saying anything about the attacks on our officials. Their lives are in danger day and night, and we can’t condone a situation where inmates think that they are now prison warders and the prison warders are now inmates. It is unacceptable that law-abiding citizens like our officials must be held hostage. Nobody has the right to take anybody hostage!
The Constitution of this country is defending and protecting the rights of everybody, but when it comes to our officials, these people in orange uniforms think that they alone have rights and they can do or say whatever they like to our law-abiding officials. These people cry when we visit these prisons. They ask us what they must do. We are not saying that they must be assaulted, but these inmates must understand that there is law and order in prisons, and we as this House must really protect the prison warders’ rights so that they can do their work to protect us.
These people are working with people with up to 23 life sentences. The other day we visited a maximum security prison where an inmate is serving 2 000 years. This person does not have any respect for life, but when he is inside there, he knows the Constitution of the country better than anyone else does. He thinks now that he is inside there he must be treated differently from people outside. I am saying that we must look into that.
The security problems at these prisons that were identified by members of the committee, include the shortage of members, partly due to the partial implementation of the seven-day working week, which means that unit and case managers who have been tasked to do their work, are often required to do security work. New recruits are used to do security work and they lack experience, which is a problem in the prisons with high gang activity, as they do not yet have the knowledge and experience to identify potential gang-related problems before they escalate.
Physical issues, such as lockers for prison officials, were also a problem. Officials’ lockers are kept within Brandvlei Maximum Security Centre, instead of outside the building, which is a security risk and can aid corrupt activities.
Our recommendation as a committee is to request the department to give updated reports on progress, on action taken to alleviate gangsterism in prisons around the country, on progress with the long-awaited anti-gang strategy. The department must report on that, follow-up on recommendations made by the Jali Commission - the report with regard to gangsterism - and monitor the extent to which these recommendations have been implemented by the department.
Collusion by some members in gang activities and the effort to reduce the opportunity for members to be involved in corrupt activities was a key concern of the commission. The committee has repeatedly called for the vetting of all staff that work in maximum security facilities. While the committee understands that part of the problem in the vetting process lies with the National Intelligence Agency, NIA, it will closely monitor efforts by the department to undertake this responsibility as agreed by the Cabinet.
The committee will also monitor progress in the implementation of security infrastructure, particularly in maximum security facilities, including the introduction of CCTV cameras, X-ray machines and the cashless system.
Mention must be made of some real successes within these two correctional centres. The Group of Hope at Brandvlei Maximum and the success of the technical courses in Drakenstein, including electrical engineering, must be noted. The department within the centres and even more importantly the offenders who drive these innovative and successful programmes must be commended. The ongoing support of the department and others in ensuring the growth of these successful programmes should be prioritised.
A problem noted by the committee was that the artisans are resigning in numbers because of poor salaries and a lack of promotion. We were informed that these people are being recruited by other countries. I want to present these reports to this House. I thank you. [Applause.]
There was no debate.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: I move:
That the Report on the Visit to Brandvlei and Drakenstein Prisons be adopted and that the Report on the Escape of Annaneas Mathe from C-Max Prison in Pretoria be noted.
Motion agreed to.
Report on Visit to Brandvlei and Drankenstein Prisons adopted. Report on Escape of Annaneas Mathe from C-Max in Pretoria noted.
BUDGET ANALYSIS WORKSHOP
HEARINGS OF JUSTICE AND PROTECTION CLUSTER, 2006
THIRD QUARTER NATIONAL EXPENDITURE 2006/07 FINANCIAL YEAR
EXPENDITURE REPORT FOURTH QUARTER 2006/07
(Consideration of Reports of Joint Budget Committee)
Ms L L MABE: Thank you, hon Chairperson. I thought that somebody would jump up and come and assist me. On behalf of the Joint Budget Committee I would like to present the Report on the Budget Analysis Workshop and the Report on the Hearings of the Justice and Protection Cluster. The Report on the Third Quarter National Expenditure, I’ll combine with the Expenditure Report on the Fourth Quarter for 2006-07.
The committee had a workshop and we looked at the terms of reference in relation to other committees of Parliament, for instance the Portfolio Committee on Finance, and what our relationship with them should be, so that we avoid overlapping of issues; the relationship with Scopa, so that issues that were raised could be taken up by Scopa and vis-à-vis the issues raised by Scopa so that we can take them as the year continues; also our relationship with the portfolio committees to ensure that both committees in the Joint Budget Committee will inform each other on the issues that they deal with in the different departments.
We also looked at what our role should be in recommendations to Parliament on amending money Bills. In the workshop, of crucial importance were the programming challenges that we are faced with. The issues when we have public hearings should be discussed in the portfolio committees so that there should be no repetition in what we do in the Joint Budget Committee and what the portfolio committees are doing, so that both committees can benefit from that interaction. Unfortunately, we still have programming challenges that need to be taken up and addressed.
The important issue that will continue to be very important in our interaction as a committee is the research problem. The research capacity of Parliament leaves much to be desired and most portfolio committees find it difficult to get information which they can use to engage different departments. The Joint Budget Committee can then engage with departments on monthly spending.
The Minister of Finance earlier on indicated that Parliament has information in the form of section 32 reports which they can use to hold the department accountable. The challenge is: Does the capacity of Parliament’s research assist committees of Parliament to do vigorous oversight? And this is a big challenge. It needs to be improved speedily.
We looked at what the training needs of the committee were so that we can have institutional memory but also that we can have an impact in terms of other departments spending for the sake of spending. Or are the departments spending to have outputs? What are early warnings in the departments? Do these departments have fiscal dumping at the end of the financial year and not have utilised funds?
Come March, especially, then you will see a lot of spending by the different departments because they will then transfer moneys to the different institutions or to local government and provincial government. This is posing a serious challenge. Without proper research capacity, the portfolio committees will not be able to monitor what is happening in the different departments and their spending of money.
We also looked at public participation. We have observed that most of the people who participated in the hearings of Parliament in the form of portfolio committee hearings, are people who have financial resource capacity. What about the poor who yearn to make inputs to what Parliament is doing regarding the budget? How do we cater for such people? Go to the rural areas. How do those people make an impact in terms of what issues are affecting their lives and how does Parliament take up those issues? These are some of the challenges that we are facing as a committee. We also looked at the challenges of the joint nature of the committee. During provincial weeks it is difficult for the committee to fulfil its mandate. The NCOP component has to go to the provinces but at the same time there is a lot of work ahead of the committee which the committee must grapple with whilst the other section is in the provinces. How can we address this problem to ensure that there is continuity in terms of addressing and attending to the issues as presented in the section 32 reports.
We also looked at the relationship between the committee and the Office of the Auditor-General and the National Treasury. I would like to report that we are satisfied and happy that both the National Treasury and the Office of the Auditor-General could take heed when we called on them and engaged them and they could meet the standard as per the request of the committee in terms of how they can assist the committee in order for the committee to be be capacitated better to fulfil its functions.
I would also like to indicate that we had to define what our role should be as the committee in terms of the financial management capacity model presented by the Auditor-General. What can we as a committee do to ensure that the departments start putting systems in place so that by the time the Auditor-General comes with auditing the departments will be in a better position to provide what is needed by the Auditor-General? They could also account for what they have done with the funds allocated to them, rather than spending for the sake of spending.
We have critically raised the issue of what the departments are doing with regard to nonperformance by senior managers. What are the powers that the portfolio committees have to ensure that, if a particular manager does not perform, they can engage the department and the Minister in that regard?
I would like to cite an example. This morning we had a public hearing. It was a joint meeting with Scopa. The CFO of Home Affairs boldly stated that he was not an accounting officer so we cannot expect him to account, whereas he was in the company of the accounting officer. His excuse was that the accounting officer is new, therefore the accounting officer cannot respond to the issues raised by the two committees. This is uncalled for because the CFO is there. He is the person who looks after the finances of the department and he must assist the accounting officer, who is new in the department, to respond to the issues raised by the committee.
This is uncalled for. And you ask yourself: If the Minister says that there is a turnaround strategy in the Department of Home Affairs, how is that possible with such a CFO who says that he is not the accounting officer? What will the situation be with regard to finances and the managing of finances in that department? This is a challenge and I would like to make an appeal to the Minister that she must address this issue with the CFO.
I would like to present the reports to the House. Thank you. [Time expired.]
Dr S M VAN DYK: Agb Voorsitter, die komitee moet aandag gee aan die bestedingspatrone van departemente. ’n Groot bron van kommer is die feit dat departemente gesamentlik R5,3 miljard van hul begrotings nie in die afgelope boekjaar spandeer het nie. Dit, ten spyte daarvan dat die staat 83% van die konstruksie-infrastruktuur daar stel, wat as basis dien vir die privaatsektor vir verdere ekonomiese ontwikkeling. Gegewe die onderspandering, is die twee grootste sondebokke die justisie- en beskermingsdienstesektor, asook die ekonomiese dienste- en infrastruktuurontwikkelingsektor. Dit is juis hierdie twee sektore wat hulle aan die grootste agterstand in dienslewering skuldig maak.
Indien ons kyk na die individuele departemente, dan het die Departement van Vervoer R400 miljoen onderspandeer. In die praktyk is daar meer as 100 000 km paaie op die waglys vir herstelwerk. Die Departement van Handel en Nywerheid onderspandeer R188 miljoen, maar in die praktyk sukkel jong, opkomende ondernemings om toegang te kry tot internasionale handelsmarkte. Die Departement van Behuising onderspandeer R171 miljoen en dit terwyl daar ’n agterstand van 2,2 miljoen huise is.
Die Departement van Landbou onderspandeer R148 miljoen en dit terwyl daar ’n groot behoefte aan opleiding- en ondersteuningsdienste aan opkomende en bestaande boere is. Die Departement van Justisie en Konstitusionele Ontwikkeling onderspandeer R477 miljoen. Die personeeltekort en agterstand in administrasie en die afhandeling van hofsake is nie naastenby aangespreek nie. Ons regstelsel beweeg nou na ’n punt om in duie te stort.
Die Departement van Korrektiewe Dienste onderspandeer R586 miljoen. Tronke om 12 000 misdadigers te huisves is nie gebou nie en Suid-Afrika sit steeds met chaotiese oorvol tronke. Die Departement van Gesondheid onderspandeer R115 miljoen. Ongeveer 50% van die geld was bestem om goedere en dienste aan te koop, wat so noodsaaklik is om ons openbare hospitale toe te rus.
Binnelandse sake onderspandeer R237 miljoen. Hierdie geld was bestem vir die aankoop van masjinerie en toerusting, wat die departement nodig het vir beter dienslewering. Provinsiale en plaaslike regering onderspandeer R820 miljoen. Vanweë ’n personeeltekort en swak ondersteuningsdienste van die departement se kant af aan derdevlakregering, het minder as 50% munisipaliteite hulle finansiële state betyds by die Ouditeur-generaal ingedien.
Hierdie ongespandeerde geld word van die belastingbetaler verhaal om dit in dienslewering terug te ploeg. Gepaardgaande hiermee het die Tesourie die afgelope boekjaar R30 miljard meer belastinggeld ingevorder as wat fiskaal beplan was vir die huidige jaar, en maak die Minister ook voorsiening vir ’n oorskotbegroting van 0,6% van die bruto nasionale produk.
Die Tesourie moet besef dat die oorinvordering van belasting en ’n oorskotbegroting niks anders as ’n skande is nie. Eerstens word geld onnodig uit die ekonomie onttrek, wat andersins in ekonomiese ontwikkeling teruggeploeg kon word. Tweedens word geld in ’n staatsrekening gestoor, wat andersins vir noodsaaklike dienslewering aangewend kon word. Derdens, die belastinglas kan verlig word vir Suid-Afrikaners, aangesien ons van die hoogste belasting ter wêreld betaal en kan die belastingkoers van 28% na 26% van die bruto binnelandse produk verlaag word.
So is die R5,3 miljard wat departemente nie spandeer het nie, tesame met die R30 miljard belastinggeld wat ooringevorder is, geld wat vrugteloos en waardeloos uit die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie onttrek is en is beslis nie tot voordeel van Asgisa se groei-inisiatiewe nie. Die Tesourie moet wegdoen met ’n oorskotbegrotingsbenadering, in plaas daarvan om dit te probeer koppel aan ’n gesonde ekonomie.
Tweedens, moet die Tesourie doeltreffender oordeel aan die dag lê tydens die toewysingsproses van geld vir departemente en dit is nou tyd dat die Tesourie sy eie interne openbare finansiële verhore hou met die direkteurs- generaal van departemente voor en na begrotingstoewysings oorweeg is om sodoende te verseker dat departemente hulle geld effektief spandeer.
Ek stem wel saam met Minister Manuel se punt dat die Parlement en spesifiek die portefeuljekomitees ’n groter en ’n strenger rol sal moet speel, om te kyk dat departemente hulle fondse effektief aanwend. Ek dank u. [Tyd verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr S M VAN DYK: Hon Chairperson, the committee should address the spending patterns of departments. Of great concern is the fact that departments have jointly failed to spend R5,3 billion in the past financial year. This in spite of the fact that the state provides 83% of the construction infrastructure that serves as a basis for the private sector for further economic development. Given the underspending, the two main culprits are the Justice and Protection Services Sector, as well as the Economic Services and Infrastructure Development Sector. It is precisely these two sectors that are guilty of the biggest backlog in service delivery.
In the case of individual departments, the Department of Transport has underspent to the tune of R400 million. In actual fact, there are more than 100 000 km of roads on the waiting list awaiting repairs. The Department of Trade and Industry has underspent by R188 million, but in reality, young emerging enterprises are struggling to gain access to international trade markets. The Department of Housing has underspent by R171 million and that whilst there is a housing backlog of 2,2 million houses.
The Department of Agriculture has underspent by R148 million and that whilst there is a great need for training and support services to emerging and existing farmers. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has underspent by R477 million. The staff shortage and backlog in administration and the finalising of court cases, have not even come close to being addressed. Our judiciary is moving towards a point of total collapse.
The Department of Correctional Services has underspent to the tune of R586 million. Prisons to accommodate 12 000 criminals have not been built and South Africa is still dealing with chaotic, overcrowded prisons. The Department of Health has underspent by R115 million. About 50% of this money was destined for the acquisition of goods and services which are so essential to equip our state hospitals.
The Department of Home Affairs has underspent by R237 million. This money was destined for the acquisition of machinery and equipment, needed by the department for improved service delivery. Provincial and local government has underspent to the tune of R820 million. On account of staff shortages and poor support services from the department to the third tier of government, less than 50% of municipalities have submitted their financial statements to the Auditor-General on time.
These unspent funds are recovered from the taxpayer to be ploughed back into service delivery. Coupled with that, the Treasury has collected R30 billion more in taxes in the past financial year than the National Treasury had envisaged it would for the present year and the Minister has also made provision for a budget surplus of 0,6% of the gross national product.
The Treasury should realise that the over-recovery of taxes and a budget surplus are a disgrace. Firstly, money is being withdrawn from the economy unnecessarily which otherwise could have been ploughed back into economic development. Secondly, money is being kept in a state account which otherwise could have been utilised for essential service delivery. Thirdly, the tax burden of South Africans could be lessened since we are paying some of the highest taxes in the world and the tax rate of 28% could be reduced to 26& of the gross national product.
So, the R5,3 billion that had not been spent by departments, together with the R30 billion in over-recovery of taxes, is money that had been withdrawn from the economy needlessly and with nothing to show for it and this is definitely not to the advantage of Asgisa’s growth initiative. The Treasury should do away with a surplus budget approach, but rather try to link it to a sound economy instead.
Secondly, the Treasury should exercise far more effective judgement during the process of allocating money to departments and it is about time that the Treasury has its own internal public financial hearings with the directors-general of departments before and after budget allocations are considered, thus ensuring that departments spend their money more effectively.
I do agree with Minister Manuel’s view that Parliament and especially the portfolio committees should play a more prominent and more rigorous role to ensure that departments use their Funds effectively. I thank you. [Time expired.]]
Mr H J BEKKER: Chairperson, I have a few general observations about the reports of the Joint Budget Committee. It has been contrasted that your first quarter expenditure is normally underproportioned, whereas your last quarter has been overspent in quite a few cases. This is particularly the case insofar as the capital budget and transfers are concerned, where you find that in the first quarter only about 10% was utilised, and in the final quarter - the fourth quarter - more than 50% of the total year’s allocation was spent. I think that one must look at this, that particularly in future, there will be a more even spread in terms of the expenditure of the budget and not that they concentrate again on the last quarter.
There is a particular concern about the provinces and local governments. Parliament underspent by R75 million and it also had about R30 million extra, mainly in the form of interest that came through and which was utilised as a surplus account. The surplus account of Parliament was utilised for parliamentary accommodation projects. I must say, I think that this was very well spent. From the little bit I have seen so far, it seems to have been very well spent.
I would also like to agree with the Chairperson with regard to the inadequate research capacity in Parliament, which remains a concern. This means that the ability of the parliamentary committees to effectively conduct oversight and thereby ensure better service delivery is being compromised. In this regard, the Joint Budget Committee recommends that Parliament should prioritise enhancing research support to the committees.
The IFP supports this report and we will vote for it if any vote is called for. [Applause.]
Ms R J MASHIGO: Chairperson, hon members, government departments should use public funds for the purpose they were voted for by Parliament according to the PFMA’s provisions, otherwise, we run the risk of the funds being diverted from appropriate priorities of government to other departments, which will inevitably compromise the quality of life of the people.
What we observe is that the departments referred to some savings under current expenditure, which I can say is actually underspending or lack of spending by the departments. Vacancies resulted in the most underspending and, as a result, at the end of the last quarter, these funds were moved from their original purpose to other programmes, which is totally unacceptable because this is what we actually term ``fiscal dumping’’.
As far as vacancies are concerned, I think there were a lot of contradictions, because the departments said there were vacancies, but we have a database of unemployed graduates who are desperately looking for work and can be trained. The departments have told us that these graduates do not have experience. I say that there are learnership programmes, through which these unemployed graduates can be trained and given experience to fill the relevant vacancies.
What’s more important is that there is a lot of money which is being used for recruitment agencies, who take a long time to headhunt suitable candidates. Some times they take far longer than the time it would have taken to retrain or put people in the learnership programmes.
As portfolio committees we should really ensure that our departments are engaged in addressing this issue of vacancies and the plans they have, because the government has all the systems in place to ensure that the issue of unemployment and vacancies is addressed.
With those words I can say the ANC supports this report. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, the ACDP notes from the report that certain government capital projects were compromised due to poor departmental planning and financial management as well as slow spending. Clearly, urgent and appropriate steps need to be taken to address these problems.
We also share the concern that the inability of some departments to fill vacancies means that the trend of underspending, more particularly on salaries, will continue. This cannot be allowed to continue as severe understaffing impacts on budget and service delivery.
Additionally, it is apparent that certain government services continue to be compromised due to weak financial planning and management, resulting in consecutive qualified audit reports. The ACDP supports the Committee’s focus on certain specific delinquent departments, including the Department of Home Affairs, Department of Health and Department of Land Affairs.
The ACDP will accordingly support this report and commends the work of the Joint Budget Committee. I thank you. [Applause.]
Ms L L MABE: Thanks, hon Chairperson. Based on the fourth quarter spending, I’m not going to comment much on the vacancies because the hon Mashego has captured what we discussed in the committee.
I would like to give an example pertaining to the Department of Sport and Recreation. The Auditor-General, in his report of 2005-06, indicated that 42% of senior managers’ positions were vacant. In addition 46% of highly skilled supervisory level managers’ posts were vacant.
This year the department underspent on vacancies, and the question is: Why does it take such a long time to employ people to fill those vacancies? What are the departments doing to ensure that they don’t compromise service delivery?
Remember that Sport and Recreation is the department that must drive 2010 for South Africa. Without proper, skilled personnel at managerial level, at supervisory level, how will we achieve that objective? Will funds be utilised? Will funds be spent and not achieve what they are intended for? That is the question which we must ask as Parliament.
Let us remember that these funds that are supposed to be spent on the vacancies are termed savings. Are they real savings? That is a definition we said National Treasury must provide to the committee and to Parliament so that we know what the National Treasury and the different departments understand by savings.
As regard capital spending, I’d like to indicate that we have discovered that departments do not plan properly and do not manage; they do not monitor what happens with regard to capital spending. They come with projects; they do not send people to those projects to see whether projects are being carried out or not.
People monitor in their offices. How is that possible? How is it possible to do monitoring in your office rather than going to the project to see whether the project is taking place, if it is being constructed or not? That is the challenge to portfolio committees to perform their oversight function.
But we also discovered in our report that 18 departments spend less than 50% of their capital spending or capital fund. Remember, they spend less than 50 %. Funnily enough, in the last quarter of the financial year, they spend more than 100% but the total budget says they spend well. How is this possible?
People outside will think that the department spends well, within the budget. Regarding capital spending, suddenly total spending is in equilibrium. This is a question that needs to be answered by portfolio committees when they engage; they must get answers from the departments.
You know, we were proud. I remember reporting to this House that the department started spending in December, but I was not aware that they would not spend for January and February, until March, which is the end of the financial year, so that they could take the money to municipalities and provinces.
I was not aware of this. I thought that they had improved. Unfortunately this was not the case, and I erred telling this Parliament that there was an improvement with regard to capital spending by departments.
I’ll also give an example of the Department of Public Works. During the first quarter they spent 8,2% of capital spending, during the second quarter 1,23%, during the third quarter 18% and during the fourth quarter 59,4%. How is that possible?
The Department of Provincial and Local Government, spent 6,2% during the first quarter, 8,4% during the second quarter, 35,6% during the third quarter and 114% during the fourth quarter. How is that possible? How is it possible, members? Remember, the Department of Provincial and Local Government must transfer funds to local government and provinces. One hundred and fourteen per cent in one quarter is a challenge to us.
With regard to the Department of Arts and Culture, they overspent because of the Women’s Day and Youth Day celebrations. Is this department not aware that it must plan and budget for those activities because they are annual activities? Can they tell us that they were not aware of these celebrations? Then they tell us that they overspent because they didn’t know that they were responsible for making provision for spending for those activities. That’s really surprising.
The other thing that I want to raise with the House is that in the 2003-04 financial year, Parliament had minus R9,8 million in its surplus account. Suddenly, right now, the balance is R293 million. That money is supposed to assist us in our work as Parliament; it now goes to the surplus fund. Who decided that it must go there because we wanted it to be used? Why did they plan for it, knowing that they were not going to use it, and put it in a surplus fund?
We, as this House, must ensure that we make them accountable. They must account to us why that is the case when we are struggling as Members of Parliament and the money has been put in a surplus fund. On behalf of the committee, I want to mention that there are some departments - I’ll give the Department of Health as an example. Of its budget, more than 90% goes to provinces in the form of transfer payments. But you go to a hospital or a clinic, there are no medicines. They get such a big allocation in the budget, but there are no medicines. What does that mean? And they tell you of procurement delays and all these things.
They will come and report to the portfolio committees that “we spent well and clinics have medication and whatever”. Go to those clinics and you ask yourself: Did we vote that medicines must not be provided to clinics? Is that what we voted for as Parliament? This is a challenge. We know that in our constituencies people struggle to get proper health care facilities, but we vote for the funds to be used and they are not used for that function.
Remember, the Minister of Finance said earlier on that national priorities are overridden by the provinces because funds go to the provinces and they decide what to do with those funds. I’d like to present the report to the House. Thank you.
Debate concluded.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move:
That the Reports be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Reports accordingly adopted.
VOTE NO 12: STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA
VOTE NO 8: NATIONAL TREASURY
(Consideration of Reports of Portfolio Committee on Finance)
Mr N M NENE: Ngiyabonga Sihlalo, namalunga ahloniphekileyo. [Thank you, Chairperson, and hon members.]
The Portfolio Committee on Finance met on 22 May 2007 to consider an Updated Strategic Plan of the National Treasury for the financial year 2007- 08 in accordance with section 55(2) of the Constitution and in line with section 27(4) of the Public Finance Management Act.
This engagement followed a briefing which took place on 10 May 2007 where the Minister briefed the committee on policy matters in relation to this Budget Vote. Subsequent to that, we had another briefing from Stats SA on its strategic plan for 2005-06 to 2009-10, together with the work programme for the same period.
Concluding these engagements, the committee tabled its reports in the ATCs of 23 May 2007. In these reports there are some recommendations that we made. We have recommended that the National Treasury must table a discussion paper on the measurable objectives so that there should be clarity on these things. We also said that the National Treasury should submit a comprehensive report on government guarantees that are issued in respect of state-owned enterprises and conditions thereof. Finally, it should develop a policy framework relating to the mandates of the developments on finance institutions which we found did not exist.
On the South African Revenue Service or Sars we said that they must submit a detailed report on the progress of discussions within six month on their role with regard to the implementation of the social security tax and wage subsidy which was proposed at the beginning of the year.
They should also submit a report within six month on the implementation measures relating to the rights of debt. As Stats SA we said they must table a report with specific timeframes for the implementation of the National Statistics Systems and finally report on the development of a national poverty line outlined in their strategic plan.
We trust that the department and its agencies will implement these recommendations and the committee will follow-up on these matters as per our mandate as Parliament. On behalf of the committee I present this report. Thank you.
There was no debate.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move:
That the Reports be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Reports accordingly adopted.
VOTE NO 21: INDEPENDENT COMPLAINTS DIRECTORATE (ICD)
STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP, 19-20 FEBRUARY 2007
STUDY TOUR TO AUSTRALIA, 30 NOVEMBER – 10 DECEMBER 2006
(Consideration of Reports of Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security)
Ms M M SOTYU: Chairperson, on behalf of the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security I’m presenting three reports for consideration by the House. There is a report on Vote 21, ICD, one on the strategic planning workshop and another on the study tour to Australia.
The Independent Complaints Directorate remains an important tool in the democratisation of the South African Police Service. This is clear in the 22% budget increase that the ICD received for this financial year. Although the increase is welcomed, it is still insufficient to deal properly with the many challenges faced by the ICD. The priorities for 2007-08 include, among others, the filling of vacancies, especially those of investigators, as I said yesterday, and improving the finalisation of cases and addressing backlogs.
The opening of satellite offices that will improve the effectiveness of the ICD is clearly a priority. Among the recommendations that the committee made regarding the ICD are: Firstly, they must keep the committee informed about progress made in filling vacant positions.
Secondly, the committee further recommended that the ICD receives the required support and co-operation from members of the South African Police Service. We supported the budget of the ICD and we’ll support efforts by the ICD for more funds to establish more satellite offices.
On 19 to 20 February 2007, the portfolio committee embarked on a strategic planning workshop. The workshop was attended by members of the committee, the Minister and the national management of SAPS. The workshop focussed on the following issues: The expected legislative framework for 2007; the training programme of the South African Police Service; the challenges that they face in terms of training, and other challenges that they face in general.
Regarding the preparations for the 2010 Soccer World Cup, the Presidential stations were discussed in detail in terms of budget allocation, training at station level, crime statistics and challenges and successes. The committee made some recommendations that are included in the report.
Regarding the study tour to Australia that was held from 30 November to 10 December 2006, the committee visited Australia to investigate legislation that specifically deals with human trafficking. In particular, the committee was interested in gaining insight into the policing of human trafficking and challenges that have been experienced since the passing of that country’s legislation.
A number of lessons and recommendations for consideration came out of the trip. Among these were: The portfolio committee will liaise closely with the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development in the process of developing this legislation. The committee will further interact with the South African Police Services on current and envisaged plans to combat human trafficking more effectively. The committee believes that in terms of legislation we would do well to address the issue of reducing demand.
We further recommend that legislation must be premised on the protection of women as a human rights issue rather that a criminal justice issue. The committee further recommends that higher penalties should be included in the South African legislation for the trafficking of children. Other recommendations deal with, for instance, actual investigations and policing of human trafficking. Focus is also aimed at the training of all departments that will be included in the process.
In the area of prosecutions very specific recommendations are made. Victim support and prevention of these crimes and specific recommendations are also included in this report. I therefore introduce the report for consideration by the House. I thank you.
There was no debate.
The ACTING CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, we move:
That the Reports be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Reports accordingly adopted. The House adjourned at 18:09. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
The Speaker and the Chairperson
- Introduction of Bills
(1) Select Committee on Social Services
(a) Traditional Health Practitioners Bill [B 20 – 2007] [See
Resolutions passed by National Council of Provinces (Minutes
of Proceedings of National Council of Provinces, 8 June 2007,
p 1040) and by National Assembly (Minutes of Proceedings of
National Assembly, 14 June 2007, p 1095)].
Introduction in the National Council of Provinces (proposed
sec 76(2)) and referral to the Select Committee on Social
Services of the National Council of Provinces, as well as
referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for
classification in terms of Joint Rule 160, on 18 June 2007.
In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the
classification of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM within
three parliamentary working days.
(b) Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill [B 21 –
2007] [See Resolutions passed by National Council of Provinces
(Minutes of Proceedings of National Council of Provinces, 8
June 2007, p 1040) and by National Assembly (Minutes of
Proceedings of National Assembly, 14 June 2007, p 1095)].
Introduction in the National Council of Provinces (proposed
sec 76(2)) and referral to the Select Committee on Social
Services of the National Council of Provinces, as well as
referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for
classification in terms of Joint Rule 160, on 18 June 2007.
In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the
classification of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM within
three parliamentary working days.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Communications on the Protocol on Policy and Regulatory Framework for NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) ICT Broadband Infrastructure Network for Eastern and Southern Africa, dated 19 June 2007:
The Portfolio Committee on Communications, having considered the Protocol on Policy and Regulatory Framework for NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) ICT Broadband Infrastructure Network for Eastern and Southern Africa, referred to it, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve the said Protocol.
Request to be considered.